This post is something I have been thinking on for a while, but Laura McWilliams prompted me to post it with her Love of the Law, part 2 post.
I went into law school with a gut feeling that I could never defend criminals, and that if I went into Criminal Law it would be as a prosecutor.
Then I was introduced, through the eyes of cases skimmed during class and through the perspective of the Criminal Defense attorneys I “met” through twitter, to the Criminal Injustice system of our country.
I mentioned in an earlier post that my Maryland Criminal Practice class was taught by Judge Dana Levitz. Judge Levitz was the State’s Attorney in Baltimore County for a number of years, and he has many incredibly interesting stories from his time as a prosecutor.
I think the best way I can sum up the way I feel about criminal law now is with the following story:
One particular story involved two young men who were driving in a pickup truck, on their way to rob a colored tile store. While en route, they saw an older gentleman driving a moped. The passenger of the of truck told the driver that “he was going to get that moped” and to pull up alongside the older man. When the truck caught up and was even with the moped, the passenger reached out the window with a gun and shot the older man in the head. At that point, they drove off.
An oncoming car witnessed the truck pulling even with the moped, heard a loud bang, and saw the old man fall. The witnesses called 911 and the police caught the two men in the truck, but they had no idea which of them actually shot the older man.
During interrogation, the driver gave a statement with all of the information — that they were going to rob a store, that the passenger told the driver to pull up and that he didn’t know what the passenger was going to do, and that the passenger shot the older man. It turned out that the passenger had a long history of violent crime, and it was the driver’s first offense. The driver had just graduated college, and was joining the Navy. The prosecution cut a deal with the driver; if he testified, the State would only ask for 20 years. The State asked for death for the passenger.
While hearing this horrific story from the prosecutor of the case, the first thing I felt was pity and sympathy for the victim and his family. I mean, I really felt for them; ever since I had kids, I find myself tearing up whenever family is implicated in anything — hell, cheesy cartoon movies can have me furtively wiping the corner of my eye.
The next thing I felt was outrage. But not towards the defendants. Here’s the prosecutor who recognizes that the driver is a young man with a whole life ahead of him. He graduated from college already. He went to college and graduated — you can imagine how proud his family is of him. He is already enlisted in the Navy and ships in a matter of months. Off to serve his country. The prosecutor recognizes all of this and offers a plea bargain — only 20 years instead of death. 20 years. Is there any doubt in anyone’s mind that those 20 years will completely nullify whatever positive direction his life was going previously? 20 years in jail, where his country will serve him (only in terms of the cost of incarceration, obviously).
I won’t discuss the death penalty; you might like to know that though the passenger was convicted and sentenced to death, he is still alive on Maryland’s death row.
I love justice. I truly and deeply feel for victims and their families and the suffering they are forced to endure, but they are not (or should not) be a party in a criminal case.
Laura says that life without prosecutors would be anarchy, and she is right. But life without Criminal Defense attorneys would be hell.
[…] is not so much critical of prosecution as it is critical of the legal system in general. See also this post by Moshe Glickman, who chooses the other side of the courtroom but would not deny me my choice. The question, if any […]
I can appreciate that 20 years is a harsh term, but let’s take a look at the facts again. Apparently having graduated college and having a future with the Navy was not enough for this person to resist going out and 1) planning to rob a store and 2) assisting his friend in, at the very least, planning to rob someone of their moped. Whether or not he had the intent to kill someone, he certainly had a ‘malice aforethought’. While the effective loss of his ‘life’ is absolutely tragic, the reason it’s a tragedy is that he did it to Himself. It wasn’t the police, or the prosecutors who stripped him of his future, it was his own malign and selfish motives put him in the hot seat. 20 years for playing that role that directly led to an innocent being robbed of his life seems awfully lenient to me.
Really? 20 years is lenient? Two whole decades?
Yes, whatever he had was not enough to resist going out. I don’t know all the facts, but it’s not hard for me to imagine:
He came from a poor family, always strapped for cash.
His friend, a continuing bad influence but one which he was able to overcome to the point of completing college and having a real plan for his future.
Until his “friend” convinces him that this will be an easy way to make some quick money… no one will get hurt… you’ll be leaving town soon anyway when you ship out…
A stupid mistake, absolutely; but I don’t think you could ever convince me that it’s worth taking 20 years of his life.
[…] suffer, but looked forward to her third year. 3L Point & Glick shared a story that changed his perspective on the role of criminal defense attorneys. 3L Lisslo attended her ten year college reunion and realized that Facebook was a poor substitute […]
RSS feed for comments on this post. / TrackBack URI