Review by Choice Review
As the author of three well-respected books in the realm of jurisprudence and as a regular contributor to several national newspapers on legal topics, Fletcher is well prepared to write this critique of the modern US criminal justice system. Among other things, he contends that the primary function of today's criminal trials is no longer to determine innocence or guilt but rather to understand the mind of the defendant and to make major crimes less heinous than they in fact are. His major attack is against defense attorneys (and to some degree, sympathetic judges) who attempt to blame society and the victim for the actions of the criminals. His analysis focuses on such topics as public relations firms working for accused killers, jury consultants who use public relations tools to aid their clients, and the consequences of tabloid television. The text can be compared with Theodore Becker's classic Political Trials (1971) and with two more recent books with similar themes, Rudolph J. Gerber's Lawyers, Courts, and Professionalism (CH, Feb'90) and Lee Coleman's The Reign of Error (CH, Oct'84). The writing style is lively and easy to follow. General through graduate. R. A. Carp; University of Houston
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Booklist Review
Whereas Jeffrey Abramson (We, the Jury [BKL D 1 94]) stressed reform of the U.S. jury system in response to changing definitions of the knowledge, representation, and deliberation expected of jurors (and in the name of participatory democracy), George Fletcher organizes his analysis of the jury system around what he calls the "new political trial," trials that focus on the victim (not the defendant) and move an element of the public to urge a particular verdict based on its identification with that victim. Prime examples of this phenomenon are the murders of Harvey Milk, Meir Kahane, Yankel Rosenbaum, and the Menendez parents; the beatings of Rodney King and Reginald Denny; the rape trials of William Kennedy Smith and Mike Tyson; both Bobbitt cases; and the growth of the "battered woman syndrome" defense. Abramson and Fletcher recommend some of the same changes; they disagree in that Fletcher's proposals reflect his conviction that, ultimately, "the purpose of the trial is to stand by the victim." With the O. J. Simpson case and Court TV keeping the selection and functioning of juries in the public eye, both studies contribute to a key public policy debate. ~--Mary Carroll
From Booklist, Copyright (c) American Library Association. Used with permission.
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
This study is a worthy complement to Stephen Adler's The Jury (Forecasts, July 11) and Jeffrey Abramson's We, the Jury (Forecasts, Oct. 17). Fletcher, a professor of law at Columbia University Law School, supports the advances of the 1960s that protected the rights of the accused, but he argues convincingly that we must heighten sensitivity to the victim. He looks at several highly charged cases-``a novel form of political trial''-which frustrated the compatriots of the victims: the killing of gay politico Harvey Milk in San Francisco; the beating of Rodney King by Los Angeles police officers; the killing of Hasidic Jew Yankel Rosenbaum during the Crown Heights riots in New York City; the rape cases against Mike Tyson and William Kennedy Smith. Fletcher's suggestions are sensible and provocative: abolish changes of venue, which ignore the local, communal stake in a case; consult victims in plea bargaining; allow jurors to be more active participants in trials; restrict psychiatric testimony on moral responsibility; allow a two-stage verdict that first establishes a criminal act, then assesses whether the defendant was fully accountable. (Jan.) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Library Journal Review
In order to protect the rights of the accused, we are careful to follow the Constitution. While doing so, we often fail to meet the needs of crime victims. Law professor Fletcher (A Crime of Self-Defense: Bernhard Goetz and the Law on Trial, LJ 7/88) characterizes this emphasis on the rights of the accused as the new "political trial," which functions not to seek the facts and condemn evil but to understand the mind of the suspect. Using four recent trials-the case of Yankel Rosenbaum, a Hasidic Jew murdered during the Crown Heights riots; both Rodney King trials; the Mike Tyson rape trial; and the Harvey Milk trial and its famous" twinkie defense"-Fletcher illustrates how powerful but flawed the American jury system has become. He offers ten proposals for bringing justice both to defendants and victims. They include changes in the jury selection format, allowing the victim to take part in the trial and to participate in plea bargaining, and limiting the use of certain types of experts. Fletcher's provocative book is highly recommended for all collections.-Sandra K. Lindheimer, Middlesex Law Lib., Cambridge, Mass. (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
Review by Kirkus Book Review
This sharp, sensible, ``angry'' book explores how four classes of disempowered Americans look to the criminal justice system to vindicate past grievances, and how the courts too often betray them. Using recent front-page criminal cases, Fletcher (Law/Columbia Univ.; Loyalty, 1992, etc.) shows how when crime victims are gays, blacks, Jews, or women, the defense counsel can exploit the prejudices of judge and jury. Fletcher explains how the preposterous ``Twinkie defense''--the argument that Dan White murdered San Francisco's gay supervisor Harvey Milk and mayor George Moscone as a result of binging on junk food--gave jurors the opportunity to avoid convicting White of murdering someone whose lifestyle they found repugnant. Similarly, the first trial in the Rodney King beating was derailed by the defense's ability to change the venue of the trial to white suburban Simi Valley, and by the prosecution's decision to forbid King to testify--he remained a symbol to the jury of drug-crazed black rage. Fletcher draws an intriguing parallel between that trial and those for the murders of Jewish nationalist Meir Kahane and scholar Yankel Rosenbaum, which were tainted by the defense's ability to stir up the anti-Semitism of minority jurors. Then, in a surprising about-face, he argues that the ability of women to exploit their status as victims has led to some erroneous convictions, most notably that of Mike Tyson, who may have been ``honestly and reasonably mistaken'' as to Desiree Washington's consent. Fletcher also argues that when minorities rallly behind crime victims from their group, they fuel the defense's ability to exploit jurors' prejudices, but this part of his argument never quite gels. The author has concrete suggestions for making our criminal justice system more just for victims and defendants: e.g., abolish changes of venue, permit the victim to question witnesses and veto plea bargains, limit the testimony of ``experts.'' His style is robust, straightforward, and notably jargon-free. For its sensitivity to the rights of victims and defendants alike, a remarkable work.
Copyright (c) Kirkus Reviews, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
Review by Booklist Review
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
Review by Library Journal Review
Review by Kirkus Book Review
