Criminal Justice System Discretion Analysis

With such a broad volume of discretion apparently in nearly every aspect of police decision making what strengths does this level of discretion have? Police work and the work environment require the use of discretion. Decisions must be made very quickly, usually without time for input from another source. This is despite the fact that a bureaucratic structure exists for the department as a whole. Moreover, communities cannot agree on what constitutes criminal behavior or the level to which criminal behavior should be sanctioned or ignored. A prime example is that of the skid-rows areas. The approach taken by most police in dealing with the skid-row “problem” or

One important work which highlighted some of the shortcomings of officer discretion was a survey sponsored by the American Bar Foundation. Among other things that survey noted in the 1960’s a national crisis arose with certain problems relating to law enforcement. The survey noted that the possibility existed that discretionary decision making could represent a pattern of discrimination, it did say, on the other hand, the survey was unable to say definitively rather discrimination existed in

Discretion is defined as the authority to make a decision between two or more choices (Pollock, 2010). More specifically, it is defined as “the capacity to identify and to document criminal and noncriminal events” (Boivin & Cordeau, 2011). Every police officer has a great deal of discretion concerning when to use their authority, power, persuasion, or force. Depending on how an officer sees their duty to society will determine an officer’s discretion. Discretion leads to selective enforcement practices and may result in discrimination against certain groups of people or select individuals (Young, 2011). Most police officer discretion is exercised in situations with individuals (Sherman, 1984).

Discretion, uncertainly, and inefficiently are rampant and essential in criminal justice. Nobody expects perfection. That would neither be good nor fair. Justice is a sporting event in which playing fair is more important than winning. Law enactment, enforcement, and administration all involve trading off the possibility of perfect outcomes for security against the worst outcomes. Policing is the most visible part of this: employees on the bottom have more discretion than employees on the top.

From the night watch in Boston, to the present day policing, law enforcement has behind in the world of technology. As time rolled through the political era, professional era, and community-oriented era, police patrols would use the rapidly advancing technology in their favor. "Those were desperate times for policemen in a hostile country with unpaved streets and uneven sidewalks, sometimes miles from the police station, with little prospects of assistance in case of need.... It took nerve to be a policeman in those days," this was reported by Chief Francis O 'Neill of the Chicago Police Department in 1903. With only having a printing press and a multiple-shot revolver over a hundred years ago, the advancement in technology today has helped improve the policing methods in patrol quite significantly. However, technology would eventually out-run the police.

Discretion in policing and the court system is a necessary and unavoidable facet of criminal justice work, yet it is still very controversial. Discretion exists when courtroom actors (police officers, attorneys, judges) have the flexibility to choose an appropriate response to a situation. Police discretion is defined as “The opportunity of law enforcement officers to exercise choice in their daily activities” (Nowacki, 2015). This means that actors with a great deal of discretion at their disposal may allow biases to affect their decision-making. These decisions lead to important implications throughout the criminal justice process, especially in the courtroom. The process begins with the decision to arrest by a law enforcement officer in the field. Once the case is forwarded to the prosecuting attorney, multifarious avenues of discretionary decisions are available to resolve a case. Potential issues that could arise and that are ever-present in everyday policing include racism, sexism and socialism (Miller, 2015). These issues ultimately have a negative affect on the criminal justice process, leading civilians to not trust the one process and actors that are there to help them. While discretion should play a role in the actions a courtroom actor takes and cannot be eliminated entirely, instead it should be limited and controlled throughout the criminal justice environment so that citizens can once again trust the process and so that there will be no disparities.

Body cameras in policing are still new, but more and more agencies are beginning to implement this technology into their line of work. At first police officers were very hesitant to wear these body cameras because they were afraid they would infringe themselves and give away their own privacy. Later, as body cameras were beginning to see more use in the work place, officers began to realize that these very own body cameras that they once thought would only cause themselves harm would actual prove to be useful in a variety of situations. Some of these situations can be citizen complaints, to even backing up an officers use of force. Body cameras can be the one sole thing that can give

In this paper, I will be writing about Police Discretion. I will start by defining Police Discretion then briefly discuss the use in domestic disturbances, minor misdemeanors, and traffic enforcement. I will also discuss the application of police discretion, the provisions it uses and how it is currently practiced. At the end of these brief descriptions, I will then present the myth that exists in regards to police discretion. And finally, I will end this paper with my personal opinion as well as a brief conclusion.

