Emily Bazelon

Interesting points about the unfair advantages of prosecutors over defences, with an account of people and organizations promoting a different way of doing the job, somewhat smothered by accounts of two individuals' cases which were covered in more depth than the purpose of the book demanded.

Prosecutors in most places: get to request bail way above what is necessary to return defendants to court, leaving them stuck in jail; choose which charges to press in an arbitrarily punitive way; demand a severe penalty in sentencing for going to trial compared to taking a plea; and thus they have the power to pressurise innocent defendants into plea bargains. They also have the right to withhold exculpatory evidence during plea negotiations, and the effective power to illegally hide it during trial. On top of this, prosecutors have immunity from civil rights lawsuits for actions taken in preparing for or trying a case. The adversarial system and elected district attorney positions incentivize prosecutors to play hardball to win tough punishments, instead of using prison-diversion programs that may result in better outcomes for recidivism.

But more progressive-minded prosecutors are being elected, who demand bail for release only where necessary and seek to do their part to reduce crime without resort to mass incarceration.… (meer)

"Charged", by Emily Bazelon, looks at the immense impact that Prosecutors can and do exert in the criminal judicial system. There's widespread support among prosecutors for a "tough on crime" stance, and being known as the "law & order" candidate in elections is the popular position that politicians, judges and prosecutors take when running for office. The result is that American jails are filled to capacity, and the number of incarcerated individuals is out of proportion to the rest of the World. And if Americans are no more prone to committing crimes than citizens of other Countries, Emily Bazelon examines whether or not we're doing something wrong in our approach to crime and punishment.

Our judicial system proudly focuses on punishment for crimes, while many other countries tend to focus on rehabilitation. In her book, Bazelon notes that there's been a recent national criminal justice reform movement which is looking at reducing prison sentences and reversing the high incarceration rates, and focusing more on rehabilitation whenever possible. Long standing practices make this reform movement a tough sell, but Emily Bazelon presents statistics and studies which point out there may be a rational for rethinking the current tough-on-crime approach taken across our Country. While discussing these statistics and studies, she also also examines two different cases in which lawyers have used different approaches to how crimes should be prosecuted. She looks at one case handled by Memphis District Attorney Amy Wyrick, and another by Brooklyn DA Eric Gonzalez. In the first case, the compulsion to bring people to justice and to win all cases led to the conviction of a convenient suspect, but also a charge of prosecutorial misconduct. In the second case, the DA chose not to push for the most punitive punishment possible, and instead allowed a young man to enter an alternative program, which had a net positive outcome for the individual.

The rational for rethinking the tough-on-crime approach is motivated in part on the financial costs and also in part on the human costs. It takes $15,000 to $70,000 per year to keep someone in prison, and that's a huge financial burden for many municipalities, especially considering that many are imprisoned only for very minor convictions or because they can't make bail. There's also an impact on society, since prisons have been shown to have become a revolving door. Often, when prisoners have served their term and are released, their criminal record makes it difficult to find a job or obtain public housing. Their record follows them and limits their options. With few options, they often turn to crime again, and end up back in jail.

There are arguments to be made for both approaches, to be sure. But the number of convictions that are being overturned based on DNA analysis, especially in death penalty cases, shows that there are a good number of innocent men or women wrongly imprisoned. This is especially unfortunate in the cases Bazelon describes when a Prosecutor overcharges a crime, whether to show toughness or to force a plea deal, or is so motivated to "win" that ethics slip in the process.

Bazelon discusses how forward looking prosecutors are starting to make judgments on the level of crime committed and on the individual, and trying to determine if drug rehab, mental illness counselling, or other attempts to rehabilitate the individual rather than imprison them would make more sense. She discusses studies which show a less punitive alternative often allows the offender to reclaim his or her place as a productive member of society. But many prosecutors and judges are reluctant to allow a defendant to enter alternate programs for fear that the individual may subsequently commit a more serious crime, and they'll be blamed for a poor decision and fail in their bid for re-election. It's easier for most to simply pursue a prison sentence, avoid any second guessing, regardless of the impact on the defendant.

