The criminal justice system has actually been referred to as the criminal justice "non-system"

Sample Solution

    When referring to the criminal justice system as a “non-system,” we are acknowledging that it is not functioning properly, and there is no unified structure of governance. The criminal justice system can be characterized as many staggering parts working across multiple layers of government at the local, state, and federal level.

Despite its appearance of uniformity in name and purpose—punishing crime and maintaining social order—the reality is that the criminal justice system consists of separate components with highly distinct functions: law enforcement, prosecution, defense counsels, courts, corrections/rehabilitation at both state and federal levels. Each part works independently from one another when making decisions that all relate to how an individual may be treated under criminal law. The lack of coordination between these various agencies makes it difficult for them to work together efficiently and effectively; this has led some observers to deem this chain of command a "non-system." Furthermore, each component within the criminal justice system operates differently depending on location because each jurisdiction has its own unique laws regarding who holds power over which aspects. For instance: in some jurisdictions police officers have more authority than prosecutors or judges; while in others prosecutors have more control over determining sentences for defendants than either police officers or judges do. This lack of consistency creates numerous complications for those involved in coming up with fair sentences as well as appropriate rehabilitation efforts after release from prison. These issues can also lead people to feel unfairly singled out by their respective systems based solely on where they live rather than based on any formal evaluation criteria set forth by the court system itself. In addition to jurisdictional differences across states, discrepancies exist even within certain counties due largely to factors such as income inequality (poorer communities tend to experience harsher punishments) or race (minorities often face disproportionate amounts of scrutiny). These uneven results serve only further complicate matters when trying to build effective policy initiatives related to combating crime or rehabilitating criminals back into productive citizens meaningfully integrated into society upon their release from jail/prison time served. Overall there are many complex problems occurring within our current framework that prevent it from being considered a true “system” given its inconsistent nature across geographical boundaries and its tendency towards unfair practices designed primarily around protecting certain individuals’ rights while disregarding others entirely - such as those accused/convicted without deserving proper consideration whether innocent or guilty. It is clear then why so many have come refer dubiously dub this an official “non-system” instead – but hopefully through better understanding what needs improvement we can begin taking steps towards strengthening our country's approach towards meting out just punishment & administering fair rehabilitative services moving forward accordingly regardless anyone's background & place origin etc…