Ethical Approach in Crime Assignment

After graduating from the university with a degree in Criminology, you were hired as a probation officer in a mid-size county. You have started your career assigned to the courts performing pre-sentence investigations and work closely with several judges. However, during the first year on the job you became very concerned with the behavior and judgement of one of the judges you work for. When you first met Judge D.O. Good you thought he was a fairly intelligent and considerate individual. He was more experienced than other judges because he had worked in the field first as a police officer and then as a Deputy District Attorney. He was appointed to the bench eight years ago and has been reelected with strong community support.
When you first met Judge D.O. Good, he would often interject biblical sayings into his speech and appeared to be somewhat of a “born-again-christian.” You got this impression when the judge told you about how he use to drink and associate with women, other than his wife, and then found the “word of God” that changed his entire life around. He told you that he strictly follows the “word of God” in all his endeavors and that people who do not “are destined to damnation.” You even noticed that he would often use religious phrases and questions during court proceedings and you had heard talk from various attorneys that Judge D.O. Goods use of his religious beliefs were inappropriate for legal proceedings.
You are well aware of the necessity of the separation of church and state and realize the damage it can cause if specific religious beliefs are used to guide legal decisions that should be based on the secular, objective process of justice.
During the last month you noticed what appear to be three blatant misuse of judicial powers that appear to be based on the judges religious beliefs and loyalty and not due process of the law. First, you performed a presentence report on an individual growing marijuana and selling it. You found that the convicted person was a member of the church the judge belonged to. When it came time for sentencing, Judge D.O. Good granted him probation and put him into a diversion program. You strenuously objected because the defendant had a long prior criminal record and was not eligible for the diversion program. The judge responded that he personally knew the defendant to be a “man of god” and not a “heathen” that belonged in jail.
The next week, the judge allowed another church member, who faced very serious drunk driving charges, to perform community service work when he was not eligible. The judged then signed off on the community service order despite the fact that the work was not done. Just yesterday, a new court bailiff came to you for advice. He told you Judge D.O. Good had ordered the bailiff to investigate the pastor of another church and come up with evidence that the pastor used narcotics. The judge told the bailiff that they needed to get rid of the pastor because his church felt the pastor was not a “man of God” because she was a woman!!!
That was the last straw! You felt action had to be taken so you had a meeting with your supervisor. Your supervisor tried to talk you out of formally filing a complaint and ordered you not to discuss these allegations any further. He told you to just look the other way. This made you even more determined, but what do you do now???????
Your Assignment
1. Clearly and concisely DEFINE THE PROBLEM.
2. THOROUGHLY IDENTIFY AND DISCUSS all of the possible ALTERNATIVES you could use to solve this ethical/professional problem.
3. For each alternative you have selected, you must accurately FORECAST ALL OF THE POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES (pro and con) of each alternative.
4. Lastly, you must state clearly which alternative (or combination of alternatives) you would select to solve this problem and you must then CLEARLY DEFEND YOUR CHOICE!
Things the assignment needs to achieve.
1. Did you adequately describe and define the problem?
2. Did you fully develop all of the alternatives available to you and fully detail the consequences of each?
3. Did you provide a logical, well thought-out explanation of which alternative (s) you would use to solve this professional decision and did you provide a clear and concise defense of that choice?
4. Is your paper typed, double spaced, neat, use excellent grammar and spelling, and is it presented in a logical manner free from fragmented sentence structure or thought?
You must follow the APA Publication Manual of Style. As per the APA Manual, you must include a cover page, and reference page citing your sources. Abstract is not needed.
The four page (Minimum 1200 words) requirement does not include Cover page and Reference page. Minimum 1200 words.