Homework answers / question archive / What is a substantial response to this post?   Part 1 When we discuss fundamental fairness in the criminal justice sector we have to take a look at where fundamental fairness is derived from

What is a substantial response to this post?   Part 1 When we discuss fundamental fairness in the criminal justice sector we have to take a look at where fundamental fairness is derived from

Law

Share With

What is a substantial response to this post?

Part 1

When we discuss fundamental fairness in the criminal justice sector we have to take a look at where fundamental fairness is derived from. In the fourteenth amendment's due process clause of the United States Constitution it states that all citizens should be afforded a fair procedure. (Payne, 2017).  So when a citizen is denied life, liberty, or property, it is a fundamental right of that person to be given a fair and a opportunity to be heard and decided by a neutral party.

Taking a look at some components of due process, we can talk about the benefit of receiving a notice of the proposed action and the grounds asserted for it. In this particular instance the individual in question is provided the charges they are accused of in which case they can better defend against it. Another component of due process is the right to present evidence and the right to call witnesses. With this particular due process the defendant or accused is given the right to defend themselves. Provided evidence and witness testimony to support their defense is a right provided which cannot be taken away according to our constitution. Another due process component is having the right to know what evidence is being presented by the prosecution. This in turn provides the defense a chance to not be blindsided by their evidence and to bring into account any kind of argument against. Another component which is also probably the most popular component is the right to counsel. Having an attorney representing the defendant is advantageous as they are the subject and law experts that can assist in defense against the prosecution as they usually have a better understanding of the severity and the strength and weakness of both prosecution and defense arguments. The right to counsel is definitely a due process afforded to the citizens. (Cornell Law, ND).

Part 2

In the case of Scott Mayo and as prosecutor I will have to dismiss the charges against Mayo based on the current facts. Under NRS 171.104 in Nevada Law, Mayo was arrested without Mayo receiving his Miranda rights therefore I'd have to believe the defendants legal team is smart enough to suppress the evidence which in this case is Mayo's statement and any other information provided by Mayo that would severely hurt the prosecutions case. (Shouse Law, 2020). Another reason why I would have to dismiss the charges is that in the state of Nevada, self defense laws allow an individual to defend themselves with the use of force when either 1. they have reasonable belief that the aggressor poses an immediate threat and the amount of force used is sufficient to stop the aggressor. (Shouse Law, 2020). In this case, Basil Scowen was the aggressor who was intoxicated and aggressively picked up a beer bottle. Scowen  uttered the words "I am going to kill you" to Mayo at which time Mayo grabbed his gun and Killed Scowen. Although the incident would be an argument for court the issue with the Miranda rights gives me reason to believe that the case isn't strong enough to proceed with the charges.