Topic: Should the Rights of the Accused Be Curtailed?
Topic: Should the rights of the accused be curtailed?
Can we as a nation, strike a balance between the liberty of the individual and the safety of citizens? And in order to strike that balance, should the bill of rights protect those accused of crimes? This contentious issue is one that causes us to truly think about our constitution’s purpose and how it is currently evolving within our country’s judicial system. On the one hand, many believe that because the nations’ crimes being committed are increasing in severity the rights of those accused of crimes should be curtailed. While on the other hand, many are not in favor of curtailing rights because they feel our legal system is designed to be just for all persons. The framers of our constitution, made a special emphasis on the rights of the accused in order to protect the individual from tyranny and unjustly convictions. Now as time progresses, we must question if the constitution protects the rights of the accused more than its victims and if so how can we go about striking the balance between the two.
History The Framers of the constitution carried a great deal of baggage with them regarding government. Coming out of Britain, where the government represented tyranny and engaged in unfair practices that disrupted and often times ruined the lives of so many. The framers of this constitution did not want the same principles incorporated in the foundation of the thirteen colonies later becoming the United States of America. That is why the Constitution and the Bill of Rights showed a great deal of emphasis on the individual and the protections those individuals were entitled to. The fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and fourteenth amendments were all aimed at ensuring the rights of those accused of crimes be protected. The writ of habeas corpus, trial by jury, self- incrimination, double jeopardy, no excessive punishments, search warrants and due process of law are all protections indicated
Can we as a nation, strike a balance between the liberty of the individual and the safety of citizens? And in order to strike that balance, should the bill of rights protect those accused of crimes? This contentious issue is one that causes us to truly think about our constitution’s purpose and how it is currently evolving within our country’s judicial system. On the one hand, many believe that because the nations’ crimes being committed are increasing in severity the rights of those accused of crimes should be curtailed. While on the other hand, many are not in favor of curtailing rights because they feel our legal system is designed to be just for all persons. The framers of our constitution, made a special emphasis on the rights of the accused in order to protect the individual from tyranny and unjustly convictions. Now as time progresses, we must question if the constitution protects the rights of the accused more than its victims and if so how can we go about striking the balance between the two.
History The Framers of the constitution carried a great deal of baggage with them regarding government. Coming out of Britain, where the government represented tyranny and engaged in unfair practices that disrupted and often times ruined the lives of so many. The framers of this constitution did not want the same principles incorporated in the foundation of the thirteen colonies later becoming the United States of America. That is why the Constitution and the Bill of Rights showed a great deal of emphasis on the individual and the protections those individuals were entitled to. The fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and fourteenth amendments were all aimed at ensuring the rights of those accused of crimes be protected. The writ of habeas corpus, trial by jury, self- incrimination, double jeopardy, no excessive punishments, search warrants and due process of law are all protections indicated
References: Alderman, E., & Kennedy, C. (1991). In Our Defense: The Bill of Rights in Action. New York, N.Y.: Morrow. Bianchi, H. (1994). Justice as Sanctuary: Toward a New System of Crime Control. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kappeler, V. E. (2006). The Police and Society: Touchstone Readings (3rd Ed.). Long Grove, Ill.: Waveland Press. "Protecting rights of accused." Washington Times [Washington, DC] 16 July 2006: B05. Gale Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 01 Mar. 2012. "Presumption of innocence a human right: SC." DNA [Daily News & Analysis] 29 Dec. 2011. General OneFile. Web. 11 Mar. 2012. Sorensen, L. (2004). The Scottsboro Boys Trial: A Primary Source Account. New York: Rosen Pub. Group. Zappata, S. (2010). The Rights of Victims v. The Rights of the Accused. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 8(1), 137-164. Retrieved February 19, 2012, from the Oxford database.