Prosecutorial Misconduct and Absolute Immunity

Question 1

It is the failure of doing the right actions on art of the prosecutor. The law requires them to undertake different actions in regards to a case. Hence, when they fail to do such, it becomes the prosecutorial misconduct (Joy, 2006). It is illegal in the eyes of the law as they attempt to have the jury convict the defendant in the wrong way or may want to pass harsh punishment on a person. The prosecutors need to follow certain rules that bound them in their conduct and service to the public. 

Question 2

Every case that judges solve have implications on the future cases that come to the court room afterwards. Hence, the Brady v. Maryland upon the issue of Prosecutorial Misconduct had an impact on how future cases were solved. There were violations from Brady and the misconduct from the prosecutors who did not give a fair and free trial. The justice served to the defendant did not prove fair to them as they did it deliberately due to their arguments that did not justify the type of punishment that they received. The trial was in a way impartial and the testimony given as evidence did not give enough and validated proof. It passed judgment on the case even though they did not have enough and valid evidence to prove that the defendant was guilty and deserved the kind of ruling. The prosecutors also denied them the right process that the law requires every case handled in the court rooms to fulfill. Many cases that are presented in court in relation to rape cases have the right to use the defense used in the case.

Question 3

Prosecutors are cloaked in absolute immunity due to the power they receive from the Constitution and the judiciary which is an independent arm of the government (Johns, 2011). They have the right to make a decision in a case which courts in one level of the system support the others. It means that once one has no satisfaction with one level of the court and they move to the other, they will get the same or equal treatment from the prosecutors. They protect each other as the law gives them some form of immunity to enjoy the power they hold. It gives them the ability to push cases in the ways they deem possible even it means that locals do not get the justice they deserve. It further becomes a cycle with unending with the citizens on the receiving end with no justice served on their cases. The law protects one of their own so as a rule.

I do not agree that the prosecutors should receive some form of extensive protection from civil liability. The reason for this is that the people have a high level of confidence in them to help in solving the questions. Once they get the protection, it is an indication that they can get away with any type of misconduct (Joy, 2006). They will also make the delivery of justice to every individual lenient and they slow down the process. It is worth noting that since the prosecutors are bound by rules, they should follow them so that they can serve the public in the right way. They further contribute to the corruption in the system and delay of justice to the citizens.

References

Johns, M. Z. (2011). Unsupportable and Unjustified: A Critique of Absolute Prosecutorial Immunity. Fordham L. Rev., 80, 509.

Joy, P. A. (2006). The relationship between prosecutorial misconduct and wrongful convictions: Shaping remedies for a broken system. Wisconsin Law Review, 2006, 399.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *