is the criminal justice system broken essay

Law and Crime

The criminal justice system is broken and can't be fixed, the best remedy for fighting the system just might be an ocean starfish..

Posted December 2, 2018 | Reviewed by Jessica Schrader

Crime permeates our social fabric. It always has because we are all deviant and deviance is an underpinning of criminality. Whether you believe people are born criminals or socialized to become so, we are afraid of being victimized by the criminal element. Even more disturbing exists the idea that any one of us (given the right circumstances) can cross the line and become "criminal." That self-awareness makes crime salient. In other words, if we can be the bad guy so easily, think of all the others who have and will despite our perceived control of our own moral and social consciousness.

Conflict criminal justice issues vacillate from sentencing, juvenile justice, and mental illness to the hiring, training, & retention of law enforcement and corrections officers. The inescapable paradox of prison and punishment as well as recidivism, probation, and parole all face today’s criminal justice students, practitioners and the general public.

If you’ve never been a victim of a true violation of law, the distant prospect of being victimized creates anxiety and fear . Everyone has an opinion on what should be done about crime and victimization. For those who don’t ride fences, you’re either tough on crime (and criminals) or you’re not. Our existential anxiety pushes the age-old concept of justice through vengeance, retribution, and punishment or, on the other hand, the perspective that criminals are “sick” and/or products of their social environment and that they are the true victims. From classrooms to courtrooms, both perspectives remain polarizing ideologies. For further explanations on a macro-sociological scale, check out my other Psychology Today articles Justice or Just Us , Finding a Phone Booth and Have We Sacrificed Security for Liberty?

A Broken System

The criminal justice system is broken and it can’t be fixed. A bold declaration that I make on the first day of "Introduction to Criminal Justice." Securing buy-in from students means that we understand that our contemporary problems with the system didn’t happen overnight, but, rather the system was built broken. A cursory examination of the word "broken" by The Merriam Webster Dictionary will yield results such as damaged, altered, fractured, irregular, interrupted, full of obstacles, weak, crushed, or disconnected.

Despite efforts to reduce or eliminate it, crime will never truly "go away." It is only displaced—moved from one part of the system to another based upon motivated offenders, suitable targets, and the absence of capable guardians. It’s a matter of risk management . The real test is understanding that we can all be victimized (or become criminal) and that apathy and denial are not our allies.

Many in society are conflicted by what is and what is “supposed to be” as well as how things have changed or how they have remained the same—both producing consequences rooted in disruption and disconnection. From the anecdotal to empirical, a survey of evidence suggests the system is broken and that there is no general consensus on how to fix it:

The causes and correlates of crime started with God-given rational choice and free will . Punishment was to be swift, severe, and certain. It moved into a hedonistic calculus and the greater good theory to a bio-psycho-social school that proffers that our genes , heredity, the brain, and upbringing/class division/wealth and power influence crime more than individual choices, accountability, and responsibility;
It started with punishment (centuries ago) and that issue sticks around. From mutilation, branding, stocks, and pillories to workhouses, exile, and finally, prisons, there is little agreement on the best methodology to deter crime;
The Social Contract is an implicit agreement for which our society gives up some of our civil liberties in exchange for security. For that to happen, however, rights must be respected and authority must be respected;
Criminal justice (as a system) is made up of cops, courts, and corrections—each with their own ideas and agendas of “justice.” They are political and arbitrary (even under the color of law) given elected and appointed officials and a dual system of government that seeks checks and balances. They operate as business silos and not cooperatively with each other;
The long withstanding model of criminal justice is that of crime control and due process. Crime control seeks order as its most important value while due process values individual liberties and civil rights. Law enforcement systems are typically public order advocates while the courts and judicial process systems advocate for due process. The corrections system often vacillates between both based upon sentencing, custody, security and who manages those functions. This includes theories and applications of incapacitation, deterrence, punishment, rehabilitation, and reintegration;
Lady Justice is depicted as blindfolded and holding balanced scales. Is justice blind? Are the scales balanced? If you place public order and due process in each scale, one is going to be heavier than the other and constantly tipping back and forth;
The existing, fragmented criminal justice system sets atop sociological pillars which helped to create it. These are primary institutions inherent to our social and moral development that are considered to be similarly fragmented—rooted in years of what many consider to be moral relativity and secular humanism. These institutions are the family , school , and religion;
Crime = violation of law, and those who violate laws are criminals. Justice = freedom, fairness and proportionality;
Criminal justice is old, but the study of criminal justice is new. Unlike its parent discipline of sociology (and other, disciplinary pick-ups), it seeks to study a broader “system” that is predicated on a business model with sociopolitical and legal frameworks—all within the executive, judicial, and executive branches of government in a democracy and republic;
Criminal justice studies the phenomenon of social control in organized societies where the rule of law is the primary social control mechanism. Operative words: social control , organized society , rule of law ;
Crime and justice is propaganda. There is no true criminal justice, but only the idea of justice;
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are not grounded in the reality of contemporary times and should be a “living” document—designed to change with the times;
Citizens of each state elect representatives and senators. Together, they are called the United States Congress. States make laws and their enforcement and sanctions are thus different;
Criminal justice reform is a new phenomenon. Although issues on crime and justice administration have been tackled by presidential commissions, lobbyists and special interest groups, only in recent decades has such a push been made to “reform” the criminal justice system.

The Starfish Thrower (or Star Thrower)

The criminal justice system is broken and it can’t be fixed. That doesn’t mean that we stop working or throw up our hands. It also doesn’t mean that we quit moving toward a better system. It’s simply too big to tackle! It has to be broken down into manageable parts for us to handle while not losing sight of the larger whole. To do this means we all must find the little things that allow us to not only survive, but to thrive within a conflicting system.

A beautiful poem was translated by Loren Eiseley in 1969 that I use at the end of each semester to empower and qualify those (including myself) who choose to believe that there is something little we can do each day—whether taking a drunk driver off the street that night, removing a sexually abused child from the home, teaching many and reaching a few, or simply giving a reassuring hug, smile or handshake. It’s always been about the little things that give us affirmation and validation and can move us forward when we get overwhelmed by the toxicity of things we can’t change or have little control over. Find your starfish—and throw it!

is the criminal justice system broken essay

A man was walking on the beach one day and noticed a boy who was reaching down, picking up starfish and throwing them into the ocean. As he approached, he called out, “Hello! What are you doing young man?” The boy looked up and said, “I’m throwing starfish into the ocean.” “Why are you doing that”? asked the man. “The tide stranded them. If I don’t throw them in the water before the sun comes up, they’ll die” came the answer. “Surely you realize that there are miles of beach, and thousands of starfish. You’ll never throw them all back, there are too many. You can’t possibly make a difference.” The boy listened politely, then picked up another starfish. As he threw it back into the sea, he said, “It did for that one.”

Eiseley, L. (1978). The Star Thrower . Sagebrush library/school binding: ISBN 1-4176-1867-1. Introduction by W. H. Auden.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary New Edition (2016). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Incorporated.

Schmalleger, F. (2019). Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the 21st Century, 15th Edition. Pearson: ISBN-13: 9780134749754.

Brian A. Kinnaird, Ph.D. , is an interdisciplinary social scientist specializing in police social systems and organizational behavior. He is a trauma support specialist, former law enforcement officer, and author of the book Life After Law Enforcement.

Find a Therapist
Find a Treatment Center
Find a Psychiatrist
Find a Support Group
Find Online Therapy
United States
Brooklyn, NY
Chicago, IL
Houston, TX
Los Angeles, CA
New York, NY
Portland, OR
San Diego, CA
San Francisco, CA
Seattle, WA
Washington, DC
Asperger's
Bipolar Disorder
Chronic Pain
Eating Disorders
Passive Aggression
Personality
Goal Setting
Positive Psychology
Stopping Smoking
Low Sexual Desire
Relationships
Child Development
Self Tests NEW
Therapy Center
Diagnosis Dictionary
Types of Therapy

Sticking up for yourself is no easy task. But there are concrete skills you can use to hone your assertiveness and advocate for yourself.

Emotional Intelligence
Gaslighting
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

Entertainment
Environment
Information Science and Technology
Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Law Criminal Justice

Is the Criminal Justice System Broken: Analyzing Challenges

Table of contents, wrongful convictions and flaws, racial disparities and bias, rehabilitation vs. punishment, pathways for reform, references:.

Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press.
Starr, S. B. (2014). Creating Criminals: Prisons and People in a Market Society. University of Chicago Press.
Lawrence, R. G., & Travis, J. (2013). The Punishment Imperative: The Rise and Failure of Mass Incarceration in America. NYU Press.
Butler, P. M. (2017). Chokehold: Policing Black Men. The New Press.
Cole, D. (2017). Engines of Liberty: How Citizen Movements Succeed. Basic Books.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

Restorative Justice
Money Laundering
Contract Law
Second Amendment
Legal Drinking Age
Surveillance

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Watch CBS News

What's wrong with America's criminal justice system? 6 questions for an expert

By Tyler Kendall

August 2, 2019 / 7:03 PM EDT / CBS News

With nearly 2.3 million prisoners behind bars, the United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Rachel Barkow, who served on the U.S. Sentencing Commission from 2013 to 2019, examines how we got to this point and what can be done to help reform the country's justice system. She currently serves as the vice dean and professor of regulatory law and policy at the NYU School of Law.

In her recent book, "Prisoners of Politics: Breaking the Cycle of Mass Incarceration," Barkow argues that years of bad policies resulted in a vicious cycle. However, there is a path to undo some of the damage.

This interview has been slightly edited for clarity.

CBS News: Your book argues that longer sentences contribute to more crime. How do you convince people that less incarceration means higher public safety?

Rachel Barkow: I do think that people have a sense that, "I'm going to lock them up and throw away the key." But, we never throw away the key. Ninety-five percent of the time, the person comes back out, and you are just kicking the can down the road. Incarceration is buying you some time, but the underlying issues the person might have, or the underlying cause of the crime in the first place, you're just putting off.

I like to think about it like your credit card bill. If you're in financial difficulty, and you can't pay your bills, you put them all on your credit card. You might think, "Phew, that problem is taken care of." However, the next month your credit card bill comes and there's interest. It gets worse and worse and the longer you don't pay, the worse things get. Long sentences are like that. While you're incarcerating people, not only are you not making them better, you're often putting them in environments where they are likely to become worse.

CBS News: We just passed the six month mark of President Trump signing the First Step Act into law. One aspect of the legislation helps alleviate certain mandatory minimum sentences , which are predetermined prison terms for certain crimes. What about arguments in favor of mandatory minimums, in that they create an equitable system of punishment?

Barkow : That was the thought, but I don't know why people assumed that would lessen disparities. Anyone who proposed that, forgot that prosecutors existed. A prosecutor does not have to charge you with the mandatory minimum. There is more than one drug crime in the federal code.

So, if I'm a prosecutor and I want to charge you with selling drugs, I have my pick of what I'm going to charge you with. That means, a prosecutor can pick and choose who gets charged with the full mandatory minimum and who doesn't. Instead of having a judge decide what a sentence should be, they've effectively allowed prosecutors to make that decision. That is really problematic. While the judge is at least an objective third party with no stake in the outcome, the prosecutor can threaten people with mandatory minimums to get them to plead guilty.

Mandatory minimums definitely made all the things it sought to solve worse. I fully recognize it was done with good intentions, but we are long past the point that anyone can claim to have a good intention for keeping it.

CBS News: The First Step Act also establishes what's known as "earned time credits" for the first time at the federal level. This system allows an inmate to earn time off their sentencing if they participate in programming while incarcerated. What stands out to you about this component?

Barkow : The last remaining question mark of the First Step Act is what will this earned time credit regime look like? Will there be enough programming? Will it be sufficiently funded? Are they going to do a good job making sure it's working well?

The people who need programming the most are high risk people. Every criminologist will tell you that. It's the best investment that we could make as a society, but the legislation makes them ineligible. It's only available for lower risk people. It's just a way for the lower risk population to cut their sentences, I think, in a politically palatable way. As a society we'd be much better off if we offered programming to high risk people.

So, an interesting wrinkle I think people might not know about, is Congress' decision to make whole groups ineligible for this, despite the fact that those are the very groups that need it the most. That was just pure politics, not based on evidence or what would be a good use of the resources.

CBS News : Why do you think there isn't more programming in place?

Barkow : There is a tendency in America to view everything as an individual decision: if a person comes out of prison and commits a crime, "That's on them." It's a little ridiculous though, because through interventions we can reduce the risk that it would happen.

We should want, during the time that they're in custody, to invest in all the things that can make criminal behavior less likely when they're released. There are things that we can do that would change the odds of that happening. The only reason that we don't, and the reason why we don't hold prisons accountable, is this weird sense people have that it's completely up to the individual. Maybe there's a cynicism that they will all fail anyways so why bother? But none of that is true.

It's good to remember there's a lot of things we can do that help people — and help us. You don't even have to be nice or empathetic, you could be truly selfish and say, "I'd like to be safer." I could be safer if instead of my tax dollars going to support facilities that do a terrible job when someone is incarcerated, they support facilities that offer the right kind of programming. That way, when someone gets out they're less likely to offend.

CBS News : If this was the first step, what's the next step for criminal justice reform?

Barkow : The First Step Act didn't really address currently incarcerated people who are serving excessively long sentences. It changed some mandatory minimums, but only from the day the act passed onward. For people currently serving the time, they did nothing. My idea would be that you have provisions to deal with currently incarcerated people who have long sentences. That's what I would do next.

We will not solve mass incarceration by relying on the federal government to do it. States need to take action. The federal government could create financial incentives, but we got where we are today from a lot of different political jurisdictions and actors making the same punitive decisions. To undo it, we're going to have to go back and have all those jurisdictions and individual actors make different decisions.

CBS News: Criminal justice reform is turning into a main issue for the 2020 election . We've already seen a few democratic contenders release plans or weigh in, including former Vice President Joe Biden , Senator Cory Booker and Senator Kamala Harris, to name a few recent high-profile unveilings. What do you look for in a candidate's platform on this issue?

Barkow : If it were me, the key things would be eliminating mandatory minimums and providing a mechanism for anyone who is currently serving a mandatory minimum. That way they could petition a court for relief. I think that's the most important thing that should be done at the federal level legislatively. It would be nice if we had legislation that just said, "The mandatory minimum idea was a failure. We thought it was going to eliminate disparities, instead it exacerbated them." Mandatory minimums don't help public safety, all they've done is create additional racial disparities and a lot of human misery.

If that can't be done, then I'd like to see a president who uses the clemency power to do the same thing. We have too many people serving sentences that are too long, and they have no mechanisms right now. The only place they can go is to the president of the United States.

For presidential candidates in particular, there are things they can claim they're going to do, but that would require Congress. So, all they're really saying is, "I as a president will ask for this." But if Congress says no, that's it. Then, there's the things the president can do on their own. They have a lot of authority, especially with clemency power.

Tyler is a producer for CBSN. She also covers criminal justice reform. Reach her at: [email protected].

More from CBS News

How low will mortgage rates drop after the Fed cuts rates? Experts weigh in

4 reasons a short-term CD makes sense now, according to experts

Grassroots organizers raise millions online for Harris in first week

How much interest would a $5,000 18-month CD earn now?

Policing’s Illusion of Safety

A demonstrator holding a candle and a sign with Justice For

I n the past 10 years, headlines have been dominated by incidents of police violence , from the tragic killing of Michael Brown, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and most recently Sonya Massey to the numerous protests that followed. These events have sparked a national conversation about the role and history of policing in the United States. The history of policing in the U.S. is neither linear nor monolithic. Instead, it is fragmented and developed differently in various regions. But one aspect of its history stands out clearly: U.S. policing wasn’t constructed out of a desire for public safety but out of a desire to preserve power and the status quo.

From its inception, policing in the U.S. has been a colonial project, with international dimensions that connect directly to imperialism. Early colonial formations of policing included slave patrols in the South and watchmen policing groups in the North. Slave patrols emerged in the early 1700s, designed to enforce slavery and prevent enslaved people from rebelling or escaping. These patrols were authorized to use violence and terror to control Black populations. In the North, early watch systems began in the 1600s, focusing on protecting property and maintaining public order, which often meant safeguarding the interests of the wealthy and powerful. The Texas Rangers, established in 1835, represent another early form of policing aimed at maintaining the interests of settlers and suppressing Indigenous populations.

The rise of industrial capitalism in the 19th century brought about new forms of policing , including the use of police to break strikes and suppress labor organizing. The first major city police department was established in Boston in 1838, followed by New York City in 1845, and Chicago in 1851. These early police forces were employed to protect capital and maintain the status quo during periods of labor unrest, illustrating how policing has long been a tool of economic control. This trend continued into the 20th century, with police frequently called upon to quell protests and labor strikes, using violence and intimidation to suppress worker demands for better conditions and wages.

Resistance to police violence and legitimacy crises have played significant roles in shaping the history of policing. And historically, the response to dissent against policing has been to strengthen policing and embed it more deeply into the social fabric of everyday life.

Read More: The Tyre Nichols Videos Demand Solemnity, Not Sensationalism

Governments, media, and mainstream social institutions have socialized us to believe that police are the only organizations that can effectively provide public safety. This belief justifies the idea that police need to maintain a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. For most of modern history, though, police weren’t seen this way. Instead, they were viewed as a violent occupying force serving the interests of those in power. For the communities targeted by police violence, the idea that police weren’t created in the interest of safety isn’t surprising. Police are said to be the stewards of public safety, but across the country, policing emerged in the 17th century as a tool of racial and class domination and control. The professionalization era of police, which began in the early 1900s and sought to address widespread corruption and the problems of policing, transformed policing practices but did not address the problems of policing: police power itself . The police violence we see today is not a fluke or aberration. The criminal-legal system today is not broken; it is operating exactly as it was designed to: as a violent tool of race and class control that protects very few.

The mid-1900s saw significant investments and efforts by politicians and police leaders that set history on a course where policing would swell in ways that few could have predicted. President Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on crime reinforced the public perception that local law enforcement was the only legitimate guardian of public safety. The 1965 Law Enforcement Assistance Act (LEAA) created a federal funding stream that expanded local law enforcement's capacity to acquire military-grade gear and hire more officers. Over the years, billions of dollars have been funneled into local law enforcement, allowing police to acquire more technology and equipment for biased crime control and protest suppression efforts. Despite differences in policing models, the use of policing to control and punish marginalized communities has remained constant.

Internationally, U.S. policing methods have been exported to support colonial and imperial efforts seeking to expand empire . For example, during the Cold War, the U.S. trained police forces in allied countries to suppress Communist movements and maintain control over colonized populations. This exchange of tactics between imperial armies and police forces highlights the interconnectedness of domestic and international strategies of control. The use of counterinsurgency techniques, developed by military forces to manage colonized populations, became a staple in American policing, particularly in managing protests and civil unrest.

