Stephen Bright's Contributions

After spending the day sightseeing in Palm Springs, you will likely have worked up an appetite.

Three models portraying our criminal justice system are the Wedding Cake Model, Criminalization Model, and the President’s Commission Model. The Wedding Cake Model “emphasizes that the system handles different kinds of cases differently; it depicts four layers or tiers of cases”. While the Wedding Model offers an accurate typology of cases processed through the system, its primary focus is on the decisions of prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges. There is a glimpse the role of power and status in such decisions, but the factors of race, class, and gender are not explicit. But, this model does not address the lawmaking process and the social inequalities in the economic and political systems in which laws are forged. Now the second model, the Criminalization model explores the role of social class in the criminal justice system. It shows that the system is used to control certain groups of people by criminalizing their behaviors and targeting them for arrest and incarceration. The third model, the President’s Commission Model provides the most famous portrayal of the criminal justice system by summarizing the stages of the system. In comparison, the Wedding Cake Model and the Criminalization Model are similar because they both show the recognition of power and status in the criminal justice system. These two models are the opposite of the President’s Commission Model due to the fact that this model does not show the roles played by race, gender, and social class at the

The Constrained Court model created by Gerald N. Rosenberg, proves that the courts are weak, powerless, and ineffective for change among race, class and gender ideologies.. Using Lisa Frohmann’s article, Convictability and Discordant Locales; in which she is ‘reproducing race, class and gender ideologies in Prosecutorial Decision-making’. Frohmann uses ‘discordant locales’ as a bridge to describe how prosecutors work in sexual assault cases. Rosenberg and Frohmann demonstrate that the courts are not effective unless they overcome these constraints, set in the constrained court model. According to Rosenberg and Frohmann social reform is nearly unachievable, through the district attorney and victim cross examination interview and jury assumptions. As Rosenberg specified in order to establish social reforms the following constraints; limited nature of constitutional rights lack of judicial independence, judiciary’s lack of power implantation and inability to develop appropriate policies need to be eradicated.

“For evil to flourish, it only requires good men to do nothing” -Simon Wiesenthal (Simon Wiesenthal Quote). During the Holocaust, an estimated eleven million people died agonizing deaths from methods such as gas chambers, scientific experiments, beatings, and malnutrition (Concentration Camps 1933-1939). This staggering number is almost as much as the current population of the state of Ohio (United States). The big question is, why did the

In the book Just Mercy: A story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson, there are several topics discussed regarding the American Justice system. One of those many topics discussed is regarding how a person’s race, social status and income, may influence the outcome of a court trail. In present day America, many years after the era of Jim crow and segregation the Justice system still seems to be more lenient towards white Americans, especially those with high income and a good standing in society. The American justice system has become unjust in the trials deemed to be fair, due to an evident prejudice against minorities, their social status and whether or not they receive a well off or poor income.

Mass Incarceration is a growing dilemma in the United States that populates our prisons at an alarming rate. Michelle Alexander is a professor at Ohio State University and a graduate of Stanford law school. She states in her award winning book, The new Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness “In less than thirty years, the U.S. penal population exploded from around 300,000 to more than 2 million” (Alexander, 6). These young men and women are unable to afford a decent lawyer because they come from such a poverty-stricken background. Men and women are at a financial disadvantage in our justice system. Lawyers and attorneys cost a fortune and most people can just simply not afford them. Others plead to their charges because

The basis of criminal justice in the United States is one founded on both the rights of the individual and the democratic order of the people. Evinced through the myriad forms whereby liberty and equity marry into the mores of society to form the ethos of a people. However, these two systems of justice are rife with conflicts too. With the challenges of determining prevailing worth in public order and individual rights coming down to the best service of justice for society. Bearing a perpetual eye to their manifestations by the truth of how "the trade-off between freedom and security, so often proposed so seductively, very often leads to the loss of both" (Hitchens, 2003, para. 5).

The existence of racial disparity and structural inequality within the criminal justice system renders the concept of true justice for all unobtainable. The statistics of convictions and prison sentences by race definitely support the concept that discrimination is a problem in the justice system as well as the insignificantly number of minority judges and lawyers. There are a multitude of circumstances that influence these statistics according to the “Central Eight” criminogenic risk factors. The need for programs and methods to effectively deter those at risk individuals has never been greater and the lack of such programs is costing society in countless ways.

George, C., & Smith, C. (2004). The American System of Criminal Justice (10 ed.). Belmont: Thompson Learning, Inc.

The intersection of racial dynamics with the criminal justice system is one of longstanding duration. In earlier times, courtrooms in many jurisdictions were comprised of all white decision-makers. Today, there is more diversity of leadership in the court system, but race still plays a critical role in many

In modern-day America the issue of racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is controversial because there is substantial evidence confirming both individual and systemic biases. While there is reason to believe that there are discriminatory elements at every step of the judicial process, this treatment will investigate and attempt to elucidate such elements in two of the most critical judicial junctures, criminal apprehension and prosecution.

Few in this country would argue with the fact that the United States criminal justice system possesses discrepancies which adversely affect Blacks in this country. Numerous studies and articles have been composed on the many facets in which discrimination, or at least disparity, is obvious. Even whites are forced to admit that statistics indicate that the Black community is disproportionately affected by the American legal system. Controversy arises when the issue of possible causes of, and also solutions to, these variations are discussed. It’s not just black versus white, it is white versus white, and white versus oriental, whatever the case may be, and it is not justice. If we see patterns then the judges should have the authority to say something. Jury nullifications cannot be overturned regardless of the cause. Exclusionary rule, according to CULS (2010) – Prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of U.S. Constitution; like unreasonable search and seizure (Fourth Amendment).

Armour and Hammond (2009) point to an assortment of explanations that have emerged for the disproportionate treatment of minorities including jurisdictional issues, certain police practices, punitive juvenile crime legislation of the 1990s, and perceived racial bias in the system. Often the outcome of criminal allegations can depend on the jurisdiction in which the youth is processed according to the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). Research indicates cases adjudicated in urban areas are more likely to result in harsher results than similar cases adjudicated in non-urban areas. Another contributing factor may come from the geographic effect. Minority populations are concentrated in urban areas; this may work to over represent minorities in the juvenile justice system. Another contributing factor related to urbanization is the location and visibility of minority youth crimes.

In the United States, the adversarial system of justice relies on ensuring a criminal defendant receives a fair trial. The sixth amendment gives defendants the right to legal representation in criminal trials even if they cannot afford one themselves. Each city and county in the United States ensures a defendant the right to counsel. There are different ways cities and counties across the United States provide representation for indigent defendants. One such approach to indigent defense is public defender programs and is a popular system used by many states today. Public defender programs have been around since the 1900’s but gained popularity throughout the years due to the many indigent defense cases.

Introduction There are many different aspects of the criminal justice system and law that help to determine what justice is. Different cultures and places around the world that have a diverse idea of what constitutes justice and how to achieve that. There are two types of societies in the that are extremely different but very prevalent around the world for the way they each constitute what justice is. There is state based societies which focus on goal setting and the accumulation of wealth and then there are traditional societies which, focus on the meaning of storytelling and sharing resources to ensure there is enough for everyone (Morrison 2017).