The criminal justice system was established to uphold justice by creating peace in our rather chaotic society. The UK criminal justice system is made up of the police service, the Crown Prosecution Service, the courts and the probation service. Legal systems work to ensure a level of fairness by ensuring justice for victims affected by crimes and decreasing the chances of recidivism. This is done by helping them become more educated and learn life skills. Through the criminal justice system, the government measures rates of criminal activity. Crime statistics show the effectiveness of criminal justice systems in the UK. For example, in 2014 crime rates fell by 7%, the lowest level since 1981. Different levels of attrition are recorded each year to examine how the criminal justice system can improve areas of crime that could be on the rise and to maintain justice. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The police have a statutory role in the criminal justice system to detect, identify crime and document it. While the police are given a lot of power when dealing with crime, there are also guidelines they must follow under PACE to ensure they do not abuse their power. However, even with PACE, there have been cases of police abusing their power and crimes are often not recorded as they should. The British Crime Survey Report published in 2015 produced evidence indicating that around 19% of crimes were not recorded. This could mean that crime rate statistics in 2015 and previous years are not being accurately recorded, meaning that those who were victims of those unreported crimes did not get the justice due to them from the system and criminals were not punished for their crimes and may consequently continue to reoffend. Many are treated by the police outside the justice system. The Police Service Statement states that “the purpose of the Police Service is to enforce the law fairly and firmly; prevent crime; prosecute and bring to justice those who break the law; to keep the queen's peace; protect, help and reassure the community; and to be seen to do so with integrity, common sense and good judgment.' This statement suggests that the police must not only ensure justice but also protect. However, past cases suggest that members of the police force cannot put aside their personal views on racial stereotypes and often discriminate and treat blacks and other ethnic minorities in a more aggressive and unpleasant manner. One of the rights afforded to members of the police is the right to stop and search an individual suspected of a crime in a public place and the right to arrest and detain such an individual. However, with this power there are still regulations, under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, to ensure that suspects of crime are still treated fairly and justly as they are 'suspects', i.e. innocent until proven guilty . Legislation such as the above not only helps to reduce and generally prevent miscarriages of justice, but also ensures that individuals are aware of their rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 and how they deserve to be treated under the Equality Act 2010 when searched. detained, arrested or simply interact withthe police. Many people are not informed of their rights, so they find themselves in terrible situations with members of the police who want to ignore people's rights and PEACE. There have been many cases that have raised great concerns regarding the police. 'Since 1990, an inquiry has recorded more than 1,000 deaths in prison and police custody in the UK[7]. Most of these individuals were black citizens or members of other minority ethnic groups. These statistics are shocking and have had a negative effect on how the police are perceived by individuals in society, particularly ethnic minorities. In the year ending 31 March 2016, police in England and Wales carried out 386,474 stops and searches. Of the 386,474 stops and searches carried out, 58,397 were people identifying as black or black British citizens, meaning black people are 6.5 times more likely to be stopped and searched by police than any other race. This increased following the statistics of 2014 and 2015 which was 4.4 times. This shows no improvement in the way blacks and other ethnic minorities are seen as criminals and continually suspected of crimes due to no other factor than their race. Statistics from 2016 suggest that following the review that Teresa may have requested in 2015 while she was Home Secretary, following the findings of the number of deaths in police custody, nothing has changed since then, the police have continued to discriminate and racially profile blacks when to stop and search. The Home Office has since published a report regarding the independent review of deaths and serious incidents in police custody. The review makes 110 recommendations to improve the length of police custody. During the 2-year period it took the government to publish a report there were 8 deaths due to restraint and force in police custody. However, the government has published this report which we hope will prevent deaths and injuries in police custody. It remains clear that some members of the police system we should rely on for protection can kill members of our public, regardless of their race. When I investigated police accountability, I was shocked to find that there had never been a successful prosecution. for manslaughter following death in police custody, the first and last successful prosecution of a police officer following death in custody was in 1969 following the death of David Oluwale in Leeds, police officers were found guilty of assault, not murder, which in itself is shocking considering it was a confirmed murder. Most recently, in November 2017, Nuno Cardoso was the fifth black man to die while being restrained by police just this year. This shows that the review has not improved deaths in police custody and the fact that police officers are not prosecuted for these deaths means they will continue to kill and abuse their power as there are no consequences for their actions. The Crown Prosecution Service has played an important role in criminal cases since 1985, deciding on the verdict of suspects. Following the Prosecution of Offenders Act 1985, the CPS works independently of the police and government and prosecutes around 600,000 cases a year. Their duty is to ensure that the right individual is prosecuted, for the right crime and, where possible, to bring criminals to justice. Other roles of the CPS include deciding which charge is appropriate in more complex cases, they are responsible for preparing cases andpresent them in court and even before the trial, offer any support or information that victims or witnesses may need. The CPS must also follow the Crown Prosecutors Code, which means before