Today, police and prison spending consume hundreds of billions of dollars that could be spent developing community infrastructures and nonpunitive alternatives to prisons and policing. The criminal-legal system, with its origins in racial and class control, has evolved to maintain the same functions under the guise of public safety. The police violence we witness today is not an anomaly but a continuation of a historical pattern designed to preserve power and control over marginalized communities.

In the 1960s, as political resistance grew, policing expanded. The violence of policing was widespread, and police used brutal tactics to suppress protests and maintain racial segregation and discrimination. During the civil rights movement, police violence was brought into the national spotlight, shocking the conscience of the nation and galvanizing support for the civil rights cause. Police employed attack dogs, high-pressure water cannons, and tear gas against protestors. These tactics were part of a larger strategy to repress activism and maintain racial segregation and discrimination. Police also enforced racial boundaries at parks, schools, modes of transportation, pools, and entire communities.

As policing expanded, law enforcement was given a large degree of latitude, enabling the mass arrest and incarceration of Black and increasingly Latinx people, a legacy that continues today. The professionalization era of policing that began in the early 20th century and the federal embalming of the 1960s with President Johnson's war on crime began shifting perceptions. This period marked the beginning of rebranding efforts—which some have coined police propaganda, or “ copaganda ”—that have positioned the police as crime stoppers and the stewards of public safety. These efforts, supported by federal funds, facilitated a rebranding of police from enforcers of marginalization and political control to perceived protectors of public safety. The promises of police to expand the category deemed worthy of protection and the idea that police are capable of reform further shifted perceptions. This expansion of policing and rebranding efforts in all areas of society led to the shift in public perception, portraying police as essential crime stoppers rather than instruments of social control.

Despite promises of reform, policing continues to focus on reinforcing power structures. These power structures center largely on capital and profit accrual, which have a history of organizing themselves along racial lines. Understanding the origins and evolution of policing in the United States reveals its true purpose: maintaining social control and protecting the interests of the powerful.

We must reimagine public safety in ways that do not rely on coercion and violence but instead focus on community-based solutions that address the root causes of harm and inequality. The rebranding efforts that have positioned the police as crime stoppers and stewards of public safety, alongside their historical and contemporary roles, underscore the need for a fundamental rethinking of public safety beyond policing.

More Must-Reads from TIME

The Rise of a New Kind of Parenting Guru
The Uneasy Alliance Between Kamala Harris and Volodymyr Zelensky
The Young Women Challenging Iran’s Regime
Ilona Maher TikToks Through the Olympics
Can Food Really Change Your Hormones?
Every Marvel Cinematic Universe Movie, Ranked
Column: The Prosecutor Versus Felon Narrative Helps No One
Get Our Paris Olympics Newsletter in Your Inbox

The Effects of the Criminal Justice System Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Broken Window Policing

Definition of broken window policing, how broken window produced racist results, why breaking the window theory is wrong.

Broken window policing is a policing concept that implies that visible signs of disorder and misbehavior in a community encourage further disorder and misbehavior, leading to violent crimes. This means that a sign of disorder in society that goes unattended can fuel such behaviors. The broken window policy has been used to target neighborhoods occupied by minority populations. With this policing, the majority of people arrested and victimized were people of color. Wilson and Kelling (2007) posit “But the police forces of America are losing, not gaining, members” (para 47). This means that the police are not successful in the use of excessive force against suspects. The quote presents the status quo in the current criminal justice system used by the police to maintain social order. Therefore, this essay will define the concept of the broken window policing, explain why it produces racists result, and describe why it is wrong using the concept of deterrence.

Wilson and Kelling (2007) say, “Social psychologists and police officers tend to agree that if a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the rest of the windows will soon be broken” (para. 11). This means that a behavior that is not solved in a society can turn into something that cannot be controlled. For instance, if a person with a violent behavior is not tamed early enough, then there is a possibility that the behavior might become a habit that is difficult to control. In other words, an untended problem in society is likely to escalate to the point that it cannot be managed. Through this quote, one can understand the meaning of Broken Window Policy. Now, one can say that a broken window is a policy that majors on the importance of a disorder such as a broken window in creating and sustaining more serious crimes.

According to Wilson and Kelling (2007), “persons who broke the informal rules, especially those who bothered people waiting at bus stops, were arrested for vagrancy” (para. 8). It means that a person would not be spared even when they break unwritten rules but defines acceptable roles and activities in a community. Normally, most people who end up being serial criminals are believed to have started breaking informal rules such as disturbing people in public places, and nothing was being done. This quote is a good illustration of a broken window policy because it majors on taming all manner of crime, whether minor or major. Based on this quote, society understands broken window policy is all about maintaining the social order by attending to any form of unethical behavior.

Wilson and Kelling (2007) claim that, “Window-breaking does not necessarily occur on a large scale because determined window-breakers inhabit some areas whereas others are populated by window-lovers” (para. 11). This means that some areas are occupied by individuals who must commit an offense, while some areas are occupied by people who love to obey the law. This quote groups people into two; people who are more likely to offend and the ones who are less likely to offend. As a result, law enforcers have always focused on areas with people who are prone to breaking the law. This quote presents a notion that people living in high crime rates are reported to love breaking the law. Therefore, window-breakers are likely to experience more arrests compared to areas with window-lovers.

Moreover, Wilson and Kelling (2007) suggest, “For some residents, this growing atomization will matter little because the neighborhood is not their home but the place where they live. Their interests are elsewhere; they are cosmopolitans” (para. 15). It means that some people will be unconcerned about the neighborhood’s growing level of social disorder because it is not their home but rather the place where they dwell. They come from other countries, and their interests are diverse. The quote tends to present a view that immigrants are less likely to be bothered by the security issues of the host country because the existing location is not their original home. This quote presents people of color and other immigrants as an enemy to social order. Based on this, the original inhabitants of the host country are more likely to perceive immigrants as the cause of insecurity in the country.

Wilson and Kelling (2007) state, “Second, at the community level, disorder and crime are usually inextricably linked in a kind of developmental sequence” (para. 11). Broken Windows is based on the assumption that crime and disorder are interrelated and that establishing order in areas through increased police presence will decrease crime and make residents feel safer. In principle, this technique would allow authorities to repair a neighborhood by enforcing minor infractions. According to CBC (n.d.), “Haworth, who was suspected of theft, was handcuffed at the time of the incident, which left him with a fractured skull and traumatic brain injury” (15 th minute). This means that people use excessive force to strike fear in people for breaking the law. Drawing from this quote, breaking the window theory is portrayed as a preventive technique to strike fear among offenders, just like deterrence theory. Breaking the window theory is wrong because it majors on driving fear in people as the main solution to reducing crime.

Breaking the window policy is also wrong because it fails to consider the main reason why people obey the law. The concept of deterrence means that people obey the law because they are afraid of being caught and punished. This indicates that when you create fear around committing an offense, more people are likely to obey the law. On the other, the breaking the window policy focuses on minor crimes committed as a means to prevent the occurrence of major crimes. According to Wilson and Kelling (2007), “But the police forces of America are losing, not gaining, members” (para 47). This means that arresting people with petty offenses is not going to make people obey the law. Therefore, the broken window argument is incorrect because the social disorders do not cause people to breach the law and commit more crimes.

The criminal justice system is supposed to keep everyone safe and make sure there is fair and equal justice. However, the current justice system is far from being fair and just because of introducing concepts such as the broken window policing. The current justice system is saddled with unfairness and ends up draining resources and disrupting communities. Broken window policing is a policing idea that suggests that apparent indicators of disorder and misbehavior in a community inspire further disorder and misbehavior, ultimately leading to violent crimes. This means that an unattended symptom of chaos in society has the potential to feed such acts. The broken window policy has been used to target minority-populated neighborhoods. People of color make up the majority of those detained and victimized as a result of this policing.

CBC. n.d. Above the Law . Web.

Wilson James, Q., and L. Kelling George. 2007 “Broken Windows: The police and neighborhood safety.” The Atlantic , retrieved (2007): 09-03.

The State of Colorado vs. Chris Watts Case
Benefits of the Legalization of THC
Handling Child Misbehavior
Sexual Harassment as Organizational Misbehavior
The Difference Between Organizational Conflict and Misbehavior
Researching of Criminal Law and Procedure
Chesier v. On Q Financial Incorporated: Case Discussion
The Nationalization and Constitutionalization of Criminal Procedure
Criminal Justice System: Child Abuse
“Estelle v Gamble”, “Lynce v. Mathis”: Law Case Studies
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, July 22). The Effects of the Criminal Justice System. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-the-criminal-justice-system/

"The Effects of the Criminal Justice System." IvyPanda , 22 July 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-the-criminal-justice-system/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'The Effects of the Criminal Justice System'. 22 July.

IvyPanda . 2022. "The Effects of the Criminal Justice System." July 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-the-criminal-justice-system/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Effects of the Criminal Justice System." July 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-the-criminal-justice-system/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Effects of the Criminal Justice System." July 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-effects-of-the-criminal-justice-system/.

Introduction to the American Criminal Justice System

(21 reviews)

Alison S. Burke, Southern Oregon University

David E. Carter, Southern Oregon University

Brian Fedorek, Southern Oregon University

Tiffany L. Morey, Southern Oregon University

Lore Rutz-Burri, Southern Oregon University

Shanell Sanchez, Southern Oregon University

Publisher: Open Oregon Educational Resources

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Darren Stocker, Professor, Cape Cod Community College on 5/27/24

The text covers a wide range of topics relative to the CRJS. It was nice to see the TOC cover the three pillars of criminal justice and further delineate police, courts, and corrections in a more detailed and comprehensive presentation. The... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

Content Accuracy rating: 5

Each of the topics provides an accurate depiction of criminal justice and is very inclusive of individuals, groups, communities, and agencies. Many of the examples provided align well with contemporary issues.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

The text does a good job covering contemporary issues while including relevant historical events and applicable case law. There is a need to be inclusive of Treatment Courts, such as drug courts, mental health courts, and veterans courts. This should also include some mention of the drug court model that is currently employed throughout the country. The illustration of probation and parole was nicely done. The increased use of biometrics for identification should also be included.

Clarity rating: 5

Overall, this is an easy read and provides enough information to satisfy the student at the introductory level. The text does a great job creating a voice that portrays each of the three major topics, police, courts, and corrections.

Consistency rating: 5

Terminology was well defined and explained. There were good examples that supported this.

Modularity rating: 5

Each chapter is broken down into very readable sections, making the text comprehensive overall. Any of the sections would be seen as providing a solid foundation for a first-year student, or those interested in knowing more about criminal justice.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The organization of the text is very consistent with other introductory textbooks currently used at the college level. The information is clear and properly illustrated.

Interface rating: 5

There were no noted concerns with the means in which this is designed and presented. From an electronic presentation, it was very easy to navigate and find topics of direct interest.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

There were no issues that I was aware of, but I do think it should be formatted in APA. The use of "Understand" in the learning objectives is not consistent with the action verbs found in Bloom's Taxonomy.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

I found nothing in the text to be offensive.

I would like to have seen the text formatted in APA. Some of the Critical Thinking Questions are not actually questions.

Reviewed by Meg Chrusciel, Assistant Professor, University of Wisconsin - Superior on 11/27/23

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The textbook does an excellent job covering the wide array of topics relevant for an introductory level criminal justice class. Rather than digging in too deeply, this book really focuses on skimming the surface of each topic (as a strong introductory book should). What is especially noteworthy is the organization both overall and within chapters. There is a lot of information included and it can get confusing quickly without proper structure and organization. This book has both. Further, the use of text boxes including example and discussion questions are so helpful for the reader and could be useful for classroom discussions. I would like to see more inclusion and discussion of drugs embedded throughout, if not made into its own chapter. Drug policy has shaped so much of the criminal justice system, it seems to warrant a deeper discussion than is made here. It is worth noting, however, that the chapter dedicated to policy is one of the strengths of this textbook. The glossary is excellent, but an index page would be helpful as well.

There were no glaring inaccuracies in this book. It addresses some controversial subjects clearly and objectively.

Because this book takes such an objective stance, it sometimes brushes over, if not omits entirely, some key concepts related to crime (e.g., drug use, gender, race). This hurts its ability to remain timely, though its discussion of underlying systems will remain relevant. Because the book includes example boxes and news boxes, these will likely need updating as time goes on, but even when older, the examples still make for good discussions or thought pieces.

The clarity of this textbook is one of its greatest strengths. It avoids jargon without explaining and contextualizing the language. The definitions provided are written in simple terms and straightforward. The authors use terminology commonly used by practitioners and researchers and does so in a way that an undergraduate student can understand. It is easy to follow and clearly written.

There are difference in tone and writing style between chapters written by different authors, though they are subtle and likely will go unnoticed by most undergraduate readers. The authors did adopt similar language and word choice throughout which helps the book read more cohesively, while still capturing different perspectives.

The modular approach of this textbook is outstanding. The book is broken into sections which each include a number of chapters. Within each chapter there are subsections which further help structure the content in a way that is easy to follow and interpret. An added benefit is that the chapters feel a bit shorter (despite containing the same content and page length as a traditionally written chapter). This helps make the sections feel more manageable and likely less intimidating or overwhelming for students.

This textbook follows the traditional four section (overview, policing, courts, and corrections) structure of most introductory books do in this field. As noted above, its modularity makes this a very well organized book that is easy to follow and makes sense for someone brand new to learning in this field.

Interface rating: 4

The interface is excellent, however it is really unfortunate that there is no index that allows you to jump around more easily. It is a long scroll in its PDF format. The use of images, tables, charts, and other graphics is immensely useful and really strengthens this book.

I did not notice any grammatical errors, at least any that impeded my reading.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

I did not find any of this textbook to be culturally insensitive or offensive. However, it could make more effort at being inclusive and representing a more diverse breadth of experiences. In trying to avoid insensitivity, it almost felt afraid to talk about some of the more problematic realities of our CJ system (such as the racial disparity in mass incarceration).

This is a great alternative to the very expensive introductory books in our field. Just as with all textbooks, its needs some adjustments and contextualization by the course instructor to really be appropriate in a respective classroom, but it certainly offers a great tool for those teaching introduction to criminal justice courses.

Reviewed by Summer Diamond, Lecturer II, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley on 12/21/22

I was impressed with the wide range of areas this text covers. It begins with the history and makes its way through to current issues, which I appreciate. The Learning Objectives and Critical Thinking questions at the beginning of each section are beneficial for students to know the "why's" of what they are learning and how to apply. I however, wish that there were more definitions in each section as this is an Introduction course and most students have not heard of a lot of these important terms being discussed.

Content Accuracy rating: 3

The content in the text is shown to be unbiased as it does come from different view points and authors. However, I found there to be some issues with accuracy of delivery of certain terms/subjects. Such as the dark figure or hidden figures of crime, the funnel effect and the delivery of jails and prisons. These particular points are crucial to teaching this topic and it was lacking in full details of each of these areas and only briefly touched the importance of them. Intro students and even higher levels need to know that jails and prisons are not interchangeable terms and although it did give a good list of the differences there could have been even more discussed to differentiate the two.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

The topics covered in this text range from the history of the CJ System to the current times which will be easy to update with any current relative events dealing with these issues and topics as time progresses. The stats listed provided a historical context but also the current stats such as those listed in the probation section provide context to what is being discussed and can be kept up to date easily.

Clarity rating: 4

The text uses personal perspectives and stories from the authors and not strictly from an academic setting that helps student relate more to the subjects and understand the application of certain situations. This is helpful in not only a lecture setting but in online courses as well.

Consistency rating: 4

The text has a good flow between the chapters and subheadings. Since it is from more than one author some areas were less informative than others and could have had more content added.

This text will be easy to pick and choose certain topics to the relative sections being covered in a specific module of my course and will be a good addition to assigned readings.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The topics chosen are clear and in a logical order that is easy to read and assign to students.

The text is an easy read especially for undergraduate students.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

There were a few grammatical errors as the stories provided for better understanding were from personal perspective the tone and language used was appropriate for them.

The text seemed to provide more current issues/stories in the media and therefore more sensitive to certain hot topics that we are dealing with in our current society.

This will be a great up to date supplement to my current required textbook. It will be easy to assign students to read additional material without them feeling overwhelmed as the sections are shorter than most textbooks which students these days will appreciate.

Reviewed by Jessica Peterson, Assistant Professor, Southern Oregon University on 12/4/22

This book is a nice and easy-to-understand introduction to the criminal justice system. As a policing scholar, I wanted to see more of a historical and analytical overview of policing. Some chapters provided more detail/in-depth discussion than... read more

More than one perspective is provided in this book.

The field of criminal justice is constantly changing; at the time it was written, the stats/charts were recent. This text is still relevant and - as a new volume is soon to come out - will be a nice intro for students throughout the 2020s.

The book is written in a relatable tone - rather than strictly academic prose - that students appreciate.

The chapters are written by different individuals, so there are differences in tone throughout the book. However, there is consistency within chapters and components of the CJ system (e.g., cops, courts, corrections).

I was able to assign sections of the reading according to what I planned to cover, even if that meant dividing up chapters.

Again, it is relateable for undergraduate students.

This book reads pretty easily.

There are some noticeable grammatical issues, but the book is meant to provide undergrad students with an introduction to the system that is less academic in nature and more relatable. From that perspective, it does a nice job of remaining conversational.

Overall, the text - particularly certain chapters - tends to address diversity, inclusion, and the lack of attention to diverse perspectives throughout the study of criminology and the criminal justice system.

I survey my students on course materials and they appreciated the local examples and relatable content in the book. This book provides a brief overview of the US criminal justice system and allows a lot of room for faculty to lecture/cover what they would like to. Assigning readings does not feel overwhelming from a faculty perspective and allows you to provide other outside materials without overburdening students.

Reviewed by Frank D'Agostino, Professor, North Shore Community College on 11/3/22

This textbook covers all the major content areas required for an Intro to CJ class. Each content area is covered in a clear and comprehensive fashion. read more

This textbook covers all the major content areas required for an Intro to CJ class. Each content area is covered in a clear and comprehensive fashion.

The textbook cites legal sources which indicate that the text has been thoroughly researched and therefore is accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 3

The textbook cites resources from within the last 10 years. My only comment here is that its unclear when the text was last revised, and in the Criminal Justice field the law/practice/procedures can change quite rapidly. This OER source may need to be updated.

Despite drawing on numerous authors, the textbook does flow and the prose is both lucid and accounts for any jargon used in the criminal justice field. e.g. specific terms like a "wobbler" (a criminal act in CA that could be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony) are clearly explained. I would give this category a 4.5 if allowed to.

Consistency can be an issue when relying on numerous authors (see comment to Clarity above) but this text does a good job blending the writing styles as well as the terminology/framework. Not an easy task when doing an overview of an entity as vast as the American criminal justice system. Once again, I would give this category a 4.5 if allowed to.

Perhaps the greatest strength/asset of this text is the ease within which the reader can move between different topics and subtopics. This makes initial reading easier, but also makes reviewing text passages (say while preparing an assignment or studying for a quiz/test) also quite facile.

