100 word response
1 reference/intext citation
Due 1/10/2025
Epps
Post 2 Q2:
Investigators often face tension between striving to prove a case and uncovering the truth. Are these orientations fundamentally different, or can they coexist within investigative work? Choose one orientation, explain your perspective, and use a real or hypothetical case example to illustrate this approach’s strengths and potential limitations.
In investigative work, there exists a critical ethical dilemma between the pursuit of proving a case and the commitment to uncovering the truth. Prioritizing truth over winning allows for a more nuanced understanding of the circumstances, emphasizing integrity and thoroughness. This approach not only serves justice but also enhances the credibility of investigators, fostering trust within the community and improving cooperation from witnesses. A focus on truth is essential in preventing miscarriages of justice, as it helps to protect innocent individuals from wrongful convictions and maintains the overall integrity of the justice system.
However, this commitment to uncovering the truth can present significant challenges. Thorough investigations often demand considerable time and resources, which may be scarce in high-pressure situations that prioritize expedient outcomes. Additionally, the emotional and psychological toll on investigators can be substantial, especially when confronting distressing realities in serious crime cases. Despite these potential limitations, the long-term benefits of seeking the truth underscore its importance in maintaining a just and equitable legal system.
A Hypothetical Example
The case of a robbery at a local convenience store highlights the difference between an investigator focused on proving guilt based on a suspect’s prior criminal record and one dedicated to uncovering the truth. While the former might quickly build a case against the suspect, the latter would conduct thorough interviews, review surveillance footage, and examine additional evidence, potentially revealing that the suspect was not at the scene and that another individual, without a criminal history, was responsible. This commitment to truth not only safeguards the innocent but also ensures that the real perpetrator is held accountable, resulting in a more just outcome for the community, despite requiring more time and effort.
