NCJ Number
85635
Date Published
1980
Length
22 pages
Annotation
Criminal procedures in France and the United States are compared, with emphasis on an imminent procedural reform of French criminal law and on the role of police fact-finding in both systems.
Abstract
The French procedural reform is termed 'projet Peyrefitte' in reference to its sponsor, Minister of Justice Alain Peyrefitte. The bill has passed the National Assembly and is expected to be approved by the French Senate. Its main goal is to punish acts of violence more severely both by directly increasing sentences and by limiting the invocation of attenuating circumstances and the use of a remission or suspension of all or part of a sentence. While these measures have been criticized by the press and public, the French left has focused its sharpest criticisms on the bill's reductions of the range of penalties for a given crime and its time limits on certain pretrial phases of the criminal justice process. The nature of the criticisms reveals the difference between the liberal consciousness in France and in the United States. In addition, an analysis of the use of discretion in the criminal process and of the French emphasis on administrative investigation rather than a trial as the main means for finding guilt indicates the main differences between the French and American systems. Nevertheless, in both systems the determination of guilt ultimately rests primarily on the fact-finding and decisions made by the police, although the systems differ concerning the police role in the total process. The United States should recognize the crucial role of police investigation and should take steps to make it more responsible. Seven footnotes are provided.