This text employs the classic organization for an Intro to CJ textbook. In short, it works, and if it isn't broke then don't fix it!

I didn't find many interface issues, most links work well, and moving back into the text was efficient, in that it brought you back to the place in the text you previously were. However, I did find that in some cases additional software was required. For example, in 7.3 the structure courts section, the 360° virtual campus tour of The U.S. Supreme Court requires the Adobe Flash Player. Perhaps this requirement is disclosed to the user up front, but if it isn't, I suggest that the authors do so.

There were no grammatical errors that I found. Of course, I am not an English teacher!

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

While I don't think the text is offensive, it does miss the opportunity to examine cultural, as well as racial, gender and ethnic, issues in a more detailed and up to date manner. For example, in 5.9 Strain Theories, 5.10 Learning Theories, 5.11 Control Theories of crime, the author relies on the seminal works to explain the topics, but misses on the opportunity to use more recent research. Although, in 5.12 other criminological theories, the author does briefly mention critical thoeries.

This is a solid Intro to CJ book. While I didn't see an associated test/question bank, I assume there is one available in the Library (perhaps?) I would suggest including some more recent cases/examples from media sources to make the text more relevant to the reader. Otherwise, great job.

Reviewed by Bahiyyah Muhammad, Associate Professor of Criminology, Howard University on 1/31/22

This book cover an array of different topics connected to the American criminal legal enterprise. Readers can find all traditional topics that one would cover in an entry level criminal Justice course. For example, Introduction to Criminal Justice or Principles of Criminal Justice. Students who use this text will be introduced to all the classical and traditional works needed to comprehensively understand the legal system.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The content for this text is presented in an unbiased manner. Each of the chapters are written in prose that are easy to comprehend for dual-enrollment high school students and early year college students.

This book has relevance for now and can be used for the future. The historical components discussed about the criminal system have relevance for the contemporary and will still be relevant as the system progresses forward. The topics in each chapter serve to frame and contextualize the major themes of the system. Ultimately, these (police, courts and corrections) can be taught during any timeframe.

The text is very clear. It is written using short sentences, examples and without subject matter expert jargon. It is written in a format that many will be able to understand without confusion. Each chapter is broken into sub-sections. This makes the content easy to digest. It also gives readers an opportunity to gain full clarity before moving into a new topic. The chapter exercises are clear and connect to real experiences. This helps readers to triangulate course information with real life. This is also helpful because it allows the instructor/course facilitator to bring in additional resources to help explain concepts further.

Each chapter follows the same layout. This helps young readers and growing scholars know exactly what to expect in each section through the text.

The textbook modularity is GREAT! The information is broken in smaller topical sections that contribute to the larger argument. This is helpful for both the reader and instructor. This modularity helped me to break the syllabus into weekly content that was consist throughout the semester. With this format student success in the course was increased. Because they knew how much they needed to read each week in order to complete each section. The book format allows consistency in contact and number of reading pages.

The organization of the book flows logically.

Images and chart are available throughout the text. This is helpful for visual readers.

There were no grammatical errors that students brought up. I also did not pick up on any of these kinds of errors.

This text provides culturally relevant content. Students in evaluating the course requested to have more of such content. Specifically, to highlight the critical ways in which race intersects with the criminal legal system.

I have used this book for 3 semesters. It has worked well in my large and small classes. I have one section of Principles of criminal Justice with 50 students. I have another with 300 students. This book is a good choice for teaching introductory criminal legal/criminology courses.

Reviewed by Wendi Babst, Instructor, Clackamas Community College on 1/2/22

The text is an excellent introduction to a wide range of topics. The structure of the text walks the reader through the topics and explains the concepts in simple terms which are appropriate for students who are beginning a criminal justice course of study or those who are exploring the discipline. The index and glossary are adequate for navigating the information in each section.

I found the information to be accurate and unbiased. As an Oregon-based educator, I may not have noted information that was not applicable to another jurisdiction as was noted by other reviewers.

I appreciate that the information is succinct and covers the basics of each topic leaving room for the adopter to supplement with their own online or other content. There are several links to some good resources that are not controlled by the author, and I have some concern they may become inactive or direct students to the wrong information in the future. I know this can be a frustration for students. As an instructor using an OER textbook, I would anticipate spending time proofing these links each time I use the textbook and providing alternatives as needed. I would expect most instructors are constantly looking for current content to keep up to date with legal changes and to keep students engaged, so using this text as a starting point for each topic is a great way to compliment other more current and easily updated resources, such as internet content.

The format of the text should allow for updates to be easily implemented. I recognize it is a huge undertaking to maintain updates, but the basic framework is solid, and this would greatly expand the shelf-life of the textbook.

I found the textbook to be well-written and easy to understand. There are simple definitions for most technical terms, and these are also referenced in the glossary. The textbook is written in a conversational style that I believe students will find appealing. I know some reviewers commented about the informal style taking away from the credibility of the text, but in a time when textbook publishers are creating comic book format materials, there is clearly an expressed desire for more informal reference material. This textbook strikes a good balance between authority and approachability I believe my students will appreciate.

Overall, the material is consistent throughout the text, but it is clear there are different authors for each section. There are subtle differences in the style of each author, but this allows for students to understand they are getting some diversity of input and it also reflects the author for each topic has specific expertise in that area which lends to the credibility of the information.

Each section is very short and easy to follow. The modules were organized well and flowed nicely from topic to topic. Each chapter was labeled, and the sub-categories broke down the material well making it easy to locate information quickly.

The topics were presented in a clear and logical fashion. The learning objectives were clearly stated and met in the content of each section.

The layout of the text is simple with limited graphics and color use. This works well for use with accessibility technology. There were some graphics that appeared distorted but were still readable. I did note at least one graph that didn’t contain any date range information which was bit confusing, but overall, the graphics worked well and were well labeled.

I noted a few grammatical errors in the text sections and the glossary, but none that greatly impacted the content.

The text provides a good balance of examples that reflect the diversity of the community. It was especially refreshing to have the perspective of a female law enforcement officer in the policing section. There was nothing culturally insensitive or offensive in the text.

This is an excellent basic text for use in course providing an overview of the U.S. criminal justice system, but sections also provide an excellent basic framework for other more in-depth courses focusing on a particular topic or topics. My hope is to adopt sections of this textbook for focused courses on corrections and juvenile justice which will necessitate supplementing other references for most topics, but this is one of the best examples of an OER criminal justice text I have found. I am very appreciative of the work the professors at SOU put into this project.

Reviewed by Scott Bushway, Adjunct Professor of Criminal Justice, Massachusetts Bay Community College on 5/25/21

This text explains how a criminal case proceeds through the criminal justice system very effectively. Each of the three components of the criminal justice system - law enforcement, courts, and corrections - is fully covered. It explains the importance of data collection to measure crime, which is essential to effective resource deployment. The court system is explained in fairly simple terms for a rather complex subject. Jurisdiction, court structure, appeal process, and court staff are all described in detail. The chapters covering the court begin with a brief history of the court system, including the history and differences between prisons and jails, including the different types of each. Restorative justice is highlighted as well as alternatives to incarceration such as diversion, and community corrections. As a final topic, the components of juvenile justice are well defined, which include rehabilitation and the juvenile justice and delinquency prevention act of 1974.

Alison Burke, Ph.D. is co-author with five other subject matter experts who have provided research-based analysis of each subject.

This textbook is relevant to today's criminal justice system and addresses current issues and challenges with each component of the criminal justice system.

The textbook is written in such a way as to address each subject with clear and concise language. Each chapter is formatted so that each topic is easily located and easily explained.

There do not appear to be any contradictions of material.

This book is easy to navigate as each chapter is properly titled with each sub-section formatted clearly.

The text begins with an overview of the criminal justice system. Then, methodically addresses crime, criminal justice policy, and policing before moving into the second component of the criminal justice system, courts. The final sections address the third component of the criminal justice system, which is corrections.

There is nothing in the textbook to distract or confuse the reader.

I found no grammatical errors in this book.

This textbook address the criminal justice system, which is factual, therefore not culturally insensitive or offense.

Reviewed by Ziwei Qi, Assistant Professor, Fort Hays State University on 5/22/21

The overall structure of the textbook is comprehensive. The authors strategically design the book for readers who needs an overall introduction understanding on the American criminal justice system. It includes an overview on crime, deviance, and justice system, scientific measurement on crime and crime trend, legal aspects of the criminal/procedure laws, sociopolitical impact on legal policy, criminological theories, the three pillars of the criminal justice system (i.e., policing, court, and correction), and the juvenile justice system. In each of these sections, the authors were able to provide both case studies and statistical information to the readers. One drawback of the content is its information can be outdated due to some statistics were in 2017.

The information presented in the current textbook was accurate with empirical and theoretical evidences as backup.

As previously mentioned, the authors could update some of the statistical analysis and research results by incorporating most recent research. While updating the information, the authors could also consider to add an additional chapter on how the Covid-19 pandemic shifted the dynamic of criminal justice system.

The charity level of the current textbook was overall good. In some chapters, such as criminal trial procedure chapter, authors can consider to incorporate infographic for beginning learners.

Overall the text is internally consistent with minor terms discrepancies, which may due to multiple authorships.

Modularity rating: 4

The authors had done an excellent job in modularity. Each section has its own theme and content, and it can be taught in segment.

The organization of the current text is good with very detailed and professional edits in the fine details of the content matter.

The interface of the current text is good.

No grammatical errors were noticed.

No cultural insensitivity was detected.

I believe this is a great book for beginners in criminal justice, law, and political sciences. I applaud that the authors can combine both theoretical and empirical context in the current book.

Reviewed by Brittany Ripper, Adjunct Professor, American University on 2/26/21, updated 3/23/21

The book covered the core components of law enforcement, courts, and corrections. However, greater detail was needed in certain areas. For example, the book listed defenses to a criminal charge, but did not provide explanations of these defenses.... read more

Overall, the content is accurate, but key details are missing in certain chapters. For example, the book tells readers that judges sentence individuals convicted of a crime. While that is true in most cases, Kentucky still has jury sentencing, and Virginia only recently abolished this practice. Moreover, juries are used in death penalty cases. In regard to bias, one author claims that the defense attorney in the Ford Pinto homicide trial won the case because he was friends with the judge. This case could have been described in a more neutral way.

Many current events and pop culture references are made. These events were usually contained within text boxes, so they could be easily updated over time.

Clarity rating: 3

The book needs a significant amount of editing. There are several sentences that are missing words, particularly in the first few chapters. Jargon like "district attorney" and "Schedule I" is sometimes used without explanation. Bolded terms do not have clear definitions.

Consistency rating: 3

Chapters are written by individual authors and there is no standard chapter organizational framework.

I would definitely recommend assigning particular sections of this textbook, as opposed to assigning the textbook in its entirety. Each chapter is broken down into digestible sections.

The book is appropriately organized by topic.

Interface rating: 3

Pictures included within the text are often fuzzy or unusually large. Additionally, there is inconsistent use of text boxes separating chunks of text from the main body of the chapter. Several links to websites are broken.

Grammatical Errors rating: 3

There are grammatical errors throughout the book, which affects its credibility and could inhibit students' learning.

The book does not go out of its way to be inclusive, but there are no insensitive or offensive statements within it. It would be nice if the term "offender" was replaced with "accused" or "individual convicted of a crime."

The chapters on policing are wonderful and full of practical information. They are written by a former police officer who discusses her firsthand experience. I will likely be using the chapter on police recruitment in my future criminal justice courses.

Reviewed by Riane Bolin, Assistant Professor , Radford University on 1/29/20

This textbook is comparable to most other introduction textbooks on the market in terms of the content. However, one topic included in this textbook that is often integrated into other chapters is criminal justice policy. I appreciate that there is a chapter specifically devoted to this topic as its importance is often understated in other texts. I also appreciate that there is a whole chapter on criminological theories as well. Several texts will either exclude this topic or will integrate it within another chapter, often not giving it the attention that it deserves.

I did not find any inaccuracies within the content. However, there are a couple areas throughout the text that I believe would benefit from further elaboration and explanation.

The textbook provides the "nuts and bolts" of the criminal justice system, including its history, development, and current issues. With that being said, the only information that will need to be updated with some frequency is the current issues facing the system and changes to the system as well as any current events and examples. This task should be relatively easy and straightforward and could be done every so often as opposed to yearly.

The book is easy to read and I think the content will be easily digestible for undergraduate students. The authors write in a conversational manner which I believe will be appealing to students. Unnecessary academic jargon is avoided and key terms are defined in ways in which someone new to criminal justice would be able to understand.

Overall, the text is relatively consistent in terms of terminology. Framework, on the other hand, varies by author. Some authors include lots of activities and external resources, while others include few to none. Another inconsistency is the tone and writing style of the different chapters. Some authors have a different writing style than others. A final inconsistency, which may not be of great concern, is the subsection length. There are some chapters (and even subsections) that are more detailed than others. One recommendation I would have for the authors is to make each subsection relatively equal in length. Most sections take up 3-4 pages, but there are some sections that are covered across 6-7 pages. This is not as big of a deal if the student has the print version, but online, the larger sections require a lot of scrolling, which may discourage them from reading all of the content.

The authors have done an excellent job of dividing each chapter into small reading sections. It would be very easy for a professor to tailor the textbook readings to meet the needs of how they teach the course.

The topics are presented in a logical and clear fashion and mirror the way in which information is presented in similar texts. However, I would encourage the authors to provide a more detailed table of contents for the online book. While the print version of the textbook, provides a detailed table of contents the online version provides only the title chapters.

Overall, I encountered few significant interface issues. However, there were places where the spacing was weird or there were inconsistencies in font type. There were also a few images that appeared distorted. In some cases, this was likely due to the age and quality of the original picture. Some graphs were also distorted (i.e., that appeared stretched out and disproportionate). While I did not click on every link available, I clicked on several and did not encounter any broken links.

Grammatical Errors rating: 2

I found a number of grammatical and typographical errors throughout. While most were minor and would not inhibit the student from understanding the information that was being communicated, they were still distracting. Also, there were numerous formatting errors with the references.

I did not find any of the content to be culturally insensitive or offensive in any way. However, examples from the book focus a lot on Oregon. While I understand this is where the authors are currently working, for those outside of Oregon, it would be nice to have examples from a wide variety of locations. There could be a more detailed discussion of the impact of race and gender within the criminal justice system.

This book has a number of strengths including that it is written in a manner in which an undergraduate or someone new to criminal justice would understand, it includes a number of links to current events and stories that could be used for class discussion, student activities are provided, and, most importantly, it covers the necessary content. However, there are some areas in which the book could be improved. Having a consistent tone throughout regardless of the author would make the book easier to read. Further, a thorough editing of the text is needed as there are a number of grammatical and typographical errors throughout. Additionally, adding more examples from states other than Oregon would make it more marketable to professors working in other states. Overall, I think the content is there, it just needs some editing and formatting.

Reviewed by Zerita Hall, Senior Lecturer, University of Texas at Arlington on 1/28/20

The authors of this book; "Introduction to the American Criminal Justice System", did a great job. Comparing it to my required textbook for purchase by other authors, this book covered most of the material and is comprehensive. This book is cultural and systemic relative to the topics of today. The glossary could be a little more expansive, but overall - good job. Although there is no index, considering this book is online a simple navigation of tabs - students can easily find what they are looking for.

Given the introductory text, it can be concluded that this book is unbiased. Dealing with Criminal Justice and its topics, I have it easy for authors to speak more from their view point than stats and facts. This book, however, gives actually data on issues that matter. For instance, in Chapter 6-Stereotypes in Policing; this could be guarded as opinion, but in this industry, they state the facts of groups as a whole. The reader can get a more realistic sense of how to view possible perpetrators as well as the police.

There is relevant information in the text. With current insight on gangs, juveniles, examples of immigration and genocide, to statistics, interviewing skills of police, surveys/studies - advances and updates to this text can easily be made. The examples given are contextualized so that whatever current event is going on a student will get the point being made. Additionally, because of the examples with hyperlinks, students/instructors can link more examples.

This book is an easy read and easy to follow and understand. Due to the nature of the criminal justice field, our terminology is steady and so is theirs throughout the book.

Although some chapters could have been flushed out a little more, there is linear connection quantity and quality among the chapters. Content is effective applicable.

The text is broken down into small blocks within the titles. This makes for easy reading and following. Certain chapters are referenced in other chapters and it was easy to understand the thought process behind it. I do think, certain topics could have been more defined in terms of identifying more content for example sake.

The topics in this text are presented in a logical, clear an linear fashion, which is very helpful to the instructor and student. Looking specifically at the Wedding Cake Model as an example, the authors expressed clear descriptions, pictures and explanations of content. Other topics flow well also.

All images checked- charts, graphs, hyperlinks, gray-text boxes pink-text boxes and pictures are problem-free. Pictures such as examples of classical conditioning is animated and well-placed in such a way, a student can easily understand the concepts presented.

I found no grammatical errors in this text. The book is well written and formatted.

I found this textbook is not to be culturally insensitive or offensive. The examples and photos used of races, ethnicities and backgrounds are appropriate and relevant to the subject and content being presented. Considering multiple authors on this project, a good variety of perspectives are included in the text. The student learns from a varied perspective throughout the text.

Overall, good textbook, I plan to use it along with other resources.

Reviewed by Jennifer Dannels, Lead Instructor - Criminal Justice/Paralegal Studies , Northshore Technical Community College on 12/5/19

Considering this is an introductory course, I thought this textbook did a nice job of covering a vast amount of material. I really liked how the book covered policy - particularly how and why criminal justice policies are created and change. The textbook I am currently using does not cover fake news, myths, and how crime is portrayed in the media at all - so I am happy to see these topics covered here and I think my students will find these topics interesting as well.

While overall comprehensive for an introductory course, I did not see coverage of the following topics within each main category: (1) Police - their various duties including predicting crime through Compstat/crime mapping; 4th Amendment and how it relates to search/seizures and warrants; and police interrogations/Miranda warnings; (2) Courts - types of evidence, types of witnesses (lay and expert), and juries; (3) Corrections - eras of corrections and prison life/culture itself - such as prisoner's rights, security threat groups, discipline in prison, and grievance procedures. While I do think these topics should have been briefly mentioned, I do realize that other Criminal Justice courses cover these topics in great detail (i.e., Police Systems and Practices, Judicial Processes, and Introduction to Corrections). Thus, students will eventually cover these materials in great depth so these omissions do not necessarily concern me. However, I also would have like to seen a small section on drugs, terrorism, and cybercrime, in addition to a brief history of crime in the United States (i.e., prohibition and organized crime, increase in violent crime in 1960's/1970's, War on Drugs in 1980's, rise of white-collar crime and terrorism, etc.)

I also thought that some topics, while covered/mentioned, could have used just a bit more coverage - most notably, the pretrial (bail, arraingment, etc.) and criminal trial process itself. While briefly described in Chapter 1, I will probably spend a bit more time on this in my classes given that it provides a good overview of how the criminal justice system actually works. While this text dedicates a good amount of coverage to theory and policy, I thought it could have provided a bit more detail on the actual process itself. I also thought the "use of force" section was too short, but it would be easy enough for an instructor to find current examples in the news to discuss in class in more detail.

