Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments

Running head: CRIMINAL DEFENSES AND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENTS 1
Criminal Defenses and Criminal Punishments
Name
Institution

CRIMINAL DEFENSES AND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENTS
2
CRIMINAL DEFENSES AND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENTS
How the court determines the lawfulness of the use of force and the level of objectivity in
each point
Law enforcement officers are permitted to use power to accomplish specific objectives by
the court. This is when they want to arrest someone or issue a warrant to the public. Incase the
police officer used force there are questions he will be asked by the lawyers to see whether he
abused the power of force or he used it rightly . the use of force is seen in these scenarios that is
what is the crime committed by the suspect , did the suspect resist arrest or was tempting to run
away from the arrest or was the suspect a threat maybe was the suspect armed or had excess
power that was used against the police officers. The police officers have been given the authority
to use as much force as they require during the time of arrest in the crime (Gray, 2018).
The level of objectivity inherent in the use of power and energy when the suspect is a
threat maybe the suspect is armed, and he is a threat to the public and the police officer himself.
This is where the police officers have to use a lot of excessive force to protect the public and him
from being harmed by the suspect.
The strict business to refuse or try to flee from being arrested, in this case, the police
officer has to use force so that the criminal is incapable of running away and he is upheld to face
justice in the crime the suspect has committed in this case they ensure that the suspect is arrested
and is charged according to the court of law (McClellan & Tekin, 2016).
How severe is the offence that the suspect has committed? Some crimes tend to cause
danger or alarming to the public, and the police officers are given authority by the law to use
force so that they can reduce the significant impact from the victim during the arrest.

CRIMINAL DEFENSES AND CRIMINAL PUNISHMENTS
3
Determine the fundamental difference between the castle doctrines and stand your ground
types of criminal defences and you justify your validity
The castle doctrine is when one self-defense or self protect himself inside his home and
house. You either protecting your family or your home that is in danger . Anyone is allowed to
use force against the assaulter and the court of law will protect you since you harmed the
assaulter for self-defense. While standing your ground types is when you defend yourself outside
your home, this is maybe out their publicly where you have to use force from the assaulter, and
you are allowed to use extreme force even that can cause death to the assaulter (Kelsen, 2017).
The justification for the castle doctrine is to protect yourself when you are in danger, or
your family is in danger while the stand your ground is when someone becomes a threat to you
and you has to use force to protect yourself from danger and or him harming you (Chamlin &
Krajewski, 2016).
An example of self-doctrine is when robbers come to your home place, and then you
attack them using a gun or sprays. Stand your ground is when you are in the street and someone
points you with a penknife in case you are armed you can either remove your pocketknife or stab
him, in this two scenarios the court will give you protection since you did the harm due to self-
defense and self-protection. (McClellan & Tekin, 2016).
The role of that double jeopardy clause plays within the trial system, and the level of
fairness give a rationale
According to the Fifth Amendment is that not anyone or persons shall be subject for the
same offence or crime be twice put in danger, this is when one is retried after either
acquaintance, conviction mistrial or given double punishments, fraud or non-final judgements
(Neubauer & Fradella, 2018).