Society, The Justice System & The Jodi Arias Case

The purpose of this post concerns the number of opinions that have been expressed on the Huffington Post regarding the Jodi Arias case and the fact that the defendant is female. Complicate­d by the apparent view that if there are females on the jury panel the courts run the risk that sympathy will play a role in these jurors ability to follow the judicial instructio­ns that guilt or innocence is to based entirely on the evidence presented by the prosecutio­n and nothing else.

I am personally offended at the implicatio­n that women are not strong enough of mind and judgment to know that individual­s who commit crimes of this heinous level simply cannot be allowed the opportunit­y to continue to live among a civilized society. I believe that violent women has always existed, the trend of women who commit violent acts whether they are Domestic Violence or otherwise are growing at an alarming rate in this country. Thankfully it is not being ignored by those who have the power to do something about it. Unfortunat­ely not everyone is aware of this fact.
 

Respectfully, my continued posts in matters of this nature and regardless of the article concerned are made in opposition to ‘knee jerk generalizations’ when making comments.  As a full time Criminal Justice student, studying the law is what I do for approximately 8 – 10 hours a day for at least 4 – 5 days a week.  While I am an active participant in these matters within my home state, my studies are on a federal thus a national level.

It is interesting how things change.

A review of English Common Law which is the foundation of the American Criminal Justice System, historically it was socially acceptable for a man to literally beat his wife, thus the origin of the saying “Rule of Thumb” which means that as long as the husband used a stick that was no thicker than his thumb the beating was acceptable.  Also, in the case of a married woman being raped, if she was not dead or very seriously injured in the course of her defending herself the courts ruled that she was a willing participant because she did not put up enough fight to defend her chastity.

The face of crime is changing drastically in this country and it is not something that is going unnoticed by everyone.  While there are many in our society that maintain that men commit more violent crimes than do women, realistic reports can be an eye opener.  Statistics provided by the Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics show a clear rise in female perpetrated criminal activity.  

More and more teenaged girls are not just joining forces with male gangs, they are forming their own.  These girls are no longer willing to sit on the sidelines and are responsible for committing 2 percent of gang related homicides in this country.   Bullying both face to face and through the internet has become a serious concern across this country and statistic show that girls perpetrate as many incidents as their boy counterparts.  However once they reach high school the incidents of girl perpetrated bullying nearly doubles that of those perpetrated by boys.

Crimes committed by females throughout this county are rising at alarming rates.  Beginning as young as 11 years old, these girls are learning that violence is a way to get or be what they want.  Many of them carry this ideology on into adulthood which accounts for the rapidly increasing numbers of women within the nations prisons and jails.

According to the FBI statistics for arrests during the period 2004 through 2008, female arrests increased by 5.1 percent whereas male arrests only increased 0.6 percent.  Even incarceration statistics demonstrate skyrocketing rate of convictions for women offenders displaying a 33 percent increase during the first half of 2008.  Female juvenile offenders have also seen a dramatic increase in crime statistics.  In 1980 statistics revealed that females represented only 11 percent of violent crimes, by 2000 that proportion had grown to 18 percent and then escalated to a 30 percent increase by 2004.

Quoting the source above:  “We believe that the statistics on women offenders and prior physical and sexual abuse is shocking and is widely ignored by society.”

Source:  http://crimeinamerica.net/2010/03/15/female-involvement-in-crime-growing-crime-news/

Additionally, the statistics on a national level for incarceration period of 2000 – 2010 show that female incarceration percentages increased by 2.2 whereas the male population only increased by 1.6 percent, showing nearly double the incarceration of female offenders verses male offenders.

Source:   http://www.corrections.com/news/article/30166-statistics-on-women-offenders

Concerning the possibility that this woman could be sentenced with the Death Penalty is of no consequence to me in light of various information and statistics.  The crime that was perpetrated against Travis Alexander [regardless of who] is a very heinous crime, one that in my opinion is deserving of a death sentence even if it was Jodi Arias who committed the crime.