I am not aware of any substantive errors. Most errors I saw were grammatical and in the glossary (i.e., descriptions of new and older generation jails). Nothing major though.

This book has lots of references to current events which I think the students will find relatable. Of course, more relative events will continue to occur -- but the instructor will just have to be mindful of this fact and update as they teach the course. This is no different than with any other Criminal Justice textbook.

The writing was clear and to the point with lots of examples to help demonstrate concepts. Some reviewers found the text a bit too informal, but I think students will appreciate the straight-forward language.

The overall framework of each chapter was consistent, although the "voice" of the author differs between chapters. Some authors are more formal than others -- but I think it still flows nicely and works.

I really like how the chapters were divided up into smaller sections, making it easy to skip sections, add sections, or vary the order. Each section was also a relatively short size which makes it easier for students to identify the issues or put their notes into outline formats.

The topics are presented in a logical and clear fashion. Each chapter begins with learning objectives and critical thinking questions which could easily be turned into interesting assignments and class discussions.

I did not experience any interface or navigation issues. The Table of Contents made it easy to jump from section to section.

Overall, I did not see many grammatical errors (with the exception of a few minor grammar issues in the glossary).

The text was not culturally insensitive or offensive. While race and gender issues may not have been directly addressed in its own section, I think these issues can be easily inserted into other sections (i.e., police shootings, use of force, community policing, sentencing, death penalty, etc.).

Overall, I really like this text (more so than the book I am currently using), and I plan to recommend that my department adopt it. The writing is clear and will be easy for students to read and comprehend. I also think the examples and references to recent events will allow students to relate to the material and realize the significance of these events to their everyday lives. This textbook also includes several interesting assignments throughout the text that instructors can choose to assign (or not). I'm looking forward to developing my Intro to Criminal Justice course using this book. While some reviewers wished to see more supplemental material, the lack of it does not bother me. I have my own teaching style, and I like to create my own presentations/assignments/quizzes/exams anyway. This book gives me a great foundation on which to build.

Reviewed by Katie Cali, Instructor of Sociology and Criminal Justice , Northshore Technical Community College on 11/15/19

This textbook covers the major topics need for an Introduction to Criminal Justice course. Topics are not explained in deep detail, but seems to be decent descriptions for an introductory level course. I would like to see this textbook expanded to include a few more chapters, such as terrorism, cybercrime and drugs. Nonetheless, the book does seem to be written in a way that should be comprehensible for Intro-level students.

As far as I could tell from my readings, the information and content matter appears to be accurate; however, as stated above, the content could use a little extra clarity.

Currently, the textbook is up-to-date. As with all books, as new events emerge the book may need to be updated to accurately represent the issues in society. I like the "Current Issues" displayed in the text. This text would benefit from writing with inclusion to other races, nationalities, genders, sexual orientations, etc. As a Sociologist with a Criminal Justice background, I have found the best way to discuss the CJ system is by presenting the various experiences from a variety of lifestyles. Nonetheless, the style of the textbook provides a relatively easy structure for making updates/additions to the text.

Academic jargon is explained enough to educate students in an introductory course, though some areas lack crucial details to ensure the understanding. As mentioned before, some of the examples and/or topics could use a little more detail or explanation to make the text have a higher clarity level. I find the style of the writing interesting for a textbook, as the authors refer to themselves in parts of the text. However, this style of writing may attract the readers attention while providing a connection between the book and the students in a way that other books cannot.

I find the textbook to be consistent, even if the writing style of the various authors are not consistent. The additional incepts and discussion topics help to promote a consistent structure for the text.

I find the modular structure of the textbook to be concise and beneficial to the instructors as well as the students. The clearly defined learning objective and the questions to ponder engage the reader and prepares the brain for the topic at hand.

I find this textbook to be well organized. The topics are presented in a logical and clear fashion. One may easily navigate themselves through the book with little to no struggle. Organized similar to other Introduction textbooks.

Throughout my use of this book, I did not find any major interface issues to be concerned about. Images were clear and organized and the book was very easy to navigate.

I did see a few minor grammatical errors. Majority of the issues were in the glossary. One more editing session would clear these issues right up.

During this review, I did not find culturally offensive or insensitive writing. However, I do feel this textbook needs to strength its level of inclusion, as mentioned earlier. This textbook seems to obviously be written from a white perspective and could use diversity to culturally enhance this text.

As a pioneer into the OER world, I believe this textbook is a great beginning, As with all pieces of work, there is definitely room to grow, which could enhance the overall experience from this text significantly. I plan to recommend this textbook to the department as a possible adoption.

Reviewed by Chris Palmore, Visiting Assistant Professor, University of Louisiana at Lafayette on 11/11/19

The text does a good job of covering the main issues of the American criminal justice system. There are chapters for the main topics, including crime, measuring crime, policing, courts, and corrections. There is also an interesting section on victimization, which many texts do not cover. Missing potential chapters like drugs and crime, mental health and crime, terrorism, bias-motivated crimes, cybercrimes, and comparative criminal justice. There is a discussion of Public Policy, which is great and something that I have not seen in any introductory text so far.

I did not see any accuracy issues, minus a few grammatical errors.

The text's omission of key social factors related to crime (i.e., race, sex) hurt the overall rating of content relevance. However, the organization of the text makes it so additions can be made with ease. The current issues boxes will need to be updated as time goes on, but that is also something that can be done easily. Some of the references were specific to a state, so a more multi-state approach could enhance the impact of the text.

The writing is clear and easy to understand. Jargon and technical terms are defined in easy to understand language. Overall, the authors used simplistic language suitable for an introductory course in Criminal Justice.

Overall the writing and framework were consistent throughout the chapters. It was a little clear that different people wrote different chapters by writing style, but I'm not sure how much that would affect the overall consistency of the text or if students would notice such a thing. Each module is set up similarly, and the overall critical framework remains in each section.

The modularity of the text is a strong point. Each section can be broken down into smaller chunks and lessons. The flow of information was nice and it laid out clear learning objectives from the start of each chapter. I also thought the critical thinking questions at the beginning of each section were a nice introduction to each module and got me thinking about the material prior to reading the material.

I thought the text was logically organized and easy to follow. Similar to other introductory texts.

I really liked the interface of the text. All the sources and links worked on my PC, but I did not attempt to pull them up on my phone or tablet. Overall, the interface made it really easy to navigate. The table of contents opened up into sections, which made skipping through to relevant sections easy.

Minor grammatical mistakes and would benefit from some copyediting.

The text is inclusive and does not alienate groups or individuals with specific backgrounds, however, it also pushes some of these major issues aside.

I did not see any teaching resources available with the text. Although many professors already have some made up, having some come with the text ensures that all the information is relevant. I thought this was a pretty good introductory criminal justice text and am considering adopting this for my Summer 2020 course.

Reviewed by Ami Stearns, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, University of Louisiana at Lafayette on 11/11/19

The textbook covers many similar topics as other introductory textbooks in the field, particularly in the areas of courts, corrections, and police. However, it lacks attention to "emerging crimes" (global terrorism, cybercrime, hate crime) and victimization. While some of these concepts are introduced, such as victim typologies in Ch 1, I believe emerging crimes and victimization should be stand-alone chapters. The Theory chapter does not prioritize or attend to feminist criminology, which should be added to the canon of Very Important Theories. Further, the book could benefit from either a chapter introducing concepts of intersectionality issues, or at least incorporate concepts of race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, and ability, as these identities relate to crime and punishment, among the existing content. The chapters are short and concise, packing in critical information along with relevant links to outside media, outside readings, critical thinking exercises, and incorporation of current events/news to bring relevancy to the content. Overall, I believe the book is comprehensive enough for an introductory level class, although I wish it had supplemental materials for instructors.

I did not see any factual errors, yet much of the content and examples are geared toward Oregon culture, laws, and customs, which I know little about. I'm not sure if this is a matter of Accuracy, but please, please, please do not link to Wikipedia. To me, this is the book's most significant drawback. Wikipedia is not used as an academic source for papers, it should not be used as even a source of information about people, places, or phenomena. This reliance on Wikipedia negatively impacts the validity of the entire textbook.

The incorporation of news items as examples and links to online media, along with attention to current events in the content, means this text is relevant and up to date. If I had to complain, the textbook authors should make the examples more inclusive of the national criminal justice system overall, rather than concentrating on Oregon. As far as longevity, I have concerns about web links that may change, and wonder if the book would be better served by including links for each chapter as part of supplemental materials, as it is far easier to update supplemental materials than an entire textbook. While it is difficult to publish a textbook that remains up to date without a tremendous yearly effort, yet this book will certainly be relevant for the next few years.

The text is very accessible for first year university students, but sometimes the writing is so casual, it would be better suited to, for example, a blog. I have gone back and forth on my opinion about this characteristic of the textbook's language. On one hand, I really do not like the casual writing because it may diminish the validity of the content. On the other hand, the casual writing does lend an air of having a conversation with the reader, rather than relying on traditional textbooks' standard one-way information delivery. After considering the pros and cons, I believe that the casual writing helps distinguish this textbook from others in the field that are extremely dry (and they are all, almost without fail, extremely dry), and that this should be considered a strength. It is a very different approach to communicating with students and I would be interested to assess students' reactions to the writing style.

The presentation of content is consistent among chapters, but I do notice that some of the writers are more casual than others, so that there are stylistic differences among chapters, though it is slight. For example, some chapters use the "I" voice and some do not. Perhaps this brings up a teachable moment in class, though. I often point out to students that textbooks are not created in a vacuum, but rather are a product of real people. Some authors structure the chapters differently, which may be problematic for students who need consistency.

The modules are self contained and very easy to read. A significant strength of this book are the short modules. These are beneficial to work with students' short attention spans.

The book is organized, logical, and clear. The organization of information is similar to many other introductory textbooks in the field.

The textbook is extremely easy to navigate. I did not see any distortion problems on my monitor. Distortion may occur on different monitors, or on an e-reader, etc.

There are a few errors throughout, mainly typos or missing punctuation. The textbook would benefit from more copy editing at some point.

I do not see cultural insensitivity in this textbook, however, as I mentioned at the beginning of my review, it would benefit from inclusion of matters related to race, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc. The individuals in positions of authority in the textbook photos are not always white, which has sometimes been a problem in older criminal justice textbooks.

I have decided to pilot this textbook next year in my introductory class. If I am able to update my review with information about student reactions to the textbook and my own impressions of its value and use, I will do so.

Reviewed by Jolene Sundlie, Sociology Instructor, Minnesota State University System on 10/27/19

This text does a great job of covering a great majority of topics one would find in a typical Introduction to Criminal Justice textbook. The book combines topics that might be covered separately in a 16-17 chapter textbook, which I think is great. Instructors can expand on the topics they choose. I do wish there was more coverage on specific types of crimes, and I did not see any inclusion of cyber crime at any point in the text.

I did not see any glaring errors or inaccuracies.

This textbook is extremely up-to-date. There are many sections labeled "Current Issues" and they are, in fact, current! My only concern is how often can/will this book be updated so it remains relevant.

I found the writing to be inviting and accessible and think my students at the community college level would agree. Terms are explained well and the book includes a glossary that offers concise definitions.

I found the content and style of writing to be consistent from chapter-to-chapter, even though the authors changed from section to section. Each chapter included boxes containing additional information and discussion questions or assignment ideas.

I really liked the way this book was divided into 10 chapters and within each chapter there were several numbered sections. This would make it much easier to break up reading in a larger chapter (e.g. Chapter 1) into sections, rather than by page number. If an instructor wanted to reorder the chapters, the material would still make sense.

This textbook follows the typical and expected organization of topics for an Introduction to Criminal Justice book. Some topics that would usually be found a separate chapters were combined under more robust chapter titles.

My only criticism is that I did not care for how references were cited. Sometimes, there was a link within the text and other times a footnote. I would prefer a consistent method. Though the links all worked fine.

I found no grammatical errors throughout the book.

I did not find any comments or references that I found to be insensitive or culturally inappropriate, but there is not much coverage of race or ethnicity other than in statistics.

I could not tell if there were any instructor resources for this book. Some Open textbooks have them, some do not, but it would be helpful if there was a clearer indication if there were any. I would prefer an academic book not use Wikipedia as a reference when many of us will not accept it from our students.

Reviewed by Sarah Fischer, Assistant Professor , Marymount University on 7/26/19

This book has fairly comprehensive chapters, but lacks a conclusion or any acknowledgement of what it leaves out (gender issues in CJ, cybercrime, comparative criminal justice, etc.). It isn’t that the book needs a chapter on each of these... read more

Unfortunately, this book contains a few substantive errors (such as stating murder is the only crime for which one can receive the death penalty in the United States).

The text was finished in 2019 and consequently is very timely. It is most relevant for CJ classes in Oregon, as many of the examples and links are Oregon-specific (many pages link to State of Oregon police agency application websites, for example).

Overall, very clearly written.

Consistent in terms of terminology. The framework of the chapters varies by author—some of the co-authors here include links to great resources (podcasts, television shows, and TED talks) that could easily be the basis of assignments. Other include almost no links to outside resources.

Very easily divisible.

Well-organized chapters. Some chapters repeat information from other chapters. Chapters do not flow into each other or have ideas/themes that carry across chapters (depending on how instructor wants to use the text, could be useful or not useful).

Some image distortion in charts, graphs, and text.

Grammar and formatting errors appear in every chapter.

The book is aimed at readers with no or positive previous experiences with police and/or the criminal justice system as a whole. If that is not the experience of your students, I would recommend looking at the specific chapter of this book you intend to use—the chapters vary in their inclusivity.

Reviewed by Geraldine Doucet, Associate Professor of Criminal Justice/Juvenile Justice, Southern University and A&M College, Baton Rouge, LA on 4/27/19

Extensive and thorough coverage of the three criminal justice segments, the functions, operations, interdependence and interrelation of the three are clearly addressed from the onset. The trends, current challenges, court cases, as well as Constitutional, legal, moral, social, political issues relevant in the criminal justice system are scholarly presented. The manner in which this textbook is written, actually ‘engages with’ and ‘talks with’ the students throughout the book using statements like— “let us go back to our example (p. 18) …. or “Imaging sitting in the college classroom with (p. 17)…”). Then there are the Internet links presented throughout the textbook making further connection to the discussions at hand. These activities are presented within the discussions and not merely at the end of the chapter presentation as is the case with some textbooks. This allows the student to stay engaged with the topic of discussion as it is occurring, thereby making the knowledge powerful and impactful.

The book’s appearance is not as attractive as its content, which is rich with various illustrations, exercises, critical thinking challenges, and other activities that engages the student throughout the book. The content is easy reading both in terms of the knowledge shared as well as on the readers’ eyes. The organization of the textbook is one of its’ greatest attraction. The chapter discussions are well integrated with examples and Internet sources that illustrate the point(s) being made. Moreover, the chapters are short yet powerful with knowledge that is presented in a clear, concise, and synchronized manner.

The language used throughout the book is applicable for an introductory level course in criminal justice/criminology that makes this book student-friendly and easy to read. The use of language is crucial in any discipline, and the authors did an excellent job in their communicative delivery. In addition to the glossary at the end of the textbook, each chapter presents an illustrative use of the key concepts for students’ understanding. The modular presentation of the material does not overwhelm the student with information. By instead, allows students to absorb an adequate amount of information per chapters/sections. The materials presented in the book are powerful, descriptive, well balanced with knowledge, pictures, illustrations, activities, and especially critical thinking that engages students in the discussions.

The textbook is well organized; starting each chapter with learning objectives followed by thought provoking “knowledge probes” or “assessments activities” leading into the discussion(s). Writing (i.e., a written reaction to a situation…p.45 or p.187) and critical thinking (i.e., critical thinking questions or “what do you think” moments…p. 160) skills are highly demanding in a Criminal Justice career/field and this textbook presents opportunities to engage the students in doing both. Our students upon graduating will need scholar writing, legal writing, and some technical writing skills; therefore, any form of writing is of value.

What is in the textbook seems accurate. The problem is what is also accurate may be missing from the Textbook. More of the popular criminological theories in Criminal Justice could be more inclusive, as restated in the Clarity section of this Review.

It looks like the textbook does not address cybercrime, terrorism, nor environmental crimes. Also, there is no mentioning of hate crimes. All these types of crime are prevalent today in America and throughout the world. You may want to add these types of crimes in the revised textbook or future textbook. The textbook can also benefit and Index section, which I also mentioned under the Organization section of the Review.

In addition, it may not be a bad idea to add a brief section/caption on the growth and expansion of criminology since its origin. Discuss the subcategories of criminology, such as penology, victimology, peacemaking criminology (i.e., restorative justice), convict criminology, and green criminology (i.e., environmental crime and harm). Explain how these came about. This information can be presented either in Chapter 1-Crime, Criminal Justice, and Criminology or Chapter-5-Criminological Theory, of the Textbook.

Chapter 6-Recruitment and Hiring Websites for Future Careers—This chapter could have been more inclusive by addressing a brief history on changes in the qualifications of police officers, such as educational requirements, the introduction of on-going professional development, and/or the growth of specialization due to technology and globalization. The presentation of the Website listing of law enforcement agencies could have been accompanied by more relevant ‘TEXT’ information.

Lastly, in Chapter 10—Juvenile Justice and particularly 10.6—Due Process in the Juvenile Court the textbook acknowledged due process related landmark court cases from 1966 to 1976. The authors may want to update the due process information on juvenile matters especially since there have been over 16 more landmark cases since that time.

The clarity issue in this textbook has more to do with the presentation of materials, such as p. 201 the “Father of modern law enforcement”, yet his name is nowhere on that page where his picture is. One would have to find it on a page before. This is the same with various Tables or Charts (i.e., Mendelsohn’s Typology of Crime Victim which is mentioned as a title on page 57 and the Chart itself is presented on page 58. There is also the presentation of the positivist school of criminology with limited acknowledgement of Cesare Lombroso contributions and no picture of him; yet, there are pictures of the other men mentioned. There is no acknowledgement of Cesare Lombroso being credited with being the “Father of criminology” and why. This is somewhat missing critical information. Chapter 5 is the chapter that probably needs to be improve with greater content information and illustrations, when possible, on theories that are popular in criminal justice, like Robert Agnew’s general strain theory; Gottfredson & Hirsch’s self-control theory/general crime theory; the developmental theories, such as latent theory by Moffitt or others, and life course theories (Aged-graded Theory) by Sampson and Laub.

