fandomhigh | Concepts of Justice and The Law [Period 4, Class #4, Jan 26]

Current Mood: contemplative

Entry tags:

concepts of justice

Concepts of Justice and The Law [Period 4, Class #4, Jan 26]

"Welcome back," Alex said. "It's good to see that none of you were irreparably harmed by this weekend's ... guests." The less said about that, in her mind, the better. "This week's topic is something called the Adversarial System. It's the system currently used by the United States and a number of other world governments, but it isn't in use in all governments, and even those of you raised under it may be unfamiliar with some of the nuances.

"The adversarial system is a judicial process by which each side gets an advocate to plead their case. In a criminal trial, the People as a whole are represented by a prosecutor - a lawyer specifically employed by the government. The accused is entitled to his own attorney. The defendant can choose any attorney he'd like, so long as that attorney is licensed to practice law, the attorney is willing to take the case, and the defendant can pay whatever the attorney charges. If the defendant can't afford an attorney, he will be assigned one, from a pool of government-employed defenders. Or the suspect can choose not to have an attorney and represent himself, but this is typically frowned upon for a number of reasons.

"In an inquisitorial system, the defendant was interrogated. A confession was the endpoint: the person is guilty, and so the case moves on to sentencing. However, the adversarial system does not stop with a confession. Perhaps the confession was obtained illegally, or under coercion. Maybe the confession was faked by an overzealous police department. The adversarial system seeks to confront these problems. Therefore, knowing that a person is guilty is not enough. The crime must be proven in a court of law, beyond a reasonable doubt, as decided by a jury of citizens. That jury will then determine the defendant's fate.

"This means, yes, that defense attorneys can and will take cases where the client is quite obviously guilty. And the attorney will still fight with every power available to her, every bit as hard as the government is fighting to convict the accused. Every legal maneuver with a fair chance of success, every technicality she can hammer, the works. If she feels she cannot defend the accused with the utmost zeal, she should recuse herself from the case and ask that a new attorney be granted. Ineffective legal counsel could cause a later court to overturn the conviction entirely, which puts everyone back at square one.

"Proponents of the system say that defendants should and must be defended this vigorously; if the prosecution's job is more difficult, then it will be especially hard for the government to convict the wrongly accused. A corrupt police force will be less likely to succeed at framing the innocent, and a victim of unfortunate circumstances will have a better chance for exoneration. It puts the burden of proof on the government, with all its associated weight, and not the accused, who is, no matter how dangerous, only one citizen.

"However. Public defenders are overworked and underpaid. Most defendants choose to hire an attorney, and one who does so presumably receives better representation than one who cannot. Especially talented attorneys will have increasingly high price tags. So the system becomes classist: the wealthy have a clear advantage over the poor. Furthermore, the ethics become complicated. Defense attorneys are seen as 'sleazy' by society. The perception is that they become rich by keeping criminals out of jail. Which is fairly unpalatable.

"Those same attorneys would argue they didn't keep their clients out of jail: they only forced the government to try harder to place them in jail in the first place, and the government failed to do so. Is that true? Let's talk about it."

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

"Wh-What about the time it takes?" Hinata asked, frowning slightly. "Doesn't this sort of system mean it can be years before any sort of justice is served?"

"It can," Alex said. "Sometimes months, sometimes years. The defendant has the right to a speedy trial, in the American system, which just means we can't lock someone up and take our time deciding what to charge him with. More time gives both sides a better chance to prepare, to reduce the chance of a miscarriage of justice. But it means that victims can wait a long time for closure."

"Do you th-think that justice is ever less important than the closure of the victim?" Hinata asked curiously. "Depending on the case, and on the trauma of the victim, if they needed that closure so they could begin properly healing... wouldn't it be cruel to make them wait years?"

Alex drummed her fingers on the desk for a few minutes while mulling that over.

"I think," she said finally, "that while I speak for the victims, that ultimately ... their sense of closure isn't my responsibility. I stand for justice. In some cases, we'll never have a suspect -- the perpetrator covered his tracks too well. So those victims might never get closure, if they seek it through the judicial system. In others, we have someone we think is guilty. My job is to ensure that justice is carried out, for the victims, and for the People. That may be long, and tiring, and unfulfilling, but justice has to be my goal. Closure can be found in a courtroom, but there are better places to seek it."

She nodded thoughtfully.

"It's a choice, then," Hinata ventured, "when you enter the profession: you must choose to dedicate yourself to justice and for the People, yes, but you h-have to know which is more important as well? To yourself, personally?"

"You do," Alex said. "There are other professions more suited to helping victims get closure, and we would try to direct victims towards those. And I fought hard for justice on their behalf. But you have to ultimately know what it is you stand for."

"I think justice is a good thing to stand for," she replied, with a nod for Professor Alex. "Th-Though I think that my feelings would be more for helping the victim find closure."

"Which is fine," Alex reassured her. "We need all types to make the system work. Is this something you're interested in pursuing?"

"It's something I have considered," she admitted, flushing a bit. "My world does not fall along the same lines as this one--we operate more on an inquisitorial system--but I th-think, perhaps, there are some changes we could make in my world that would benefit the victims."

Really, any change would be good change. Hinata's world was terrifyingly bereft of social support services of any sort.

Alex nodded, wondering how much to reveal in response to that.

"The cases I work," she said, finally, "often leave the victims in harrowing emotional places. And so the police are trained to deal with, not just investigating crime, but handling victims at their most fragile. Having an outside resource can help -- a crisis center, or another victim advocacy organization. The police can then make sure the victim is in safer hands, with someone who focuses only on closure and healing."

She didn't know an SVU detective who didn't know the rape crisis center hotlines by heart.

Her eyebrows drew together slightly in confusion. "A crisis center? I don't..." Hinata flushed, embarrassed. "I don't know exactly wh-what that means."

Alex was also blushing. Mostly for not realizing that wouldn't be a universal and explaining better to start.

"They're relatively new here, too," Alex said, "or at least, within the past generation or two. I'm most familiar with rape crisis centers, which help victims of sex crimes. The centers will provide free and confidential information as well as emotional support. If the victim decides to press charges, the counselor can walk her through the steps, even accompany her to important procedural matters. The counselor makes sure the victim knows her rights and understands what choices she has, and helps her cope with the aftermath. The centers' sole obligation in the process is the victim's physical and mental well-being."

"Th-They sound like a wonderful idea," she said, still pink but now with more understanding of the topic at hand. "Very centralized. I... do not know if they'd work in my world," Hinata admitted. "But I do wonder if something might be started, just to see."

Re: Discussion: Pros and Cons - JST04

glasses-justice.livejournal.com - 2010-01-27 05:38 (UTC) - Expand

"It's due process," Jennifer said. "It can take years, but sometimes I think that's a good thing. There's always cases that end up changing because of new evidence found years later."

"Is th-there a large percentage of cases like that?" Hinata asked, flushing slightly. "I wouldn't know, I admit. But if th-there is a large problem with that then shouldn't things be done to make it so there are less cases wh-where evidence isn't found for years?"

"Oh, not a large one," Jennifer said. "But it's actually the longer cases where that sort of thing takes place. I think. I'm still feeling out judicial history."

Hinata considered that carefully. "Do you think some of that might be... that people's perceptions of what happened alter over time? And perhaps things that weren't evidence become evidence as perspectives change?"

"That's very possible," Jennifer agreed. "It's not an exact science. There's a lot of manipulation involved in a trial."

"Th-That seems like it'd be easy to have things go wrong then," she admitted. "Just thinking about it how many ways people can present things."

"Well, there's a lot of regulations on that, too," Jennifer said. "Judges play a big role in controlling that."

Hinata laughed softly.

"Your system--it is yours, correct?" she checked. "Is a great deal more complicated th-than ours at home."

Jennifer nodded. "Complicated, yeah," she had to agree. "But so is justice."

So young and full of ideals.

"I do not think justice is that complicated," she replied. "Not wh-when it comes to what was right and wrong and what benefits the People the most."

"Right and wrong and what supposedly benefits the 'people' most is actually why justice is so complicated," Jennifer said. "Because what is justice for one person isn't necessarily what is right."

"It's right to th-them," she pointed out. "And basic decency is a very simple thing."