Regardless, currently 16 states have abolished the Death Penalty, leaving only 34 who still carry this punishment books.   Although I am personally in support of the death penalty where the forensic science evidence is not only quality but of a substantial amount to convince a reasonably sound person that the defendant was the perpetrator of the crime for which they have been charged; the Death Penalty has lost its power of deterrence.  This is not due to fear of the sentence but the knowledge that the sentence [if carried out at all] will not become a reality for many years.

This particular fact is made clear when reviewing the fact surrounding the Murder Felony Rule.  I totally agree with the essence of the Felony Murder Rule and the purpose behind it.  The ideology should be that the idea or threat of being sentenced to death would create an unwillingness to participate in or to commit these types of crimes.  Individuals who go out and commit or participate in heinous crimes of this nature should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.  My observations in doing some outside research regarding this topic for my Criminal Justice Thesis is that unfortunately laws vary from state to state because as we know each state has the right to either adopt or abandon a law completely or merely certain specifics of those laws.

Unfortunately because of the current ‘social atmosphere’ regarding the death penalty I believe that it has lost enough of its power that the purpose and affect behind even the Felony Murder Rule has been similarly affected.  Additionally there is the equation of the number of convicted death row inmates that have been found innocent due to new technology I feel strongly that although it is considered by many to be waste of tax dollars to allow convicted criminals their constitutional rights to appeal their convictions, this is an essential part of our justice system.  We do this ensure that only the guilty are punished and especially when the Death Penalty in on the table.

The following example is provided entirely for the purpose of supporting not only my point that the death penalty [thus the Felony Murder Rule] has lost the power [of deterrence] it once had but that there is nothing to fear at all in too many cases.  While these inmates are in no way being sent to ‘Club Med’ Death Row inmates are held in private cells and therefore not subjected to the hardships suffered by other prisoners who are housed in the general prison population.

Article title:  Death Row Inmate’s Life of ‘Leisure’: Danny Robbie Hembree Writes Shocking Letter.  This convicted murderer actually taunts the parents of the daughter her murdered by talking about the [many] benefits he is now enjoying on Death Row.  Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/26/death-row-inmate-letter_n_1233890.html

Additionally, Encyclopedia.com reports that:

 “It can be a long wait on death row. Table 6.7 shows the average length of time prisoners spent under the sentence of death before they were executed between 1977 and 2005. The average time between the imposition of the death sentence and the execution was 125 months (10 years and 5 months). White prisoners waited an average of 123 months (10 years and 3 months) and African-American prisoners waited an average of 131 months (10 years and 11 months) before their execution. Snell indicates that of the 60 inmates executed in 2005, the average length of time they had been on death row was 128 months (10 years and 8 months).
Table 6.8 lists the average number of years inmates spent on death row in various states as of December 31,2005. The longest time reported was in Idaho (13.7 years), followed by Nevada (13.2 years), Florida (12.7 years), Tennessee (12.5 years), and California (12 years). Snell reports that Idaho had eighteen prisoners under the sentence of death at the end of 2005. Of the three states with the highest death row populations at year-end 2005—California, Texas, and Florida—Texas reported the shortest average number of years under the sentence of death (8.8 years).”

Statistics: Death Sentences, Capital Case Costs, And Executions, (2008), Capital Punishment: Cruel and Unusual? Retrieved January 30, 2012 from: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3078400012.html

The statistics above reflect the entire number of inmates housed on Death Row across the nation and do not distinguish between male or female.  Regardless the period of time between sentencing and execution is the same.  The above statistics do not show the time period between the arrest and conviction which can take approximately 4 to 6 years just to reach the court room.  

Therefore the idea of the possibility that this woman could be given the death penalty if convicted would have no bearing on my personal decision of guilt or innocence if I were to be a part of the jury.  It is the evidence and the prosecutors’ ability to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that this woman committed this crime.  The requirement is not ‘beyond a shadow of a doubt’ but rather to present enough facts that a ‘reasonable prudent person can see no other means by which this crime could have been committed’ and that is what a great many people do not understand.

