Question: 1. For your initial post, give an opinion. Is it inevitable for formal legal truth and substantive truth to diverge? Why or why not? Under
1. For your initial post, give an opinion. Is it inevitable for formal legal truth and substantive truth to diverge? Why or why not? Under which circumstances is the divergence between formal legal truth and substantive truth more or less (or equally) acceptable? How does this map onto our earlier discussion of Packer's models of criminal justice (due process v. crime control)?
2. From a research standpoint, one of the most important goals is to increase the likelihood that formal legal truth and substantive truth overlap. That is, as researchers, we attempt to create policy and procedures that maximize the chances guilty individuals will be found guilty while simultaneously minimizing the chances that innocent people will be found guilty. Given what you've learned about wrongful conviction, what policy solutions do you think might accomplish this goal? Why might they do so?
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Get step-by-step solutions from verified subject matter experts
