Legal Guilt vs Factual Guilt

  • Type of paperTerm Paper
  • SubjectCriminology
  • Number of pages3
  • Format of citationAPA
  • Number of cited resources5
  • Type of serviceWriting from scratch

This paper will be send to so please please be careful. I will also provide an example of how I personally write my papers so if you could just try to write the paper as similar as you can to mine, that would be great. I will also provide the rubric that was given so you can look over everything that needs to be done, as well as the PowerPoints that my professor have provided for us will be included



Legal guilt: Jodi Arias case
In the year 2008, Travis Alexander was found date in his apartment in Mesa, Arizona.
He was found with a bullet hole in his head while his body had multiple stubbed wounds
from the head, back, chest and a deep cut of the throat. Police from Arizona state department
carried out detailed investigations to ascertain the reason for the killing; during the
investigation, the detectives found a camera in Travis washing machine which contained
graphic and explicit photos objectifying a rendezvous between the latter and Jodi Arias who
was his lover. In one of the images Travis body could be seen lying lifeless next to Jodi’s leg,
these photos formed the basis for incriminating the named lover over the death of his lover.
Jodi was arrested and detained over the overwhelming evidence gathered on the crime scene
which included traces of DNA of her blood and hair which were obtained from Travis house
(Sarteschi, 2017). The case Jodi arias proceeded to trial, and in the year 2013/4 she was found
guilty of first-degree murder by the jury (two separate juries) and was sentenced to life
without parole. From the text above, legal guilty supersedes factual guilty because the
accused was presumed innocent until she was proven guilty by the evidence presented in
A just and fair society is defined by its adherence to the rule of law, and the due
process followed and practiced to facilitate the latter. The contemporary society is governed
by a set of principles embodied in by the virtues of democracy, hence providing checks and
balances that are necessary to ensure there is miss-couraged justice. The existing laws do not
guarantee fairness, equality, or justice; therefore, the instruments of powers and laws have
been split between the factual or legal approach when ascertaining if a person is guilty or not

guilty. Thus, the paper will focus to debate on the key issue of the law and constitutionally
legal reforms by supporting the idea that Legal Guilt should take precedent over Factual Guilt
Argument: Factual Guilt should take precedent over Legal Guilt
The aspect of legal guilt forms the basis of fairness and justice in courts; it is the
clause that ensures the rights of a person, of being innocent until proven guilty are adhered to
and observed. There is an increasing number of people who have or are wrongly convicted,
and some are executed for a crime they did or have committed. Such unfortunate miscarriage
of justice is usually preceded by factual actions of a court that fails to follow the due
procedures when persuading a case or trial in a court of law (Antonacci, 2013). Legal guilt
should not supersede factual guilt because the latter offers a significant level of “confidence”
that the trial or case in pursue will be free and fair by facilitating proper mediation between
the accuser and the accused. Legal guilt relies on concrete evidence provided by both side,
the ability and reliability of producing reliable witnesses or shreds of evidence form the basis
of fairness and justice in a given court of law, this ensures or reduce wrongful convictions or
disbandment of cases in a court of law. Furthermore, the philosophies of criminal justice
overlook the aspect of the factual quilt by focusing on the due process and ensuring the entire
procedural prerequisite are adhered to and respected. Meaning that for a verdict to be made
irrespective of the crimes committed, the court and the jury have to follow the stipulated laws
be exonerating or incarcerating a person. This will ensure that justice is served to both
parties, the accuser and the accused thus Legal Guilt should take precedent over Factual
The factual guilty should provide the basis for the legal guilty; this ensures the
presumption of innocence if upheld before a person is considered guilty or not guilty (Blume
& Rebbecce, 2014). Meaning any individual, groups or business accused of any crime is

constitutionally guaranteed to a free trial in the court of law, thus in the event of such a
person or persons is not given a fair trial or an assumption of “is guilty” is made. Then it will
be assumed the latter was not given a free and fair platform to prove their innocence
irrespective of their past criminal records. Any persons accused of doing or participating in a
crime is entitled to his or her rights as guaranteed by the constitution and stipulated in the
criminal justice system – procedural safeguards. The above sentiments form the basis for
legal guilt where the court and its apparatus facilitate or create an environment that
safeguards the interests of both parties involved in the trial or case. Since the government is
the custodian and defendant of the constitution, it is obliged to observe the aspect of legal
guilt, by ensuring that all legal procedures are followed and adhered by; before a verdict is
presented in court. Coherently, guaranteeing that the accused and the accuser have been
provided with the fair and just representation in court before a verdict is given (Neubauer &
Henry, 2018). Hence the factual Guilt should take precedent over legal Guilt because it is
enshrined and defined by the constitution and offers the basis for equality and justice in the
“eyes” of the law.
The factual guilty is not consistently used or observed in the contemporary courts; it
can be easily be interfered with or tampered with by either the prosecutors or the defendants.
To demonstrate the above sentiments; a person accused of murder may be proven “not guilty”
if he or she may tamper or threaten the witnesses who may testify against him or her
(Alschuler, 2015). The above examples indicate the weaknesses of the factual guilty as a tool
of law. Conversely, the legal guilt takes the approach of the rule of law by studying,
analyzing and deploying the necessary tools that are required by the state that are vital in
determining the verdict between the prosecutor and the defendant. However, most legal cases
gravitate towards the “legal guilt” this is because most of the accused are presumed innocent

until the state provides justifiable evidence incriminating the charged against the case(s)
leveled against him or her.
In the contemporary society, human rights and the rule of law are the primary
fundamentals that govern the individual rights of every person who stands to accuse or be
accused in the court of law. Coherently, individuals should be assumed to innocent until
proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt; this will guarantee free and just trial. Thus the factual
guilt should take precedent over legal guilt because it can provide clear guidance on the
process to be followed or undertaken when legally factual circumstances may arise.