Archive of ‘Civic Issues’ category
The three main factors that contribute to the difficulty of exonerating wrongfully convicted women include false confessions, stereotypes, and tunnel vision of criminal justice professionals. When I was thinking about possible policy recommendations to increase the representation of female exonerees in the United States, I began to think about the lack of females in law enforcement positions. By having an increased amount of female law enforcement, tunnel vision and stereotypes may not be negative factors in the exoneration process for wrongfully convicted women.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, only 13% of law enforcement officers are women. This percentage has increased from just 3% in the 1970s, so why has it taken 50 years for this percentage to increase so little? According to the University of San Diego, there are several benefits of recruiting and training females, which are now becoming more apparent to law enforcement agencies and organizations throughout the United States. By having more women in law enforcement, the public safety force would become more balanced and the quality of law enforcement would be enhanced through the implementation of females’ perspectives and abilities in the criminal justice system.
Benefits of Having Women in Law Enforcement
There are several benefits to having an increased number of women working in law enforcement positions throughout the United States, which can positively impact law enforcement practices.
- Female law enforcement is less likely to use violence and excessive force. According to the 2019 National Institute of Justice Special Report, “Women in Policing: Breaking Barriers and Blazing a Path,” meta-analyses have proven that female officers are less likely to use force compared to male officers in addition to not being as likely to engage in police misconduct. Female officers typically use de-escalation techniques in uneasy situations, because women are sometimes at a physical disadvantage when dealing with a suspect and these tactics can be more successful.
- Female officers can help address violence against women. According to a study conducted by the University of Zurich, violent crimes against women as well as rapes are reported more often in communities where there is an increased number of female law enforcement. In addition to this, as female officer representation increases, the number of homicides against partners and domestic abuse cases decreases. When it comes to sexual assault cases, victims may want to speak with a female officer rather than a male, which is difficult when there are not enough females in law enforcement.
- Women have excellent communication and problem-solving skills, which can increase law enforcement relationships with the local community. Women have many qualities that make them trusted members of society, including effective and efficient communication and problem-solving. Female police officers have different strengths compared to male police officers, which makes them necessary in law enforcement to help create safer communities.
Encouraging Women to Consider Careers in Law Enforcement
Even though there is an increased awareness of women needed in law enforcement and their potential to make a positive impact in communities across the country, more can still be done to encourage and support women entering law enforcement. The U.S. Border Patrol has pushed out a recruiting campaign aimed at women due to the thousands of migrant women crossing the U.S.-Mexico border who have faced sexual assault. In addition to this, encouraging and informing young girls about the need for women in law enforcement and the critical role they play in helping victims in their community.
The 30×30 Initiative
In the 2018 National Institute of Justice report, the 30×30 Initiative was introduced, and the goal is to increase the representation of women in law enforcement to 30% by 2030 as well as support female officers in their positions. Several organizations, universities, and groups of police leaders have joined together in support of the 30×30 Initiative, including Penn State University Police and Public Safety. They are slowly raising awareness about the importance of having females in law enforcement throughout the country. The 30×30 Initiative urges 115 law enforcement agencies and groups to “take measures to increase the representation of women in all ranks of law enforcement, ensure that policies and procedures are free of all bias, promote equitable hiring, retention, and promotion of officers, and ensure their culture is inclusive, respectful and supportive of women in all ranks and roles of law enforcement.”
Conclusion
Overall, I believe that more women are needed within the criminal justice system to support local communities, specifically female victims. I look forward to seeing if the percentage of female law enforcement increases to 30% by 2030 as the encouragement and support of women in the criminal justice system grows. I have enjoyed learning more about this topic and how it relates to the issue of the underrepresentation of female exonerees and the lack of sexual assault reports within the United States.
Sources:
In this blog post, I will be explaining the issue that I will be addressing in my brief, which relates to the PA Innocence Project. Throughout the post, I will also discuss the exigence and rhetorical situation surrounding the issue, the potential “cause” of the problem, and which policy instrument I will use to craft the reform at the end of the brief.
Overview of the Issue Brief
In the issue brief, I will be addressing the problem of the lack of wrongfully convicted women being exonerated compared to men. According to several sources, this disparity occurs due to multiple factors against wrongfully convicted women throughout the conviction, interrogation, incarceration, and exoneration process. Some of these factors include false confessions, inadequate legal defense, tunnel vision of police and prosecutors, the exoneree’s relationship to the victim, and no crime occurring in the first place. If these factors are known, then why is nothing being done to reform the criminal justice system in order for more wrongfully convicted women to be exonerated and set free?
