There are many battles fought by attorneys in the criminal
field, but only two main battles are fought in the courtroom: the
guilty/not-guilty verdict, and the sentence. In most situations involving
juries, these two battles are fought in two different theatres of war, the jury
decides the verdict and the judge decides the sentence. However there are currently
six states that allow the jury to conduct sentencing as well as a guilty/not
guilty verdict: Arkansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and Virginia.
As Felony Jury Sentencing in Practice: A Three-State Study explains, the theory behind jury sentencing is very flawed. In theory it is
supposed to gauge the sentiment that the public has towards certain crimes and
give the people the power to put people in prison for the amount of time that
they see fit due to the crime that they have been deemed to have committed.
Unfortunately, the reality is that juries are given one lone job, in a sea of ongoing
litigation. The juries are currently given sentencing guidelines which they
then follow. My question is: if we trust the juries to make decision of guilty and not
guilty, why can we not trust them to also make the decision of how long the
defendant. that they have put behind bars, should lose his freedom?
To make a necessary change in our legal system we have to
find a way to get people out of prison. As of today the United States has
around 2.2 million people currently incarcerated which is the largest prison population in the world. This is largely due to long sentences given to prisoners who do not necessarily
deserve to have their lives wasted away in a prison cell. There are countless
stories of young men being placed behind bars for the majority of their adult
life for a mistake that can be chalked up to immaturity. If we chose to give
juries the freedom to choose their own sentences rather than use the guidelines
given to them by a higher power, would that not give the people more democracy
in regards to the criminal justice system than we currently have? By giving the
juries the ability to have a full range of sentences at their disposal we would
get a more democratic approach to the legal system, and while the ranges of punishments
for like offenses would probably vary greatly among regions, we would get to
see how people truly felt about certain crimes and how they should be punished.
I believe that if we are going to give the duty of sentencing to the jury, we
should give them the freedom to decide how long they are going to take freedom
away from someone else. If they get out of control, we can always just do what
the rest of America does… let the Judge decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment