01/16/98

Justice, American Style

Americans find live courtroom drama riveting. During the OJ Simpson trial the entire nation learned about the multiple faces of justice. Evidence doesn't stand on its own. The nature of its message changes through the eyes of each beholder, be he judge, attorney, defendant, juror or witness. The same evidence can even produce opposite verdicts, as we saw in the OJ criminal (not guilty) vs. civil (guilty) proceedings.

Under the glare of TV cameras the justice system goes on trial, too. It's reassuring to witness careful jury selection, painstaking preparation by attorneys, attention to minute details of evidence and testimony, all under the direction of an impartial judge -- reassuring because we want such diligence for ourselves, if we ever need it. And we believe in the fundamental premise of our justice system: that each man and woman who stands accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty.

But what happens in court away from the cameras? Does our legal system generally treat people fairly? How much do factors other than basic fairness and the rule of law effect the court's decisions? Consider the following situations.

Angela rushed a national sorority during her freshman year in college. As part of initiation she and two other new members were sent on a scavenger hunt. One of the items on their list was a toilet paper dispenser, which they collected by ripping it off a bathroom stall wall. They were caught red-handed and arrested for vandalism.

The judge decided to treat them harshly as a deterrent to other fraternity/sorority excesses and sentenced them to three days in jail. Parental persuasion, character references and absence of prior arrests made no difference to the judge. Upon release, Angela, in utter humiliation, dropped out of school. Was justice served in this case?

In a second case, Vincent, a graduate student from Caracas, struggled to make ends meet. He worked nights as a busboy in a small restaurant and convinced himself that he deserved the food and dishes he sometimes took home after work. Petty thievery escalated to shoplifting and stealing cash or clothing from student dormitory rooms. Students reported their losses to campus police, who conducted interviews and lie detector tests of several students, including Vincent. They also planted a decoy wallet covered with an invisible powder to pick up fingerprints which later proved to be Vincent's.

But no arrest or restitution of property occurred. To avoid embarassment and international ill will (from Vincent's prominent Venezuelan family) university officials quietly arranged for Vincent to leave the country. Was justice served in this case?

I support the rights of individuals and recognize that circumstances differ in every legal case. Nevertheless, principles of fairness and the rule of law must prevail over influence, money, power, persuasion, legal loopholes or judicial whim. Otherwise our laws are no more than a mirage, visible on the books but invisible in court.

How has our legal system treated you?

Please send questions or comments to bbruno@snet.net.