There is a quiet war going on at the Supreme Court level regarding the Death Penalty.  More and more states are reviewing their stand on this issue due to the constitutionality of it.  Based on the ideology of the Eight Amendment concerning  concept that the ‘punishment should fit the crime’ many legislators are proposing that the death penalty be completely abolished in this country as it has already been in so many other countries throughout Europe.  The European Convention of Human Rights has successfully convinced all 47 countries that comprise the European Council to abolish the Death Penalty.  This plays a vital factor in extradition negotiations for American criminals who flee to European countries, the do not extradite as long as there is a possibility that the offender will face the Death Penalty.

Source:  http://www.coe.int/lportal/web/coe-portal/what-we-do/human-rights/death-penalty

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Debating Eclipse535 - The Jodi Arias Case

 

The following comment was posted concerning the article about Jodi Arias:

It's unlikely she will ever be executed. T­here will probably be some female jurors who will feel sorry for her.In general women think that violence against men is acceptable­.

To which I replied:

 

Violence is unacceptab­le regardless of who it is directed against or who is doing the directing.

Steadfast in their opinion, this individual continues with:

 

“There is definitely a double standard.M­ale on female violence is harshly condemned and punished.F­emale on male violence is laughed at,approve­d of,or excused.Th­at was my point.”

To which I replied:

"T­here will probably be some female jurors who will feel sorry for her.In general women think that violence against men is acceptable­­." - quoting you. I have a personal objection to 'generaliz­ations' on any topic. As a rape survivor as well as a survivor of a brutal Domestic Violence altercatio­n that has left me permanentl­y disabled, what you stated was in my opinion 'out of line' on so many levels. While we are all entitled to our opinions and have the American 'Right of Freedom of Speech' and I truly believe in that right. I am [at times] so appalled at various comments here [and other boards]. When we comment on these articles, we have no idea who is going to be reading them, where they have been or what they have been through.

 Continuing with the same mentality, the poster replied with:

I don't know what you thought was out of line.There­'s no question women are given more lenient treatment than men in the criminal justice system.I can think of several cases where women committed horrible acts of violence against men but people made excuses for them which they would never do if the genders were reversed.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Facebook Defriending Murder: Jenelle Potter, Daughter Of Accused Killer, Had History Of Cyber Fights

 

Surfing through the various articles under ‘Crime’ on the Huffington Post I found this one to be interesting enough to read.  I read the statistics about just how many ‘accounts’ Facebook claims to its’ fame, it does seem that everyone has their own page.

Regardless, I ran across this particular post by user ‘Beachgirl61’ and found it to be interesting enough to comment on.  It read simply:  [quote] Good grief. People friend and "defriend" all the time on facebook and for a wide variety of reasons. People need to quit taking FB so seriously, especially with folks they don't even in real life. I thought the point of FB was to connect with real friends that you already know, not make pseudo-fri­endships with perfect strangers. [end quote]

I just want to say that there are a lot of folks who still use it for that reason.  Due to home, work and school requirements I have periods of time where I’m only on my Facebook page maybe once a week.  I’ve personally become more than a little disillusioned with it since I first signed up for it a couple of years ago.  I used to enjoy the personal interaction between everyone, now it’s a lot of ‘share’ stuff, images that contain poems or other sarcastic remarks.  I see a lot of political agendas being pushed by some folks that gets annoying as well in my opinion, I leave all of that sort thing to the various discussion boards online.  I try to have fun with my Facebook page since I’m related to 75% of those I’m ‘friends’ with on there, the rest are folks I went to school with, worked with or was in the Army with them.   I seem to use the ‘Message’ feature more than anything else anymore.