The picture on page 340, which is labeled “People Incarcerated in the U.S.” and the same picture on page 353 (i.e., labeled “Correctional Control by Type 1975-2016) are the same, However, on page 353 the caption underneath the picture says 'Correctional Control by Type 1975-2016', with no years are being shown. It this a mistake or is this how it is meant to be?;

Another strength of this textbook is the use of a modular approach to present the materials. This approach is manageable and self-directed, which makes it easier for students to read and absorb the knowledge. Given the fact that criminal justice/criminology are interdisciplinary/multidisciplinary studies, the modular approach is excellent. The integration of knowledge is more effective and successful. This is great for the students’ course enrichment, which is what every author/textbook should strive to achieve. It is certainly what every instructors want--for students to READ the BOOK.

Except for grammatical errors and a few suggested additions needed, the organization structure of the textbook is good. There are some problems with the flow or transition of materials when referring to pictures, tables, and/or charts. They are not always synchronizing perfectly with each other. Lastly, the addition of an Index section in the back of the book would be useful.

Excellent job combining/blending the criminal justice and criminology knowledge together without sacrificing one discipline over the other. If there is one exception, it would be Chapter 5 when blending the criminology theory that are more popular in criminal justice as oppose to sociology or psychology, for instance.

Several minor grammatical errors that needs corrections, such as font size corrections (p. 37). Revisit pages 40 and 41 with the exception of the material written in the gray boxes (or illustration captions) the words on page 40 is the exact same as the words on page 41. However, the numbered footnotes are different (8 & 13). The word “Misdemeanor” could be placed on page 56 (to include the work with the definition. Bring the caption “Mendelsohn’s Typology of Crime Victims from page 57 to page 58—with the chart—it makes for a better connection of the material. Do the same with Table 1 title (Criminal Justice Frames and Examples of Narratives) on page 114, move it to page 115 so that the Title is over the Table?

There is room for some improvement by showing greater diversity beyond black and white. This textbook is about America’s criminal justice system; let that also reflect all culture/subcultures in this great country

Overall, this is a very good beginner’s textbook for an Introduction Course and can further be useful as a supplementary and resource book as the student continues to pursue their criminal justice/criminology education. Chapter 4-Criminal Justice Policy is uniquely presented as a separate chapter. This is significant because often policy in Criminal Justice is a topic that is given a low priority or put-on-the-backburner in an Introduction course, nonetheless is vital. Nearly everything about criminal justice impacts policy, whether it involves, reform, re-entry, community corrections, sentencing, to mention a few. Chapter 4 is a great selling point for this textbook. This textbook will be read by the student because of how the material is presented—student friendly, simple, easy reading, which is significant. As an instructor, I want a book that my students would pick up to read because it is quick and easy to read with clear understanding. Moreover, the student learning outcomes postulated in the chapters can be achieved using this textbook. Except for the minor criticism offered, I like the textbook. It is my opinion that it well suited when working with students enrolled in dual-credit programs (with criminal justice as a college major) as well as an entry-level college student majoring in criminal justice.

Reviewed by Raymond Delaney, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice, Southern University at New Orleans on 4/18/19

The book addressed the key areas of the criminal justice system. Each component (courts, cops, and corrections) were reflected of key elements essential to the operation of the justice system. Please provide more detail information in a nuanced form. For someone who may not be familiar with the operation of the system or an incoming majoring student, they may have more questions than answers for their curiosity. Subjects are briefly addressed and then the section abruptly ends. Definitions could be more defined, most of the key terms had one very brief but not concise definition.

Information in each section appears appropriate. The authors may want to consider providing more substantive and clarifying depth to the subject matter. After reading certain areas, I was looking for a follow-up example or closure to the subject.

Attempt to provide key cases that change public opinion. I reviewed the authors' insight on Michael Brown and the Ferguson incident. However, the author could have drawn parallels from other landmark incidents such as Tamir Rice and Trayvon Martin. Consider including information that addresses the lack of reporting and tracking by law enforcement on excessive force. No mention of black lives matter existed.

Clarity rating: 1

Clarity would be an area or need for major or significant improvement.

The text is consistent in the subject matter. However, it is also consistently lacking depth.

The text is broken into readable and identifiable sections. Easy flow and follow through.

This section would be of great strength. The structure and flow of the text would align to most or traditional introductory textbook. The organization of the subject matter or key elements were notable.

No significant or major issues of concern.

The authors overuse too many pronouns. Perhaps, using clear subject-verb agreements as it relates to the topic could help minimize overly used terms such as “This.”

Cultural Relevance rating: 2

Cultural relevancy and sensitivity would be an area of strengthening. The text focuses heavily on the negative occurrences that affect African Americans. Rightfully so, since African Americans have faced such bigotry, hatred, and racism as an ethnicity. However, the authors may want to find leaders of significant roles in criminal justice. Search and include positive situations or stories that African Americans could be of a positivist in the criminal justice system.

I commend the authors attempt to provide a resource available to fragile collegiate students. However, the text overall lack clear and concise subject matters. The authors may want to focus on providing depth. If I were to include this in my syllabus, it would need additional resources or references that could potentially appear burdensome to an incoming freshmen/sophomore student. Please highlight major key cases and/or events that shaped and formed form public opinion and outcry.

Reviewed by Hollie Macdonald, Lecturer, Longwood University on 4/11/19

The book covers all areas and ideas briefly. The book could explain some concepts in more depth, and also explain them in a less casual way. The glossary is good but not extensive of all concepts and also lacks accurate punctuation. read more

The content is accurate but the examples are not always clear. The general idea that the author is trying to convey comes through in most examples but some of the examples leave the reader asking further questions that are never answered. The examples are great but seem like they should be added in a lecture to supplement the book, not in the book itself.

The content is up to date, uses data and resources that are relevant. If updates are needed, they will not be difficult to add.

Clarity rating: 2

The text is written clearly and with accessible prose but the author refers to themselves, "I", many times which I do not think should occur in a college-level textbook. She gives examples based on her own experience which is fine but makes the book sound like a transcribed lecture, not necessarily an academic piece.

The text is consistent but also seems very causal in its presentation of concepts.

The text is easily readable and is broken up into logical sections. The flow is good. The author does give examples throughout and makes an effort to separate examples from the concepts and chapter content.

The book is organized in a clear and logical way. The book's structure is similar to all other introduction to criminal justice textbooks that I have read and used in my courses. The book touches on policy and theory which is important in introduction to criminal justice classes because that is the material that the students will study in depth towards the end of their undergraduate education and in graduate school.

The interface was fine, no problems. The table of contents was helpful and navigation was smooth.

The glossary has inconsistent punctuation. Sentences started with the word "Because". Grammar is casual at best. Does not come across to the educated reader as professional grammar and word usage. This might be intentional to connect with less educated readers (potentially first year students taking an introduction course).

The author uses first person throughout the book which undermines the "seriousness". When students are reading this material we want them to feel as if the information is important and coming from an objective source. The book gives good information but does not seem objective with examples and stories about the author.

Overall, the book looks promising. It covers basic concepts that set the foundation for learning but there are things that could be improved. As an undergraduate level instructor in the field, who has read many similar textbooks, this one seems casual in its prose and explanations. The book could be great for a high school criminal justice class but I would not recommend as the only textbook in a college level class. If this book were to be used at the college level it would need to be accompanied by supplemental materials that provide a clear more professional explanation of the concepts.

1: Crime, Criminal Justice, and Criminology
2: Defining and Measuring Crime and Criminal Justice
3: Criminal Law
4: Criminal Justice Policy
5: Criminological Theory
6: Policing
8: Corrections
9: Community Corrections
10: Juvenile Justice

Ancillary Material

About the book.

There is a dearth of OER textbooks in Criminology and Criminal Justice, which made creating this textbook all the more exciting. At times we faced challenges about what or how much to cover, but our primary goal was to make sure this book was as in-depth as the two textbooks we were currently using for our CCJ 230 introduction course. The only way we were willing to undertake this project as if it was as good, or better than the current books students read. We have had very positive feedback about the required textbooks in the course but consistently heard how expensive the books were to buy. We also needed to ensure we met the learning outcomes outlined by SOU for a general education course, as well as the state of Oregon, to make sure this textbook helps students meet those outcomes.

About the Contributors

Alison S. Burke is a professor of criminology and criminal justice at Southern Oregon University. She earned her Ph.D. from Indiana University of Pennsylvania and her MCJ from the University of Colorado Denver. While in Denver, she worked with adjudicated youth in residential treatment facilities and group homes. She has published a variety of journal articles and book chapters related to juvenile justice, delinquency, and gender, and her primary research interests involve women and crime, juvenile justice and delinquency, and pedagogy in higher education. Her most recent book is titled Teaching Introduction to Criminology (2019).

David E. Carter joined the Criminology and Criminal Justice Department in 2008. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Cincinnati. Dave served in the U.S. Army for 8 years as a linguist prior to attending school. He has published works in the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency in the area of lifecourse research, as well as in the Corrections Compendium, where he wrote about U.S. inmate populations. He also works with local agencies (in a consultative role) providing evidence-based practices and evaluations for correctional programs in the area of effective interventions and evidence-based programming. At SOU, Dave has helped facilitate the Lock-In event and annual that provides students with a hands-on experience of the justice system.David E. Carter joined the Criminology and Criminal Justice Department in 2008. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Cincinnati. Dave served in the U.S. Army for 8 years as a linguist prior to attending school. He has published works in the Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency in the area of lifecourse research, as well as in the Corrections Compendium, where he wrote about U.S. inmate populations. He also works with local agencies (in a consultative role) providing evidence-based practices and evaluations for correctional programs in the area of effective interventions and evidence-based programming. At SOU, Dave has helped facilitate the Lock-In event and annual that provides students with a hands-on experience of the justice system.

Brian Fedorek earned his doctorate at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania in Criminology. He has taught classes in Terrorism, Comparative Criminal Justice, Theories of Criminal Behavior, and introductory courses. His research interests include media and crime, criminological theory, and criminal violence. He has served on the board of the Western Association of Criminal Justice.

Tiffany L. Morey has an almost three-decade career in the law enforcement arena. She retired as a Lieutenant from a police department in Las Vegas, Nevada. Her expertise is in the law enforcement, crime scene investigation (CSI), and forensics fields. During her tenure in policing in Las Vegas she worked in patrol, the crime prevention division, community services, recruitment, special events, problem-solving unit (first ever unit/substation for her department in a high gang and drug area), undercover prostitution and narcotics stings, search warrant service assistance, mounted unit departmental work, CSI (crime scene investigator), forensics, Sergeant and Sergeant field training program and master trainer, Lieutenant and Lieutenant field training program, and finally Acting Captain. During this time, she was also chosen and paid by an independent firm to travel the country and conduct oral board interviews and assessment center testing and recruiting for law enforcement agencies and fire departments. She developed a ground-breaking class to assist candidates in the law enforcement hiring process and is now under contract to publish the related textbook/study guide. Tiffany continues to operate in the field of CSI and forensics as an expert investigator and witness on violent crime. She also runs a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) business, offering citizens and owners of businesses CPTED reviews to ensure the safety of their homes and buildings. Finally, in her free time, she runs SOAR Wildlife Center (SoarWildlife.org), which is a non-profit organization, that rehabilitates sick, injured, or orphaned fawns and other baby mammals.

Lore Rutz-Burri is a 1982 graduate of Southern Oregon State College (now SOU) with a Bachelors of Arts degree in Criminology and Political Science. After graduating, she lived in Southern Austria until 1984. Upon returning to the states, she earned an M.C.J (Master’s degree in Criminal Justice) from the University of South Carolina. In 1985 she started in a Ph.D. program at the University of Maryland, College Park, but early on decided she would rather pursue a law degree. In 1989 she graduated “order of the coif” with her doctor of jurisprudence (JD) from the University of Oregon School of Law. Following law school, Lore clerked for the Superior Court of Alaska in Fairbanks for one year and then worked for 5 years as a deputy district attorney in Josephine County, Oregon. There, she prosecuted a variety of crimes, but mostly assault cases. In 1995, she began teaching criminology and criminal justice at SOU. Since 2015 she has been a part-time Circuit Court judge in the Josephine County courts. Lore has been married for over 27 years to her husband, Markus (a Swiss national). They have two sons– Severin (who studied at SOU and majored in psychology) and Jaston (who studied at U of O and majored in philosophy). She has both case books and introductory text on criminal law and criminal procedure.

Shanell Sanchez joined the Criminology and Criminal Justice department at Southern Oregon University in Ashland, Oregon in 2016. Prior to that, Shanell was an Assistant Professor in Criminal Justice at Colorado Mesa University in Grand Junction, Colorado. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Nebraska- Lincoln in Sociology in 2012. Her research and teaching interests are centered around social change and justice, inequality, and comparative crime and justice.

Contribute to this Page

Reviewing the Criminal Justice System

In recent years, the criminal justice system’s integrity has come into question. At one point, the country’s justice system and way of law were a beacon of light for many to see and follow. However, after decades of scandal, misuse of power, and the political polarization of society, there have been calls for changes in the criminal justice system to alter the direction that it is currently headed (Rappaport, 2020). However, before any discussion is made concerning the direction of the US criminal justice system, it is first integral to determine where is the criminal justice system currently.

Each person has their own belief of what the current state of the criminal justice system in America is like (Duarte et al., 2020). Each opinion is influenced by the information and biases that each person has. I start with this disclaimer to ensure that while I intend to be as neutral as possible, there are instances where my biases will crop up, for which, I hope, they will not interfere with the overall message.

I believe that the US criminal justice is broken but not beyond repair. One of the reasons I believe this is because of the many years that the system has run without checks and balances, which has led to abuse of power and the spread of prejudice in its ranks (Rappaport, 2020). For example, there are many cases where police officers and other law enforcement agencies, which are an integral part of the criminal justice system, have abused their authority through excessive use of power and abuse of their authority to harass and discriminate against individuals, particularly those from minority populations in the country, is evidence of the brokenness of the criminal justice system. Events such as the CRASH unit and the courts’ selective enforcement of the law show the level of brokenness of the criminal justice system (Duarte et al., 2020).

The current state of the criminal justice system is also defined by political interference (Rappaport, 2020). Through a series of events, the system, whose efficiency relies heavily on non-bias, has declared political allegiances. Granted, the individuals in the criminal justice system are American citizens and have a right to express their political views (Rappaport, 2020). However, this has led to a further spreading of the gap between the criminal justice system and the people. In particular, law enforcement has further distanced itself from people, with more civilians refusing to cooperate with them. The situation is further worsened by the new trend emerging where it is seen as cool to hate the police. There have been several instances where people have begun hurling insults at the police without provocation. There have also been instances where a mistake from the police is seen as an attack on the people rather than a genuine mistake (Duarte et al., 2020). Political polarization in the country has further worsened things. The gap between the criminal justice system and the people continues to become wider and broader.

The political influence of the judiciary flows into the judiciary as well. An integral part of the criminal justice system, the judiciary plays a vital role in guaranteeing that those found guilty of crimes are prosecuted. However, there have been instances where the judiciary has been used as a political tool (Rappaport, 2020). A good example is the appointment of individuals to the Supreme Court. The insistence on appointing Supreme Court justices with political leanings that favor the government at the time leads to the political influence of the judiciary. There have also been instances of state-led litigation where state attorney generals use the judiciary as part of the criminal justice system to sue the governor and the state (Duarte et al., 2020). This is particularly common in states where the governor and state attorney general have different political leanings.

With an understanding of the current state of the criminal justice system, it is now possible to analyze the system’s future. For one, the future involves abusing the system for political gain (Rappaport, 2020). Many have realized that one of the ways to gain political power is through the criminal justice system. This is why a good number of those in Congress are former District Attorneys or have worked in one capacity or another in law enforcement. Many in the criminal justice system also know that if they gain enough influence, they can leverage their influence for political power. The future of the criminal justice system is undoubtedly influenced by politics (Duarte et al., 2020).

The future of the criminal justice system also involves more regulation of law enforcement (Rappaport, 2020). Now more than ever, law enforcement is on a critical watch from the general public. This aims to prevent the abuse of power by these individuals. The regulation also involves a public eye on law enforcement. The regulation does not have to involve only policy but also more scrutiny of their actions (Kurlychek & Johnson, 2019). Having the public eye on the police at all times and with stricter policies on the police will undoubtedly lead to more regulation of the criminal justice system, particularly law enforcement. The judiciary is also being watched to ensure they distribute justice fairly and without bias.

The future of the criminal justice system also involves further separation between the people the system is serving and the system. The battle between Blue Lives Matter and Black Lives Matter is a glimpse into this. The fact that both camps were unable to come together and work on the issue of systemic racism facing the criminal justice system shows the extreme nature of both camps and how hard it is for both parties to agree with one another (Kurlychek & Johnson, 2019). This rift is bound to affect the communication between the two factions, which will affect the delivery of services and how issues are solved.

However, the future also brings with it a glimmer of hope. The current state of affairs in the criminal justice system has brought much concern to various stakeholders. There has arisen a group of people who have been willing to work to better the system. Various stakeholders are keen on improving the system and the current state of affairs. This shows there is hope for the criminal justice system to take a turn for the right and become the beacon it once was.

Changes in the Criminal Justice System

There have been several calls for changes in the criminal justice system. One of the significant changes is police reform. There have been various proposals concerning this endeavour. Some have advocated for defunding the police, where less funds should be allocated to law enforcement. However, a growing approach is the increased training on de-escalation and community policing. This approach also involves increased transparency and accountability mechanisms to improve community relationships between the communities and law enforcement. The likelihood of this success is minimal, as police unions are firmly against the idea of regulation of force, as they believe it would hinder their effectiveness in communities. Granted, there have been several consentions by law enforcement in this direction, including the adoption of body cameras and civilian oversight boards, which shows hope for this change (Duarte et al., 2020).

Another proposed change in the system is better funding for reentry programs. Currently, the country has one of the highest recidivism rates in the world (Graham et al., 2020). This shows the failure of the criminal justice system in this regard. The proposed change advocates for introducing educational and vocational training opportunities for incarcerated individuals. There should also be invigilation of these programs to prevent abuse from social workers and parole officers. The likelihood of his succeeding is high, particularly in liberal states (Graham et al., 2020). With bipartisan support, this can become actualized at a federal level.

There have also been calls for action to address the issue of systemic racism and bias within the criminal justice system (Graham et al., 2020). However, this has proven easier said than done. Radical individuals from both sides are arguing for strict actions to be taken. This has led to a push and pull between civilians and the criminal justice department. It is also important to note that considering the country’s history with racism, the issue is very engrained, and addressing it can be an issue due to its delicate nature. This means that the potential for success for implemented measures is minimal.

“It should be borne in mind that nothing is more challenging to take in hand, more risky to execute, or more doubtful in its accomplishment than to take the lead in introducing a new order of things,” stated Niccolo Machiavelli. “Because the innovator’s staunchest opponents are those who prospered under the previous regime, while the most ardent supporters stand to benefit from the new circumstances but are still on the fence (Machiavelli, 2011). This coolness originates partly from dread of the opponents, who have the laws on their side, and partly from the disbelief of humanity, who do not easily believe in new things until they have had a lengthy experience with them.” This quote perfectly explains the conundrum of trying to change the direction of the criminal justice system (Machiavelli, 2011). The truth is that the issue presents several challenges, and addressing them is easier said than done. However, there is hope for a better future for the criminal justice system.