After reading this book, readers may not change their attitudes toward punishment vs. rehabilitation, but should at least recognize when applied rationally, there are situations when jail should not be the only outcome in a criminal matter. Also, for those who may be interested in other books dealing with innocent people being wrongly convicted due to prosecutorial misconduct, John Grisham's covers the subject nicely in several of his novels, including The Innocent Man", "The Confession; and in his most recent book "The Guardians". Better examples from non-fictional accounts include Radley Balko's book "The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist"; Bryan Stevenson's excellent book "Just Mercy"; Raymond Bonner's book "Anatomy of Injustice: A Murder Case Gone Wrong"; Burned", by Edward Humes, or Michelle Alexander's "The New Jim Crow".… (meer)

If you want to understand criminal justice in the US, and the need for reform, you need to understand the role of prosecutors and the way the system is rigged. In the early 1970s, the northeast, midwest, and western US had incarceration rates comparable to the Nordics. After that, they skyrocketed.

Emily Bazelon explores the roots of our rigged system--and what might be done to change it--partly through the lens of two cases. Kevin (not his real name), was arrested for a gun possession charge in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn. Noura Jackson was arrested for the murder of her mother, Jennifer, in 2005. The Kings County and Shelby County DAs take very different approaches.

Prosecutors have enormous power within the system--deciding who to charge, with what offenses, what bail to seek, and how to handle plea agreements. All of these can and are used to increase conviction rates and hence incarceration, and prosecutors leverage them effectively--piling on charges to given them maximum power, keeping people jailed for lack of cash bail, and using prison time to punish people for choosing a trial instead of a plea. Since poor people, especially poor people of color, both experience prejudice at the hands of the system and have few resources to fight it, they're disproportionately impacted by its whims and failures. The political powers involved in our system--electing judges and DAs, giving wide latitude towards people who then need to show they're "tough on crime"--damage the quality of justice on offer. New Jersey's new system of using a scoring tool for bail and removing most cash bail has been successful.

In his book Locked In (which Bazelon references), Fordham professor John Pfaff makes a convincing case that in order to end mass incarceration and its social consequences, we cannot just look at nonviolent crime: we need to consider violent crimes, too. In Kings County (Brooklyn), the new, reform minded DA is doing just that. What crimes need to be considered "violent"? One focus is on guns: gun control, in New York, involves both civil and criminal penalties, pushed heavily by former mayor Michael Bloomberg. Criminal penalties fall predominantly on black people: 87% of people prosecuted in the gun courts were African American, even though Brooklyn is only 1/3 black. Who should be given a second chance and put through a diversion program?

In Shelby County, the approach has been the opposite. Here, DA Amy Weirich commits a Brady violation (withholding evidence) in Noura Jackson's murder trial, and the portrait of her and her office is deeply unflattering. Other figures in the Tennessee justice system also come in for a harsh reckoning.

This is a vivid, narrative focused read, but with a great deal of legal detail packed in. Readers of The New Jim Crow will recognize a lot of the paths Bazelon takes. Our criminal justice system has been focused on the severity of the punishment and the number of people punished, not the effectiveness of punishments or the long term social consequences. The work being done with criminal justice reform today may show us a new path forward for dealing with crime.… (meer)

A marvelous, reality-centric look at bullying at the onset of the 21st century. I'm quick to add the time qualifier not because this book lacks anything, but because a) bullying certainly has changed with the advent of the internet and cell phones for everyone of all ages, and b) the constant change/evolutional bent of technology means that it can't possibly completely on top off everything.
But the author is on top of the several cases she portrays, including a bunch of old favorites you'll a little bit hate her for reminding you of. The Irish girl in Massachusetts who was bullied to death, and the woman who created a fake MySpace profile to "get back at" the girl next door in retaliation for what the girl did to her daughter - both are explored in depth here, and may surprise you with the details.

The author takes pains not to blame any specific person, institution or group as the cause or chief complaint. Much like with all things, there's enough blame to be spread around for everyone, and the "solutions" (such as they are) stick mainly to the lines of "everyone should be nicer and pay more attention to things." While that sounds like brushing it aside, it's not - there is no one-shot, quick-fix program that miraculously fixes things. It is, as with all interpersonal relationships, about viewing/treating people as people, giving others some slack, and stepping in when you see someone abusing someone else.… (meer)