Crime Control Model tries to deter crime by all means. Crime control model is in favour of the idea that individual rights must be put aside for the purpose of maintaining public safety. Crime control model is a theory of criminal justice which places emphasis on reducing the crime in society through increased police and prosecutorial powers.
Crime control model is less protective of individual rights which are fundamental rights. The crime-control model emphasizes the standardized, expeditious processing of defendants through the court system and the uniform punishment of offenders according to the severity of their crimes. Under crime-control model, arrest and prosecution tend to imply guilt.
Professor Herbert Packer, in his "The Limits of the Criminal Sanction in 1968," discusses the attributes of the two conflicting models of a criminal justice system. The first model is the Crime Control Model, the purpose of which is to reduce the number of criminals on the street. Crime control model assumes that sometimes one has to give up ones rights for the benefit of society as a whole.
Unlike a crime control model, a public health model looks at particular kinds of crime like drug abuse or prostitution as public health issues. There have been many papers comparing and contrasting the role that the due process model and crime control model have on shaping criminal procedure policy.
Two crime control models: the due process model and the crime control model have been debated for a long time.
Due Process Model gives credence to the principle that an individual cannot be deprived of life, liberty, or property without appropriate legal procedures and safeguards. When people are charged with a crime they are required to have their rights protected by the criminal justice system under the due process model.
Crime control model for law enforcement is based on the assumption of absolute reliability of police fact-finding and treats arrestees as if they are already found guilty. Law enforcement agencies generally prefer the crime control model. They treat arrested as if they were already guilty and emphasize on arrest, prosecution and conviction of those who have broken the law.
There are many differences between the due process model and the crime control model:
In the due process model people that are arrested are perceived to be innocent until proven in a court of law. The crime control model believes that the people that are arrested are guilty and punishment by the government is needed.
Due process model believes that policing within the criminal justice system is essential to maintaining justice within society.
Crime control model believes that the arresting of people in the criminal justice system has a negative effect and slows down the process of the criminal justice system.
THE CRIME CONTROLS AND
DUE PROCESS MODELS - By Brandon A. Perron.
Consider the goals of the American Criminal Justice system for a moment. Primarily the goals can be categorized into two very distinct missions:
(1) the need to enforce the law and maintain social order, and
(2) the need to protect people from injustice.
However, the two goals are generally considered to be in conflict with each other. The first goal is referred to as the crime control model. We have addressed both the crime control model and the due process model and have found significant strengths and weaknesses inherent to both of them.
Liberal proponents of the due process model believe that the crime control model is too harsh and pursues the ideology of a police state. The arguments of the conservative supporters of the crime control model complain that the due process model protects the guilty at the expense of innocent law abiding citizens.
Due Process for the
Global Crime Age: A Proposal -
L. Song Richardson.
Abstract: Herbert Packer described two models of criminal procedure: the crime control model and the due process model.
The crime control model posits that the most important function of the criminal justice system is to suppress crime.
The due process model focuses on the fallibility of the process. Crime control norms usurp due process values as a result of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties which regularize foreign evidence gathering for prosecutors while explicitly preventing defendants from using them.
This article breaks new ground by constructing a framework that will both protect due process norms and simultaneously preserve effective crime control model.