Favoritism in the American Judicial System

2056 Words5 Pages

Favoritism in the American Judicial System

OUTLINE

I. Introduction

II. Youthful Offenders

A. Mistaken Notion of Leniency

B. Proof of Increased Effort to Criminalize Youthful Offenders

1. Stronger Penalties

2. Prison Population

C. Preventative Affects

III. Drug & Violent Crimes

A. Mistaken Notion of Leniency

B. “Get Tuff” Attitudes

IV. Incarceration Issues

V. Conclusion

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………………v

Statement Of Purpose……………………………………………………..1

Youthful Offenders…………………………………………………….….1

Drug & Violent Crime Cases……….………….………………………….4

Incarceration Issues………………………………………………………..6

Works Cited………………………………………………….…………….7

Favoritism in the American Judicial System

Statement of Purpose

As crime in America seems to be decreasing, reports from law enforcement experts state that: violent crimes are expected to increase (Butterfield 6). Many people feel that the American Judicial System treats the criminal as a victim, therefore, favoring the criminal. The American judicial system, however, has taken an attitude that “Perpetrators not only deserve blame but are worthy of it, in the fullest, most human sense of the word” (Reidinger 98). Despite the popular belief that the American Judicial System favors the criminal, in reality, this system imposes strict penalties in the majority of criminal defense cases in this country.

Youthful Offenders

Crime in the United States appears to be increasing and gives the general public

a mistaken notion of leniency toward youthful offenders. Underage students on college campuses, for instance, continue consuming alcohol at alarming rates; yet, some colleges merely fine students rather than demanding them to face their legal punishment. Most psychologists maintain the theory that a young child who commits a cold-blooded rape and murder cannot tell the difference between “fantasy and reality” leaving the public to feel this child has gotten away with murder (Adler n.pg.). According to a report from the Justice Department, all states may now charge juveniles as adults giving judges and prosecutors the power to file major youth felony cases in adult courts (Adler). These new changes in law have, in fact, led to stiffer penalties and increase prison sentencing.

The judicial system has also proven its effectiveness by the rise in ...

... middle of paper ...

...rectional Center for Women, Raleigh, NC.

Telephone interview. 5 Mar. 2000.

Johnson, Kevin. “Youth in Adult prisons double, Increase is reflection of states’ hard

line.” USA TODAY 28 Feb. 2000: 1A.

Lawrence, Jill. “Similar agendas, dissimilar approaches.” USA TODAY 28 Feb. 2000:

11A.

Leinward, Donna. “Michigan, Federal laws address children and guns.” USA TODAY

1 Mar. 2000: 3A.

Murphy, Caryle. “Underage Students Still Have Easy Access to Bars, and Experts Decry

a culture of alcohol.” Washington Post 12 Mar. 2000: C01.

Powell, General Colin. “Left To Myself.” Newsweek 27 Apr. 1998

http://www.newsweek.com/nw-srv/issue/17-98a/nw-980427_032_1.htm. 11 Mar. 2000.

Reidinger, Paul. “The making of a victim.” ABA Journal Apr. 1996: 98.

Department of Justice Miami, FL. Executive Summary Department of Justice,

5 Dec. 96 through 1 Jun. 97.

Sniffen, Michael. “Federal Drug Sentences Declining.” Washington Post 13 Mar. 2000:

C12.

Wall, Lucinda. Former Inmate, Raleigh Correctional Center for Women, Raleigh, NC.

Interview. 5 Mar. 2000.

Young, Rebecca. “Bad News In Massachusetts.” ABA Journal Nov. 1996: 42-47.

Open Document