Safeguarding criminal justice system from wrongful convictions

Research Question and Introduction Development
Topic: Safeguarding the criminal justice system from wrongful convictions through an efficient innocence program
Research Question: What aspects of the innocence program need improvement, and in what ways, in order to guard the judicial system from wrongful convictions? (Rossi, Lipsey & Freeman, 2004)
Introduction
Wrongful conviction is an abuse of justice. It entails the sentencing and subsequent punishment of someone for crimes they never committed (Huff & Killias, 2013). Wrongful convictions can happen in civil and criminal cases alike. Many criminal justice processes have been tailored to overcome this possibility and overturn such erroneous judicial decisions. It is quite difficult to achieve this, however, due to fundamental challenges in the judicial system. Wrongful convictions may take years or decades to overturn. In some instances the discovery of innocence happens after a person has already served their time in prison, after they are dead or after they are executed. Wrongful convictions and miscarriage of justice are often times synonymous. They are phrases used to refer to an unfair trial. The exploitation of better mechanisms of collecting, handling and presenting evidence is an avenue with potential to alleviate wrongful convictions. DNA evidence has gained popularity in recent years and has been used to exonerate suspects from false convictions.
There are many people who have been exonerated of criminal charges. In what was referred to as the trial of the century the defense team in the O.J Simpson versus the People case relied on DNA evidence to exonerate him of the double murder case (Abramson, 1996). A research conducted by Irazola et al. (2014) revealed that the wrongfully convicted, the victim and the actual offender suffer psychologically at the point of conviction and exoneration of the wrongfully convicted individual. Grounds (2004) performed a descriptive study on men whose convictions were overturned after appeal after their release from a long period in prison. All men apart from two were from the U.K. the researched revealed extensive morbidity in their psychology. Fourteen men were assessed as enduring changes in personality as a consequence of catastrophic experiences, 12 of them were diagnosed with PTSD (Post traumatic stress disorder), and many of them showed anxiety and mood disorders (Grounds, 2004).
Grounds (2004) uncovered fundamental issues with social adjustments and psychology for the victims of wrongful convictions and their families. The challenges experienced by the family were similar to those experienced by families of war veterans. Grounds (2004) conclude by emphasizing the fact that miscarriage of justice and the subsequent punishment has far reaching psychological problems for victims and their families. Even the culprit suffers.
Topic Rationale
It is necessary, urgent and fundamental that victims of wrongful convictions are accorded a fair chance to plead their case. Their exoneration must be expedited if the purpose of the criminal justice system is to be upheld. Any criminal justice system, no matter how solid and progressive it may be, that allows an innocent person to go to prison as a result of falsified evidence, wrong identity, errors in judgment etc. must engage in a thorough review of its judicial processes in order to seal loopholes. In the people v. O.J Simpson case it was proven in court that a former LAPD detective by the name Mark Fuhrman mishandled the crime scene and presented force evidence in court (Toobin, 2016). It was quite clear that the LAPD has been falsifying evidence in court in order to convict suspects. This revelation led to a thorough review of the LAPD with an objective of cleaning up the system and exonerating victims of wrongful convictions emanating from false evidence. With an understanding of what victims of a wrongful conviction go through as well as their families it is only fair that the criminal and civil justice systems are safeguarded from such a situation. The right to a fair trial and thorough examination of evidence presented before a court of law is essential. All the players in a criminal justice system from the judge, jury, stage attorney, the police, the dense attorney etc. must be above reproach.
Motivation behind this Evaluation
The people v. O.J Simpson case is a good pointer to the underlying issues that often go unnoticed in the criminal justice system. Abramson (1996) makes glaring revelations of the rot that describes the judicial system by pointing out the issues. The key highlight in any wrongful conviction case is often laxity from key players in the judicial system. An evaluation of the innocence program is likely to reveal the social impact an enhanced judicial system would have. As alluded to by Grounds (2004) and Huff and Killias (2013) there are deep ramifications of a lopsided judicial system. The judiciary and justice system has been touted as only serving justice to the rich and mighty. Often the middle class and poor in society are the victims of miscarriage of justice. Justice is bought: that is what they say. With a government funded and efficient innocence program the poor in society might get justice as well.


References
Abramson, J. B. (1996). Postmortem: The O.J. Simpson case. New York: Basic Books.
Grounds, A. (2004). Psychological consequences of wrongful conviction and imprisonment. Violence and Abuse Abstracts, 10, 4.). Sage Publications.
Huff, C. R., & Killias, M. (2013). Wrongful Convictions and Miscarriages of Justice: Causes and Remedies in North American and European Criminal Justice Systems. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Irazola, S., Williamson, E., Stricker, J., & Niedzwiecki, E. (2014). Addressing the Impact of Wrongful Convictions on Crime Victims. Nij Journal, 274, 274.)
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE Publications. Retrieved 13, January, 2018, from https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2005/SPP405/Rossi_Evaluation_kap.1-5.pdf
Toobin, J. (2016). The people v O.J. Simpson. London: Cornerstone Digital