Essay on The case of unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field
Today special attention is paid to the importance of ethics in Criminal Justice. Ethics in the Criminal Justice field has been a hot topic since the late 1990s and it continues to be important in the 21-st century. The issue of ethics in the Criminal Justice filed is considered to be similar to the police ethics. However, ethics refers to all branches of the Criminal Justice system. Because of the increased role of policing, many ethical issues are connected with policing in today’s society. This paper explores the case of unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field. The case under discussion is the case of Kalvin Michael Smith (1997). This paper provides much important information about unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field, providing the overview of the facts of the case, the explanation of the violation of written and unwritten ethical code, and the ways to prevent this type of situation.
Introduction
Ethics plays a significant role in the Criminal Justice field. Unethical behavior varies from one case to another, but the practice of criminal justice is influenced by the four “root sins”, including “lying and deception; prejudice and racial discrimination; egoism and the abuse of authority; and misguided loyalties” (Souryal, 2009, p. 214). The case of Kalvin Michael Smith is an example of unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field caused by unethical behavior and corruption in the system. Actually, ethics has always been an important issue within the criminal justice practice because criminal justice practitioners, including the police investigators and prosecutors are kept under scrutiny. Therefore, the case of Kalvin Michael Smith can be used to improve ethical behavior through the promotion of the study of ethics. According to researchers, “scholars can be of assistance to practitioners by studying the sociological and psychological forces that impact ethical and unethical behavior” (Byers, 2014, p.1). The facts of Kalvin Michael Smith’s case point out to the violation of ethical code by the criminal justice practitioners. It is necessary to use the proper methods to prevent this type of situation in the future.
The major goal of this paper is to research the case of unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field, providing the overview of the facts of the case, the explanation of the violation of written and unwritten ethical code, and the ways to prevent this type of situation.
The overview of the facts of the case
The case of Kalvin Michael Smith is also known as the Silk Plant Forest case. Mr. Kalvin Michael Smith was charged of “Robbery with a Dangerous Weapon and Assault with a Deadly Weapon with the Intent to Kill inflicting serious injury” (Cunningham, 2010, p. 29). The incident occurred on December 9, 1995 in Winston-Salem. The assistant manager of Silk Plant Forest shop, Jill Marker (33), worked in the shop. At 8:55 pm, Jill was found seriously injured. The man was attacked by a thief who used a blunt instrument to beat his victim. The cash was opened, and the sum of $304 was taken by the thief.
The thief attacked the shop at 8:45 pm – 8:55 pm. The witness informed the time of attack as he left the shop several minutes prior to the incident. Jill was severely beaten and the healthcare professionals did not expect her to survive. The case was given to a homicide detective Williams two days later, when the police were told that the victim would survive. When the perpetrator attacked Jill, she was pregnant. Being in coma, she gave birth to her child via cesarean section. There were no people in the shop except Jill and the perpetrator or perpetrators; therefore, there were no eye-victims to the crime. The pool of blood on the floor at the crime scene was analyzed and all samples belonged to the victim (Silk Plant Forest Truth Committee, 2009).
Six months after the crime, a young black man Kalvin Michael Smith (25) was involved in the case. On June 1, 1996, a woman “A” accused Kalvin Michael Smith. On July 22, 1996, the man was arrested base on the woman’s report. The man was brought to the Winston-Salem Police Department and denied his involvement in the crime. The suspect l took a polygraph test (or a lie detector). The polygraph test results were used as evidence. According to Detective Williams report, Michael was identified as truthful based on the polygraph testing. The police did not continue any further investigation of the man’s fault. On January 24, 1997, he was arrested. Michael’s photo was presented to the victim, who pointed out to the fact that the perpetrator was a black man, but failed to identify him. Another suspect Kenneth Lamoureux (40), a white man, was identified by the victim as a man who visited the shop that day (Silk Plant Forest Truth Committee, 2009).
Kalvin Michael Smith was involved in the case based on the reports of his women whom he deceived. In fact, there were no eyewitnesses in the case, as well as there were no physical evidence. Detective Williams’s investigation process led to the trial, based on four witnesses’ reports who testified against Kalvin Michael Smith. In addition, Jill Marker identified the black man Kalvin Michael Smith as the perpetrator who caused injury to her at the Silk Plant Forest shop. The judge reviewed the evidence, including the victim’s identification of the perpetrator in the court, and brought in a verdict against Kalvin Michael Smith of “guilty on both counts: assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury with intent to kill; and armed robbery” (Silk Plant Forest Truth Committee, 2009, p.1). Michael was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 28 years and11 months.
The explanation of the violation of written and unwritten ethical code
In the Silk Plant Forest, Kalvin Michael Smith was brought to trial by jury, but he had the right to appeal on several circumstances. The officials within the criminal justice system studied his case and have found that there were “not significant flaws in the process that convicted Mr. Smith” (Cunningham, 2010, p. 29). They argued that the flaws found in the legal and judicial process could not lead to the miscarriage of justice. Moreover, they stated that the results of criminal trial would be the same even if these flaws were absent (Cunningham, 2010).
Nevertheless, the Criminal Justice System Failure is obvious. In 1998, Kalvin Michael Smith’s appeal of the court’s judgment was denied. In 1999, Kalvin Michael Smith wanted to correct errors, filing a motion for appropriate relief (MAR) without the attorney’s benefit, which was also denied. In 2003, the case of Kalvin Michael Smith was reviewed by the members of the Duke University Law School Innocence Project. The investigation of the case took one year. The members of the Duke University Law School Innocence Project proved that Michael was not involved in the crime, as well as in the scene of the Silk Plant Forest shop (Kalvin Michael Smith vs. Todd Pinion, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 2013).