While I’m not really sure what the intent was behind user ‘spidermom’ making the following comment [quote] “if I want to tell someone something I just email them. No one sees it but who I sent it to.” [end quote]

I can only say that if I wanted to tell someone something I could just pick up the phone as well, but then again I’m not really concerned with everyone on my Facebook page seeing anything I’ve posted.  Everyone uses Facebook for different reasons and just like everything else in life it is the responsibility of the user to become familiar with how to properly use it.  Everything can be used for good or bad.  Facebook has been a tremendous help to me in discovering information that fills in gaps for me in my genealogy research.  It has been a great connection tool for me and a number of my colleagues at school when we have to work on a joint project through group discussions.  By taking the time to learn how to properly use the privacy settings and the list options, it’s very easy to maintain control over how you view the posts on your Facebook page.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Bullying And Suicide: The Dangerous Mistake We Make

Laws vary from state to state. You can look up what law are in place in your state by visiting this web site. If you don't like what you see, there are a lot of ways to change it.



http://www­.olweus.or­g/public/i­ndex.page
About School Bullying
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Miramonte School Scandal: Entire Staff To Be Removed During District Investigation

I can agree with that in the sense that while I believe the majority of the teaching staff probably had absolutely nothing to do with what was going on as well as probably no knowledge of it, they will still be viewed as tarnished so to speak in the eyes of many until there is proof positive that they are innocent of any wrong doing. That is going to be the same as punishment­. Unfortunat­ely it will not surprise me if there were to be additional arrests, however I cannot see an entire school [every single staff person] having knowledge of the actions of those who are guilty.
About Video
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Emma Wise, Former Rhode Island Teacher, Accused Of Giving Alcohol To Minors (VIDEO)

The comments on this article show a pretty wide variety of attitudes and reactions to what this teacher has done. I graduated high school in 1977 and will admit that throughout my school years I found various teachers who were attractive­, but not to the point that I even thought about them beyond the fact that they were my teachers. These are individual­s that we were taught to respect as persons in authority positions, people we were supposed to look up to and trust.



I realize that all of that has different meaning to many people today, although I have not changed my personal viewpoint. When people choose this profession they need to recognize and to accept the fact that they are entering a profession that is by its very nature one that shapes the minds thus the attitudes of the children of our nation, the people who will one day be the teachers, doctors, scientists­, senators and congresspe­rsons.



Simply because it is the place where these young people spend so much of their time during their most vulnerable and formative years, that I personally place a great deal of responsibi­lity square on the shoulders of those within the educationa­l system and primarily the teachers.

This teacher and others who have committed these types of [and other more heinous] crimes have violated that trust, the trust of the child, the parents and the community. It is a trend that must be taken seriously and stricter punishment­s mandated without hesitation­.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Cops, GPS Devices, and You

After reading a number of posts on here I can agree that without a doubt there are two distinct sides of this issue, the viewpoint of the citizen and the viewpoint of law enforcement.  I’m sure there are any number of individuals who have at one point or another have either stated or heard it said that more and more the laws seem to favor the criminals.  While I agree that this can all too often appear to be the case, it is necessary to insure that every individual who is charged with any criminal activity be afforded all the rights they are entitled to under the constitution and the due process of law.  Part of that ‘due process’ is to be ‘safe in the knowledge’ that truth will come out and in the best case scenario this will happen during the investigation prior to an actual arrest.  The primary problem that I personally have with the opinions of the Superior Court Judges is that we live in a highly technical age, technology that is used by both the criminal element as well as law enforcement.  The same information currently obtained from such things as images from toll booths and cell phone use from local towers in proving innocence as well as possible guilt.

The subject of ‘reasonable expectation of privacy’ is at the heart of any issue that involves the activities of law enforcement regardless of the level, be it local police or the FBI.  There is no question that we as Americans place a high value on our privacy, however it is not an actual constitutional right but rather considered to be a basic human right.  The difference being that as a constitutional right it would be something that is guaranteed but as a human right it is simply considered to be something that is taken into consideration.  The constitution refers to or implies a right to privacy in different ways but does not outright proclaim that there is ‘a right to privacy’.  

