Criminal Court Visit
The general majority believe that crime is on a constant rise, although statistics show offenses are at their lowest since the early 1990s. Criminologists blame news coverage for the unwarranted increase f the public’s awareness f crime versus actual crime. Politicians exploit the sensationalized crime as a way to relate to the public’s perception that the increased crime needs special attention, so they manipulate the reports by the media. Although the television has been harmful in it’s’ distortion f reality, it is useful in keeping people informed on criminal information and warnings when there is a real concern.
Criminal procedure is generally based on the idea f obtaining balance in the system. Criminal procedure is composed f the rules governing the series f proceedings through which the substantive criminal law is enforced. (Law about Criminal Procedures) The public perceives that there are not enough rules regulating police and that police have too much discretion in obtaining information and evidence in charging and individual with a crime. Unfortunately, when you make it easier to prove guilt, then it becomes harder to establish innocence. (Overview f Criminal Procedure) The public may perceive that the ends justify the means and that the criminal procedure as it is written today may violate or deprive an individual f the constitutional rights. An example f one court case. U.S. vs. Dunnock, 295 f.3d 431 (4th Cir. 2002) Defendant, "by virtue f the fact he was standing outside his home in the presence f police as they were about to execute a valid search warrant, had all the benefits f the protections afforded by the knock and announce. There are basic guidelines governing criminal procedures, such as. reasonable suspicion is used in stopping or frisking an individual, and probable cause is used to arrest, sear, or detain a suspect. Criminal procedure must balance the defendant’s right and the state’s interest in a speedy and efficient trial with the desire for justice
The public perception f the courts is either the jurors are not fully informed as to the ramifications or what their specific duties are pertaining to the case at hand. Many time juries will not be informed that their decision will pass down an extremely harsh sentence for fear that they will not find guilt because they do not like the sentencing guidelines for the criminal activity. For example. the jury foreperson in the Waco massacre case wept openly when she discovered how much prison time the federal government gave those defendants. She further stated, if the jury had known the accused were going to receive such severe sentences, that even though they were guilty f the crimes, they would have never been convicted (Jury Nullification). The statement that was made by the foreperson f that jury would have nullified the jury. If a juror disagrees with the law and court instructions a judge can remove the juror. The perception from the public on this matter is if the juror disagrees with the majority f the jurors the judge can remove that particular one. The judges and prosecutors not only blame the mishandling f many criminal court cases and appeals on the increased case loads, but they fault political agendas and the pendulum swing f what the public perceives as criminal