The criminal justice system does not function in the same way for the rich and the poor. As we saw in OJ Simpson's case earlier this semester, OJ was able to use his money and fame to hire the best attorney's and essentially get a free pass from even the police when they would show up to his house from abuse calls. OJ certainly would have had no chance if he was an average African American man.
Currently, more than 60% of people in US prisons are racial and ethnic minorities, and the majority of them are poor. Theoretically, the law is race-neutral and class-neutral. However, that simply isn't the case. While the upper class and lower class use drugs are roughly the same rates, one who is a part of the lower class is much more likely to be put behind bars. Drug law enforcement is told to focus on certain low-income communities of color.
According to an expert by the name of Marc Mauer, the wealthy are not exploiting the system, but they are able to take advantage of the rights they can afford. They can pay bail, hire capable defense counsels, and they are overall in a much better position to set themselves free. Statistically speaking, one may argue that the lower class is more inclined to commit crimes. However, I believe that there should be no advantages in the justice system for certain groups based on income. Rather, one should be tried and have equal opportunity to defend themselves. Too many innocent people are locked up behind bars due to not having a capable defense team.
Sources:
https://www.researchgate.net/blog/post/two-in-one-differences-in-the-us-justice-system-for-the-rich-and-the-poor
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
As Coronavirus is spreading through the world, people are losing their lives and the virus has been spreading out of hand. As it entered t... -
Ethan Couch and his defense team used an 'affluenza defense'. Affluenza is the psychological condition in which wealthy children hav...
-
Welcome to our classroom blog! I sincerely hope you find this a valuable resource for information and sharing ideas. Please remember to ob...
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. However, although these minorities are "receiving" their rights, I believe they are not received in the full way that others who are richer can be protected. The legal system should be fair and justice and should not take into account any money. However, I believe that police should spend some time educating, so cases like the Central Park 5 don't happen either. I believe this problem will still be prevalent for years to come.
ReplyDeleteI agree that there should be no advantages in the justice system for different incomes. It's very unfair to lose a trial for something you didn't do just because you don't have the money to afford a good lawyer. As Anthea mentioned, the sixth Amendment gives you the right to a lawyer even if you can't afford one, but that does not necessarily mean you get a great lawyer. For example, OJ was found innocent because he could afford his "dream team." I think that people should have an equal chance to get a good lawyer that does not depend on a persons income.
ReplyDeletePeople who are affluent have a much better chance of securing justice in America. While this is unjust, this is an obvious reality in our justice system. This was seen through the Von Bulow case. Claus was ultimately pronounced not guilty of the murder of his wife Sunny Von Bulow. The only reason Claus was able to get a new trial and hire fancy lawyer Alan Dershowitz was because of the money he had from Sunny. Without this money, Claus would've never gotten another trial and would've served the time in prison allotted for him during his original sentence. Von Bulow's case shows that the criminal justice system definitely works differently for people based on their financial status.
ReplyDelete