Justice Systems

Chapter 10
1) Identify two types of remedies against government wrongdoing and the differences between them, and give examples of each.

The two types of remedies which are against the wrong doings are, exclusionary rule and civil suits alleging offences. If a person is treated badly by the police officers or otherwise the prosecutors, then that person has the right to sue the police in the civil court. If they are found guilty, then the complainant can get damages awarded (Viebig, 2016). On the other hand, the wrongdoings of the government may be punished through weakening the legal position of the government in a case against the affected party.
2) Identify and explain the rationales behind the three justifications for the exclusionary rule.  Which justification does the U.S. Supreme Court adopted to apply the deterrence justification?

Constitutional right: it is a fragment of the constitutional rights which is against the irrational seizure and compelled confessions and the privileges to an advocate and the due process of a law (Viebig, 2016).

Judicial integrity: it acts in protecting the nobility and trustworthiness of the courts (Samaha, 2014).

Deterrence: it mainly acts in preventing those in authority from law breaking. The Supreme Court has consequently relied on deterrence as the only way of rejecting valid evidence, since 1989 up to date (Viebig, 2016).
3) State the narrow scope of the reasonable, good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.

In most cases, the police consequently act against the fourth amendment which is commonly known as goodfaith. Good faith consequently relies on the reasonable reliance rather than to the subjection of good intentions. The court therefore recognizes the exception to the fourth correction exclusionary rule (Viebig, 2016).
Chapter 11
1) Summarize the Bivens v. Six Unnamed FBI Agents case, and explain its significance.

This is a case whereby the Supreme Court of the U.S ruled that, an obscure cause of action occurred for a person whose Fourth Amendment freedom from irrational search and commandeering had been dishonoured by federal agents. The victim of the deprivation had therefore the right to sue against the violation of the amendment itself (Viebig, 2016).

Thus this prevents the authorities from violating the law thus harming the citizens. Hence it made it easy for people to be able to sue the authorities against the violation of the law (Samaha, 2014).

2) Identify and describe the differences between two kinds of state civil lawsuits against individual state officers.

The two kinds of state civil lawsuits are: State Tort lawsuits and U.S Courteous rights Act lawsuits. State lawsuits mainly involves a single individual officer. On the other hand, civil rights act includes the agencies (Viebig, 2016).
3) Identify two elements plaintiffs in 1983 actions against state and local law enforcement officers have to prove.

The two plaintiffs are: the individual exposed plaintiff for steering which occurred under the state law colour and this behaviour underprivileged the plaintiff of the freedoms, rights or immunities assured under the federal laws or the constitution. The country and the officials may tamper with the federal rights in two dissimilar ways. After the enforcement of the state laws, or laws which are likely to go against the state, and the local authorities deny the victims the federal rights. Thus the officials’ deny the victims their rights through acting in accordance to the colour of state law (Viebig, 2016).
4) Identify and describe the stages, possible dispositions, and disciplinary actions in internal review procedures.

Report the allegations of professional misconduct

Each and every person has the right to inform the authorities about any professional misconduct of any official members of the government (Samaha, 2014). This suspicion should then be discussed with the relevant authorities.

Inquiry

An inquiry will be set in order to look at the problems associated with the relevant authorities. This consequently allows the inquiry to look into the matter carefully before coming up with solution (Viebig, 2016).

Chapter 12
1) List the reasons that affect whether police drop cases or take them to prosecutors.

Conducting Investigations.

Laying a charge to the accused (Samaha, 2014).

Referring the accused to the prosecutor.
2) List and explain the importance of the reasons behind the decision of prosecutors to charge, divert, or drop criminal cases.

Trial, this allows the accused to prove his or her innocence in the court before the judge finally renders the judgement (Viebig, 2016). This makes it easy for the court to either prove the suspect to be guilty or innocent. Trying the accused in the court also allows him or her to be able to enjoy his or her constitutional rights which allows an accused person to be tried in a court of law before judgement being rendered.

Sentencing, the judge is the only one who can be able to render the verdict according to the crime committed. Hence the suspect will be sentenced according to the crime committed thus making a just sentencing (Samaha, 2014).
3) Explain the difference between probable cause to detain a suspect and probable cause to go to trial.

Probable cause is mainly a level of evidence which is above mere suspicion but is otherwise less than what is actually needed in order to be able to convict a person. Thus if the probable cause of a certain criminal activities cannot be based on evidence, the person is then subjected to be detained. On the other hand, if the probable cause cannot be weighed or otherwise is conflicting, then it makes the suspect to go on trial (Viebig, 2016).

Reference

Viebig, P. (2016). Illicitly obtained evidence at the International Criminal Court.

Samaha, J. (2014). Criminal procedure.