The Crime Control Model
The crime control and due process models are mainly involved in challenging crime and issuing the right justice. Herbert Packer is regarded as the founding father of research models in crime processes. He contributed significantly to developing systematic thought on the administration of criminal justice in society. Crime control entails ensuring that there is no violence and unrest. Consequently, condemns any person found to have committed a crime often termed as criminal (Ellis, & Nash, 2012) (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
In the crime control model, The legislature serves as the focus instead of the courts to provide criminal sanctions. Such sanctions offer a definite guarantee of public order and social stability. According to Parker, crime control would be successful with efficient police investigations and prosecutions. The crime control model is concerned with early, administrative fact-finding initiatives where police have broad investigative powers to arrest suspects for questioning. Therefore, this model provides a practical approach for police and prosecutors to screen suspects to face trial in courts.
The Due Process Models
Due process ensures individuals have their rights, while crime control ensures enactment of justice to criminals for committed crimes. However, it becomes challenging to bring an individual to justice because of the due process model. Moreover, because criminal agencies need to uphold individual’s rights, despite one being charged of committing a crime (Ellis, & Nash, 2012). Hence, rights such as the right to bail where the individual get released from police custody tend to affect the process of bringing the criminal to justice (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Due process usually tends to reject or discard the notions of the crime control model. The crime control model usually deals with understanding what occurred during a crime so as to convict the perpetrator. Consequently,, due process tends to swing in favor of the perpetrator, stating that the crime victim may have given inaccurate data. Also, policies such as a search warrant remains essential before criminal agencies commence search to the criminal (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Criminal Justice Ethics (Models in Criminal Justice Research)
Ethics is the study and investigation of what realizes terrible or great behavior in a workplace, group, or state. It can likewise mean a system of good values that separate guidelines for conduct, taking into account an individual’s or gatherings’ thoughts of what is alluring or not. Criminal justice ethics is the study of morals as applied in the territory of law implementation commissions and authorities (Cowburn, Gelsthorpe, & Wahidin, 2016) (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Moreover, a glance at justice ethics states another meaning of right and wrong may change as time goes on. What individuals might consider morally right or wrong on the contrary might not quite emerge the same as what remains legitimately viewed as good or evil. Usually, a continued study of morals is required of implementation organizations. Moreover, this specific study examines morals in justice frameworks and how they influence the outcomes they expect to get.
An example of criminal justice ethics involves CCTV policies and procedures. The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) in Washington DC utilizes administrative strategies set through policies to avoid mishandling. Consequently, It expresses that to guarantee the viability of the CCTV framework and secure it against potential misuse, they have built up a far-reaching General Order that sets up strategies and methods to utilize this framework (Aviram, 2019). In crisis cases, the Chief of Police can retrieve CCTV footage (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Informed Consent and Confidentiality
Informed consent implies the approval of a proposed action by the recipient of a person affected by the action’s effects. Typically, informed consent is a legal requirement in many fields. The essence of obtaining informed consent is to show that the person’s participation in activities is voluntary and not compelled. Furthermore, Informed consent reduces the liability of parties for the actions they take.
Consequently, informed consent is integral to the work of human service workers. In California, informed consent requirements are based on Cal. 3d 229 (Jones, 2012). Further, In the human service providers context, the law requires full disclosure of the information to the patients or clients. This enables them to make a correct judgment on the treatment option that they would like (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Maintaining respondent confidentiality is one of the major ethical issues in criminal justice research, which has continuously presented a challenge for qualitative researchers (Rhodes, 2010). Moreover, presentation of some rich and detailed individual accounts on social life aspects while researching creates ambiguity in social research because different disciplines and bodies give various opinions and approaches towards maintaining confidentiality and anonymity (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
In research ethics, anonymity and privacy appear mostly used interchangeably. Anonymity means that research participants or respondents remains unidentified or unknown by any person, with the researchers included. Some research phenomena call for strictness in maintaining anonymity, and therefore, any action by the researchers that breaches the participants’ anonymity usually considered unethical (Jones, 2012). As used in research ethics, confidentiality means that researchers can know or identify respondents or participants, but access to this information should not go beyond the researcher (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
The participants trust the researchers with their information, which they cannot disclose without the participants’ permission. The anonymity and confidentiality issues closely connect with another ethical research issue in beneficence rights, respect for fidelity, and dignity. Protection of anonymity entails avoiding the creation of links between individual responses and the research subject’s identity. In cases where it is difficult for researchers to promise anonymity, confidentiality has to be addressed, which broadly entails private information management by researchers to protect the identity of the subject (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Research Topic: Technological Innovations in Crime Prevention and Policing. A Review of the Research on Implementation and Impact
Technological innovations and advancements have bolstered efforts to prevent crime compared to traditional crime control and prevention forms. Moreover, there are two types of technological innovations identified; information-based technologies and material-based technologies (Byrne, & Marx, 2011). These technologies have revolutionized police technology by changing how police were organized and how they operated using available resources: automobiles, telephones, and the two-way radio. Since this research is on technology and social control, it focuses on some broader social and ethical implications of recent technological implications (Models in Criminal Justice Research).
Over the years, police activities have been shrouded with moral and ethical concerns. Consequently, technological interventions will transform policing and develop science strategies to increase police performance (Byrne, & Marx, 2011). Society needs police who can effectively and efficiently use technological resources to deliver justice. Nevertheless, technological resources can divert vital resources away from traditional crime prevention and police strategies that make society a lot safer without adversities such as increased public distrust, erosion of personal freedom, and emphasis on coercive control.
Aviram, H. (2019). Adversarial Bias and the Criminal Process: Infusing the Organizational Perspective on Criminal Courts with Insights from Behavioral Science. The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice: Studies Inspired by Malcolm Feeley, 19.
Byrne, J., & Marx, G. (2011). Technological innovations in crime prevention and policing. A review of the research on implementation and impact. Journal of Policy Studies, 20(3), 17-40.
Cowburn, M., Gelsthorpe, L., & Wahidin, A. (Eds.). (2016). Research ethics in criminology: Dilemmas, issues, and solutions. Taylor & Francis.
Ellis, T., & Nash, M. (2012). Crime control or due process?. In Debates in Criminal Justice: Key Themes and Issues (pp. 7-32). Routledge.
Jones, J. A. (2012). Ethical considerations in criminal justice research: Informed consent and confidentiality. Inquiries Journal, 4(08).
Rhodes, R. (2010). Rethinking research ethics. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(10), 19-36.