Crime and the politics of hysteria : how the Willie Horton story changed American justice /

Anderson, a 25-year crime reporter (first for the Wall Street Journal, more recently for the New York Times), delves into William Horton's life and crimes--and ways his crimes have been reported and manipulated--because "the Horton case [has] become the locus classicus for a new American folktale of crime and justice [which] both arose from and encouraged a politics of fear . . . now turning Americans away from principles that had governed their approach to law enforcement and penology for two centuries." In the U.S., innocent victims meet random violence infrequently. But such crimes are overreported, so scared citizens demand "expressive justice" : the death penalty, mandatory sentencing, "three strikes and you're out," as well as Singapore's caning, Alabama's chain gangs, and other actions whose only justification is that they make some victims and observers feel better. There are many villains here: criminals, of course, but also sloppy journalists, venal politicians, clumsy bureaucrats, and citizens (including victims) who use public policy debate as personal therapy. Making fundamental changes in the U.S. justice system so that people will feel better is profoundly dangerous; Anderson calls for crime-victim benefits but argues eloquently that "expressive justice" can only delay real crime control. (Reviewed July 1995)0812920619Mary Carroll

In the 1970s, penologists began to articulate the philosophy that the purpose of incarceration is punishment, not rehabilitation. Thus the incident of a convict sentenced to life who, while on furlough in 1987, terrorized a couple and raped the woman can hardly be said to have altered the system substantially. Yet the case of Willie Horton is widely acknowledged to have helped decide the 1988 presidential election, when George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis after Republicans accused the Massachusetts governor of allowing the prison furlough program from which the convict Horton had escaped. New York Times reporter Anderson (Crimes of Justice) here probes the implications of the case, with its racist overtones (Horton was black, his victims white), for the criminal justice system. He also looks into what he terms the cynical manipulation and exploitation by politicians of Americans' fear of crime and makes recommendations for rehabilitation and enlightened crime control along with victim compensation programs. Many readers are apt to consider his proposals idealistic rather than realistic. (June) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved

A tonic exploration of the notorious Willie Horton case and the ``politics of fear'' that has hindered American justice. The Horton case, exploited in potent TV ads during the 1988 presidential campaign by supporters of George Bush, involved a black convict released on furlough by Massachusetts prison officials during the administration of Michael Dukakis; Horton went on to commit rape and assault on a white Maryland couple. Former New York Times editorial writer Anderson (Crimes of Justice, not reviewed) sees the Horton case as fostering ``expressive justice,'' that is, policies like capital punishment and mandatory sentencing that are ``designed more to vent communal outrage than to reduce crime.'' But he addresses such broad policy questions only infrequently, devoting the bulk of his book to a close--at times too close--analysis of the Horton case. Reconstructing Horton's 1987 rampage, Anderson notes that it was hardly unusual, but the country, fed crime but not context on TV, reacted disproportionately. He flashes back to probe Horton's initial conviction and his generally responsible prison record. While Horton's crimes were not monstrous and his release on furlough an error, not gross malfeasance, outrage was magnified by the emotional cries of crime victims; irresponsible coverage by a local newspaper; and the persistence of unfounded rumors regarding the crime that landed Horton in prison. After describing the Bush forces' grim calculations and the issue's continuing fallout--including Bill Clinton's refusal during the 1992 campaign to pardon a brain-damaged convict sentenced to death--Anderson argues that we should support rehabilitation but must also allocate more resources to help crime victims. Common-sense talk in a debate characterized by demagoguery.