Perception of Community towards wrongful Conviction in Nueva Ecija
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22161/Abstract
Many known cases of wrongful conviction arose from a burden on law enforcement officials to settle the case either because it is high-profile, or due to financial or other systemic considerations. The study described the perception of the community towards the causes of wrongful conviction and effects of wrongful conviction to the community. This study used the descriptive method. A total of 100 respondents composed of different professionals were surveyed in the study. The researcher used likert-scale responses on the distributed questionnaire and analyze the data through frequency count and percentage. From the data gathered, the researcher concluded that the main reason of wrongful conviction is poverty as perceived by the community garnered the highest frequency count and percentage of being strongly agreed. Further, greater fear topped the effects of the wrongful conviction as perceived by the community garnered the highest frequency count and percentage of being strongly agreed. In the foregoing conclusions, the researcher derived that wrongful conviction has a cognitive and emotional impact to the community’s perception. It is recommended that possible attitudes of citizens in wrongful conviction should be conducted in an oral interview instead of survey for more specific and defined answer
Downloads
References
Camic, P. M., Rhodes, J. E., & Yardley, L. E. (2003). Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design. American Psychological Association.
Cole, S. A. (2006). The prevalence and potential causes of wrongful conviction by fingerprint evidence. Golden Gate UL Rev., 37, 39.
Garoupa, N., & Rizzolli, M. (2012). Wrongful convictions do lower deterrence. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft, 224-231.
Findley, K. A. (2001). Learning from our mistakes: A criminal justice commission to study wrongful convictions. Cal. WL Rev., 38, 333.
Huff, C. R., & Killias, M. (Eds.). (2010). Wrongful conviction: International perspectives on miscarriages of justice. Temple University Press.
Lando, H. (2006). Does wrongful conviction lower deterrence? The Journal of Legal Studies, 35(2), 327-337.
Leo, R. A., & Gould, J. (2009). Studying wrongful convictions: Learning from social science. Ohio St. J. Crim. L., 7, 7.
Ramsey, R. J., & Frank, J. (2007). Wrongful conviction: Perceptions of criminal justice professionals regarding the frequency of wrongful conviction and the extent of system errors. Crime & Delinquency, 53(3), 436-470.
Risinger, D. M. (2006). Innocents convicted: An empirical justified factual wrongful conviction rate. J. Crim. l. & Criminology, 97, 761.
Vagias, W. M. (2006). Likert-type scale response anchors. clemson international institute for tourism. & Research Development, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson University.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
