He argues that there is hope for justice because of these reasons:

1.  Even though our new Attorney General, Mr. Sessions, believes that marijuana is as deadly as heroin and he plans to start prosecuting violators (even though many states have legalized the possession of marijuana, federal law still makes it illegal to posses), in reality most of the criminal justice activities are handled by state and local governments.  They also pay for over-crowded prisons and have to deal with the mess that comes from incarcerating low-level offenders when they are finally released.  As a result, many states have re-thought the penalties for low-level crimes and how they handle offenders.  (Prison vs. probation, for instance)  The results can give us all hope for justice in this country.
2. There have always been reformers who have advocated a modern approach to the criminal justice system in light of new research.  Today, more ex-offenders are coming forward to tell the voting public what it’s like to be incarcerated and its effects on the entire family.  Their stories are causing legislators and local boards to re-think the old ideas of how to deal with crime and criminals.
3. There’s hope for justice in America because many of the local prosecutors (who prosecute 90% of the crimes in this country—not the federal government) recently elected are open to re-thinking what the impact of a criminal prosecution has on not only the accused but also the extended families—and the cost to taxpayers.
4. What about the victims?  Shouldn’t we consider their pain and suffering?  Of course.  But the interesting thing local prosecutors and defense lawyers have discovered is that, if given the choice between prison for 20 years or some kind of rehabilitative alternative, many victims want the criminal rehabilitated.  This is great because not only are the offenders treated differently, but victims are also given a role in the outcome of the process—something to give us all hope for justice in America.

If you get a chance, read Mr. Forman’s essay.  Instead of the vision of America as a post-apocalyptic wasteland that will be helped only by locking up more and more people that comes from those in the White House, here’s a refreshing essay about the significant changes being made in our local communities.   It gives us all hope for justice in America.

The post There’s Still Hope for Justice in America appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

1.  Juries are more representative of the community.  When I started trying cases before juries, they were selected from property owners and driver’s license records.  The result was juries of older, white people who generally lived in the suburbs.  Over the years. the local government has worked hard to pick people from other records.  The result has been jurors who are very diverse in all ways and more truly represent the community—which improves the criminal justice system.
2. When I started, there was hardly any attention paid to the female victims of domestic abuse.  Since then, the criminal justice system has developed new laws specifically aimed at punishing offenders and has also created many resources for the victims from victim/witness advocates to shelter protection and counseling for the victims.  This is another reason why the criminal justice system in better now.
3. The judges hearing cases were all older, male, and white with the exception of two white women.  Today, every race is represented, women, men, and different religions.  The more accurately represent the community.
4. Child protection used to be a minor, back-wash area of the juvenile court.  Parents didn’t even get lawyers if they couldn’t afford to hire their own.  Today, the parents and even children over 10 get free lawyers and the number of child protection cases brought into the criminal justice system has sky-rocketed.  The resources available for parents and children has expanded and has been successful in many cases to improve the criminal justice system.
5. The quality of judges is high.  Here’s another reason why the criminal justice system is better now.  In Minnesota, almost all judges are selected by the governor after a lengthy vetting process by a state-wide judicial selections board.  The result has been high quality candidates and little corruption.

When the media or people complain about the criminal justice system, there certainly are areas that could be improved.  On the other hand, these reasons are why the criminal justice system is better now that it has been in years.

If you’ve been to court, what’s your experience been?  What do you think?

The post Why the Criminal Justice System is Better Now appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

1.  The criminal justice system assumes that an unwavering eyewitness who identifies the defendant at trial, is enough solid proof for a finding of guilt.  But new scientific studies have clearly shown that eyewitnesses choose an innocent person about 1/3 of the time!  The witness can be affected by biases, failed memory, and the lack of time to actually see the suspect.

2.  The criminal justice system relies on a signed confession by a suspect as clear proof of guilt.  After all, we think, why would an innocent person sign a confession about their guilt?  But again, scientific studies have shown that the “tricks” the interrogators use can affect the suspect’s actions.  Often, police will exaggerate the strength of their case and offer to let the suspect go—if only they would just sign this piece of paper indicating their involvement in the crime.  Their guilt, that is.

3.  Even some scientific testing can be flawed.  We’ve come to assume that DNA analysis is fool-proof and will provide the criminal justice system with the truth.  But even here in my area, there can be problems.  For instance, a police forensics lab in St. Paul was recently closed because of the sloppy manner in which they did their testing.  All the cases they analyzed had to be re-opened and looked at.  The testing may be okay, but the humans running the tests are only that—humans subject to errors.

So, what should we do to reform the criminal justice system?

Prof. Benforado suggests that we use the research that we have now.

1.  Witnesses should not be coached or even talked to by the police actually investigating the crime.  Use a neutral party to present line-ups to witnesses.  Research also shows that a better identification can be made by showing witnesses suspects’ photos one at a time rather than all at once.

2.  To reform the criminal justice system of interrogations, police should use a less confrontational approach and rely, instead, on an information gathering style.  The process should be recorded by cameras set at “third party” positions.  (Many interrogations place the camera behind the cop or behind the suspect—both lead to biased impressions among juries)

3.  Lab technicians should not be informed that samples are from the suspect.  Research has shown that the human bias to help law enforcement can affect the lab test results.

Will this cure all our problems?  Of course not, but I like the idea of using the evidence-based research to change and reform our criminal justice system.  Now the job of doing it starts . . .

Do you have any suggestions?

The post Science to Reform the Criminal Justice System appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.