Essay on Police's Violation of Jack's Constitutional Rights

Jack's due process and constitutional rights were violated during the investigation. The police did not read the offenders Miranda rights for a juvenile when they began the studies. The Miranda rights states that the police should read the rights to the offender at the beginning of the investigation. If they do not do so, whatever the offender says cannot be used against them in a court of law (Rose, 2017).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Jack's constitutional rights were violated during the hearing process. The police used inadequate evidence against him. The juvenile rights state that the charges against a juvenile should be proved beyond reasonable doubt (Pennington, 2015). The police did not obtain the gum or candy from the jack, which was not enough evidence. There was also no witness to confirm that jack assaulted Moe.

As a defense attorney, my argument in defense of jack would be for the court to release jack as the case does not have ground on which to prosecute him. The evidence provided is too shallow, making it inappropriate for use. The evidence presented in the situation should be beyond reasonable doubt as required for prosecution of juvenile cases (Welsh et al., 2008)

As a prosecutor, I would use the argument that jack should be convicted for the crime of theft and simple assault as a way of disciplining him for his wrongdoing (Harp, Kuykendall, Cunningham, & Ware, 2016). Jack is a young man who should be guided so that he should not repeat this kind of action in the future. The court should therefore charge him to serve as a warning to him and others who engage in such behaviors.

In the federal system, the case would have been different as jack would have been charged for robbery with violence after he assaulted Moe in his shop. The national system does not also require the evidence beyond reasonable doubt as Diane had already admitted to the crime, making jack guilty for the crime committed (Friehe, & Miceli, 2016).

An appropriate court-ordered option would be for jack to do community service. This is because jack refused to admit to his wrongdoing even though Diane already confessed to their theft.

References

Friehe, T., & Miceli, T. J. (2016). Law Enforcement in a Federal System: On the Strategic Choice of Sanction Levels. The Journal of Legal Studies, 45(1), 73-103.

Harp, C., Kuykendall, M., Cunningham, M., & Ware, T. (2016). Juvenile delinquency and community prosecution: New strategies for old problems.

Pennington, L. (2015). A case study approach to procedural justice: Parents' views in two juvenile delinquency courts in the United States. British Journal of Criminology, 55(5), 901-920.

Rose, K. (2017). You Have the Right to Remain a Child: Juveniles and Miranda Rights. Liberty Law., 13.

Welsh, B. C., Loeber, R., Stevens, B. R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Cohen, M. A., & Farrington, D. P. (2008). Costs of juvenile crime in urban areas: A longitudinal perspective. Youth violence and juvenile justice, 6(1), 3-27.