A simple review reveals that the Constitution does not specifically mention a right to privacy. However, Supreme Court decisions over the years have established that the right to privacy is a basic human right, and as such is protected by virtue of the Ninth Amendment which has essentially become the ‘catch all’ when referencing the ‘so called right to privacy’ in determining the validity of evidence.  The legal definition of this amendment simply states, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” So what does that mean?  Only that the right to privacy is something that is ‘understood’ but not ‘guaranteed’

The right to privacy has come to the public's attention via several controversial Supreme Court rulings, including several dealing with contraception (the Griswold and Eisenstadt cases), interracial marriage (the Loving case), and abortion (the well-known Roe v Wade case). In addition, it is said that a right to privacy is inherent in many of the amendments in the Bill of Rights, such as the Third Amendment which basically requires that in a ‘time of peace, no soldier shall be quartered in any house without the consent of the homeowner, nor in a time of war except as prescribed by law’ and by the Fourth Amendment which basically infers to ‘the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.’

While there are many that also consider the Fifth Amendment as being supportive of the ‘right to privacy’ simply provides that no person shall be forced to provide information that can or will result in self-incrimination.  It makes no reference to a blanket statement or inference to the right to privacy as it has been prescribed by the viewpoint of the majority of Americans.

So what point am I trying to make with all of this?  While I would love to say that it is simple, it is in reality the furthest thing from simple.  As a criminal justice student as well as an individual who has just over two decades of working in some capacity with both law enforcement and the judiciary system itself, I have a different understanding of how things work.

It is an analogy that I am not exactly content with yet is the most applicable based on both experience and academic challenges.  Our judicial system is based on an arbitrary system whether we like it or not.  Essentially because we all know for a fact that every person, indigent or otherwise is guaranteed by the constitution the right to counsel if they have been arrested and charged with a crime.  We have the right to know what we are being charged with and to face the accuser whether it be the victim or the courts as a representative of that victim.

In the real world there is a process called pretrial motions where defense attorney’s will submit arguments to have sometimes mountains for evidence suppressed [meaning the jury will not know about it until afterwards] because it will prejudice the jury against the defendant.  While there are instances where I agree with this process for the very reasons that are being proposed by the defense attorney, there are also far too many cases where jury members have stated later that had they known about a specific piece of evidence their decision would have been different.

I do not in any manner support the indiscriminate use of any device or technology that invades the privacy of any individual for purposes other than to support already substantiated probable cause as determined by the ruling of a magistrate or a grand jury.  I believe that all actions of this nature should be addressed before a magistrate in the process of the procurement of a legal warrant prior to the use of any device or technology that would be intrusive to the privacy of any individual.  I believe that those who are seeking permissions for any actions that are required to be approved by a search warrant or should have enough evidence at the time of the request to prove to any reasonable prudent individual that they are merely seeking additional information in order to substantiate what they can already prove in a court of law.

In supporting these issues I wholeheartedly admit that while I believe that the vast majority of those who comprise our nations law enforcement do so because they believe in the system and that they sincerely want to ‘make a difference’ so to speak, I also acknowledge that there are those who do not and are careless in their discretion.

The need to compile certain types of evidence is based entirely on the need to be able to convince a jury that the defendant in a case is either innocent or guilty.  The evidence provided to these people are the tools that they will use once they go behind those closed doors to discuss and arbitrate their personal viewpoints on the matter at hand.  I for one do not support the hampering of that decision by restricting what information can or will be made available to them.  It is simply that I believe that the best decision is a well informed decision.

All of this simply boils down to the fact the greater majority of those individuals called upon to be a jurist have a limited knowledge of the law.  Therefore these individuals not only want but they demand that they be provided with not just 'enough' information or evidence but the 'kind or type' of evidence that will allow them to make their decision and walk away with the feeling and belief that they made the right decision, not just the right decision based on the information provided.


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost