Case Studies: Applying the Models

This page presents case studies that illustrate the application of the crime control model and due process model in real-world scenarios. These examples help demonstrate the practical implications of each approach to criminal justice.

The Barry George/Jill Dando case provides insights into both models:

Example: In the due process model, the police investigation was thorough, and Barry was allowed to appeal his conviction, with decisions being challenged.

Example: In the crime control model, Barry was targeted because he fit the profile of a loner, and his conviction was based on a single particle of gunshot residue. He faced imprisonment, failed appeals, and received no compensation.

The Colin Stagg/Rachel Nickell case further illustrates the differences between the two models:

Example: In the due process model, the judge threw out the case due to improperly obtained evidence (the "honey trap" technique).

Example: In the crime control model, Colin was targeted as he fit the profile of a "loner," and undercover officers were used to try to extract a confession.

These case studies highlight the strengths and weaknesses of each model, demonstrating how they can lead to different outcomes in criminal investigations and trials.

Highlight: The application of these models in real cases shows that while the crime control model may lead to quicker arrests and convictions, it can also result in wrongful convictions. Conversely, the due process model may protect individual rights but can sometimes allow guilty individuals to avoid conviction due to procedural technicalities.

Crime Control and Due Process Models

The crime control model and due process model are two contrasting approaches to criminal justice, defined by Herbert Packer in 1968. These models of criminal justice system represent different priorities and methods in addressing crime and protecting society.

Definition: The crime control model is an approach that prioritizes suppressing crime and efficiently prosecuting offenders, often starting from a presumption of guilt.

The crime control model advocates for giving police significant freedom and authority to act swiftly in catching and prosecuting suspects. This model can be likened to an efficient conveyor belt, focusing on quick and easy prosecution of suspects to protect victims and society.

Highlight: The crime control model prioritizes societal protection, even at the risk of potential wrongful convictions.

Example: Crime control model examples include zero-tolerance policies and right realism approaches to criminal justice.

In contrast, the due process model focuses on protecting the rights of the accused and ensuring fair trials.

Definition: The due process model emphasizes the protection of individual rights against potential abuses of authority, treating the accused as "innocent until proven guilty."

This model sets up safeguards and restrictions on police power to prevent abuse and ensure fair treatment of suspects. It can be compared to an obstacle course that authorities must navigate to secure a conviction.

Highlight: The due process model emphasizes the protection of individual rights over societal protection, potentially allowing some guilty individuals to go free on technicalities.

Example: Due process model examples include the implementation of PACE (Police and Criminal Evidence Act) restrictions on police powers.