Duarte, C. D. P., Salas-Hernández, L., & Griffin, J. S. (2020). Policy determinants of inequitable exposure to the criminal legal system and their health consequences among young people. American Journal of Public Health , 110 (S1), S43-S49.

Graham, A., Haner, M., Sloan, M. M., Cullen, F. T., Kulig, T. C., & Jonson, C. L. (2020). Race and worrying about police brutality: The hidden injuries of minority status in America. Victims & Offenders , 15 (5), 549–573.

Kurlychek, M. C., & Johnson, B. D. (2019). Cumulative disadvantage in the American criminal justice system. Annual Review of Criminology , pp. 2 , 291–319.

Machiavelli, N. (2011). The prince (il principe). 120 banned , 137 .

Rappaport, J. (2020). Some doubts about” democratizing” criminal justice. The University of Chicago Law Review , 87 (3), 711-814.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Related Essays

Essay on developmental psychology, navigating the interplay between actual and “ought self” characteristics, components of criminal justice, promotion of racial disparity through media, deviance and social control, how communication skills affect building connections in organizations, popular essay topics.

American Dream
Artificial Intelligence
Black Lives Matter
Bullying Essay
Career Goals Essay
Causes of the Civil War
Child Abusing
Civil Rights Movement
Community Service
Cultural Identity
Cyber Bullying
Death Penalty
Depression Essay
Domestic Violence
Freedom of Speech
Global Warming
Gun Control
Human Trafficking
I Believe Essay
Immigration
Importance of Education
Israel and Palestine Conflict
Leadership Essay
Legalizing Marijuanas
Mental Health
National Honor Society
Police Brutality
Pollution Essay
Racism Essay
Romeo and Juliet
Same Sex Marriages
Social Media
The Great Gatsby
The Yellow Wallpaper
Time Management
To Kill a Mockingbird
Violent Video Games
What Makes You Unique
Why I Want to Be a Nurse
Send us an e-mail

< Previous

Home > FACULTY-SCHOLARSHIP > FACULTY-PUBLICATIONS > 898

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The idea of "the criminal justice system".

Sara Mayeux

Document Type

Publication title.

American Journal of Criminal Law

Publication Date

Page number.

criminal justice system, criminal law, policy, punishment

Disciplines

Criminal Law | Law

The phrase "the criminal justice system " is ubiquitous in discussions of criminal law, policy, and punishment in the United States-so ubiquitous that, at least in colloquial use, almost no one thinks to question the phrase. However, this way of describing and thinking about police, courts, jails, and prisons, as a holistic "system, " became pervasive only in the 1960s. This essay contextualizes the idea of "the criminal justice system" within the longer history of systems theories more generally, drawing on recent scholarship in intellectual history and the history of science. The essay then recounts how that longer history converged, in 1967, with the career of a young engineer working for President Johnson's Crime Commission, whose contributions to the influential report The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society launched the modern and now commonplace idea of "the criminal justice system." Throughout, the essay reflects upon the assumptions and premises that go along with thinking about any complex phenomenon as a "system" and asks whether, in the age of mass incarceration, it is perhaps time to discard the idea, or at least to reflect more carefully upon its uses and limitations.

Recommended Citation

Sara Mayeux, The Idea of "The Criminal Justice System" , 45 American Journal of Criminal Law. 55 (2018) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/898

Included in

Criminal Law Commons

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately, you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

Collections

Advanced Search

Notify me via email or RSS

Author Corner

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Our ‘Broken System’ of Criminal Justice

November 10, 2011 issue

Submit a letter:

Email us [email protected]

The Collapse of American Criminal Justice

William Stuntz was the popular and well-respected Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law at Harvard University. He finished his manuscript of The Collapse of American Criminal Justice shortly before his untimely death earlier this year. The book is eminently readable and merits careful attention because it accurately describes the twin problems that pervade American criminal justice today—its overall severity and its disparate treatment of African-Americans.

The book contains a wealth of overlooked or forgotten historical data, perceptive commentary on the changes in our administration of criminal justice over the years, and suggestions for improvement. While virtually everything that Professor Stuntz has written is thought-provoking and constructive, I would not characterize the defects in American criminal justice that he describes as a “collapse,” and I found his chapter about “Earl Warren’s Errors” surprisingly unpersuasive.

Rather than focus on particular criminal laws, the book emphasizes the importance of the parts that different decision-makers play in the administration of criminal justice. Stuntz laments the fact that criminal statutes have limited the discretionary power of judges and juries to reach just decisions in individual cases, while the proliferation and breadth of criminal statutes have given prosecutors and the police so much enforcement discretion that they effectively define the law on the street.

Ironically, during an age of increasing protection for civil rights, discrimination against both black suspects and black victims of crime steadily increased. Stuntz attributes this development, in part, to the expansion of prosecutorial and police discretion—in his view, “discretion and discrimination travel together.” For example, the discretionary authority to enforce posted speed limits has enabled state troopers to be selectively severe in making arrests, and to use those arrests to justify searches for evidence of drug offenses. While Stuntz does not suggest that such discriminatory enforcement of traffic laws is itself a national crisis, it provides one illustration of the negative effects of excessive enforcement discretion.

The result, Stuntz writes, has been a serious disadvantage to African-Americans in their encounters with the American criminal justice system. While only 10 percent of the adult black population uses illegal drugs, as does a roughly equal percentage—9 percent—of the adult white population, blacks are nine times more likely than whites to serve prison sentences for drug crimes. “And the same system that discriminates against black drug defendants also discriminates against black victims of criminal violence.” As “suburban voters, for whom crime is usually a minor issue,” have come to “exercise more power over urban criminal justice than in the past,” police protection against violent felonies has disproportionately extended to suburban neighborhoods rather than the urban centers where more black individuals reside.

The “bottom line,” Stuntz explains, has been that “poor black neighborhoods see too little of the kinds of policing and criminal punishment that do the most good, and too much of the kinds that do the most harm.” In this sense and others, Stuntz concludes, our criminal justice system has “run off the rails.”

A major part of the book includes a historical narrative that identifies the sources of this discrimination against African-Americans and also explains the severity of our treatment of all offenders. The severity of the system is almost as disturbing as its discriminatory impact. In the years between 1972 and 2007, the nation’s imprisonment rate more than quintupled—increasing from 93 to 491 per 100,000 people. The rate at the end of that period vastly exceeded the analogous rate in other Western countries, which varied from 132 for England and Wales to a mere 74 in Germany and 72 in France. Moreover, during those years,

The number of prisoner-years per murder multiplied nine times. Prisons that had housed fewer than 200,000 inmates in Richard Nixon’s first years in the White House held more than 1.5 million as Barack Obama’s administration began. Local jails contain another 800,000.

Rather than a “collapse,” however, these figures suggest to me that the current system of criminal law and enforcement (like too many of our citizens) has grown obese.

Stuntz believes that two enormous migrations that led to crime waves largely define the history of crime and punishment in the United States. The first occurred during the seventy years preceding World War I when over 30 million Europeans came to America and settled primarily in cities in the industrial Northeast. The second occurred during the first two thirds of the twentieth century when seven million blacks left the rural South and moved into the same cities. To put simply Stuntz’s description of the central difference between those two migrations: during the European migration, urban politics soon produced local police forces made up of officers who were similar to and resided among the residents of the areas they were protecting—Irish-Americans trusted Irish cops from the neighborhood to treat them fairly—whereas during the black migration, the white majorities living in suburban areas selected the prosecutors and police officers who enforced the law in black urban neighborhoods.

During the Gilded Age, crime was not controlled chiefly through punishment, but rather through local democracy and the network of relationships that supported it:

Police officers sometimes lived in the neighborhoods they patrolled, and had political ties to those neighborhoods through the ward bosses who represented their cities’ political machines. Those patrols happened on foot: officers, those whom they targeted, and those whom they served knew one another. Cops, crime victims, criminals, and the jurors who judged them—these were not wholly distinct communities; they overlapped, and the overlaps could be large.

Stuntz is careful not to romanticize that justice system because he recognizes that while policing was then “more relational,” it was also “more brutal, more corrupt, and lazier,” as police officers licensed vice and merely regulated crime, rather than enforcing prohibition of it.

It is fair to infer, however, that the relationships between the police and the residents of high-crime neighborhoods have a significant impact on the amount of crime that prevails in those areas. The dramatic difference in the homicide rate in the area where I grew up and President Obama lived before moving to Washington—“Chicago’s upscale, racially integrated but mostly white Hyde Park”—and the “neighboring Washington Park, with a poor, 98 percent black population,” certainly suggests that there is a material difference in the quality of the police protection available in those neighboring areas. In Hyde Park, the homicide rate is 3 per 100,000; in Washington Park, it is 78 per 100,000.

One suggestion implicit in much of the book is that a more prompt and vigorous attempt to take affirmative steps to enlist black police officers to protect black neighborhoods with which they are locally connected might well have been wise. I am reminded of the powerful argument set forth in an amicus curiae brief filed eight or nine years ago in Grutter v. Bollinger , the University of Michigan affirmative action case.

The brief was filed by twenty-nine military leaders, including men like General Wesley Clark and General Norman Schwarzkopf and several others who had achieved four-star rank. Those amici were thoroughly familiar with the dramatic differences between the pre-1948 segregated armed forces and the modern integrated military, and their brief recounted the transition from the former to the latter. Within a few years after President Truman’s 1948 Executive Order abolishing segregation in the armed forces, the enlisted ranks were fully integrated. Yet during the 1960s and 1970s, those ranks were commanded by an overwhelmingly white officer corps.

The chasm between the racial composition of the officer corps and the enlisted ranks undermined military effectiveness in a number of ways set forth in the brief. Among these was the failure of enlisted service members to report maltreatment to their commanding officers. In time, the leaders of the military recognized the critical link between minority officers and military readiness, eventually concluding that “success with the challenge of diversity is critical to national security.” They met that challenge by adopting race-conscious recruiting, preparatory, and admissions policies at the service academies and in ROTC programs.

The historical discussion in that brief did not merely imply that a ruling outlawing comparable programs would jeopardize national security; it also implied that an approval of Michigan’s admission policies would provide significant educational benefits for civilian leaders. The reasons for taking positive steps to create a diverse officer corps in the military surely apply as well to the need for staffing urban police forces with officers who are capable of relating to the communities they are responsible for protecting. Officers who inspire the trust of members of those communities may more effectively encourage crime-reporting and other forms of cooperation by them.

Stuntz believed that our Constitution overprotects procedural rights and underprotects substantive rights. He begins his discussion on this point by criticizing James Madison’s emphasis on procedure in our Bill of Rights, which he compares unfavorably with the relatively contemporary provisions of the French Declaration of the Rights of Man. Stuntz speculates that Thomas Jefferson, through conversations with the Marquis de Lafayette of the French National Assembly, may have influenced the drafting of the French Declaration. Notwithstanding those similar origins, Stuntz notes that the French document, unlike the American Bill of Rights, contained a definition of “liberty”—“the power to do anything that does not injure others”—and a substantive limitation on the power to criminalize conduct—“only such actions as are injurious to society.” While he recognizes that those French principles did not survive Napoleon’s rule, he implies that comparable provisions in our Bill of Rights might have restricted the virtually unlimited power of legislatures in America “to criminalize whatever they wish.”

Stuntz contrasts the pen of the great James Madison with the second-rate politicians of later times, who adopted “slapdash” institutional arrangements that too easily bend to the shifting winds of local politics:

America’s justice system suffers from a mismatch of individual rights and criminal justice machinery, between legal ideals and political institutions. When politicians both define crimes and prosecute criminal cases, one might reasonably fear that those two sets of elected officials—state legislators and local district attorneys—will work together to achieve their common political goals. Legislators will define crimes too broadly and sentences too severely in order to make it easy for prosecutors to extract guilty pleas, which in turn permits prosecutors to punish criminal defendants on the cheap, and thereby spares legislators the need to spend more tax dollars on criminal law enforcement.

In Stuntz’s view, constitutional law could reduce the risk of this “political collusion” by limiting legislators’ power to criminalize and punish. Madison’s text, by focusing on procedural instead of substantive limits, ignores “the core problem” posed by the strange design of our justice system.

According to Stuntz, the basic explanation for the mismatch is that the present institutions of American criminal justice did not develop until well after the drafting of the Bill of Rights, hence that document did not provide limits tailored to those institutions. The changes that occurred in the North between the Founding and the 1850s began the expansion of the power of local and elected officials in criminal law enforcement that later facilitated the excessive discretion and political collusion that Stuntz criticizes. Private tort-like enforcement of criminal laws gave way to full-time elected criminal prosecutors; elected state judiciaries wielded greater power than their appointed predecessors; politicized legislative codes began to substitute for common law crimes; urban police forces were organized, the first having been established in New York City in 1845; and the power of juries to determine whether given conduct merits punishment was narrowed.

Rue des Archives/Granger Collection

A member of the NAACP protesting against segregated hotels and a member of the Ku Klux Klan distributing leaflets, Atlanta, Georgia, 1962

As a predicate for his analysis of the “failed promise” of the Fourteenth Amendment, Stuntz describes differences between the administration of justice in the northeastern states and the antebellum South, as well as two different kinds of violence against African-Americans during the early years of Reconstruction.

The three criminal enforcement systems in the antebellum South were the justice of courts, the justice that masters enforced over their slaves, and the justice of the mob. The second came to an end when the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery, and it seems clear that the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to end the all-too-common practice of lynching African-Americans and a surprisingly large number of their white sympathizers. Unfortunately, that practice survived the Civil War.

Stuntz provides us with brief descriptions of the two types of mob violence that illustrated the need for federal involvement in the protection of the new class of black citizens. In Memphis and New Orleans, white police officers played an active role in killing blacks, whereas in the tragic Colfax massacre on Easter Sunday in 1873, white Klansmen killed sixty-two black men—some of whom were unarmed and had attempted to surrender—without any active assistance from state officers. Broadly speaking, the Fourteenth Amendment might have been construed generously to authorize direct federal involvement in the prevention of mob violence in both types of cases, or more narrowly only to prevent state action, such as occurred in the Memphis and New Orleans mass murders.

In an Alabama case decided in 1871, then Circuit Judge William Woods interpreted the Equal Protection Clause to support the broader view: “Denying includes inaction as well as action, and denying the equal protection of the laws includes the omission to protect.” Judge Woods also reasoned that because “it would be unseemly for Congress to interfere directly with state enactments,” Congress’s power to enforce the amendment must have been intended to authorize legislation “which will operate directly on offenders and offenses.”

That broader view prevailed in a series of Klan cases, mostly in South Carolina and Alabama, which produced nearly six hundred convictions in federal courts in 1871 and 1872. It seems fairly clear that the large-scale enforcement effort by the Freedmen’s Bureau, federal prosecutors, and federal agents that produced those convictions was faithful to the intent of the Grant administration that had sponsored the Fourteenth Amendment and its implementing legislation.

The broad view, however, was rejected by the Supreme Court in the infamous case of US v. Cruikshank , decided in 1876, that arose out of the Colfax massacre. Stuntz argues that that decision is best understood as the product of political developments following the stock market collapse in 1873 that gave Democrats control of Congress. The opinion in Cruikshank emphasized the Fourteenth Amendment’s limits, concluding that it prohibited only state action and did not “add any thing to the rights which one citizen has under the Constitution against another.” Although I have reservations about accepting a political explanation for a judicial decision, there can be no doubt concerning Cruikshank ’s unfortunate effects. The Court not only set aside the conviction of one of the Colfax massacre’s leaders, who had made a sport out of lining up black men at the parish to see how many he could execute with a single bullet, but its decision also judicially constrained the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection principle in a manner that has not been undone.

Stuntz’s description of the Colfax massacre and the Cruikshank decision draws heavily on Charles Lane’s exhaustive research in his recent book, The Day Freedom Died . * Stuntz convincingly explains why the rationale adopted by the Supreme Court was neither necessary nor faithful to the promise of the Fourteenth Amendment, and how it put an end to Klan prosecutions:

The change in the nation’s political tilt wrought by the depression of 1873 was temporary, as such changes always are. The legal change was permanent. The ideal of equal protection—the notion that all Americans are entitled not only to freedom from government oppression, but to a measure of freedom from private violence as well, and the same measure their well-to-do neighbors received—was, for all practical purposes, dead. So were thousands of southern blacks who needed that protection, and needed it badly.

Whether the Cruikshank decision was faithful to the intent of the men who drafted and ratified the Fourteenth Amendment rather than to the Democratic majority that had been elected in 1874 may well be debatable. I have no doubt, however, that the 1954 Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education , which put an end to segregated public schools, represented an application of the equal protection guarantee that the original authors and ratifiers of the provision did not anticipate. Unlike Cruikshank , Brown gave effect to a broad vision of the equal protection guarantee, although not the particular broad view that Cruikshank had obliterated.

In the US v. Reese case, decided on the same day that the Supreme Court announced Cruikshank , the Court set aside convictions of Kentucky election officials for conspiracy to deprive a black prospective voter of his right to vote. They had refused to register him when he offered to pay his poll tax, but the Court held the statute unconstitutional because it did not require proof that their conduct was racially motivated. After that decision, in Stuntz’s view, “even Klan-influenced government officials were nearly unconvictable, thanks to the requirement that the omnipresent but unprovable discriminatory motive be established in every case.” Stuntz’s criticism of that decision for its overly stringent requirement of proof of motive may be correct, although elsewhere in the book he identifies the requirement for mens rea criminal intent as a valuable limitation upon law enforcement, and its absence in later statutes as a significant contributor to overenforcement of criminal law.

Stuntz identifies three Supreme Court decisions from the last three decades that he perceives to exemplify the impact of the errors that infected Cruikshank and Reese . I found that discussion especially interesting because although I had written a dissenting opinion in each of those three cases, I had not cited Cruikshank or Reese in any of those dissents. In McCleskey v. Kemp , in 1987, the Court rejected convincing evidence that in Georgia a black killer of a white victim more often receives the death penalty than when the victim is black or the killer is white, because the defendant had failed to prove a discriminatory motive by any relevant decision-maker in his own case. In US v. Armstrong , decided in 1996, the Court found insufficient justification for allowing discovery procedures in a trial judge’s firsthand knowledge about drug prosecutions, where such discovery almost certainly would have confirmed that the government tended to federally prosecute drug defendants who were black but to permit more lenient state court prosecution of those who were white. In Castle Rock v. Gonzales , decided in 2005, the Court found no constitutional violation where police failed to enforce a restraining order obtained by a mother against her estranged husband, who ultimately killed their three children.

McCleskey and Armstrong do indeed support the thesis that the Court has tolerated law enforcement practices that are discriminatory against African-Americans, but I do not re- member discrimination to be at issue in the outrageous failure of the police to do their duty in Castle Rock . Perhaps Stuntz means to suggest—consistent with his thesis earlier in the book—that the discretion afforded to law enforcers by Castle Rock , which found no constitutional entitlement to police protection, facilitates the unequal offering of police protection to crime victims of different races.

