Introduction
Although suspected criminals may have broken the law, the principles of natural justice are intended to protect them. Therefore, inmates must be treated fairly and impartially regardless of their social and financial statuses. The prosecution is mandated to utilize all the resources at their disposal to ensure that suspected criminals are brought to justice. The use of jailhouse informants is one of the mechanisms that ensure there is enough evidence against suspects. However, the approach is associated with serious implications for the criminal justice system, including wrongful convictions. Therefore, necessary actions must be taken to protect inmates from wrongful convictions that arise from the use of jailhouse informants.
Ethical System in Badpenny’s Case
Although Badpenny deserves fair treatment from the jailers, she is treated with indifference. The ethical system that relates to Badpenny’s experiences is that of principles of natural justice: the rule against bias and the right to a fair hearing. The principles bestow upon criminal justice officers a duty to act fairly (LexForti Legal News Network, 2020). In the given scenario, the correctional officers are biased against Badpenny to the extent of denying her basic needs. The officers continuously disregard her request to get a shower or communicate with other people. The treatment is against the principles of natural justice since Badpenny is limited from enjoying her basic human rights.
Implications of Using Jailhouse Informants
Although the use of jailhouse informants can be helpful in a criminal investigation, it is associated with negative implications. The approach involves the use of prisoners to provide information in exchange for monetary compensation or reduced jail terms (Golding et al., 2022). The informants may provide wrong and unreliable information that may exacerbate wrongful convictions (Neuschatz & Golding, 2022). Additionally, the use of jailhouse informants is associated with unethical practices since there is an infringement on the suspects’ right to privacy (Wetmore et al., 2022). Incentivizing third parties to obtain information from criminal suspects is seen as a coercive method. Therefore, using jailhouse informants to gain information undermines the integrity of the justice system.
Problems of Wrongful Convictions
Wrongful convictions are associated with various problems that are detrimental to the convicts and society at large. Individuals who are convicted wrongfully are prone to psychological disorders such as depression and anxiety (Temares et al., 2022). Consequently, their well-being becomes vulnerable, attracting high medical care costs. Additionally, the families of the wrong convicts are subjected to serious mental and financial downturns (Temares et al., 2022). The convicts and their families may lose their reputations and liberty. Furthermore, wrongful convictions undermine public trust in the criminal justice system. Mistrust in police officers and other criminal justice stakeholders can cause turmoil in a peaceful society. Criminal justice officers must ensure that there are no wrongful convictions.
Occupational Culture in Corrections
Occupational culture involves that which is defined by traditions and norms within an occupational group. In the given scenario, the occupational subculture among corrections officers has influenced their tendency to be biased against a specific group of prisoners, including Badpenny. The culture pressures some officers to remain silent even when they witness forms of mistreatment by other officers, the inmates (Higgins et al., 2022). Consequently, occupational subculture increases dehumanizing and unfair behaviors among corrections officers. Corrections institutions can adopt strict codes of conduct and consequent punishments to encumber occupational culture.
Conclusion
The criminal justice system is guided by the principles of natural justice. Suspected convicts ought to be fairly and impartially treated. While the use of jailhouse informants can help in solidifying evidence against suspected criminals, it can lead to wrongful convictions. Consequently, the suspects and their families can be subjected to psychological and financial difficulties. Corrective institutions must adopt ethical standards that protect inmates from corrections officers’ occupational culture and possible wrongful convictions.
References
Golding, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., Rawn, K. P., Lippert, A., Bornstein, B. H., Pals, A. M., & Le Grand, A. M. (2022). The influence of jailhouse informant testimony on jury deliberation. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 28(4), 560–572. Web.
Higgins, E. M., Smith, J., & Swartz, K. (2022). “We keep the nightmares in their cages”: Correctional culture, identity, and the warped badge of honor. Criminology, 60(3), 429-454. Web.
LexForti Legal News Network (2020). The principles of natural justice: Duty to act fairly. Web.
Neuschatz, J.S. & Golding, J.M. (2022). Jailhouse informants: Psychological and legal perspectives. New York University Press. Web.
Temares, A. E., Parker, B. D., Walker, L. E., & Shapiro, D. (2022). Parental grief, wrongful incarceration, and the continued effects after exoneration. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 32(1-2), 1–23. Web.
Wetmore, S. A., Golding, J. M., Tucker, A. L., & Neuschatz, J. S. (2022). “The witness is lying!”: The impact of a defendant countering a jailhouse informant’s testimony. Psychology, Crime & Law, 1–19. Web.