U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

TOWN HALL FORUM ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE

NCJ Number
62055
Author(s)
ANON
Date Published
1976
Length
22 pages
Annotation
A TRANSCRIPT IS PRESENTED OF AUDIENCE AND PANEL INTERCHANGES AT A 'TOWN HALL FORUM ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE' SPONSORED BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SECTION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN AUGUST 1975.
Abstract
THE FORUM DEALT WITH THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: (1) DID PRESIDENT NIXON'S PARDON DECREASE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM? (2) WILL MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES HELP TO REDUCE CRIME? (3) WHAT SAFEGUARDS ARE NEEDED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL TO USE ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE? (4) WOULD THE SYSTEM FALL APART WITHOUT 'PLEA BARGAINING'? (5) WHAT ABOUT THE VICTIM? (6) IS THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 'NO-WOMAN'S LAND'? (7) SHOULD THE INSANITY DEFENSE BE ELIMINATED? SOME PARTICIPANTS FELT THE NIXON PARDON WAS APPROPRIATE IN THE INTEREST OF NATIONAL MORALE, WHILE OTHERS FELT IT UNDERMINED CONFIDENCE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AS A DISPENSER OF EQUAL JUSTICE FOR THE POWERFUL AND THE INSIGNIFICANT. MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCES ARE VIEWED AS INEFFECTIVE IN REDUCING CRIME AND DESTRUCTIVE TO INDIVIDUALIZED SENTENCING. WHILE THERE WAS SOME CRITICISM OF THE USE OF THE EXCLUSIONARY RULE AS A TOOL TO CURB POLICE ABUSE OF A SUSPECT'S RIGHTS, THERE WAS SENTIMENT NOT TO ABOLISH ITS USE UNTIL ALTERNATIVE MEANS FOR DEALING WITH ABUSIVE POLICE PRACTICES ARE DEVELOPED. SOME FAVORED ABOLISHING PLEA NEGOTIATIONS BECAUSE THEY ENCOURAGE COMPROMISE WITH RENDERING JUSTICE, WHILE OTHERS BELIEVE PLEA NEGOTIATIONS AID IN OBTAINING CONVICTIONS OF GUILTY OFFENDERS WHO WOULD NOT BE CONVICTED IN A FULL ADVERSARIAL TRIAL. COMPLAINTS WERE LODGED THAT WOMEN ARE NOT ADEQUATELY REPRESENTED AMONG CRIMINAL JUSTICE PERSONNEL AND ARE NOT TREATED EQUITABLY AS DEFENDANTS. THE INSANITY DEFENSE WAS ADVOCATED BECAUSE OF THE INAPPROPRIATENESS OF ESTABLISHING CULPABILITY UNDER THE CONDITION OF MENTAL DISABILITY. (RCB)