After the Court’s decision in Cruikshank , the federal government was not a major participant in law enforcement for decades. Stuntz describes the expansion of federal criminal law through the culture wars of the early twentieth century concerning lotteries, polygamy, prostitution, opium, and alcohol. In his discussion of harmful addictive substances, he does not mention tobacco but does contrast Prohibition with today’s continuing war on drugs.

Stuntz explains, “The chief drug war of the early twentieth century concerned alcohol, not any of the range of narcotics that so obsessed the late twentieth-century legal system.” Prohibition, authorized by the Eighteenth Amendment and the Volstead Act, is generally regarded as a “great disaster,” but was in fact more effective and a lesser cause of crime than often assumed. Among the benefits that Stuntz identifies were a decrease in alcohol consumption, caused in part by the significant increase in its price (a quart of gin, for example, rose from 95 cents to $5.90), and open discussion of the pros and cons of using alcohol.

While “the law of Prohibition may have been foolish,” it was also far less severe than the modern war against drugs. It did not prohibit the mere possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages, only their manufacture, sale, and transport; it exempted use in private homes and service to “bona fide guests”; and doctors were expressly permitted to prescribe the use of alcoholic drinks for therapeutic purposes. Today prison sentences are imposed for simple possession of marijuana and a long list of other controlled substances, and federal law (as upheld by the Court in a 2005 opinion that I wrote, Gonzales v. Raich ) even bars possession of home-grown marijuana prescribed to combat the nausea that attends most cancer treatments.

Stuntz describes some harms of alcohol consumption and criticizes Prohibition, but he does not address facts about Prohibition’s enforcement costs or the consequences of its repeal. Those consequences obviously included the replacement of significant litigation and imprisonment costs with generous tax revenues, and expansion of profitable commerce in the production and marketing of alcoholic beverages. On the other hand, as Stuntz’s own reasoning suggests, those consequences also likely included an increase in alcohol consumption, which continues to have serious adverse social effects today.

Such a discussion of the pluses and minuses of the repeal of Prohibition might have provided information relevant to a debate on the wisdom of current drug enforcement policies. As Stuntz mentions, the absence of developed debate among present-day political leaders about drug policies is striking in light of the openness of the debate among political leaders in the 1920s and early 1930s—such as Al Smith, the Democratic presidential candidate in 1928—about the wisdom of prohibiting alcohol. In short, while Stuntz’s discussion of Prohibition is interesting and informative, it omits a potentially valuable assessment of how the lessons from Prohibition’s repeal might bear upon, and inform political debate about, the current war on drugs.

Extending his criticism of our system’s focus upon criminal procedure rather than substance, Stuntz’s eighth chapter concerns “Earl Warren’s Errors.” That chapter title is both misleading and inaccurate. It is misleading because much of the chapter does not describe “errors,” but rather unintended consequences of decisions— Mapp v. Ohio (1961) and Miranda v. Arizona (1966)—that I think were clearly correct.

Stuntz argues that because those decisions were unpopular, they undoubtedly provided ammunition to politicians who campaigned on promises to be “tough on crime” if elected, and that the success of their campaigns in turn led to the enactment of more and harsher criminal laws, such as the exceptionally severe drug laws sponsored by men like Nelson Rockefeller. It is quite unfair to criticize Earl Warren for his “poor timing” just because the Court found it necessary to make unpopular decisions when the public was especially concerned about rising crime rates. Indeed, a paramount obligation of the impartial judge is to put popularity entirely to one side when administering justice.

As a descriptive matter, Stuntz’s discussion of those unintended consequences does help to explain the severity of today’s criminal law. (Unfortunately, however, he omits analysis of the unintended consequences of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, which, in part by curbing judicial discretion, led to a dramatic increase in the severity of federal sentences, as well as the severity of those imposed by states that adopted comparable “reforms.”)

Stuntz minimizes the importance of decisions like Miranda and Mapp , which prohibit the use of probative evidence in certain cases, because the Supreme Court has developed waiver rules that enable the police to avoid their requirements. Moreover, he argues that reliance on such rules has produced a system in which defense counsel give primary attention to the litigation of procedural issues rather than to factual investigation that seeks to come to a correct conclusion on the issue of guilt or innocence. While there is some merit to such criticism, I think it abundantly clear that the rules do far more good than harm.

With particular attention to Miranda , as Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in his opinion upholding Miranda against congressional abrogation a decade ago, the case “has become embedded in routine police practice to the point where the warnings have become part of our national culture.” Indeed, in my judgment, the decision played a major role in changing a police culture once riddled with incompetent, lazy, and brutal behavior into a law enforcement profession that is both more effective and also commands widespread public admiration for its dedicated public service.

Stuntz also comments in this chapter on the very live debate among the current members of the Supreme Court about the extent to which the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment—the right of the accused “to be confronted with the witnesses against him”—requires the exclusion of certain evidence obtained from witnesses who are unavailable at the time of trial. He is critical of two recent decisions that—like both Miranda and Mapp —require exclusion of probative evidence. I think Justice Anthony Kennedy, who dissented in both of those cases, might well have written the comments Stuntz offers. Stuntz argues that while “live witness testimony may have been the best possible means of proving guilt…when the confrontation clause was written and ratified,” “it hardly follows that it is the best possible means today” now that forensic and scientific analysis of physical evidence are more accurate. And he claims that “forcing crime laboratory technicians to double as courtroom witnesses raises the cost to the laboratories of performing the technical analysis,” which “mean[s] less analysis, and hence a less accurate adjudication system,” rather than one that reflects contemporary needs and capacities.

To the extent that Stuntz suggests that confrontation does not advance “any rational policy goal” because live witnesses are less important today than they once were, his argument is quite unpersuasive. Among other justifications, the Supreme Court majority in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts (2009), explained that “confrontation is one means of assuring accurate forensic analysis.” Cross-examination permits a criminal defendant to probe the analyst’s competence, training, judgment, and incentives or pressure for manipulation of the results. Such questioning can expose flaws in the forensic testing process that undercut the reliability of such evidence, the very reliability about which Stuntz expresses concern.

The final chapter in the book is entitled “Fixing a Broken System.” It includes an appraisal of the likelihood of achieving various reforms, their potential costs and benefits, and the political problems they present. While some of Stuntz’s suggestions invite changes in judicial doctrine, his primary focus is on the need for important legislative change. He stresses four themes that have been identified in earlier chapters.

First, he persuasively argues that putting more police officers on city streets is a policy move that should reduce both crime and the number of prisoners. By deterring crime with broader, more certain enforcement rather than heavy punishments for the few most easily caught, this policy would respond both to the problem of excessive penal severity and to the twin effects of systemic racial discrimination—excessive enforcement against black offenders and inadequate protection of black victims.

Second, Stuntz believes that judicial interpretation of the equal protection guarantee in the Fourteenth Amendment should endorse the broad view that prevailed in the early years of Reconstruction, and that was rejected by the Supreme Court in 1876 in Cruikshank and more recently in McCleskey , Armstrong , and Castle Rock . His fundamental point is that the duty to govern impartially requires the state to provide all of its citizens with equal protection against violations of the law: no class should receive less police protection than another or be punished more severely for its crimes than another. The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against disproportionate punishments also applies that equality principle. The Court’s recent decision prohibiting Florida from imposing a sentence of life without parole on a juvenile for a non-homicide offense is a step in the right direction because such a penalty is almost never imposed in other jurisdictions. Stuntz suggests other means of avoiding disparate sentencing for similar crimes.

Third, he favors allowing judges greater discretion to rein in the political overexpansion of the criminal law. He supports judicial discretion to impose lighter sentences and therefore endorses the Court’s decision in US v. Booker (2005) that essentially changed the federal sentencing guidelines from mandatory rules to advisory recommendations. By the same logic, I believe Stuntz would have opposed legislation imposing mandatory minimum penalties.

Fourth, Stuntz clearly would limit the scope of prohibition and the severity of punishment for the possession or use of drugs. Such amendments would reduce discrimination against black defendants, diminish the severity of the entire system, and make it more difficult for prosecutors to obtain guilty pleas to serious crimes that they are not able to prove. Stuntz notes the same problem—guilty pleas to unprovable crimes—resulting from a prosecutorial practice of charging offenses that make the defendant eligible for the death penalty in order to bargain the defendant into accepting a life sentence. Because of the uniqueness of the fear of death, I find that prosecutorial bargaining chip particularly offensive since it seriously risks persuading an actually innocent defendant to plead guilty and to accept incarceration for his entire life. In my view, it should not be permissible.

For each of three reasons, Professor Stuntz’s account of the “collapse” of an overgrown system of criminal law enforcement is well worth reading. It is full of interesting historical discussion. It accurately describes the magnitude of the twin injustices in the administration of our criminal law. It should motivate voters and legislators to take action to minimize those injustices.

November 10, 2011

The Real Deng

In Zuccotti Park

Subscribe to our Newsletters

More by John Paul Stevens

How state judiciaries can set an example for the federal judiciary

December 6, 2018 issue

How Justice Scalia’s understanding of the Constitution is wrong

October 23, 2014 issue

October 24, 2013 issue

John Paul Stevens served as a Supreme Court Justice between 1975 and 2010. (December 2018)

The Day Freedom Died: The Colfax Massacre, the Supreme Court, and the Betrayal of Reconstruction (Holt, 2008). ↩

An Illegal War

October 21, 2004 issue

Witness for Westmoreland

January 17, 1985 issue

The Fate of the Union: Kennedy and After

December 26, 1963 issue

Statements on ‘A Solution for the US–Iran Nuclear Standoff’

March 20, 2008 issue

Short Reviews

April 5, 1973 issue

The Perils of Secrecy

November 30, 2000 issue

Mad About Guns

December 21, 1989 issue

Save $168 on an inspired pairing!

Get both The New York Review and The Paris Review at one low price.

Already a subscriber? Sign in

Unfair: The justice system is broken, can science fix it?

From false confessions to expert testimony that juries are ill-equipped to understand, our criminal justice system needs a radical refit, says a new book

24 June 2015

New Scientist. Science news and long reads from expert journalists, covering developments in science, technology, health and the environment on the website and the magazine.

Prejudice often stands in the way of a fair trial. Can we do better? (Image: Doug Dubois & Jim Goldberg/Magnum Photos)

THE criminal justice system is flawed. Many of its key assumptions about human nature lack evidence. Deep-set prejudices make it hard for some defendants to get a fair trial. False confessions are rife. Lawyers are no more honest than anyone else, and judges no less susceptible to bias. Juries often make terrible decisions. Too many cases ride on expert testimony that jurors and judges are ill-equipped to understand.

Unfair: The justice system is broken, can science fix it?

So says Adam Benforado, in his provocative book Unfair . His criticisms are not new. The usual response from the legal profession is that the system is the best it can be, and a notable improvement on such previous incarnations as summary justice and vigilantism. But Benforado, an associate professor of law and former lawyer, thinks we could do a lot better – by bringing behavioural science into the mix.

In Unfair , he argues that most errors in criminal justice stem from the failure to take into account the frailties of human cognition, memory and decision-making. “We think we understand the factors that determine whether a cop draws his gun, where police departments and prosecutors allocate precious resources, how high a judge sets bail, and if legislators pass a tough new crime bill,” he writes. “But a growing body of scientific evidence suggests that we are not the consistent, rational number-crunchers that we suppose.”

As well as being a legal scholar, Benforado is well versed in behavioural science: the two disciplines meet in many of his papers. Much of the psychological research he presents has been documented, including Stanley Milgram’s obedience experiments and Daniel Kahneman’s studies on heuristics. But the implications for justice are less well known, and are shocking.

Consider, for example, that the police interrogation technique most commonly used in the US amounts to coercion and has led to numerous false confessions; that even with training, police officers are no better at spotting deception than anyone else; that the behavioural cues that jurors are encouraged to monitor in defendants for signs of guilt are largely meaningless; and that the lack of diversity among judges – in gender, race, background and political orientation – has resulted in a dangerously constricted notion of right and wrong.

Benforado’s solutions are radical. He recommends banning all procedures known to be troublesome, such as in-court identification line-ups (easily corrupted) and expert witnesses loyal to one side (he would make them all independent, funded by both parties). He also favours disposing of live trials, replacing them with virtual environments where participants interact using avatars. “When you don’t know if a defendant is black or white, slim or obese, old or young, attractive or unattractive, it is far less likely that biases grounded in these interpersonal differences will exert an influence.”

“The author favours replacing live trials with virtual courts where participants use avatars”

Does he expect too much from science? He is occasionally over-eager to apply laboratory findings to real-world situations. For instance, he proposes using fMRI to screen jurors for inherent biases towards certain groups, even though there is much disagreement among researchers about whether fMRI could do any such thing, and recent research shows that biases do not affect perception as strongly as is commonly supposed .

And some of his arguments end up spiralling beyond the orbit of both science and law. How can we legally resolve the insight, from social psychology research, that a person’s decision to commit a crime is part-determined by psychological and situational influences beyond their control? Unsurprisingly, he leaves that hanging.

Yet this is a book everyone in the legal profession should read, and the rest of us too, for it is as much about the confounding idiosyncrasies of everyday behaviour as inequity in law. “The main enemy of justice does not lie in the corrupt dispositions of a few bigoted cops, stupid jurors, or egotistical judges,” Benforado says. “It is found inside the mind of each of us.”

Unfair: The new science of criminal injustice

Adam Benforado

Crown Publishers

This article appeared in print under the headline “When justice goes wrong”

forensics /
books and art

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

More from New Scientist

Explore the latest news, articles and features

Apr 10, 2024 Researchers have unveiled a groundbreaking method capable of detecting drug substances from fingerprints lifted from crime scenes, which could provide fresh insights into unsolved cases. The technique is sheath-flow probe electrospray ionization. Supplied by Meg Cox M.A.Cox@lboro.ac.uk

Drug residue can be detected in fingerprints left at crime scenes

Subscriber-only

Bullet shells on the ground as members of the FBI practice their investigation techniques

Missing bullets can be identified by ricochet residue at crime scenes

fingerprint or thumbprint set isolated on white

AI can tell if prints from two different fingers belong to same person

Men and women's hands can be distinguished just from their scent

‘Thread that needle’: Kamala Harris’ criminal justice policies in California angered progressives and police

As the new Democratic standard bearer, Vice President Kamala Harris has described her contest with former President Donald Trump in blunt terms — tough prosecutor versus civil and criminal defendant .

“I took on perpetrators of all kinds, predators who abused women, fraudsters who ripped off consumers, cheaters who broke the rules for their own game,” Harris said at a rally in Wisconsin on Tuesday. “So hear me when I say I know Donald Trump’s type.”

But critics say that Harris’ record as a prosecutor, first as the district attorney in San Francisco and later as the California attorney general, reveals a political chameleon rather than a tough-on-crime top cop, according to interviews with current and former law enforcement leaders across the state, civil rights advocates and politicians.

In a statement, Harris campaign spokesperson James Singer said, “During her career in law enforcement, Kamala Harris was a pragmatic prosecutor who successfully took on predators, fraudsters, and cheaters like Donald Trump.”

Harris has written two books about her time as a prosecutor and attorney general. In her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer,” published near the end of her tenure as DA, Harris described herself as a prosecutor who was “tough on crime by being Smart on Crime,” said she promoted programs to fix recidivism and made “improving my office’s felony conviction rates my number one priority.”

Five years later, after the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, which vaulted the Black Lives Movement onto the national stage and made criminal justice reform a top issue, Harris embraced the calls for change.

In her 2019 memoir, “The Truths We Hold: An American Journey,” published while she was senator, Harris described herself as a “progressive prosecutor.”

“I knew I was there for the victims. Both the victims of crimes committed and the victims of a broken criminal justice system,” Harris wrote. “For me, to be a progressive prosecutor is to understand — and act on — this dichotomy.”

Trump and his allies are now trying to emphasize the “progressive” part of Harris’ identity. On Tuesday, the former president attacked Harris as a “radical left person” and blamed current crime in the city on her tenure as district attorney.

“Really, what you should do is take a look at San Francisco now compared to before she became the district attorney, and you’ll see what she’ll do to our country,” Trump said.

'Tough' and 'compassionate'

Harris, the daughter of an economist and a scientist , was born in Oakland, grew up in Berkeley and graduated from Howard University in 1986. She then attended the University of California law school in San Francisco, then known as Hastings, graduating in 1989, according to her congressional biography , and immediately began working as a prosecutor. She first worked at the Alameda County District Attorney’s office, prosecuting child sexual assault cases and later moved to the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office, which provides legal services to the city and represents it in civil claims; she served as head of the office’s division on children and families.

Louise Renne, who as San Francisco city attorney at the time was Harris’ boss, said she hired Harris because she was known for being “tough on the law” as well as “compassionate and kind,” Renne told NBC News in an interview this week.

In 2003, after working five years in San Francisco, Harris was elected the city’s first Black, South Asian and female district attorney.

During her seven years in that office, Harris began formulating a reputation of being a careful prosecutor committed to holding individuals who commit serious crimes accountable and helping nonviolent offenders turn their lives around.

Lateefah Simon, who started the office’s first youth offender re-entry division under Harris, praised her approach.

“She’s the only district attorney that I would ever work for to this day, because I believed the ethics that she put into the office,” said Simon, who is now running for Congress in the Bay Area as a Democrat. “She tried to create an office that was fair and balanced.”

Four months after Harris was sworn in, a gang member shot and killed police Officer Isaac Espinoza in April 2004. She declined to charge the gunman with a capital offense, sparing him from the death penalty. Harris’ decision rankled California’s political leadership.

San Francisco Police Officer Isaac Espinoza.

During Espinoza’s funeral, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., slammed Harris’ decision. “This is not only the definition of tragedy, it’s the special circumstance called for by the death penalty law,” Feinstein said at the time.

Throughout her tenure as district attorney, Harris focused on securing convictions. Felony conviction rates rose from 52% to 71%, and gun crime convictions rose to 92% in the first five years she was in office, according to her book.

“We are sending three times as many offenders to state prison [as] we were in 2001, three years before I took office,” Harris wrote in her 2009 book.

She also increased convictions for drug sellers, from 56% in 2003 to 74% in 2008, Harris noted. At the same time, Harris also implemented the Back on Track program, which provided nonviolent offenders — many of whom were low-level drug dealers — with the chance to receive a high school diploma, job training and access to available work, instead of prison sentences.

“The imperative today is both to go after the worst criminals and also to redirect the future of lower level offenders,” wrote Harris in her 2009 book.

Her relationship with progressives grew strained. She pushed for the prosecution of truancy cases — which resulted in the parents of children who were habitually absent from school being prosecuted and forced to pay fines of up $2,500 and potentially serving up to a year in jail. Some critics said the policy disproportionately affected Black families.

