Presumed Guilty doc - Discussion about the criminal justice system from a Mexican law perspective. PDF

Preview

Summary

Discussion about the criminal justice system from a Mexican law perspective. ...

Description

Presumed Guilty The documentary on criminal justice in Mexico (“Presunto Culpable”) which means presumed guilty is a ground breaking documentary that highlights how the judicial courts are corrupt in how they serve justice to the criminals in Mexican prisons. (Hernández and smith, 2008) In the documentary they present statistics that in Mexican prisons 95% of the inmates in the prison have never seen a charge neither have they seen a document to show what they were incriminated for. According to the Mexican criminal law system, (Nadelmann, 1990) offences such as drug trafficking, homicide, human trafficking and other tax offences are considered to be federal offences, arrests of such cases are tried in a federal court and on arrest the criminal is has the right to an orthodox legal defense with a public or public protector or lawyer to execute on the rights of the criminal. The law also argues that a preliminary hearing should be conducted to determine whether there is enough evidence for conviction or not. (Nadelmann, 1990) However in the documentary we are shown how Antonio Zúñiga a young hardworking man who sells videos and electronics in a market stall in the streets of Mexico is charged with the murder of a man who was gunned down. In the reports shown several witnesses had filed that they had seen the defendant at his stall from 10am to 6pm whereas the records showed that the murder took place at 3pm which was a 40min away walk from Antonio’s stall. The witness’s statement was however not used by the police during the trial. This goes to show how corrupt the criminal justice law is very corrupt in the carrying out of investigations and making convictions of criminals.

Southern New Hampshire University

Page 1

The most shocking thing about the whole case is that the alleged criminal Antonio Zúñiga who is also known as Tono had several alibi’s that proved where he was at the time of the shooting, the reports on the case showed that the evidence showed that he had no gunpowder in his hands and the man who accused him of the murder fails to describe him and also during his first two initial statements he mentions three suspects and not the defendant but changes his statement later on saying that he saw the defendant but cannot describe him. Although all the evidence provided by the reports and the second trial showing the accuser Victor Daniel Reyes Bravo the murder victim’s cousin saying that the police are the ones who told him the defendants nickname which is a contradiction of the investigations report presented before which showed that he was the one who told them the name of the victim he is still termed as guilty of the offense by the same judge the second time and is sentenced to imprisonment for 20years. The entire legal system in Mexico is shown to be corrupt and unjust and due to this reason the movie is banned from theaters and in international film festivals reason being that the media had no right of showing the accusers as well as the detective in charge of the case faces and that it was a defamation of their image and reputation. The movie was removed from theaters due to this ruling. Thereafter the case was revoked and the documentary was back on television broadcasts country wide but was halted due to the case made against the directors of the film by the police in charge of the investigation José Manuel Ortega Saavedra and the family of the murder victim.

Southern New Hampshire University

Page 2

In cases where there is limited evidence should the case be presumed guilty or innocent? The human rights law states that every criminal or offender has the right to a fair and just trial therefore investigations should be thoroughly carried out to ensure that no one is unjustly convicted or imprisoned. This has however been difficult to follow through as Mexico is well known for the high criminal rates and organized crimes in the world thus leading to the several cases of corrupt criminal justice cases. “The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that considers one innocent till proven guilty” (Friedman, 1999).Whereas the presumption of guilt, according to smith in the proof of guilt “When it is said that a defendant to a criminal charge is presumed to be innocent, what is really meant is that the burden of proving his guilt is upon the prosecution this is the golden thread that runs through the web of the English Criminal Law”. (Smith, 2005) The case of how a case should be presumed guilty or innocent has been challenging in most cases in Mexican criminal justice cases as several cases have been made such as the case in the documentary on how many criminals are convicted unjustly and without proper trail and investigation. Another major cause for action for the criminal law justice not only in Mexico but other countries with corrupt criminal justice courts are the laws that govern how law enforcement in dealing with the public during arrests. Every state should ensure they oblige by the human rights act law without discrimination by not abusing their power by using force when handling the arrest or conducting an investigation. ”. (Smith, 2005)

Southern New Hampshire University

Page 3

Some of the effects of the law enforcers not being accountable and respecting human rights is what causes the violation of crimes by criminals and also organized crimes and terrorists who revolt due to the cruelness of the people who are supposed to be the ones offering protection and security to the society. The effect of the use of the presumption of innocence and the guilty has both its positive and negative side. (Smith, 2005).The positive side is that every person has the right to not being convicted or imprisoned till proven guilty by a court of law this law is however misinterpreted by other courts as many inmates in prisons all over the world have been convicted yet being innocent of the crime they were put in for. This has greatly led to the devastation of many innocent families and communities as they are left without fathers, breadwinners and in poverty. Most of the families of the prisoners who are unjustly convicted are usually poor and cannot afford a proper lawyer who can fight for their case and are also usually unaware of their rights. The fourth amendment as stipulated in the U.S constitution of 1791 argues that “It is the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”.( Amar,1994) Therefore police or any other law enforcement agent is allowed to search your home or office without and official warranty. In conclusion the documentary is an eye-opening film about how corrupt criminal law justice courts and the police are corrupt in handling cases in most countries and as such we should read and understand our rights as citizens of a particular country in order to eradicate such cases.

Southern New Hampshire University

Page 4

References Amar, A. R. (1994). Fourth Amendment first principles. Harvard Law Review, 107(4), 757-819. Friedman, R. D. (1999). A presumption of innocence, not of even odds. Stan. L. Rev., 52, 873. Hernández, R., & Smith, G. (2008). Presunto culpable. DVD. Mexico City. Instituto Mexicano de la Cinematografía. Nadelmann, E. A. (1990). Role of the United States in the International Enforcement of Criminal Law, The. Harv. Int'l. LJ, 31, 37. Smith, B. P. (2005). The presumption of guilt and the English law of theft, 1750–1850. Law and History Review, 23(1), 133-171.

Southern New Hampshire University

Page 5...