deciding on charges, "prosecutors must be fair, objective and independent". When it comes to prosecution, the CPS will not prosecute whether the evidence to support the case is insufficient or not. credible. However, if they believe the evidence is sufficient, the prosecution must decide whether or not conviction is in the public interest. Although the CPS claims to be independent of the police and the government, others may claim to be dependent on the police to do their work, so their decisions may be influenced by the police. Following the handling of the Nigel Evans case, the Attorney General; has been called upon to launch an urgent review of the CPS's approach to historical sexual offences, leading people to question the independence and accountability of the CPS. They were also accused along with the police of failing to reveal crucial evidence about defendants in 2017. The CPS, like other criminal justice systems in our society, often faces a lot of criticism regarding decisions made, however, it is important to remember the positive impacts that have on our society when it comes to delivering justice. The CPS carries out annual strategic assessments, which helps them to identify local priorities and formulate plans that will help them tackle these issues, they also have victim personal statements, where victims are given the opportunity to talk about their experience and get support if necessary[16]. This is very important, as it helps to identify problem areas and create a safer environment and the victim's personal statements influence other victims to speak up and know that justice will be done. Courts are another type of criminal justice system. The role of the judiciary is essentially to enforce legislation and interpret the law as written. Court judges will make decisions on cases through the doctrine of judicial precedent. The vast majority of cases are heard by lay magistrates, who are ordinary members of our society who may not possess any legal qualifications, however, they sit and hear cases as a panel of two or three, as a single lay magistrate has limited powers. Although some cases are often heard by truly qualified lawyers, some people believe that they are better heard by lay magistrates as everyday people, rather than by a lawyer who might fit the description of an older, upper-class, white male. who may not know the reality of life for a normal person. However, others also criticize that the chosen lay magistrates do not represent society, in terms of race, class and age, I think it is more representative than a normal court. Lay magistrates have a high satisfaction rate, I imagine this is because people feel like they are being tried by their peers. The crown court deals with serious criminal cases, murder, rape and robbery. A jury will most likely appear in the Crown Court to decide the verdict of the case, or a judge will decide on the sentence. Jury trial for some provides justice in a similar way to lay magistrates, you are tried by your own colleagues and instead of a judge there is a diverse group of normal people. There have been cases of miscarriages of justice in the past where jury members were biased. In the case of Sajid Qureshi, where the members of the jury had already made a decision before the trial, one of the members had fallen asleep andthe other members of the jury were bullies and heavily tried to influence others, this led to a very unfair trial. Cases like this raise a question: Can unqualified members of the public be trusted to make a fair and just decision based simply on chance, ignoring the media and the opinion of colleagues? The jury may not be a fair representation, however they were chosen randomly, so it's not the courts fault. While some people agree that juries should continue to appear in crown court, just as with many things in the criminal justice system there are positives and negatives. How the jury would allow individuals to be tried by their peers, the jury has no legal experience and may not be able to fully understand, is quite a complex question. A jury trial can extend the time it takes for the court to hold a trial because it is a lengthy process to find trustworthy people. Courts ensure there is justice in our society by convicting criminals and making our cities safer. With the sentence they also guarantee the victims peace of mind, knowing that justice has been done. When trying to bring justice, there have been times when people have spent a long time in prison, before being tried for a crime they did not commit, these miscarriages of justice mean that often the court's decision can be wrong due to the ignorance of the evidence, lack of forensic resources, limited evidence and other factors. In rare cases of individuals like Victor Nealon, he spent 17 years in prison for a crime of which he was innocent because the police and CPS had neglected to test his DNA. These cases show the ways in which the criminal justice system fails the victim but more importantly the suspect, as he or she is deemed guilty without being proven guilty. These miscarriages of justice will continue to occur in our criminal justice systems because they are often based on unreliable evidence. Cases of miscarriages of justice show us that the most reliable sources the system relies on to solve crimes, such as eyewitnesses, circumstantial evidence, and even DNA evidence, can all be discredited. Dr. Naughton "that the presumption of innocence leaves those accused of crime" vulnerable to wrongful convictions because fewer resources are allocated to the defense team. Instead, the prosecution and the police are well funded to undermine the presumed status of innocence. This suggests that in some cases, if you are considered suspicious, without resources and time to find another individual who might be a suspect, it is likely that you could be found guilty. Miscarriages of justice are due to our criminal justice system failing to deliver justice and being unjust and unfair to the victim and the innocent individual prosecuted. In case of wrong prosecution the falsely prosecuted individual gets no help from the system. The prison gives them money for transportation, they are not given housing that they may not have due to the loss of family ties, and they are reintegrated into society without any help, despite being falsely accused of having committed a crime. Another way criminal justice The system creates justice and supports it through the National Probation Service, established after the Probation Offenders Act 1976. Their role is that of a 'statutory criminal justice service supervising the release of high-risk offenders into the community'. It is important that criminals serve their sentences based on the crime they committed. Once released, some criminals quickly return to criminal activities as it is.