The innocence project policy aims at ensuring that the people in the United States are not convicted for crimes they did not commit (Manning, 2003). The instances where the innocent or convicted wrongly then they find ways in which the evidence is rechecked in order to look at whether the DNA evidence proves that the suspect committed the crimes they have been convicted of in prisons. The policy has ensured that there are innocence commissioners in nearly all states who would be able to cater for the needs of the people who will need them in each state. The policy is also giving pressure to the legislature so that the government is compensating for the people who are wrongly convicted for crimes they did not commit.
The innocence project policy in this paper is about the wrongful conviction of people in the United States of America. There are numerous cases that have been reported in the United States of people who have been convicted wrongfully because of crimes they have never convicted. There are many reasons why people have been convicted and one of the major ones is due to racial profiling. Racial profiling which has been done since the time of slavery continues to persist. The other ways, in which people have been convicted wrongly, is when they confess falsely because of the brutal ways that the police officers use to make the people confess to crimes (Cassell, 1998).
This approaches used by the police officers may be effective but it intimidates people to the point where the people being interrogated just want the whole thing to stop thus will claim they committed the crimes. This shows how wrongful conviction of people has been there for years. The policy will look at the history of the subject from the past to the present. The main aim of this policy is aimed at looking at how the legal system has ruined the lives of so many by convicting them of crimes they did not commit. This policy is looking at finding ways in which the legal system will find new approaches in which they will be able to convict the real criminals or whenever they have convicted innocent people and evidences come to light about their innocence they should be released immediately (Manning, 2003). The problem is many people who have been convicted innocently their cases are usually overturned when they have spent years in prison, died or have been executed by the state.
Historical background of wrongful convictions in the United States
After slavery ended which brought about the Jim Crow era many people of color were convicted and executed for crimes they did not commit. This is also when racial profiling began in, which the whites were favored in that whenever they committed crimes they were exempted and the blacks were the ones who were arrested. Apart from racial profiling in that era there were some other people who were arrested and convicted to prison term while others were executed. At that time there was no DNA testing or other newer techniques used to catch criminals (Cassell, 1998). This kind of miscarriage of justice has happened all over the world. One of the most notable cases where a person was wrongly convicted and executed occurred in the 18th century. When Jean Galas was accused of murder and was sentenced to death. After his execution evidence showed that, there was a possibility that he was innocent. It also showed that the police officers who were investigating him made a few errors. This prompted people to question the death penalty because it caused the deaths of so many innocent people.
In the 20th century, that is when there have been numerous reports that people have been wrongly convicted in the United States. This is also, where racial profiling was very common and was tolerated by law. A number of black people have been convicted for cases such as rape murder, drugs, gun possessions and burglary. A good example of this case was Darryl Hunt who was pinned for the murder of Deborah Sykes a white woman, in 1984. The only reason for his conviction was because of his race. He maintained his innocence until it was overturned in 2004. In 2013, there have been a number of cases that have been overturned this is due to the fact that the prosecutors and other lawyers have fought hard for the people who have been wrongly sentenced.
Causes of wrongful convictions in the United States
Confessions is one of the most damaging or useful evidence that could cause one to be sentenced to prison or given the death penalty. United States of America is well known to have many people confess falsely that has led to about 400 people to be convicted yearly. According to most researches conducted, it has been estimated that about 25 percent of the wrongful convictions this is the main cause (Zinn, 2004). In looking at the confessions, made most of the cases were of a very serious nature such as capital offence or violent cases. When one makes a false confession there is a high probability they could end up being convicted regardless of being exonerated by the DNA evidence.
There have been some cases where some people have been let go after confessing falsely when the DNA exonerates them. These people are the lucky few who have made false confessions. Most of the time the reasons that led one to confess falsely is because of the techniques or methods used by the investigators to interrogate them. Some of the methods used are usually because of the offence committed thus the investigators are being pushed to get a conviction from a certain suspect. The other reasons that causes many people to confess is the fact they might want to gain fame, others may be mentally ill or they may be juveniles. This policy should ensure that it educates people on the importance of having a lawyer when being interrogated in order for one not to make false confessions. The other thing that could cause the once confessions to be reliable is when the investigators tape or record all that is happening in the interrogation room. This is so that there is no one who is a criminal can say that the interrogation was biased or unfair thus leading to the false confessions by the suspect. The recorded interrogation should be looked at by the judge so that the innocent can be protected or would be persecuted.
The criminal justice system
In the criminal justice system, there are so many actors in it in that they are responsible for the conviction of a suspect. At times, this people seem to work well together in that they caused many criminals to be imprisoned or executed for crimes they have committed. There are other times when these people do not see eye to eye, because some people are blinded by their own needs and goals in that they have caused the convictions and executions of innocent people. It is considered to be unethical by the judiciary process when there is exoneration of some of the convictions that have been made previously. This is why even when one is considered innocent it takes a while for them to be released or for a new trial to be done.
The legal organization named as the innocent project is used to defend the people who have been convicted while innocent. That is why they have created this policy to ensure they catered for all people in all states. They step in only when they are absolutely sure that the person is innocent. This is when they find evidence that would prove that those people did not commit those crimes. There are instance when the prosecutors have with held evidences in cases from the defense attorney. At other times they ensure that the evidence is destroyed, they pay witnesses, use of fraudulent evidences as well as pressuring the witnesses. This will cause the trial not to be free and fair. This policy educates the defense attorney to investigate further in order to have almost all the facts that the prosecutors (Buti, 2011).