This issue is an intervention in a policy discussion because there are reforms that must be made to bring justice and equality to the United States’ criminal justice system, which would result in more incarcerated women being exonerated. Some possible reforms include clearer judicial procedures for convicted people to present their claims of innocence for unlimited time and increased training of police officers and prosecutors on how to prevent “tunnel vision” as well as associated stereotypes from impeding their judgment.
Exigence and the Rhetorical Situation
We hear many stories from men about their experiences being wrongfully convicted, incarcerated, and some eventually exonerated, but very rarely do people hear about women being wrongfully convicted and exonerated. Since 1989, only 258 women have been exonerated out of 2,991 exonerees, according to the National Registry of Exonerations. In addition to this, according to the Prison Policy Initiative, women are the greatest increasing group of incarcerated people. Why are women being forgotten and overlooked when it comes to conversations about mass incarceration? Does gender affect the incarceration and exoneration process for women? What unique factors do wrongfully convicted women face compared to wrongfully convicted men?
In looking at current statistics, there are obviously factors and obstacles that wrongfully convicted women face in this process that typically does not lead them to exoneration. Throughout the issue brief, I would like to discuss the various factors against wrongfully convicted women which makes them harder to exonerate. In addition to this, I will also discuss possible reforms that could be made in order to exonerate more women in the future by responding to the current rhetorical situation.
Cause Categories
According to the “Causes” article, Deborah Stone, a political theorist, stated in her book Policy Paradox that causal explanations for policy problems usually fall into one of four categories including intentional, inadvertent, mechanical, and accidental causes. Out of the four categories of causes, the lack of wrongfully convicted women being exonerated is the result of a mechanical cause. A mechanical cause is created by a system that creates harm by working the way it is intended to. Regarding the difficulty to exonerate wrongfully convicted women, the system at fault is the United States’ criminal justice system. In order to decrease this disparity between wrongfully convicted men and women, the criminal justice system must be reformed in some way.
Policy Instruments
Policy instruments are tools that are able to put visions into action. According to the “Making Policy” reading, the four types of policy instruments include mandates, inducements, capacity builders, and system changes. Out of the four policy instruments, the lack of wrongfully convicted women being exonerated could be solved using the two of the policy instruments – capacity builders and system changes. Capacity builders focus on educating citizens to alter their personal attitudes, social norms, and culture. This tool could be used to change the societal stereotypes of women as bad mothers or caregivers. This could help wrongfully convicted women in cases where they are accused of the harm or murder of a child of which they were taking care.
In addition to this, system changes deal with changing the power dynamics or modifying how a particular institution works. In this case, the institution being changed would be the United States’ criminal justice system. A system change is occasionally the most dramatic of policy instruments, but by using this tool, the greatest amount of positive change will likely occur. I believe that a system change would most likely increase the amount of wrongfully convicted women being ultimately exonerated.
Conclusion
Overall, I hope you enjoyed this post and learned more about what I will be discussing within my issue brief on wrongfully convicted women and the many factors against them throughout the exoneration process. I look forward to learning more about this topic as well as writing and sharing my issue brief next month.
Sources
Introduction
In this blog post, I will be reflecting on the deliberation project my group created and facilitated, as well as the other deliberations I attended as a participant. Throughout the reflection, I will be exploring six out of the nine criteria for deliberative discussion from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation to fully evaluate the various deliberations.
Create a Solid Information Base
The first criteria from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation are creating a solid information base by discussing personal experiences, as well as factual information about the topic. In my deliberation, I knew that every participant had some form of personal experience with taking standardized tests during their junior or senior year of high school, which varied due to the pandemic shut down in March 2020. Many students, including myself, began to question the “when”, “where”, and “why” of requiring standardized tests in the college admissions process. During the personal stake section of the deliberation, I was surprised that not many students shared their experiences considering that each of us went through the stress of trying to take the SAT/ACT to apply to college. Even though most participants were aware of the background information on this topic, we felt it was important to share a brief overview of the standardized testing process during the deliberation.
