Crime Control Model
Due Process Model, Public Health Model
Crime control model tries to deter crime by all means. Crime control model is less
protective of individual rights. 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 assumes that sometimes one has to give up ones rights for the benefit of
society as a whole.
Due Process vs. Crime Control Model
Two models of crime: 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.
There have been many papers comparing and contrasting the
role that the due process and crime control models have on shaping criminal procedure
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 need to be punished by the government.
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 courts generally prefer the due process model because
the due process model equally favours all citizens, even the criminally accused, by
securing their rights and freedom. Due process model assures that all individuals rights
are protected as stated in the Bill of rights.
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.
THE CRIME CONTROLS AND DUE PROCESS MODELS
By Brandon A. Perron, Board Certified Criminal Defense Investigator
The American justice systems need for an effective strategy to combat crime has been
debated for years. In fact, close examination reveals that the core of the controversy and
conflicting philosophies are fundamentally liberal and conservative and thus political in
nature. Consider the goals of the American Criminal Justice system for a moment. The
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 and was developed by
Herbert Packer and presented to the academic world in his analysis of the criminal justice
system in the 1960s. The second goal is quite the opposite focusing upon protecting
the individual rights of the accused and is commonly referred to as the due process
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. Close examination reveals
that law enforcement agencies must be careful not to allow their agencies to pursue one
model with disregard for the other. Both appear to have potential pitfalls and dangers
that could threaten both safety and security and the individual freedoms that have made
the United States a beacon of stability and freedom throughout the world. 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, DePaul University College of Law
Cornell International Law Journal, Vol. 41, No. 2, 2008
Abstract: This article argues that the adjudication of transnational criminal cases in the
United States raises troubling questions about the government's commitment to principled
criminal process standards. Concern over global crime has resulted in a criminal process
that inadequately protects fairness and legitimacy norms. Over 40 years ago, in his
seminal work on the domestic criminal process, 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. Its
primary concern is with fairness and reliability. Balancing the norms of the two models is
challenging, but necessary. No such balancing exists in the global crime era. Instead,
crime control norms usurp due process values as a result of Mutual Legal Assistance
Treaties (MLATs) 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. Under the framework, U.S. prosecutors must obtain
important foreign evidence needed by defendants in domestic prosecutions. The framework is
consistent with existing doctrine, is familiar to the courts and the parties, and will
leave MLATs intact so that their benefits can inure to both prosecutors and defendants.
In 1968, Professor Herbert Packer published The Limits of
the Criminal Sanction. In his book, Prof. Packer 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. This is accomplished by increasing the number of police, increasing
the number of correctional facilities (and filling them up), increasing the length of
sentences meted out by the Courts, giving criminal justice agencies more legal powers
(investigative, coercive, and repressive), and proceeding on the basis at trial of
guilty until proven innocent. The outcomes of this model are ostensibly
that it reduces crime, protects citizens and the community, punishes offenders, and
provides efficient justice.
The second model is the Due Process Model, the purpose of which is to ensure that
the rights of the defendant are protected. - Goff, Colin, Criminal Justice in
Canada, 3d Ed., Thomson-Nelson, Scarborough, 2004, at pages 20 & 21.