Criticism of the CJS Forensics 5.1 October 6,

Objective: SWBAT Analyze criticisms of the criminal justice system 2

Criticism The innocent go to jail False confessions Misleading/ circumstantial evidence Bias from the jury/ prosecution Poor legal counsel 3

The Innocence Project Founded in 1992 by Barry C. Scheck and Peter Neufield While in law school at Yeshiva University Assist prisoners with attaining DNA testing to prove their innocence 4

The Innocence Project Nationwide they have helped overturn 311 cases 244 since 2000 The first took place in 1989 Exonerations have been won in 36 states 18 were death row inmates The average length of sentence was 13.6 years Total number of years served was over 4,000 Average age at the time of conviction 27 5

The Innocence Project Race of the African Americans 94 Caucasians 22 Latinos 2 Asian Americans 152 tests led to the arrest of the actual criminal DNA evidence clears a potential suspect in roughly 25% of cases nationwide 6

Does the state owe anything to someone that was wrongfully convicted? Assuming that the state didn’t do anything illegal? 7

Criticism of the CJS Forensics 5.2 – The Death Penalty in the United States October 23,

Capital Punishment The penalty of death differs from all other forms of criminal punishment, not in degree but in kind. It is unique in its rejection of rehabilitation of the convict as a basic purpose of criminal justice. And it is unique, finally, in its absolute renunciation of all that is embodied in our concept of humanity. -Justice Potter Stewart Furman v Georgia 9

The Death Penalty (1) the defendant is charged with a crime for which the death penalty is a legally authorized sanction, (2) the defendant intended or had a high degree of culpability with respect to the death of the victim, and (3) one or more aggravating factors specified in a statutory list are present in the case. The statutory aggravating factors include such factors as the commission of a killing in the course of another serious offense, the defendant's having a prior criminal history involving serious violent offenses, the commission of a killing after substantial planning and premeditation, killing multiple victims, or endangering the lives of other persons (in addition to the person killed) in committing the crime. 18 U.S.C

The Death Penalty (1) the defendant is charged with a crime for which the death penalty is a legally authorized sanction, (2) the defendant intended or had a high degree of culpability with respect to the death of the victim, and (3) one or more aggravating factors specified in a statutory list are present in the case. The statutory aggravating factors include such factors as the commission of a killing in the course of another serious offense, the defendant's having a prior criminal history involving serious violent offenses, the commission of a killing after substantial planning and premeditation, killing multiple victims, or endangering the lives of other persons (in addition to the person killed) in committing the crime. 18 U.S.C

The Death Penalty (1) the defendant is charged with a crime for which the death penalty is a legally authorized sanction, (2) the defendant intended or had a high degree of culpability with respect to the death of the victim, and (3) one or more aggravating factors specified in a statutory list are present in the case. The statutory aggravating factors include such factors as the commission of a killing in the course of another serious offense, the defendant's having a prior criminal history involving serious violent offenses, the commission of a killing after substantial planning and premeditation, killing multiple victims, or endangering the lives of other persons (in addition to the person killed) in committing the crime. 18 U.S.C

The Death Penalty (1) the defendant is charged with a crime for which the death penalty is a legally authorized sanction, (2) the defendant intended or had a high degree of culpability with respect to the death of the victim, and (3) one or more aggravating factors specified in a statutory list are present in the case. The statutory aggravating factors include such factors as the commission of a killing in the course of another serious offense, the defendant's having a prior criminal history involving serious violent offenses, the commission of a killing after substantial planning and premeditation, killing multiple victims, or endangering the lives of other persons (in addition to the person killed) in committing the crime. 18 U.S.C

The Death Penalty 18 USC Conditions The Death Penalty needs to be “on the table” The Defendant needs to have a “high degree” of culpability Aggravating factors Killing in the commission of another crime (Felony Murder) Premeditation History of violent offenses Multiple victims Endangering the lives of others 14

Furman V Georgia William Furman was a burglar He “accidentally” killed the a family member of the house he was burglarizing Georgia held a sentencing trial to apply the death penalty It lasted one day The jury had nearly complete discretion to level and sentence they wanted It appeared that poor, black (and poor and black) defendants were receiving the death penalty at a much higher rate 15

The decision 5-4 Decision overturning the Sentence There were over 200 pages of concurrence and dissent Brennan, Douglas, and Marshall (Thurgood) The Death Penalty was almost certainly cruel and unusual Stewart, White The Death Penalty can be used, but must be done fairly and openly There can be no arbitrary application The dissenters Said this was a matter for the states and personal feelings should not come into play 16

17

18

Criticism of the CJS Forensics 5.3 – Effective Representation October 25,

Capital Punishment The penalty of death differs from all other forms of criminal punishment, not in degree but in kind. It is unique in its rejection of rehabilitation of the convict as a basic purpose of criminal justice. And it is unique, finally, in its absolute renunciation of all that is embodied in our concept of humanity. -Justice Potter Stewart Furman v Georgia 20

Effective Representation The Sixth Amendment Guarantees the right to legal counsel Gideon v Wainwright No matter how poor/ the level of case you are guaranteed legal counsel 21

Effective Representation Legal Services Corporation Federal Non-Profit Corporation Signed into law in 1974 Richard Nixon LSC is the single largest source of funding for civil legal assistance in the country “there is a need to provide high quality legal assistance to those who would be otherwise unable to afford adequate legal counsel.” 22

Who gets legal aid? In 2012 Over 2/3 were women 46% white 27% black 18 % Hispanic It cost over $800 million to fund LSC programs nationwide Almost 2 million people served 809, 830 cases closed 3, 945 full time attorneys That is roughly 206 cases per full-time attorney 134 local legal aid programs 23

The LSC comes under fire Nixon made the corporation legal Regan cut the funding. Regan did not feel that it was the role of the federal gov’t to fund this program and attempted to defund the entire corp It remained but tit was severely limited Today LSC is a functioning non-profit funded in part by the government It also gets funding from charitable foundations and other sources In the current budget LSC received just under $341 million dollars in federal funding 24

Classwork: 1) What is the biggest challenge facing legal aid services right now? 2) Why is it such a challenge? How do individual politics play into the matter? 3) Why is it so important to ensure that the poor have effective legal representation? 25