M8A1: Herbert Packer's Crime-Control Model of Criminal Justice is More Needed Today than the Due Process Model of Deterring Crime

Herbert Packer's Crime-Control Model of Criminal Justice is More Needed Today than the Due Process Model of Deterring Crime.
Name
Institution
Date
Herbert Packer's Crime-Control Model of Criminal Justice is More Needed Today than the Due Process Model of Deterring Crime.
Introduction
In 1964, a renowned Stanford Law School professor, Herbert Packer, proposed two criminal justice models; the crime control model and the due process model (Herbert, 1964). Over the past years, the two models have influenced much about criminal justice, in the U.S. However, the two models hardly offer a convenient way of meeting the ever competing demands of the criminal justice system because there have been series of tension regarding which model is better suited. This paper seeks to compare and contrast the two opposing models in order to determine which of the two has an upper hand in the today’s criminal justice system.
The Crime Control Model
The crime control model is viewed as a traditional approach to crime used to protect the public and their possessions from being damaged by criminals. The model stresses on stringent and quick punishment to criminals, which benefits the society by instilling fear in anybody attempting crime. It also emphasizes on prompt action on criminal cases throughout the criminal justice system by the police and prosecutors. Packer made an assumption that competence in police investigations, arrest, and prosecutions result in highly reliable facts that will find the accused guilty, thereby controlling crime. Gaines & Miller (2015) indicated that the main goal of crime control model was to deter crime by arresting and incarcerating criminals as quickly as possible to assure safety in the society.
Principles of Crime Control Model
One of the primary ideas that allow the principles of crime control model to prevail is the fact that it allows police to do their jobs by limiting the amount of judicial oversight of law enforcement tactics (Gaines & Miller, 2015). This means that police are given extensive analytical powers to arrest and the only restrictions during questioning are those intended to guarantee the consistency of the suspect's statements because any intimidation may lead to the conviction of an innocent person. Moreover, police have this power because only the guilty ones have something to hide. The scheme relates well to the case of Ohio vs. Robinette, which allowed the police greater freedom to search the automobile of a driver stopped for speeding. After the search, police found some marijuana and ecstasy tablets, and Robinette was arrested for being in possession of the controlled substances. However, after appealing, the court reversed the verdict declaring that the search followed an illegal detention. Instead, the police would have informed him that he was free to leave and then request to search the car.
Another reason that helps the principles of crime control model to succeed is its ability to limit the number of rights and protections that a defendant enjoys in court. It places the goal of controlling crime uppermost, putting less emphasis on protection of individuals’ rights (Cole et al., 2015). A detained person is not allowed to speak to their lawyer b...