Although, it has been found that the investigative report of Smith’s case failed to “constitute clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption of correctness regarding these findings,” the case of Kalvin Michael Smith remains unclear to the public and experts (Kalvin Michael Smith vs. Todd Pinion, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 2013). There is much evidence that the existing ethical code was violated. In other words, the case of Kalvin Michael Smith proves that unethical behavior by the police investigators and prosecutors resulted in a wrongful conviction of a black man (Kalvin Michael Smith vs. Todd Pinion, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 2013). In his interview at the correctional institution (Taylorsville City, Utah), Kalvin Michael Smith said, “It bothers me being in here (prison) for something I know I didn’t do. It’s an unexplainable feeling. It tears you up on the inside” (Zerwick, 2013, p.2). The traumatic injury Jill Marker got seriously damaged some portion of her brain that is responsible for memory storage and organizing. Besides, the police investigator played an important role in formation of her memory (Zerwick, 2013). In fact, Detective Williams was determined to find the perpetrator; therefore, he used Kalvin Michael Smith as the prime suspect. The major violation of written and unwritten ethical code is caused by mistaken identification.
In the case of Kalvin Michael Smith, Detective Williams asked the victim to explore six photographs in order to identify the perpetrator who attacked the victim. Jill Marker pointed to Smith’s photograph. However, Detective Williams violated ethical code (Zerwick, 2013). The interview was not videotaped. As a result, he did not provide any records, except for his notes and the notes of another police officer about Jill Marker’s identification of Smith’s photograph. According to researchers, “There’s no way to know for sure what was said or suggested” (Zerwick, 2013, p.2). The police did not find any physical evidence that could be used to link Kalvin Michael Smith to the crime. This fact means the charge against Smith was based only on Jill Marker’s identification and the statements given by three people who knew Smith.
According to neuropsychologists place emphasis on the role of memory function in the criminal justice practice. Many tests are developed to evaluate different aspects of a patient’s memory (Zerwick, 2013). However, none of these tests was used in the case of Jill Marker, who suffered severe brain injury. Based on the report findings, Jill Marker’s doctor affirmed that the woman suffered from some form of amnesia. However, the attorney of Kalvin Michael Smith did not use this information (Zerwick, 2013). The jurors and the police investigator violated ethical code because of the breaches of professional ethics, the law and professional responsibilities (Crowder & Turvey, 2013; Zerwick, 2013).
The ways to prevent unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field
This type of situation should be prevented. Mistaken identification is a real problem that should be solved to prevent unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field. According to the member of the N.C. Commission on Actual Innocence, appointed by the Chief Justice of the N.C. Supreme Court to promote effective reforms in the Criminal Justice field aimed at stopping wrongful convictions, Kalvin Michael Smith is innocent (Zerwick, 2013). The black man was wrongly accused. The commission helps to tackle the problem of mistaken identification in the Criminal Justice field (Zerwick, 2013). This is one of the effective tools to prevent unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice system. One of the first reforms proposed by the commission was to prevent a police investigator from inducing psychological pressure on the witness’s or victim’s choice, both intentionally and unintentionally. In this case, “the commission recommends that an investigator with no knowledge of the case should conduct police lineups to prevent an investigator from influencing the witness’s choice, intentionally or unintentionally” (Zerwick, 2013, p. 2).
Moreover, unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field can be prevented by the application of whistleblowing practice. According to Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2012, the staff members of federal agencies should be protected from punishment for reporting misconduct, illegal acts and behaviors, violation of the established ethical code, etc. (Crowder & Turvey, 2013). Today special attention is paid to the “ethical obligations, policies and laws associated with reporting misconduct by employees within the criminal justice system” (Crowder & Turvey, 2013, p. 435). Any whistleblowing practice used by criminal justice practitioners is based on the obligation to inform any act of misconduct or unethical behavior they are aware of and have enough evidence to prove these acts (Crowder & Turvey).Undoubtedly, these obligations can be regarded as part of professional ethics, a criminal justice organization’s policy or the law. In case of Kalvin Michael Smith discussed in this paper, Detective Williams’s unethical behavior should have been reported by his colleagues who had direct knowledge of this behavior. Criminal justice practitioners should understand that the stakes are high and the lives of people depend on their response to misconduct or unethical behavior (Crowder & Turvey). In other words, the “failure to report misconduct is likely to result in someone losing their life, their job and their family, along with their basic liberties”( Crowder & Turvey, 2013, p. 436).
Besides, unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field can be prevented by means of an effective anti-corruption policy that will include the proper mechanisms to address problems caused by unethical behavior and misconduct of criminal justice practitioners (Pollock, 2011). Researchers recommend including the following aspects in this policy: the proactive methods to identify wrongdoing; to provide screening of the staff members, using effective psychological tests, to improve the existing working conditions of employees; and to provide reliable role models to motivate employees following the established code of ethics (Pollock, 2011).
Conclusion
Thus, it is necessary to conclude that the case of Kalvin Michael Smith can be viewed as the case, in which unethical behavior of the criminal justice practitioners has led to destroying one’s life, as well as the basic liberties. The attack of a young woman at the Silk Plant Forest shop on December 9, 1995 was investigated by the police. The prosecution and conviction of Kalvin Michael Smith caused by unethical behavior of criminal justice practitioners destroyed the life of a young man. Jill Marker, an assistant manager at the shop, was a victim. Based on the police report, her head trauma was serious enough and could influence her memory functions. As a result, her identification of the attacker could be a mistake. There are several ways to prevent unethical behavior in the Criminal Justice field, including the formation of the commission that will help to tackle the problem of mistaken identification, unethical behavior and misconduct in the Criminal Justice field; to apply the whistleblowing practice; and to develop effective anti-corruption policy.
Do you like this essay?
Our writers can write a paper like this for you!
(1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...