The due process and crime control models, both created by Stanford University law professor Herbert Packer, represents two opposing method of principles functioning within criminal justice system. Although the models describe the important facets of the politics and practice of criminal justice, both have been criticized since presented by Packer in 1964. Presently both models are acknowledged as imperfect standards to explain the politics and law of criminal justice. The crime control ideal represents traditional principles, whereas the due process belief reflects moderate values; therefore generating conflict evident throughout the years. This paper discusses models, crime control and due process, and how each affects the criminal procedure; as well be an inclusion of the review and assessment of several amendments and how each applies to both models.
Contrast between crime control and due process models
The crime control model incorporates upholding principles that demonstrate the traditional values of the criminal justice system. Supporters of this model believe criminal justice should center on maintaining victims’ rights instead of protecting the rights of defendants. The suppression of crime, an imperative task of criminal justice, is a vital provision for a liberated society. According to this model establishing the true culpability of the accused or ascertaining the truth is an essential point of the criminal justice process. Cases validated by this model proceed very quickly according to disposition and are controlled by law enforcement and prosecutors. The end result is the plea of guilt.
The due process model incorporates modernized principles of the criminal justice system. Supporters of this model believe the criminal justice system should provide basic fairness or due process according to law. Instead of victims’ rights, supporters believe the defendant’s rights should be the focus as stated in the Bill of Rights. Following such protocol could help in cases where classifying a person’s guilt is based on fact finding by way of fair and honest legal procedures instead of presenting facts alone. Because the rights listed in the Constitution are not simple, accountability and liability must be present for criminal justice officials and authorities. Equality and uniformity should have a place in the justice process.
In summary, the differences between the two models are obvious. The crime control model depends on the skill of investigative and prosecutorial officers; the due process model respects the reliability of fact-finding processes. The assembly line of the crime control model is mostly involved with competence while the due process model is interested in equality and justice for the accused. The due process model perseveres on the deterrence and riddance of errors possible; the crime control model acknowledges the possibility of errors in which inaccuracies could impede the purpose of inhibiting crime (Roach, 1999).