Advocates validate a full on battering upon criminal activity as a means to detect, track, detach, and in the long run eliminate the criminal component in our society. This tactic may involve pursuing high crime areas, undercover surveillance, a large increase of patrols, profiling, and belligerent raids intended to bring a halt to criminal activity. Proponents contend that specific individual rights must be relinquished for the benefit of everyone. The beneficial outcomes of such methodology are clear in that delinquents and illegal activity become the direct aim of law enforcement. The objective of this model is to get the cases through the frameworks quickly, regardless of the fact that it implies growing forces of the courts. It actually gives more supremacy to the prosecutors and the courts that are taking care of the cases. In contrast the due process model is a right guaranteed by the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Due process is a central and necessary part of American criminal justice. It requires thoughtful, careful, and informed consideration of the facts presented in each individual case. Under the due process model, law enforcement must identify the privileges of the accused during arrest, interrogation, and hold. Prosecutors and judges must recognize constitutional and other guarantees during trial and the presentation of evidence. Overall ensuring that the innocent is not convicted, yet ignoring the rights of the victim. Both models grasp Constitutional values and work as indicated by our antagonistic framework. In particular, the police and prosecutors are not permitted to act against a man unless there is a conviction and some set standard of proof that he or she has abused the law - there are points of confinement to the framework and it is not taking into account indicting conduct esteemed just unethical or