Lenient criminal justice system in need of reform

Monday, May 6, 1996

Changes in legal system, tougher laws, sentencing should be
enacted soon

I am continuously surprised at the leniency and ineffectiveness
of our criminal justice system. Even after a fourth arrest for rape
in 1993, Edward Patrick Morgan returned to the streets. The
following year he raped, mutilated and killed another woman (for
which he was convicted this month). My question is, why was this
wacko (and others like him) out on the streets?

Think that’s bad? Then you haven’t seen the number of repeat
felony offenders who could each list enough arrests and convictions
to probably fill up a small blue book.

The system, as a whole, sucks. Plain and simple, no ands, ifs or
buts about it. It fails to punish criminals adequately, fails to
protect society’s interests, fails to protect the people from
repeat offenders and wastes countless taxpayers’ dollars in the
process. Something needs to change.

There are a few ways to address changes in the justice system.
We should focus on jury reform, tougher sentencing laws, prison
reform and changes in the legal system. The combined effect of
these reforms will serve to improve America’s criminal justice
system dramatically.

Jury reform was endorsed last week by the state Judicial
Council’s high-powered Blue Ribbon Commission. They have proposed a
system where an 11-1 jury vote would be required to decide the
outcome of a jury trial. Unanimity is a tough thing to require from
12 different personalities. A better proposal would allow only a
10-2 vote in all criminal cases (except capital offenses). This
change will bring more efficiency to the jury system and will
reduce the incidence of hung juries.

Tougher sentencing and harsher punishment for criminals has
become a battle cry for many average Americans (liberals and
conservatives alike). California’s three-strike law for repeat
offenders and one-strike proposal for serious rapes are steps in
the right direction. But a law similar to Georgia’s two-strike
proposal for violent offenders would be better. Two violent crime
convictions, and you can kiss your life and future goodbye. Good
night, see ya! There are plenty of other people in society that we
need to worry about. Twice convicted violent criminals don’t
qualify for my sympathy.

Assemblyman Bill Hoge has a good proposal right here at home.
Under his bill, repeat child molesters would face chemical
castration. What parent would oppose protection from child
molesters for their kid?

But the essential question is, what good are tougher laws if
they aren’t enforced? Almost no good. Prosecutors and judges need
to apply the law as it is without injecting their own biases.
Judges don’t have the right to dismiss three-strike cases because
they don’t agree with the law. If they cannot uphold the law that
they swore to uphold, I suggest that they find another
occupation.

I’ll be the first to admit that judges have been scapegoated for
many of the criminal justice system’s problems. Bob Dole is
somewhat off-base when he blames society’s violence on "liberal"
judges. Many of these people are just enforcing the law. It’s the
laws that have to be changed first, the judges only to a lesser
extent.

Tougher laws require more prisons and places to put criminals.
Proposals to increase prison funding need to be supported.
Criminals shouldn’t be paroled out of prison simply for a lack of
space. Yes, but prisons do cost money.

Some of the cost of increased prison building can be offset by
cuts in benefits to prisoners. No unemployment benefits, no weight
training gyms, no Pell Grants, no televisions. Prison is FOR
punishment. Furthermore, there seems to be nothing wrong with
forcing additional prisoners to do work while they are
incarcerated. Put these people to work to help boost our
economy!

The legal system needs to be revised to allow wider exceptions
to police’s "good faith" violations of search and seizure.
Technicalities should not allow guilty parties to go free from
crimes. It is the Constitution and our laws which must be
amended.

Judges need to be granted additional power in order to prevent
the dismissal of criminal cases simply on the bases of a
technicality. If a cop made a mistake during questioning, the cop
should be sanctioned. This should not mean that a criminal gets to
escape prosecution scot-free.

Changes in habeas corpus have already been approved by the
commendable anti-terrorist legislation that the president signed
last month. They will dramatically limit federal judges’ ability to
intervene in capital cases, and they will restrict death row
appeals.

A final piece in reforming our criminal justice system must be
the expanded enforcement of the death penalty. It has never been
applied correctly in this country. We barely execute 30 people a
year in this country. Thousands more sit on death row and waste
taxpayer money filing unnecessary appeals.

Most murderers and rapists should get nothing but a one way
ticket to death row, where they should expect execution within
three years. Only one appeal should be allowed to death row
inmates. With the number of violent offenders in our prisons today,
there should be 30 executions every week. We don’t have the time,
resources or concern (in my case) to sit here and feel sympathy for
the rights of deranged psychopaths.

With the death penalty enforced quickly and efficiently, the
taxpayers can be spared the expense of numerous death row appeals.
I guarantee that the execution of our most violent criminals can be
cheaper than incarcerating them for their lifetimes, if it is done
in the manner I described above. Let’s spend our money somewhere
else, anywhere else!

Patel is a fourth-year political science student. His column
appears on alternate Mondays.