Defendants and Characteristics of Victims

Defendants and Characteristics of Victims
The criminal justice system has a seemingly impossible task: balancing the rights of the accused with the rights of victims. Further complicating this delicate balance is the demand to recognize the potential impact of prejudice upon the decision-making of police, prosecutors, jurors, and even judges. Although defendants can be members of every class, race, or gender, defendants who are African-American have been historically discriminated against by the criminal justice system. The rising population of Latinos within America has also created challenges, given that Latinos often face linguistic difficulties and assumptions (founded or unfounded) that they are likely to be illegal immigrants.
Discrimination and prejudice is not only suffered by defendants, however. For many years, women who were involved in rape trials would be treated like criminals by defense attorneys, and interrogated about their sexual practices and demeanor. Victims who are older, white, male and more economically powerful often find it easier to have justice meted out in their favor.
Other factors that can prejudice the minds of juries are the slanted perspective offered by television shows, which portray a sensationalized view of crime, and do not acknowledge that a disproportionate number of sex crime offenders, for example, are male and rapists often know their victims and are not random, violent attackers. Critics even have suggested that aspects of the victim’s right movement, like the inclusion of victim’s impact statements in the sentencing process, can prejudice both juries and judges in an emotional manner. As with so many aspects of the justice system, there is no clear answer to the need for both defendants and victims to have their rights protected, and justice is always a balancing act.
Ch. 10: Law action perspective
The criminal justice system does not view all crimes as being created equal. The criminal justice system is often viewed as being constructed much like a ‘layer cake’ in which historical cases, serious felonies, lesser felonies, and misdemeanors are seen as making up various layers of the ‘cake.’ However, most crimes, regardless of severity, pass through a series of stages, the first of which is the arrest, during which the suspect must have his or her Miranda Rights read; the initial appearance, charging, preliminary hearing, Grand Jury, trial, and arraignment. At almost any stage of the process the criminal can see his or her case dismissed, if there is insufficient evidence for proceeding with the prosecution. While prosecutors have occasionally been criticized for being overzealous in pursuing cases, in other instances, politics, limited resources, and simple human judgment can result in the suspension of a prosecution.
The notion of the criminal justice ‘layer cake’ does not necessarily convey the sense of real importance of various cases, but of perceived importance, namely that the public often perceives cases such as the O.J. Simpson trial as more important than lesser offenses and the attention they bring to the operations of the justice system. In these cases, the system itself is often seen as being on trial, not just the defendant, as people ask if it is possible for someone to get a ‘fair shake’ in the American court system. The second tier is that of serious felonies, which, if improperly handled, could result in hardened criminals being released onto society. Lesser felonies are not given as much attention, despite the fact that their victims may feel wronged. Limited resources inevitably mean that some cases will receive more prosecutorial attention than other cases. And misdemeanors attract the least attention of all and may be dismissed if it is determined that the offender committed an honest mistake or the prosecution of the offense is not worth the costs to the system.
Ch. 11: Bail reform
Bail is the act of an individual vouching for a potentially accused defendant by offering a certain sum of money for the defendant’s freedom. The posting of bail is often based upon the defendant’s likelihood of being a flight risk, the severity of the crime, and also his or her persona demeanor in court. A friend, relative, or a bail bondsman may post bail.
Despite the idea that justice is blind, there are rather obvious inequities manifest in the bail system. It is far easier for wealthier defendants to post bail. Minorities and the poor are disproportionately unable to post bail. They are also less likely to be allowed to post bail at all and are simply remanded into custody until trial, compared with non-minorities who have committed similar offenses. Defendants who cannot post bail are often psychologically devastated by the jail time, are less able to assist in their defense, If they are innocent, they are effectively forced to do jail time for a crime they did not commit — which they would not have been forced to do, had they been wealthy enough to post bail. This seems to violate the principles of the due process model of justice, which states that no one should be condemned for a crime until he or she is proven guilty. Advocates of the crime control model of justice state that remanding an individual into police custody takes a potentially violent criminal off of the streets, as well as lessons the costs a flight risk can pose to the system. These advocates argue for bail reforms that shift the system to a greater emphasis on preventative detention for all defendants. The due process model stresses making affordable bail and pretrial service programs more available.