Ethical Problems and Exoneration in Wrongful Convictions

Running head: WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS
Wrongful Convictions
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note

WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS 1
Abstract
Wrongful convictions are an international issue that requires a solution for the better of
society. There have been considerable studies to identify the cause, prevalence, and other
correlations. The United States has been mentioned with the highest number of wrongful
convictions though improvements have been pushed with the use of DNA testing. This article
aims to analyze ethical problems that have higher contributions to wrongful convictions. This
part will focus on ethical problems with law enforcement, the prosecution, and other issues that
can be considered as trial misconduct. Further, this paper will analyze the process of exoneration.
Here the paper will focus on DNA analysis and the impact of wrongful convictions on
exonerated defendants. The paper will finish by analyzing the various theories of criminology
such as deontology, virtues of ethics, and peacemaking. This part will look at how these theories
can be applied to reduce wrongful convictions.
Keywords: Wrongful Convictions, Law enforcement, Prosecution, Jury, Deontology,
Virtues of ethics, Peacemaking

WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS 2
Introduction
Criminal justice systems (CJS) ensures management of crimes through the various penal
practices that are divergent across societies. These principles are believed to work through a
sound investigation of delinquencies where their perpetrators are brought to justice. However,
wrongful convictions undermine this rationale. The basic idea about wrongful conviction is that
whenever CJS convicts one innocent person, there is one guilty person left to roam free. Since
this is an issue that affects a great number of people, the society starts depicting miscarriages of
justice as something orchestrated by correctible systemic influences as opposed to the inevitable
CJS failures.
A realm of literature has shown that wrongful convictions occur in the rate between 1%
and 5% of the US convictions (Gould & Leo, 2010; B. Smith, Zalman, & Kiger, 2011).
According to (Leo, 2017), wrongful conviction is a term that the public uses to mean flaws from
the CJS’ procedures that result in the conviction of innocent. Though there has been no
definitive method of measuring the incidence of miscarriage of justice, the 2016 report by
(Cornell Law School[CLS], 2018) reported that there was a minimum of 60 prisoners who were
facing death sentence due to false convictions. In the latest report by (Medill Justice
Project[MJP], 2019), the top five countries with the highest number of wrongful convictions
were led by the US with 3,517, 930 in the UK, 150 in Australia, 130 in India, and 97 in Canada.
In order to recover from wrongful conviction, the defendant needs exoneration which (B.
Smith et al., 2011) states that they are granted in small proportions of wrongful conviction
decisions. The main sources of wrongful conviction are suggestive lineups, perjured testimony,
forensic error, false confessions, police tunnel visions, prosecution error and misconducts, bad
lawyering, and racial discrimination among others (Gould & Leo, 2010; B. Smith et al., 2011).

WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS 3
In most cases, the public views wrongful conviction as an outcome where the innocent person
was convicted of crimes that he did not commit (Morawetz, 2017). The work of (Henry, 2018)
also points out that there are even situations that people are convicted of offenses that never
occurred.
Ethical Concerns
The people expect CJS to observe fairness and diligence when dealing with all from the
time a crime is reported, to the time the jury gives its verdict. However, this does not happen.
Starting from the investigation, (Clark, 2010) informs that delayed investigation causes the
witness to forget the facts of the crime which causes them to accept the narratives that come with
the police. One of the most disturbing cases that involved police misconduct was the Tulia and
Rampart police scandals (Liptak, 2003). The two incidents led to false convictions of more than
150 persons.
After law enforcement faults, plea bargaining has been viewed as another avenue where
the prosecution secures an easy conviction. In (Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Statistics, 2010)
the study reported that there were 96.8% cases where arrested persons pleaded guilty after plea
negotiation. What happens in plea bargains is that prosecutor offers the arrested person a reduced
sentence if the arrest foregoes the right to seek the trial before a jury trial. Given this, the
defendant does not only give up his rights but also places his case at the mercy of the prosecution
who are pressured to prove to the public that they are doing their job. In the case of (Santobello
v. New York, 1971), the Court overturned the sentence of Santobello which was orchestrated by a
plea agreement that the prosecution itself refused to honor.
While the situations mentioned above involve matters that happen outside the Courtroom,
there has been evidence that wrongful conviction resulting from judges when they refuse to

WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS 4
admit evidence that could have shown the innocence of the defendant. For example, in the case
of (Dedge v. State, 1983), the defense had already prepared its testimony which the judge
refused. Additionally, Courts have also been faulted for inappropriately admitting expert
opinions hence leading to a wrongful conviction. An example of such Court’s outcome was the
ruling of the outcomes of the (R v Broomfield, 2010) and the decision of (R v Mullins-Johnson,
2007) in Canada.
Apart from judges, the defense team has also been faulted for unprofessionally arguing
the case. According to (Medwed, 2017, p. 228), every wrongful conviction has traces of bad
lawyering. In most cases, these are practices which involve critical failures of the defense
lawyers to carry out their own investigation, poor preparation, and conspiracy with the
prosecution side. A well-known case of this nature was the defense in the case of (Washington v.
Com., 1984) which lasted 40 minutes. In (Garrett, 2011), the case of Washington v. Com was a
matter of a death sentence that the lawyer was supposed to take months of preparation to counter
the State’s position in the case.
It paramount to understand the gravity that is connected to wrongful convictions. Firstly,
the work of (Morawetz, 2017) has already mentioned that the effects of these convictions can
either be insignificant very significant. The clearest harm is life imprisonment or a death
sentence for the most serious crimes. The interrelated outcomes are a financial loss, damaged the
reputation and other damages that result from wrongful conviction (Innocence Project, 2010).
Besides direct injuries on the arrest, the public also starts developing feeling trauma through two
occurrences. The first cause of trauma is knowing that the criminals responsible for their attack is
still free and living with them (Jenkins, 2014). The second one is the guilt of knowing that they
put to jail a wrong person thus destroying his life (Jenkins, 2014). Furthermore, work of (E.

WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS 5
Smith & Hattery, 2011) estimated about $87 million being spent in 2011 for the exoneration of
250 prisoners in the US. With this evidence of the negative impact of wrongful convictions, it
would be worth going into the details of each contributor of wrongful as named above.
Poor investigations by police (1000)
As previously mentioned, there are different ways the police department can be the cause
of wrongful convictions. According to (Leo & Davis, 2010), poor investigations can cause
wrongful convictions in cases where the police use suggestive practices and tunnel vision to
conclude an investigation without considerating other alternatives. The work of (Leo & Davis,
2010) state that once police accept tunnel vision, the further investigation becomes just
confirmation bias. While it is important to rely on eyewitnesses, the lengthy delay between the
occurrence of the crime and the lineup can cause wrongful conviction. The work of (Gould &
Leo, 2010; Innocence Project, 2010) confirmed that there were mistakes from eyewitness
accounted for 75% of the false convictions which were overturned by the use of DNA. In
addition to police errors, the work of (Keene & Handrich, 2012) stated that there is always a
false confession in almost every crime. According to (Keene & Handrich, 2012) and (Gould &
Leo, 2010), there are 65% prisoners of false confession, and most of these are the vulnerable
persons in the society such as the young, mentally ill, the naïve, and people who were under
psychiatric medication.
As stated earlier, research has shown that there are people whose imprisonment is
orchestrated through race bias during the arrest of the suspect, interrogation, prosecution, and
even during the trial (Gould & Leo, 2010). Research has proven that there is a high likelihood of
minorities being targeted for factors that lead to wrongful conviction or even being the actual
victims of wrongful conviction (Gould & Leo, 2010). According to the study, the largest number