CJUS201 Dustin Belden - #38087

Crime Control v. Due Processes Due: 1/31/07

There are two models of how criminal justice is achieved in the United States.

These two models can be thought of as a balance with crime control on one end and the

due process model on the other end. The balance continually shifts from leaning one side

to the other way, never completely shifting to one side. Currently in the United States, the

balance is greatly leaning towards the crime control model.

The crime control model of criminal justice involves using law enforcement to

repress criminal conduct and prosecute societal interests. The reason crime control model

is commonly used is because it is very efficient, although, the process also has its flaws.

The crime control model involves a substantial amount of police discretion. Police decide

who to stop, arrest, prosecute, what to charge the individual with, and sentence

recommendations. Such a system is vulnerable to discrimination. For example, police in

New Jersey suspecting criminal activity purposely were stopping black people in nice

cars with white women more often than white people in nice cars. Such discrimination

proceeded, until finally the police stopped a black judge with his assistant in a nice car.

The crime became known as “driving while black.” The judge decided to do something

about it and a lot of New Jersey cops got in trouble.

Another widely used criminal justice model is the due process model. The due

process model was very popular during the 1960s and 1970s but has somewhat taken a

backseat in today’s society. The main goal of the due process model is to preserve

individual rights of liberties of the citizens. The due process model is successful because

of its reliability. The majority of the decisions are made in the courtroom as opposed to
by police discretion. However, such decisions often take a very long time, often

influencing suspects to plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit for a faster process. The

judicial process can often take up to six months for even the pettiest crimes. In 2006, two

SDSU basketball players were involved in a rape that took place on campus. The victim

filed a restraining order on the two players. Therefore, the two were banned from campus

and suspended from the basketball team. Just last week, the trial finally took place. The

two men were found not guilty and acquitted of the charges. Even though they were

found not guilty, the process still probably ruined a year of their lives.

Overall, both systems have their good and bad. Neither system is completely right

or completely wrong and a combination of the two is probably the best for today’s

society. Hopefully, the balance will shift a little more towards the middle.