|
Twitch
|
i got homework i can put om here too.
“Justice Overruled” does a good job of explaining some of the problems with the criminal justice system. We see how attorneys destroy honest witnesses on the stand, ignoring all professional ethics. We see attorneys hide evidence and go as far as to doctor documents. We even see witnesses say whatever the attorneys tell them to say. And ultimately, we see some juries intentionally give unjust verdicts, without any concern to the unjust affects that their wrongdoing will have.
Katz's first criticism of our courts is the exclusionary rule. This rule is intended to keep evidence out of the courtroom if the cops seize it illegally. While it is all well and good to deter police misconduct, this rule is not part of our constitutional rights. All it accomplishes is to make truth irrelevant in criminal proceedings. He explains that it has to go, and our rights have to stay.
The same goes for the "Miranda" rule. This is also not a part of our constitutional right and only gets truth out of the courtrooms. Since truth is a prerequisite for justice, this has to be counterproductive.
Removing these rules would decrease the number of lies told by police on the witness stand to avoid some legitimate cases thrown out. These lies cause everyone to lose respect for justice, and at some crucial moments, good lawyers will catch the police telling such lies and get completely guilty defendants to go free, causing the justice system to look even worse.
Of course losing things such as the exclusionary rule can make it all too easy for police to plant items on people or simply search without a warrant. One can easily see the problems in privacy that this would create.
Katz explains his credentials to make such judgements in the beginning of the book. As a former 13-year prosecutor in Los Angeles and a trial judge, he is not another under qualified twit spouting political “mumbo jumbo” that he himself has had no experience in (a la Michael Moore.)
This isn’t to say that his views are easy to agree with. The recommendations he makes to get rid of excuses such as "diminished capacity" and "temporary insanity,” are sure to strike a chord with some people. Still, Katz makes a valid argument. He is well-acquainted with the law and its pitfalls or loopholes.
Katz cites a few classics in his novel such as Tom Wolf’s “The Bonfire of the Vanities” (page 210) along with “A Man for All Seasons” by Robert Polt (page 91), and “Sweet Bird of Youth” by Tennessee Williams (on page 10). Of course books like “A Man for All Seasons” and “Sweet Bird of Youth” only presents us with situations, as one is a play and the other a story.
This book isn’t an easy pill to swallow and is for someone who doesn’t mind an extreme view backed up with logic. Most of the points presented in this book make sense on both sides. Katz is very opinionated and is describing what would have made a difference in his cases. The overall tone of the book is cynical, but then 13 years as a prosecutor, and 7 plus years as a judge are sure to curb any youthful idealism.
|
060326
|