Historically speaking, authorities of the law were never in a position where their professional duties and their character as a public servant of the law were demeaned in a way that there needs to be constant surveillance of them and the people whom they come into contact with. There was never a need of documenting every encounter you had with a civilian before. In this day in age, things have certainly changed, and the past has always been something society likes to change and make better even if it raises concerns. Due to all the violent police stories that has surfaced in the past decade, the idea of having police officers wear video cameras as a part of their uniform while on duty has resulted in a radically divergent account of society’s future. The law may uphold cops to wear cameras while working, but is this really the best decision? This topic is very controversial and may create issues with cops and the civilians they try and protect in the future.

In the criminal justice system, discretion is often performed by the police, prosecutors, judges and juries, correctional officials and

But police officers are also taught to not use discretion all the time so that society can also learn to follow the law, so discretion cannot always be practiced because then it will give people the idea that they can do whatever they want. According to “Criminology Articles” on police discretion, it talks about there are three categories or variables on how it is used such as, offender’s variable, situation variables, and the system’s variables. Offender variable is when “aspects-are directly linked to the offender including their age, race, economic status, gender, and health among others” (Scott 1). This means when a police officer is using discretion, they are making decisions based on what someone looks like, what their financial background seems like, if they are young or if they are older, and if they are healthy. When it comes to situation variables, this depends on the “seriousness of the crime, the type of property involved in the crime, and who initiated the investigations” ( Scott ). This means depending on what crime was committed police will use discretion to make a decision depending on how serious the crime is and to see if any property damaged is involved. The last

discretion with regard to enforcing and interpreting the law.” Here I will discuss both pros

The reality of discretion in some cases is very possibly discrimination. As indicated above, the problem lies within the enforcement side of the issue. How can one hope to show discrimination when it can be legally explained in some instances, as the execution of discretion by the officer involved in the situation. Discretion is and always will be a very important part of the criminal justice system. Even though there may be those instances as the writer described above where justice does not seem to prevail, society must acknowledge the necessity for discretion as a tool to be used by law

In the United States of America, law enforcement has the ability to make their own judgement, while encountering criminals. Although discretion is at all levels of the police department, law enforcement agencies can easily make unlawful decision. Researchers determined that police officers are prohibited from using offensive language or speaking discourteously, abusing their authority, and using unnecessary force (Carroll, Kovath, & Pereira, 2004). Law enforcement officers are expected to respect their community and ensure that all citizens are kept safe. Some police activity can occur in a private view without supervision from the public, which allow police officers to make a reasonable decision. Police often make quick reaction when it comes

You should be able to know from experience and what you have learned so far to make the correct decisions in situations. The fourth form of discretion is discretion as liberty. This states that Discretion is not where the law ends, nor is it the same as intellectually deriving principles from rules. It's about permission to act as a free and equal agent, and using that permission in extending the rights and duties of office (under color of law) toward a vision of liberty, inalienable rights, and the kinds of things that no majority, rule, or principle can ever take away (Kleinig 1996). This form appeals more to the rights of people and to being free. This form is trying to say to make decisions keeping in mind that you are a free person and that you are equal to every other human being. The fifth and final form is discretion as license. This form states that Discretion is the opposite of standard expectations. It's the privilege to go against the rules, disobey your superiors, be less than optimal or perfect all the time, all without degenerating the rules or eroding the trust between you, your superiors, or the public. License (not licentiousness) involves a sense of accountability that does not have to be formally recognized or structural (Kleinig 1996). This form is one that I think is the most confusing for some people but is one that has truth to it. It’s basically stating that police have the privilege to go