NCJ Number
46104
Date Published
1978
Length
68 pages
Annotation
THE PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL SURVEY OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD COURTS AND JUSTICE ARE PRESENTED.
Abstract
THIS SURVEY WAS DESIGNED TO CULL PUBLIC OPINION ON COURT SYSTEM PERFORMANCES, WHILE ASCERTAINING TO WHAT EXTENT THESE VIEWS WERE ROOTED IN COURT KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE. THE RESULTS INDICATE THAT LARGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE HAVE VERY LITTLE FAMILIARITY WITH THE WORKINGS OF COURTS, THEIR LEVEL OF CONFIDENCE IN THE COURTS IS NOT HIGH, AND THERE IS CONSIDERABLE DISSATISFACTION ARISING FROM THE EXPENSE AND DELAYS OF LITIGATION. SIX MAJOR CONCLUSIONS EMERGE FROM THIS STUDY: (1) THERE IS A PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN VIEW -- BETWEEN THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY LEADERS ON THE ONE HAND, AND JUDGES AND LAWYERS ON THE OTHER -- WITH RESPECT TO COURT OPERATIONS; (2) THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY LEADERS ARE DISSATISFIED WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF COURTS AND RANK COURTS LOWER THAN MANY OTHER MAJOR AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS; (3) THE GENERAL PUBLIC'S KNOWLEDGE OF AND CONTACT WITH THE COURT SYSTEM IS LOW; (4) THOSE HAVING KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE WITH COURTS VOICE THE GREATEST DISSATISFACTION AND CRITICISM; (5) IN SPITE OF LIMITED KNOWLEDGE AND MARKED DISSATISFACTION, THE INTEREST OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN COURTS IS HIGH, WITH IMPRESSIVE SUPPORT FOR REFORM AND IMPROVEMENT; AND (6) PUBLIC ATTITUDES ON CRIME AND PUNISHMENT ARE FAR LESS SIMPLISTIC THAN PREVIOUSLY NOTED IN MORE LIMITED STUDIES. THE PUBLIC'S DISCONTENT STEMS FROM THE FEELING THAT THREE BASIC EXPECTATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN FULFILLED: PROTECTION OF SOCIETY; EQUALITY AND FAIRNESS; AND QUALITY PERFORMANCE BY COURT PERSONNEL. FOR THE MOST PART, JUDGES AND LAWYERS PARTICIPATING IN THE SURVEY DISAGREE WITH THE VIEWS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY LEADERS. WHILE 37 PERCENT OF THE PUBLIC REPORTS LOW CONFIDENCE IN COURTS, ONLY 5 PERCENT OF JUDGES AND 17 PERCENT OF LAWYERS SHARE THEIR VIEW. ON THE OTHER HAND, 23 PERCENT OF THE PUBLIC VOICES HIGH CONFIDENCE IN THE COURTS, WHILE 63 PERCENT OF JUDGES AND 45 PERCENT OF THE LAWYERS MAINTAIN A HIGH CONFIDENCE LEVEL. THE PUBLIC, MORE OFTEN THAN JUDGES, PERCEIVES A NEED FOR REFORM AND, WHILE THERE IS NEAR CONGRUENCE BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND LAWYERS, COMMUNITY LEADERS ARE MOST LIKELY TO EXPRESS A DESIRE FOR REFORM. THREE OUT OF FOUR PERSONS CLAIM THAT THEY KNOW EITHER VERY LITTLE OR NOTHING ABOUT STATE AND LOCAL COURTS, AND THIS SELF-PERCEPTION OF LOW-LEVEL KNOWLEDGE IS MATCHED BY A LOW LEVEL OF ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE; THE PUBLIC IS MISINFORMED ABOUT MANY TOPICS RELATED TO JURISDICTION AND COURT OPERATION AND PROCEDURE. THE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE ONE IS CONCERNING THE COURTS, THE MORE LIKELY ONE IS TO POSSESS AN UNFAVORABLE OPINION. THOSE WITH COURT EXPERIENCE TEND TO BE MOST NEGATIVE AND CONCERNED ABOUT PARTICULAR COURT PROBLEMS. THE STUDY ALSO SHOWED THAT THE GENERAL PUBLIC'S HIGH LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT COURT PROBLEMS AND REFORM IS MATCHED BY A WILLINGNESS TO COMMIT TAX DOLLARS TO IMPROVE THE JUSTICE SYSTEM. COMPLEX ATTITUDES ON CRIME AND PUNISHMENT EXIST. MORE SUPPORT IS EXPRESSED FOR FINDING BETTER JUDGES THAN FOR CREATING MORE PRISON FACILITIES. CONTRARY TO WHAT MIGHT BE EXPECTED, ONLY 11 PERCENT FAVOR DETERMINATE SENTENCES, WHILE THE MAJORITY FAVORS SOME FORM OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION. A TABULAR BREAKDOWN OF THE SURVEY DATA IS PROVIDED. (KBL)