Criminal Justice System Procedures

CJA
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM PROCEDURES

MODULE 1 case Jessica M. Tabor

TUI University

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM PROCEDURES I believe that the president has established a policy that backs what the United States is trying and overall is the backbone of this country which is freedom and a certain respect for all of its citizens of certain rights. With that being said, its thought that by setting this standard to treat rules of the UCMJ violators differently but with the same respect within the country while other countries could care less how they treat their violators of crimes is much different. As the U.S gives the same rights to defendants of other countries to a trail and a lawyer with certain respect and privileges sometimes seems a little much. We will give them their rights to a trail and the support but overall they might still be just as guilty, but procedure is procedures. The tribunal does not seem to violate the procedures of criminal justice because it does not seem to target the only crimes that are usually in a civil criminal trial matters. The UCMJ is meant for military members or anyone involved with a military affiliation during a time in war in connection with crimes accused against them. They are given the same rights to have a trial and to contact a lawyer. In connection with the crime the military will conduct its own trail which may include a civilian defense attorney if needed. When a violator of the UCMJ is presumed guilty and charged with an article, they are punished in different ways then civilian members in a civilian trail. Military members have their own set of punishments different from civilian punishments, but even worse foreign terrorist will usually rot or be punished to death. Another difference between civilian and military is the way the prosecution and trail is held which in the civilian sector it can be publicly viewed but with military its only open to the witness, prosecution, defendant and any other important parties involves. Since the wars with the Middle East we have had lots of conflicting issues with the terrorist especially all the ones that were are still are held at Guantanamo Bay Cuba’s prisoners holding center. They are held there because the US has no room for them plus why would we bring them back to the U.S for trial, instead they are in Cuba waiting a trial that might not happen or release if and when it comes. When suggested the tribunal, everyone assumed that the Tribunal would create a confusion of fairness and unclear of the circumstances because of the protection by the government on whom what when where and why is all up to the Government/military proceedings. But in return this bill requested that it be open to the public, except in extenuating circumstances which I am sure there is a reason to make most qualify in that category in some instance, but to qualify they must be fundamentally fair, and as long as the minimum requirements were met then it’s good to go. Example of such would be the convicted of the 9-11 attacks and the Al Qaeda organization that would be considered in this category and anyone that tried or successfully plotted a terror attack against the U.S from any other country. Overall I do not believe that having military tribunals is the best and most sufficient plan in place, there is no way that we can turn over mass killing terrorist to the supreme court for prosecution and place them in civilian court systems and civilian prisons let alone in the United States. These are killers who hate Americans and hate the U.S.A it’s in our best interest to keep them out and let the military handle them correctly. Yes I do believe that people deserve to die that would sacrifice their own lives to kill for what…….? Status……acceptance…… absolutely nothing that makes since to me or ever will so anyone in that category should die so how it happens or when is not my problem just as long as it does. We as Americans will stand up and we will punish one way or another. So ever is in the best interest of the United States I support because I do not want terrorist in the U.S simply for prosecution etc for something they don’t deserve by being a mass terrorist killer.

Works Cited

Draft of Tribunal Rules Would Require Public Trials, Death-Penalty Unanimity
By Jess Bravin. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Dec 28, 2001. pg. A.18

Cited: Draft of Tribunal Rules Would Require Public Trials, Death-Penalty Unanimity By Jess Bravin. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Dec 28, 2001. pg. A.18