NCJ Number
154808
Date Published
1995
Length
315 pages
Annotation
This is a critique of America's system of criminal prosecution.
Abstract
The author argues that the primary function of today's criminal trials is no longer to determine guilt and to condemn evil, but to understand the mind of the criminal, to camouflage the crime as less heinous and less deserving of punishment. He further claims that judges have lost control over their courtrooms. The author cites the trial of Dan White for the deaths of San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and councilman Harvey Milk as the beginning of a trend in criminal trials in America. White's conviction for manslaughter, not first-degree murder, and the infamous Twinkie defense, led to such disturbing verdicts as those in the Lorena Bobbitt, Rodney King and Menendez brothers trials. These and other high-profile, politicized criminal trials of the 1990s have become focal points for activist groups who have suffered in the criminal justice system and who now take their grievances to the street. Lawyers have free reign to divert jurors from the facts of a trial with outlandish theories that portray their clients as the supposed victims. The author examines four disenfranchised groups who he claims are helping to create a new form of American political trial--gays, blacks, Jews, and women. There is a chapter on the quest for a fair trial, including discussions of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights. One chapter examines society's reactions when criminals are no longer punished for their crimes, when the criminal's wrong is compounded by official cowardice. An examination of juries and American justice considers what happens when the law is out of touch with popular sensibilities. The author suggests ten principles for bringing justice to both victims and defendants: (1) think of every case as a new political trial; (2) divide the verdict into two stages; (3) reallocate the victim's power from sentencing to plea-bargaining; (4) give the victim a role at trial; (5) establish diverse juries; (6) abolish changes of venue; (7) establish an interactive jury; (8) psychiatric experts should not testify about issues of moral responsibility; (9) experts in police-brutality cases should not testify about departmental policy; and (10) move toward communitarian punishment. There is a Timeline showing the case histories of trials that triggered popular identification with victims, including some events not discussed in the book. Notes, index