Ethical Dilemmas in Criminal Justice: Three Case Studies
This paper examines three interconnected ethical dilemmas in the criminal justice system. The first case analyzes a judge deciding whether to prioritize punitive sentencing or mental health treatment for an addicted defendant, applying virtue ethics, duty ethics, and utilitarianism. The second case evaluates a district attorney whose aggressive prosecution of police officers for minor infractions undermines her broader mandate to reduce street crime, assessed through a utilitarian lens. The third case considers a new police officer who conducted an illegal search and must decide whether to report the mistake or attempt to conceal it, framed through virtue ethics. Together, the three cases illustrate how classical ethical frameworks apply to real-world criminal justice decision-making.
- The Judge: Mental Health Treatment vs. Punitive Sentencing: Judge weighs community pressure against defendant's mental health needs
- Ethical Frameworks Supporting the Judge's Decision: Virtue ethics, duty ethics, and utilitarianism justify lighter sentence
- The DA: Prosecuting Police vs. Serving the Community: DA's anti-police prosecution undermines broader public safety mandate
- The Officer: Illegal Search and the Ethics of Honesty: New officer must choose honesty over concealment after illegal search
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Each case study is self-contained yet consistently applies named ethical frameworks (virtue ethics, utilitarianism, duty ethics), giving the paper analytical coherence across all three scenarios.
- The paper explicitly weighs competing consequences before arriving at a recommendation, modeling the kind of deliberate moral reasoning expected in applied ethics writing.
- Citations are used purposefully — Vogel et al. (2014) on mental illness and incarceration, Johnson et al. (2015) on restorative justice, and Mill (2008) on utilitarianism — grounding practical arguments in scholarly sources.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates multi-framework ethical analysis: rather than selecting a single theory and applying it mechanically, each case is evaluated through two or more ethical lenses, showing how different frameworks can converge on the same recommendation (or illuminate different dimensions of a problem). This approach signals higher-order critical thinking in applied ethics.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized into three numbered case studies. Each follows a consistent internal structure: (1) description of the dilemma and competing interests, (2) analysis of motivations and potential consequences, (3) a recommended course of action, and (4) the ethical justification for that recommendation. This parallel structure makes the paper easy to follow and allows direct comparison across cases.
The Judge: Mental Health Treatment vs. Punitive Sentencing
The situation in this case is that Woodrow Wilson is in need of mental health care, and his actions are caused by acute addiction and associated mental illness. He may receive the care he needs if he is given a lighter sentence and sent to county jail, but the business community wants the maximum sentence, which would mean state lockup and no mental health assistance. From a punitive justice standpoint, it makes sense that Wilson be given the maximum sentence to satisfy the business community. However, from a humane perspective, it is obvious that Wilson needs mental health care, which he will not receive if sent to state imprisonment. The judge can pacify the business community — and potentially secure his seat, if he is elected and depends on the community for votes — by sentencing Wilson to the maximum per guidelines. From a humane perspective, however, the judge would do right by Wilson by sending him to county jail and ensuring he receives mental health help.
The judge should act from the standpoint of virtue ethics, which focuses on doing the right thing that will build a person's character based on universal virtues. In many cases, crime is shown to be largely a mental health problem, and the underlying issues too often go unaddressed. To stop the cycle of crime and address the root causes, mental health must be addressed. This should not be a matter of the judge thinking about his standing with the business community. He is there to preside over each case and assess what needs to be done. For Wilson, helping him deal with his issues would be the best outcome, and it would reflect good character on the part of the judge.
Also from a utilitarian standpoint, it would be best for the common good of society. If criminals are simply locked up for a few years without their mental health issues being treated, nothing is truly solved. The judge would simply be placing a temporary band-aid on the problem. He has a responsibility to act in the best interests of the community — and in this case, that means focusing on what can be done to prevent this type of behavior from Wilson in the future. There is ample evidence to show that the incarcerated need mental health help (Vogel, Stephens, & Siebels, 2014). The judge should take that into account when making his decision.
The consequence of giving Wilson the lighter sentence and ensuring he receives mental health care would be that the business community turns against the judge and he possibly loses his seat at re-election. However, for Wilson it would mean potentially getting the care he needs and breaking his addiction.
The consequence of giving Wilson the maximum sentence and sending him to state prison would mean that the business community would support the judge at re-election. However, Wilson would receive no mental health care and the likelihood of recidivism would remain high.
References
Holmes, A. (2007). Ethics: Approaching moral decisions. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
Johnson, T., Quintana, E., Kelly, D. A., Graves, C., Schub, O., Newman, P., & Casas, C. (2015). Restorative Justice Hubs Concept Paper. Revista de Mediación, 8(2), 2340-9754.
Mill, J. S. (2008). Utilitarianism. Copyright: Jonathan Bennett.
Vogel, M., Stephens, K. D., & Siebels, D. (2014). Mental illness and the criminal justice system. Sociology Compass, 8(6), 627–638.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.