Introduction to Criminal Justice Free Essay Example, 1500 words

In the case, Ulster v. Allen, 442 U. S. 140, 1979, presumptions as evidence was used where the defendants refused to the introduction of the guns into evidence since there was not enough proof to connect them with the guns. The trial court canceled the protest, relying on the presumption of custody created by a New York law providing that the existence of a weapon in a vehicle is presumptive confirmation of its unlawful ownership by all people then occupying the automobile, except when inter alia, the weapon is set up upon the individual of one of the occupants (Samaha, 20111). To find guilty a criminal defendant, the prosecutor must confirm the defendant guilty beyond a rational uncertainty thus presumptions should be allowed. As part of this procedure, the defendant is given a chance to present a justification (Ingram, 2011). There are several types of defenses, from I did it but it was self-defense or was under the influence of illicit stuff to know what I was doing and I did not do it. Some of the defenses that criminal raise include, the defendant did not do which is the most common where they try to avoid punishment by claiming the crime at hand was not committed by them and they have no idea who did (Ingram, 2011) it. We will write a custom essay sample on Introduction to Criminal Justice or any topic specifically for you Only $17.96 $11.86/pageorder now Others even go to the lengths of saying they were not near the perimeter of the crime. The defense for I did it but with a good reason is another type of defense where the offender tries to avoid punishment even though there is sufficient evidence that they did the crime in question. Self-defense is a defense normally asserted by people charged with the offense of aggression, such as striking someone, physical attack with a harmful weapon, or slaughter (Ingram, 2011). The defendant admits that they, in fact, committed the offense, but claims that it was acceptable by the other person's intimidating actions. The insanity justification is based on the opinion that penalty is justified only if the defendant is competent enough to control their behavior and understanding that what they have done is harmful to others (Ingram, 2011).