Prosecutors are very notorious for using tricks, which could cause a person to be imprisoned for crimes they did not commit in the United States. This is why most of the people in America do not believe in the justice system. There are some prosecutors who do not commit such offences but due to the bad record the other prosecutor have made they are all ranked the same way. A good example in which the prosecutor caused the conviction of an innocent man happened in North Carolina, 1991 (Jones, 2012). In this case, Darryl Anthony Howard was convicted for the murders of Doris W. and her thirteen-year-old daughter Nishonda. They were found nude and murdered and also there was an indication that they were raped. In the trial, the prosecutor did not mention the rape incident but only said that they were murdered. When the defense lawyer tried to talk about the rape case he was shut down by the prosecutor who claimed that there was no rape therefore, he would be found not guilty for that crime but was surely guilty for the murder. Howard was found guilty and sentenced. It was years later when the DNA evidence proved his innocence (Romano, 2003).
The police officers are the ones who are mostly involved in the conviction of innocent people (Jones, 2012). During the investigation process, the police officers usually intimidate or threaten a suspect to the point where they are able to break them into confessing for that particular crime. Most of the crimes that are well for officers to get false confessions are drug trafficking, murder, rape and high profile theft. There are many reasons that causes the police officers to use intimidating strategies to make one confess to crimes or rush investigations such as the pressure they are getting from their bosses, complaints from the people, media interference, their personal moral conflict towards the crime and racial profiling. These reasons can be valid but that does not mean that they should not do their jobs accordingly.
Snitches and eyewitnesses
It is a fact that sometimes snitches and eyewitnesses could be telling lies about a particular crime. In gang relations sometimes, the people who are snitches are seeking for revenge or initiations to enter the gang therefore, they frame the people for crimes committed. There are incidents when the snitches and eyewitnesses are paid in order to provide false accusations about a suspect. These people are usually paid by other criminals as well as the state. This will make them to provide false accounts of things that the suspect might have done. There are other times when the eyewitnesses are able to identify the suspect of the crime they are claimed to have committed. Therefore, the prosecutor or the police officers make them believe that the suspect is the person they supposedly saw committing the crime in question. There should be a way in which when the eyewitnesses is not credible they should be used in the cases (Clark, 2009).
This policy recommends that any person who is a snitch should not be used as credible witnesses; this is because most of them want something in return for their services. Therefore, they usually end up giving false accounts of how things happened. There should also be procedures in all the states so that will help to reform eyewitness identification therefore it will reduce some of the witnesses from giving false accounts of what happened. There are some states that already have these procedures such as Ohio, Dallas, Minneapolis, New Jersey and North Carolina. The policy ensures that the innocence commissioners are located in all the states. This is so that whenever a person has been charged for crimes they did not commit they would be able to get a lawyer who would help them find new evidences that will cause their convictions to be overturned. In the United States, the innocence commissioners can be located in states such as New York, California and Texas.
It is a fact that anyone who has been wrongly accused and convicted of a crime they did not commit should definitely be compensated. This is because of the emotional and physical trauma they have experienced. In the prison system, everybody knows it is a hard life where anyone who is said to have been convicted for sexual assault is usually sexually assaulted by the inmates. There are many cases where people have reported or are claimed to have been raped in the prisons. Whenever an evidence comes out or something happens that overturn their conviction. The person would have become a different human being. Some of them are void of emotions while others fear every man or woman they meet. This is not a way for one to live. In getting these compensations, they are able to at least get something that would help them to start a fresh or compensate the time they spent in prison. This policy indicates that there should be the development of compensation statutes in all the states for all those people who have been wrongly convicted and have been released or freed from prisons. In the compensation statutes, the services rendered should range from money compensation, health care and job training.
In conclusion, this policy is aimed at ensuring that the rights and the needs of the people who are wrongly convicted are able to get justice. The truth of the matter is that there are many people in the justice systems who are involved in the conviction of innocent people in the United States. Good examples are the prosecutors and the police officers (Manning, 2003). This policy tries to find ways in which the justice system will be able to get the real criminals and convict instead of the innocent civilians. The policy aims at ensuring that the people who are convicted are able to be compensated when they have been freed. This is why the innocence project puts pressure on the legislature in order to ensure that these people are compensated.
"Eyewitness Misidentification". (2012). The Innocence Project.
Buti, A. (2011). Brothers: Justice, Corruption and the Mickelbergs. Fremantle Press.
Cassell, P. G. (1998). Protecting the innocent from false confessions and lost confessions—and from Miranda. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology.
Causes of Wrongful Convictions. (2014). Michigan: The University of Michigan Law School.
Clark, S. E. (2009). Eyewitness identification evidence and innocence risk. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
Jones, J. A. (2012). Wrongful Conviction in the American Judicial Process: History, Scope, and Analysis. The International Student Journal.
Manning, P. (2003). Policing Contingencies. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Innocence Project (2013). 10 Things Anyone Can Do To Help Exonerate Innocent People and Prevent Wrongful Convictions. Retrieved from http://www.innocenceproject.org/fix/What-can-I-do.php
Romano, L. (2003). When DNA Meets Death Row, It's the System That's Tested. Washington Post.
Zinn, H. (2004). Voices of a People's History of the United States. New York: Seven Stories Press.