A Harris campaign aide said the policy was effective: "Truancy dropped by 33 percent because of the policy and it also helped people in the community — this wasn’t one or two days; this was kids missing 60 to 80 days out of a 180-day school year."

Harris also clashed with the San Francisco Board of Supervisors over a policy related to undocumented immigrants . In 1989, the board made San Francisco a “sanctuary city,” which meant that local police were generally not allowed to share any information with federal immigration agencies that they had obtained from interactions with undocumented people.

Harris, along with then- San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom , later supported a policy that would require law enforcement to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement if an undocumented juvenile immigrant was arrested under suspicion of committing a felony.

David Campos, who has served on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors as well as the Police Commission, said he and other progressives have not always agreed with Harris, but supports her bid for the presidency.

“She will be able to bring forward an experience, that perspective, that points to results where she was able to thread that needle between being tough on crime and also being reform-minded when it comes to criminal justice,” said Campos, who is now the vice-chair of the California Democratic Party.

A Harris campaign aide said, "If you’re angering the far left and the far right, you’re probably doing something right."

Prison reform

Several years after Harris was elected state attorney general in 2010, California voters passed a ballot measure that enacted sweeping sentencing reforms across the state. In an effort to relieve overcrowding in the state's prison, the proposition reclassified a list of felonies as misdemeanors, including certain drug crimes and theft — including shoplifting of property valued at less than $950.

The attorney general’s office under Harris released a summary of the law , called Proposition 47, which predicted that prison and jail populations would decrease while funding for truancy reduction programs and mental health services would rise. It also predicted that the state criminal justice system would save hundreds of millions of dollars due to the changes, and local prosecutors and sheriffs would have reduced workloads.

As of last week, prison officials reported, there were 92,480 people locked up in California’s prison systems, down from a height of more than 156,000 inmates during the early 2010s before the law was passed. But as NBC News reported last year , California’s reforms created a prison-to-homelessness pipeline, as counties were overwhelmed with an influx of returning inmates.

Violent crime, meanwhile, has increased across the state. The state attorney general’s office reported that from 2014 to 2023, violent crime had risen by more than 30% — including jumps in rapes, aggravated assaults and murders.

Although Harris didn’t take a formal position on the measure, Republicans accused her of misrepresenting Proposition 47 to the public. Steve Cooley, who served as the Los Angeles County district attorney from 2000 to 2012, blamed the rise in crime on Harris and the referendum.

“The damage has been untold and, in a sense, irreparable,” said Cooley, who ran as a Republican against Harris for attorney general. “It was beyond a bait and switch. It was fraud by misrepresentation.”

California Attorney General Kamala Harris

Critics also blame a rise in retail theft in California on Proposition 47. They say the reforms enable serial shoplifters to cycle in and out of police custody with little accountability. Even if they are repeatedly arrested, they are only charged with misdemeanors as long as the goods are valued at less than $950.

Frustration over shoplifting is now driving voters to try to amend the law. In November, California residents will decide whether to amend Proposition 47 to allow people with two theft convictions to be charged with a felony after being caught stealing a third time. It would also permit judges to sentence repeat “hard drug” offenders to prison instead of jail.

Douglas Eckenrod, a former deputy director of parole for the California prison system, who is now running for sheriff as a Republican in Sedona, Arizona, said Harris was too lenient on criminals.

“Kamala Harris is not a hard-liner [on crime],” Eckenrod said. “Prop 47 couldn’t happen without the AG’s office support. Her support of it was literally critical.”

In 2017, Harris left her post as California’s attorney general after being elected to the U.S. Senate.

Police reform

Harris’ relationship with both police officers and police reform activists has been fraught.

When she ran for attorney general in 2010, the San Francisco police union president did not back her, citing her refusal to seek the death penalty in the killing of Officer Espinoza. “That is a relationship that is never going to be OK,” union boss Gary Delagnes told SF Weekly at the time.

Harris also attracted criticism from those on the left. Civil rights attorneys and police reform advocates lambasted her for failing to charge police officers who they said had used excessive force in deadly confrontations.

John Burris, an Oakland-based civil rights attorney who has sued police departments and officers across the state, said he couldn’t recall a police violence case that Harris, as San Francisco district attorney and later as California attorney general, chose to prosecute. But he added, prosecutors during that era rarely challenged police officers.

“It’s no secret that prosecuting police in shooting cases is an uphill battle for the most part,” Burris said. “I thought that she appreciated those issues, even though I didn’t necessarily agree with the ultimate decision.”

Harris also rarely used a state law, enacted in 2001, that allows the attorney general to investigate problematic local law enforcement agencies for widespread abuses. In December 2016, weeks before she was sworn in as senator, Harris announced that her office would investigate the Kern County Sheriff’s Office and the Bakersfield Police Department over allegations of excessive force and serious misconduct.

A spokesperson for California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, defended her record and said in a statement to NBC News that Harris also opened an investigation into the Stockton School District and its school police department. The California Department of Justice later found that the Stockton school district had referred a disproportionate number of Black, Latino and disabled students to law enforcement.

The spokesperson also noted that Harris launched an open data initiative that releases the number of law enforcement officers killed or assaulted on the job, the number of people who die in custody, and the number of arrests and bookings. She also announced new requirements for reporting officer-involved shootings and use of force incidents.

Despite complaints that she failed to hold police accountable for abusive behavior, Harris said in her 2019 memoir that she supported the mission of Black Lives Matter. She credited the protests for motivating her to make several policy changes.

Harris wrote that she required officers in California to attend anti-bias training and ordered some state-level officers to start to wear body cameras.

“I was able to do it because the Black Lives Matter movement had created intense pressure,” Harris wrote. “By forcing these issues onto the national agenda, the movement created an environment on the outside that helped give me the space to get it done on the inside.”

CORRECTION: A previous version of this article misstated where Harris grew up. She grew up in Berkeley, not Oakland (where she was born).

Alexandra Chaidez is an associate producer with the NBC News Investigative Unit

Simone Weichselbaum is a national investigative reporter for NBC News, focusing on local and federal law enforcement issues. She previously was a police reporter for The Marshall Project, the New York Daily News and the Philadelphia Daily News. She holds a graduate degree in criminology from the University of Pennsylvania.

Andrew Blankstein is an investigative reporter for NBC News. He covers the Western U.S., specializing in crime, courts and homeland security.

5 Things to Know About Kamala Harris’ Criminal Justice Record

Here’s where vice president kamala harris, a former prosecutor, stands on important criminal justice issues..

Vice President Kamala Harris, an Indian and Black woman with medium skin tone wearing a black suit, looks to the left while holding a microphone. She is sitting on a chair in front of three American flags.

President Joe Biden, who announced the end to his re-election bid in a letter on X, has endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to replace him on the Democratic ticket.

Now, Harris’ record on criminal justice — as a former prosecutor, senator and 2020 presidential candidate, as well as vice president — will face new scrutiny. In recent years, the country has witnessed protests following the murder of George Floyd , pandemic-related fluctuations in crime rates , as well as heated rhetoric over immigration and crime . Where does Harris stand on these and other criminal justice issues?

Here are five things to know:

The Biden-Harris Administration has a mixed record on criminal justice reform.

Over the last three and half years, the administration has promoted some criminal justice reforms — but its track record has come under criticism from advocates.

Following two mass shootings — one at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and another at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York — Biden signed into law the Safer Communities Act in 2022. The legislation marked the first substantial package of gun safety laws in nearly 30 years, included a new law on gun trafficking , and expanded an existing law preventing people convicted of domestic abuse from owning a gun.

But efforts on many issues that Biden campaigned on — like ending the federal death penalty and pledging to undo former President Donald Trump’s immigration policies — have not materialized .

Harris’ early missteps on immigration could be used against her.

One of Harris’ first assignments as vice president in 2021 was a diplomatic role at the U.S. Southern border, but the rollout was fairly disorganized. News headlines described Harris as the “ point person on immigration ” — but the vice president doesn’t oversee the border; the U.S. Department of Homeland Security does.

This, combined with verbal slip-ups in press interviews, including a viral clip from a speech in Guatemala — in which she told people who were considering making the “ dangerous trek ” to the U.S.: “Do not come. Do not come.” — bruised her image.

In June, Biden announced an executive order to bar migrants who unlawfully cross the southern border from seeking asylum. The order is conditional and goes into effect when crossings “ exceed our ability to deliver timely consequences ,” according to an announcement from The White House. Advocates have decried the move, saying it raises the bar for asylum seekers.

Republicans have seized on Harris’ earlier flubs on immigration and for years have referred to her as the “border czar” — a jab that also came up again during the Republican National Convention.

During the Republican convention, former presidential candidate Nikki Haley said: “Kamala had one job. One job. And that was to fix the border. Now imagine her in charge of the entire country.”

Harris has billed herself as a “progressive prosecutor” — but her record is complicated.

Before joining the U.S. Senate in 2017, Harris spent years as a prosecutor in California, including as the San Francisco District Attorney and the state attorney general. It’s difficult to fit her time in those roles into a clear box as a “reformer,” a “progressive” or as a “tough-on-crime” campaigner, in large part because those definitions have changed substantially since her prosecutorial career began decades ago.

According to Jamilah King, writing for Mother Jones in 2018, “Harris has long tried to bridge the tricky divide between social progressivism and the work required as a prosecutor — sometimes more successfully than others.” One characteristic example: As San Francisco district attorney, Harris vowed not to seek the death penalty, but as California attorney general, her office argued it should stand.

In her 2019 memoir, “The Truths We Hold: An American Journey,” Harris observed, “America has a deep and dark history of people using the power of the prosecutor as an instrument of injustice.”

But critics on the left have frequently criticized Harris over a record they say has fueled mass incarceration.

In a first-of-its-kind town hall hosted by and for incarcerated people and their loved ones that same year, Harris touted her record as a prosecutor and district attorney. She singled out a small reentry program called “ Back on Track ,” for people charged with first-time, nonviolent offenses, like low-level drug sales.

In 2020, Harris ran to the left of Biden on key issues regarding incarceration and policing.

During the 2020 presidential primary, Harris worked to shed some of her tough-on-crime image and ran to the left of Biden on most criminal justice issues , including solitary confinement, federal mandatory minimum sentences and decriminalizing border crossings.

Candidates Harris and Biden also split on clemency. It’s one of the few criminal justice realms where the president has the power to make sweeping unilateral changes by releasing people from federal prisons.

Harris proposed creating a federal sentencing review unit that would consider early release for people who have served at least 10 years of sentences of 20 years or more. So far the Biden administration has been comparably restrained on clemency, approving a smaller share of petitions than any president in recent history.

Harris also outflanked Biden on policing reform, saying she would support a national standard for police use of force, and proposing a new federal board with the power to review police shootings. The effort, popular with some policing think tanks, would function like National Transportation Safety Board reviews of airplane crashes.

After nearly four years as vice president, some of Harris’ positions may have changed.

The national criminal justice landscape has changed dramatically since Harris’ 2020 presidential bid and her time as a prosecutor in California. The murder of George Floyd , increased crime rates amid the COVID-19 pandemic , and record crossings at the southern border are just a few of the events that have reshaped the political landscape over the last five years.

Those events have pushed some voters and politicians toward endorsing “tough on crime” policies, and have fueled ideological conflicts in a Democratic Party that — as recently as 2020 — largely backed reforms to a system they saw as overly punitive. That means it’s less obvious which approach Harris would take as the party’s standard-bearer.

Harris has also spent the past year rehabbing her image following the missteps earlier in her term, with people in her close circle observing a more confident vice president. Harris has made more than 60 trips so far this year, speaking on issues related to race, abortion rights, and the war in Gaza.

Our reporting has real impact on the criminal justice system

Our journalism establishes facts, exposes failures and examines solutions for a criminal justice system in crisis. If you believe in what we do, become a member today.

Jamiles Lartey Twitter Email is a New Orleans-based staff writer for The Marshall Project. Previously, he worked as a reporter for the Guardian covering issues of criminal justice, race and policing. Jamiles was a member of the team behind the award-winning online database “The Counted,” tracking police violence in 2015 and 2016. In 2016, he was named “Michael J. Feeney Emerging Journalist of the Year” by the National Association of Black Journalists.

Lakeidra Chavis Twitter Email is a staff writer for The Marshall Project. She has written extensively on gun violence and gun enforcement in Chicago, as well as Black suicides, gang structures and the opioid crisis. Her work currently focuses on juvenile justice. She previously reported at ProPublica Illinois and for NPR stations in Chicago and Alaska. Lakeidra was a 2021 Livingston Award finalist. She lives in Chicago, Illinois.

Stay up to date on our reporting and analysis.

Sample details

Criminal Justice

Criminal Justice System

Is the Criminal Justice System Broken

Our criminal justice system is violating our values as a people. A nation that savors liberty now incarcerates more human beings than any other nation on the planet. Like in any other system, it always needs adjustments. We need to have a Criminal Justice System that is effective and that prosecutes individuals in a fair way to ensure that we as a society are able to maintain peace, order, and security. The outcome of a case I read about a Chicago police officer who shot seventeen-year-old shows a broken criminal justice system not just an injustice by a single police officer and it was all based on racism. Too often arrest is not being applied in a way that reflects our belief in equality under the law. As a society, we have to acknowledge when we are locking up these many people with this kind of frequency. Our criminal justice system isn’t broken. The glaring racial inequity is actually a result of how the justice system was designed to work, a system with an undeniable historic connection to slavery that was outlawed a century ago. During the 1960’s, the criminal justice system faced serious challenges regarding racism. Today many fear that racism is becoming a serious issue in our criminal justice system. CBS News poll reported that about three-fourths of blacks said they thought that the criminal justice system was biased against African-Americans and that police were more likely to use a deadly force against a black person than a white person.

There are many ways law enforcement can improve by giving better training to help officers deal with situations that escalate too quick so that incidents don’t happen. It is extremely difficult to prove if an officer is being racist because the supreme court requires that you offer a conscious racial bias or some kind of admission in order to even get in the courthouse door. The single most important thing we can do to eliminate racial bias in the criminal justice system is to end the war on drugs. The drug war is responsible for the arrest, incarceration, and branding of millions of people of color as felons. Drug use, abuse, as well as drug dealing, is just as prevalent in white communities as it is in poor communities of color but the drug war has been waged almost exclusively in ghetto communities resulting in what I believe is racial undercast.

ready to help you now

Without paying upfront

In a speech, President Obama proposed an overhaul of the criminal justice system. He mentioned how in too many cases the criminal justice system is a pipeline from underfunded schools to overcrowded jails. He said we needed to minimize the sentencing of non-violent drug crimes. He also mentioned prison conditions and how we should not be tolerating overcrowding, gang activity, and rape in prison. He talked about how we should give formal prisoners who have done their time and are now trying to do the right thing, a decent shot in job interviews and ban the question on job applications that asks if they have ever been convicted of a felony. We should also restore voting rights for those who have served their sentences.

Cite this page

https://graduateway.com/is-the-criminal-justice-system-broken/

You can get a custom paper by one of our expert writers

Check more samples on your topics

Pros and cons of criminal profiling criminal cases criminology.

Criminology

Many people who hear person say they are a condemnable profiler they are inclined to believe of T.V. depicted shows such as Profilers, Criminal Minds and films like Silence of the Lambs. Unfortunately, these illustrations portray a glamourous categorization of capturing felons ( Fulero and Wrightsman, pg.79 ) .Condemnable profiling is considered to be the

The Differences Between Criminology and Criminal Justice

While I am not a criminal myself, I have long been fascinated by the world of crime and seeking to comprehend the reasons behind it. The motivations for committing crimes and the persistence of illegal behavior in spite of harsh consequences have always intrigued me. For numerous years, criminologists have delved into these inquiries and

Ethics in Criminal Justice

I believe a top ethical issue within the criminal justice system is that known as the Blue Code of Silence. This is an unwritten law amongst Police officers to not report things they see their fellow officers engage in, whether it be inmate abuse to not accounting all narcotics obtained in a seizure. When investigations

Questions: Forensic science. The Criminal Justice System.

Crime scene

Forensic Psychology

Review Questions 1. What is forensic science? The application of science to the criminal justice system 2. What three tasks or responsibilities does a forensic scientist have? Three responsibilities of a forensic scientist are collect and analyze evidence, and train other law enforcement or officials in how to record and collect evidence 3. What criteria

Criminal Justice Careers

For this assignment I have chosen the three criminal justice career fields that interest me the most and what I may pursue once my Air Force career has come to an end. I will discuss of course being a police officer since that is what I do in the Air Force, the next is ATF

Why I Became Criminal Justice Major

A rarer in Criminal Justice could be bother rewarding and exciting. Although, the career has a high risk of danger, but being TABLE to capture someone who has harmed another human beings is a great reward. If do decide to become a law enforcement officer, I'll be TABLE to help keep criminals off the streets

Examples of experimental research in criminal justice

The importance of keeping the criminal justice system updated with technological advancements in order to effectively combat crime cannot be overstated. It is crucial for the success of these organizations to adapt to these changes. This article will explore the use and implementation of criminal justice organizations, behavior theories, societal and organizational diversity impact, as

Measured Injustice in the Criminal Justice System

Feminism, the empowerment of women, is inherently one of the most complete terms for the pursuit of justice and the preventing of crimes against women in the criminal justice system. There are many ills of the criminal justice system. Radical changes in crime control and sentencing policies have led to an unprecedented escalation of the

A Comparative Study of the Criminal Justice System of Different Countries All Over the World

You are to be sentenced death by stone!" Your punishment is to cut off the arm that has chosen to steal!" All these statements or sentences were given or can be given to Saudi Araba citizens for certain criminal acts. One might believe that one's own country, religion, or culture is better or right and

Hi, my name is Amy 👋

In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

Home / Essay Samples / Law / American Criminal Justice System / Discussion Is the Criminal Justice System Broken

Discussion Is the Criminal Justice System Broken

Category: Law
Topic: American Criminal Justice System

Pages: 4 (1808 words)

Downloads: -->

Introduction

Parts of the criminal justice system, sentencing and correction, problems of the criminal justice system, the process a criminal goes through in the system.

https:www.freemalaysiatoday.comcategorybahasa20190722sprm-tangkap-hakim-dalam-siasatan-kes-lepas-pendatang-haram, Sunday, 18 July 2021
https:www.masterproblems.com201311problems-in-criminal-justice-system.html#:~:text=5 major problems with the criminal justice system,that this is easier wished for than done. , Sunday, 18 July 2021
http:mathews.mythe-different-types-of-sentencing-in-criminal-law , Friday, 16 July 2021
https:www.ojp.govncjrsvirtual-libraryabstractscorrection-young-offenders-malaysian-prisons , Friday, 16 July 2021
https:www.upcounsel.comlectl-some-background-on-the-criminal-justice-system-of-malaysia Thursday, 15 July 2021

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

First Amendment Essays

Justice Essays

Advocacy Essays

Second Amendment Essays

Cyber Crime Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->