This is how it works.

This is how it works.
As you can see, everyone must go through the same process, no matter their race/status/income/gender/species.

The justice system is biased based on which of the following? (choose all that apply)



Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Gears still being ground.

The issue of race is a touchy one that facts can be presented on either way; however, the issue of discrimination based on wealth is one that, honestly, I am embarrassed to have to discuss. The main argument that people present on the issue is that the criminal justice system favors and gives lighter sentences to the wealthy of the country. This argument is based solely one the fact that people of wealth are more likely to make bail, and can usually afford "better" lawyers. The purpose of bail is to keep the people from being packed into jails like sardines (more than they already are). Bails are not meant to reward the wealthier criminals for being successful in life by letting them buy their way out of going to jail. Odds are, if a person is given a reasonable bail and are not able to pay it, they are not receiving a very harsh sentence anyway. The bail system does not favor those with money, it is simply keeping the jails from being completely full of people who have committed petty crimes.
The topic of purchasing attorneys is an even more ridiculous issue. To become an attorney, one must go through certain schooling, take certain certification tests, etc. There is not a secret set of classes and extra schooling for people who aspire to be attorneys for the wealthy. Every lawyer, public defender or not, receives the same amount of schooling. Of course certain attorneys will be better at there job than others, but those are spread throughout the system and the difference in skill level is so insignificant that it doesn't need to be considered. Poorer people are usually given court-appointed attorneys to represent them in court. This is a known fact that no one can or will dispute. The argument is whether being appointed an attorney puts a person at a disadvantage. According to the United States Department of Justice, the number of people found guilty of crimes when represented by public attorneys is very similar to when represented by a private attorney (see chart below).
Case                   Public      Private
disposition            counsel     counsel
75 largest counties

Guilty by plea          71.0%        72.8%
Guilty by trial          4.4          4.3
Case dismissal          23.0         21.2
Acquittal                1.3          1.6

U.S. district courts

Guilty by plea          87.1%        84.6%
Guilty by trial          5.2          6.4
Case dismissal           6.7          7.4
Acquittal                1.0          1.6



As you can see, the type of attorney that someone has has little effect on the outcome of their case in the U.S. as well as worldwide.
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. kateschutteApril 21, 2010 at 6:33 AM

    I've never really given much thought to this... but it's interesting. I mean, of course a court-appointed attorney isn't really any different than a privately appointed one, but for some reason the media or whatever tends to send the image that somehow they are a lower class of attorney because they're not getting as much control over what case they take and, therefore, how much money they make from that case.

    also, attorneys aren't in it all for the money either. newsflash:
    NOT ALL ATTORNEYS MAKE THE SAME AMOUNT! for example, a Public Defender working for the State makes much less than an attorney who owns his/her own firm. this is not to say that a State attorney's work isn't as (if not more) important than the work of one working out of their own business, but they've all gotten the same amount of schooling and they all have a passion for what they're doing. that's the real reason many attorneys have the job they have.

    ReplyDelete
  2. BryanApril 21, 2010 at 4:13 PM

    Fantastic points, I must say, and truly lovely statistics. I'd agree with Kate that public defenders are oftentimes portrayed as small and weak. However, I think it's also a valid point that they choose to be public defenders because they want to uphold justice, not because they want to make money. Private practice lawyers, however, always seem to be fierce and money-grubbing sharks who are just out to make some cash. Personally, I think I'd rather be defended by the former than the latter. And apparently it's only a 2.5% difference betwixt the two anyway.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)