Why is Criminal Law Important in usa ?
The criminal law system is a multifaceted entity that permeates every aspect of law and order within our society, impacting individuals in countless ways. Whether a police officer interacts with you on the streets, or you’re summoned to serve on a jury, you are engaging with the criminal justice system. This vast network encompasses our prison system, courts, and law enforcement agencies.
Your voting decisions on laws and legislation shape the criminal justice system, helping to define societal norms and acceptable behaviors. These laws delineate the conduct of our police force, establish sentencing guidelines, and determine who will be held in custody. The criminal justice system’s reach extends beyond incarceration, as those released on probation or parole continue to remain within its purview.
The influence of the criminal justice system reverberates throughout society, as the consequences of incarceration affect more than just the incarcerated individual. The system’s breadth and interconnectedness are far more extensive than many citizens realize.
The criminal justice system represents a significant portion of our societal structure, consuming a substantial amount of taxpayers’ funds. However, many individuals are only familiar with fragments of this vast system.
Civil vs. Criminal Law: Case Example
The distinction between civil and criminal law is primarily based on the consequences of breaching either. A violation of civil law typically leads to a lawsuit or potential financial liability, while transgressing criminal law can result in criminal charges and subsequent conviction. Civil law governs disputes between individuals, businesses, or other entities, where one party may need to compensate for damages inflicted upon the other. Contrarily, criminal law addresses cases involving crimes, with the perpetrator facing punitive measures.
A prime example of an action leading to both criminal and civil proceedings is the 1995 case involving Orenthal James Simpson. The lawsuit, titled People of the State of California, et al.Orenthal James Simpson, was a criminal trial, whereas Goldman v. Simpson was a civil trial. Both cases stemmed from the same incident but were adjudicated in different court systems.
Simpson, in a high-profile case, faced criminal charges for the alleged murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown, and Ronald Goldman. The evidence that pointed towards Simpson’s involvement in the crime was overwhelming. It included his blood at the murder scene, the victims’ blood in his vehicle, bloody footprints matching his shoes, and a glove matching one found at the crime scene in his vehicle. Despite the considerable evidence, Simpson was absolved of the criminal charges, but he was held liable for wrongful death in the civil trial.
The disparity in the verdicts can be attributed to the differing requirements for conviction in criminal and civil trials. A unanimous decision from the jury is necessary for a criminal conviction, but not always for civil cases. During the civil trial for wrongful death, additional evidence was presented, leading to Simpson being ordered to pay restitution to the victims’ families.
Principles of criminal law
Historically, criminal law has been rooted in the notion that a crime is fundamentally a morally reprehensible act. The core aim of criminal sanctions was twofold: to compel the offender to atone for harm caused and to cleanse his moral guilt, with the severity of the penalty directly proportionate to the offender’s guilt.
In more contemporary times, a shift towards more rational and pragmatic perspectives has been observed. Some of the most well-known intellectuals of the Enlightenment era are the Italian Cesare Beccaria, the Frenchmen Montesquieu and Voltaire, the Britishman Jeremy Bentham, and the Dutchman P.J.A. von Feuerbach from Germany advocated that the primary role of criminal law should be crime prevention.
The evolution of social sciences gave rise to innovative ideas, including the safeguarding of the public and the offender’s reform. This objective is evident in the 1998 German criminal code, which instructed courts to consider the anticipated impact of the punishment on the offender’s future societal life.
In the United States, the Model Penal Code, proposed by the American Law Institute in 1962, stipulates that criminal law should aim “to provide a clear warning of the behavior deemed to constitute an offense” and “to foster the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders”.
Since then, there has been a revived interest in the idea of general prevention, encompassing both the deterrence of potential offenders and the reinforcement and consolidation of societal norms.
Substantive criminal law
Substantive criminal law encompasses various elements: It defines what constitutes punishable offenses, categorizes crimes (for instance, felonies and misdemeanours in the U.S, or crime, délit, and contravention in continental law), applies principles and doctrines to the adjudication of crime that further refine criminal legislation provisions (including self-defense, necessity, insanity, among others), and establishes principles for national jurisdiction over internationally-related crimes (those committed by foreigners, nationals abroad, or on ships and aircraft outside the national domain and waters).
Attempt
Within the framework of Anglo-American law, a particular category of crimes exists, referred to as inchoate or preliminary crimes. This classification is unique because guilt is ascribed even if the original criminal intent was not realized. Crimes of this nature include incitement or solicitation, which involve persuading or asking someone else to commit a crime. Certain forms of solicitation, such as for bribery, illicit activities, or military mutiny, are considered criminal. The Model Penal Code along with several U.S. states categorize conspiracy as an inchoate crime. However, other states and federal law distinguish conspiracy as a separate primary offense, sometimes imposing harsher penalties than the crime that was the objective of the conspiracy. As an illustration, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a two-year imprisonment sentence for conspiring to obstruct mail delivery in Clune et al. v. U.S. (1895), even though the maximum penalty for obstructing mail delivery itself would only have been a fine not exceeding $100.
The most significant subcategory of inchoate offenses is the crime of attempt. This involves any action intended to carry out a criminal act that, while failing to be fully realized, extends beyond mere preparation and dangerously approaches the completion of the intended harm. The distinction between preparatory acts and a genuine attempt is often challenging to establish. In some Anglo-American and continental European legal systems, an attempt can also involve actions that would be considered criminal if the circumstances were as the perpetrator believed them to be. A defense of “impossibility” is only acknowledged when the error is demonstrated to be unequivocally unreasonable. Unlike certain continental European jurisdictions, traditional law does not typically offer a defense to an offender who voluntarily refrains from inflicting the intended harm once their actions have progressed beyond simple preparation. However, the Model Penal Code and several U.S.
State statutes provide an affirmative defense if the defendant “desists from his intent to commit the crime or otherwise impedes its execution, demonstrating a thorough and voluntary withdrawal from his criminal intent.” For further understanding, consider studying criminology.