Miscarriage of Justice or wrongful conviction is probably today most biting headache for the legal and justice fraternity. With the discovery of wrongful conviction on the rise, the state and convicts engage in a diabolic tussle on actual innocence and to what extent the law serves its people. These fissures in the Justice system inspired this research. The research will provide content analysis of the state's policy on wrongful convictions, give a detailed report on the causes, process of being exonerates and compensation of exonerates. Though the wrongful conviction policy is tentatively young in the justice system, most states have incorporated it into their system and have mechanisms of aiding exonerate. The importance of the statute is discussed below.
According to Huff, wrongful convictions are a miscarriage of justice where persons are arrested and charged for criminal offenses, plead guilty or are found guilty, but are in fact innocent. This breach of the constitution and has attracted a multi-disciplinary approach from scientists and scholars in an attempt to explain the new yet essential aspect in the legal system (Leo, 2005). The public opinion helps formulate public policy that governs emerging trend in wrongful conviction. An increasing number of convicts are seeking to overturn their ruling in an epic tussle with the state. Wrongful conviction is wholly dependent on effective participation of the state, police, defense lawyers and the judge. The public affects the policy of wrongful conviction, though there is no measurable public opinion (Burstein, 2010)
[...] The public opinion helps formulate public policy that governs emerging trend in wrongful conviction. An increasing number of convicts are seeking to overturn their ruling in an epic tussle with the state. Wrongful conviction is wholly dependent on effective participation of the state, police, defense lawyers and the judge. The public affects the policy of wrongful conviction, though there is no measurable public opinion (Burstein, 2010) Literature review Since its inception, wrongful conviction has been subjected to a series of research to fully understand this emerging phenomenon. [...]
[...] L. (1998). Basic interests: The importance of group in politics and in political Science. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Borchard, E. M. (1932). Convicting the Innocent. New York: Double day. [...]
[...] According to Scheck et al. (2000) 21% of DNA exonerations involve use of jailhouse snitches. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL The government guarantees each convict of a state lawyer. Lack of proper legislation allows most of these counsels engage in professionalism and often watch as their clients are convicted. The counsel mostly fails due to their inadequate preparedness for trial work. There is no good remuneration as compared to the private sector. This leaves the lesser in the community at the pity of the well to do who can afford to hire lawyers for a good lawsuit. [...]
[...] There are several causes of wrongful conviction OVERZEALOUS AND UNETHICAL COPS AND PROSECUTORS The law grants a great deal of discretionary authority to law enforcers. This allows the law enforcers to slip into unethical or criminal behavior. In his post-conviction DNA exonerations research, Scheck et al noted a 63% police involvement in prosecutorial misconduct. This is against the very spirit of professionalism. This jeopardizes public safety by arrests of the wrong persons leaving the real criminals free. Cops embellish evidence and offer false testimony. [...]
[...] Borrowing from the current wave of wrongful conviction, the number could even be higher ((Borchard, 1932). In 1972, study showed that Americans were ignorant on issues concerning death penalties and would be less supportive if fully informed 2005)). Later in 1983 another study showed that only 33% agreed that there is too much danger of executing innocently ((Huff C. A., 1986). The following 20 years saw the American people overwhelmingly oppose and express their displeasure in capital punishment. This was partly due to the inception of the center for wrongful conviction that became an eye opener of the gloss malpractice in the American courts. [...]
using our reader.