It may be easy for people in Cranford to make immediate decisions on one's guilt or innocence based of a simple smattering of information. The trouble with this is that those facing criminal accusations have the right to have their stories heard before actual judgment against them can be pronounced. Those quick to make judgments against another may indeed eventually find themselves in situations where they need to rely on the understanding of others to allow them to recount their sides of their stories in order to avoid criminal penalties. Yet if opinions on them have already been formed, it may difficult to have those stories heard.
Law enforcement officers in Cranford are entrusted with what can often be a difficult task: enforcing the law while also respecting the rights of local citizens. That responsibility may typically be carried out without incident, yet there also may be cases where authorities use force when dealing with those who have come under criminal scrutiny. The use of force may indeed be justified if it is believed to be necessary in order to protect themselves and others. It should not be exercised, however, as simply a means to exert authority over another.
If you have been convicted of a crime in Cranford, you certainly do not want the consequences to linger any longer than the completion of whatever fines or sentence you are forced to face. Yet having the information regarding your criminal activity on your public record can hinder your chances to completely move on with your life once you have satisfied the demands that came with your conviction. Therefore, seeking to have your criminal record expunged is definitely something you will want to look into.
The common perception of criminal law cases is typically that of a team of prosecutors and defense squaring off against each other in the tense courtroom setting. Yet oftentimes in criminal proceedings in Cranford, the unique circumstances of one's case may make it advantageous to consider plea bargaining. Indeed, information shared by the Bureau of Justice Assistance estimates that 90-95 percent of both federal and state court cases are resolved with a guilty plea. Yet simply because this appears to the norm in criminal matters does not mean that the process does not have its complexities.
A common refrain often heard in connection with alleged criminal activity in Cranford is that the accused perpetrator "should have known better." That statement may imply both a strong understanding of the law and also a blatant disrespect for it. However, many criminal cases may not easily fit into such a generality. There may be times when one does not understand how serious his or her actions are viewed (at least not to the point of considering them to be criminal). Then there may also be cases where cravings and perceived needs could cause one to set aside legal standards that he or she might otherwise honor in order to satisfy an addiction.
Many in Cranford are likely familiar with the old saying "sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me." Harassing and threatening language may, however, leave one facing criminal charges due to New Jersey's terroristic threats statute. The issue in arresting and charging one for making threats may come down to a simple question of delivery, which prompts the question of what matters most: the intent of the speaker, or the interpretation of the audience?
Claims of self-defense may seem to be cited so often as justification for crimes allegedly committed in Cranford that many may have trouble assigning any validity to them. Yet there certainly are legitimate cases where the use of force (even deadly force) may be justified. Indeed, information compiled by the Violence Policy Center shows that as recently as 2012, 259 of the gun-related homicides reported in the U.S. were determined to be justifiable.