Civil versus Criminal Liability Introduction

Criminal justice practitioners do have a civil liability that puts them at risk of being sued by the public. The purpose of civil liability is to encourage accountability and responsible in the field of criminal justice. For that reason, “local governments can now be held liable for the conduct of police officers and jail personnel. In addition, sheriffs, police chiefs, and mid- level supervisors can be held personally liable for the conduct of their subordinates” (Barrineau, 1987, p. 35). Criminal justice agencies can also be held criminally liable for their actions if their behaviors break the law. This paper will examine the difference between criminal and civil liability and show how each relates to criminal justice agencies and practitioners.

The Principles of Criminal Law

The rule of law principle is what binds all to the laws passed by government in the U.S. In order for a person or agency to be held to the rule of law, the law must be:

· Publicly promulgated

· Equally enforced

· Independently adjudicated

· And consistent with international human rights principles (U.S. Courts, 2018a).

There can be no discrimination in terms of who is held accountable to the law. Once a law is made known to the public, all are bound to it. However, the law must be applied to all and it must be enforced in an impartial, non-biased manner. The law must also conform to international norms. If these criteria are met, no agency or criminal justice practitioner can be considered above the law. The rule of law, one applied, embraces all people and agencies in the nation. Any violation of the rule of law can lead to a person or agency being held criminally liable and prosecuted by the state.

When it comes to prosecuting a criminal case, other principles of criminal law include: a) the presumption of innocence—i.e., that one is innocent until proven guilty; b) the burden of proof—i.e., the prosecution must supply the proof if making a charge of guilt; c) the right to remain silent—i.e., one does not have to answer questions during an interrogation; and d) the rule of double jeopardy—i.e., no one can be punished twice for the same crime (General Principles of Criminal Law, 2018). These principles must be observed in criminal...

In civil liability a civilian charges that the offending party has personally injured the civilian, in which case the offending party is held responsible for damages to the person in civil court. A civil action begins with one party filing a complaint against another: “the complaint describes the plaintiff’s damages or injury, explains how the defendant caused the harm, shows that the court has jurisdiction, and asks the court to order relief” (U.S. Courts, 2018b).
The Civil Liabilities of Criminal Justice Agencies and Practitioners

Criminal justice agencies and practitioners are subject to the rule of law just like everyone else in the country. Just because they work in the field of the law does not mean they are above the law. However, the other principles are not quite as strict. For example, the burden of proof principle is not applied in the same way. Instead of the burden of proof falling on the prosecution, in a civil case, the individual filing the suit only needs to provide a “preponderance of evidence”—this means just enough evidence to “tip the balance in favor of the plaintiff”—i.e., “if the plaintiff proves that it is more likely than not that the defendant was responsible for her injuries or loss, she wins” (Nolo, 2018). Other principles apply as well: the individual may sue over negligence, such as the agency or practitioner failing to exercise due care which resulted in some loss or damage to the plaintiff. The individual may sue over purposeful acts—such as spreading false rumors that the agency or practitioner knew were false.

For example, President Trump could end up suing the FBI and some of the practitioners in the FBI who knowingly disseminated false information about him using the Steele dossier, which was full of allegations that could not be verified and yet that were used as proof to launch an investigation into Trump and his associates. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh could, if it were to come out that his accuser of sexual assault was lying, sue her…