In the “Homelessness in Skid Row” deliberation, the group gave a solid background on the issue of homelessness in the United States, specifically in the “Skid Row” section in Los Angeles, CA. Even though none of the participants or facilitators were directly affected by homelessness, we all recognized that it is a severe problem in many major cities across the country and around the world. In addition to this, all of the participants and facilitators agreed that something needs to be done to address poverty and help those who are homeless.
Identify a Broad Range of Solutions
The second criteria from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation are identifying a broad range of solutions to solve the problem. My deliberation team created three different approaches to solve the issue of whether or not standardized tests should be required in the college admissions process. Our three approaches included requiring test scores and offering a free test preparation course, offering test-optional score submission, and eliminating test score submissions. Some participants offered the idea of skills tests or specific subject area tests being required for college applications rather than a benchmark test like the SAT or ACT. Other participants thought it would be hard to come up with an alternative to the current SAT that would properly assess the college readiness of increasingly diverse applicants. Throughout the deliberation, we examined each approach and received feedback from participants on each solution, as well as other aspects to consider.
In the “Cancer Alley” deliberation, the facilitators presented three approaches to solve the issue of toxic pollution in Louisiana, including anti-pollution legislation, terminating factory production, and relocating the community members. After considering the three approaches, I believe that the proposed solutions would help relieve exposure to toxic pollution and substances, but none of them would eliminate the pollution that is causing the cancer clusters. While these solutions are a good place to start to solve the problem of air pollution in Cancer Alley, more work should be completed on how to effectively eradicate the actual pollution at the root of the problem.
Weigh the Pros, Cons, and Trade-Offs of Proposed Solutions
The third criteria from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation are weighing the pros, cons, and trade-offs of the various proposed approaches. For each approach to the issue of requiring or not requiring standardized test score submission, there are advantages and disadvantages. If score submissions are required and a free test prep class is offered, colleges would be able to compare applicants uniformly as well as provide colleges with information on individual students and their potential success in college. Because of the difference between students of low vs. high socioeconomic status, there is unequal access to test prep due to financial constraints, accessibility, and varying programs offered in local school districts. If colleges offer test-optional score submission, it gives students a choice to submit their score and allow for other ways to show their strengths in the application process. However, there would be no benchmark to compare applicants using the test-optional approach, therefore making it riskier for colleges to accept students. Lastly, eliminating score submission creates a fairer process for students of lower socioeconomic status without access to test prep or other resources to apply to schools. There is also less stress on students during the admissions process, but there would be more weight on high school GPA, which could be inflated.
In the “Order in the Court” deliberation, the team proposed three approaches to solve the problem of injustice in the courtroom, including bail, sentencing, and limitations on media presence. If bail is implemented more heavily, it would reduce strain on the prison systems by allowing those who can afford bail to be released more quickly, but this “catch-and-release” situation could cause issues and it is unfair to those who cannot afford to pay their bail. By reducing minimum sentencing, people would be in prison for fewer years and there would be fewer penalties for drug offenders specifically. Even though the years of minimum sentencing is decreased, this does not stop the offenders from being imprisoned multiple times. Lastly, by restricting the media presence in the courtroom, the influence of outside opinions on the judge and jury would be decreased and it would prevent celebrities convicted of crimes from making a profit from breaking the law. The lack of media in court cases would restrict public access to information on crimes as well as it would be very difficult to implement and control in our society.
Ensure Mutual Comprehension
The fourth criteria from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation are ensuring mutual comprehension between facilitators and participants by speaking clearly and asking for clarification when necessary. During our deliberation, everyone spoke equally and asked clarifying questions. I appreciated that the participants would ask questions to better understand a certain aspect of the topic or approach. By providing the topic guide, participants were able to read and gain background knowledge on our topic and approaches, so when they came to the deliberation, they were prepared to ask questions and discuss. While we were lucky that our topic was familiar to the students in the class, I would have liked to ask the participants to share their experiences a second time because I know that each participant at the deliberation went through the college admissions process and has interesting and relevant information to add to the conversation.
Consider Other Ideas and Experiences
The fifth criterion from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation is listening carefully to others, especially during a disagreement. Throughout the deliberation, many people shared their personal experiences, thoughts, and opinions about standardized testing in the college admissions process. At some points during the discussion, there were some disagreements among the participants and toward the approaches colleges are taking. The participants seemed evenly split on either requiring standardized test score submissions or not requiring score submissions. Overall, several participants disagreed with our first and third approaches, but they all did so respectfully – which we appreciated!
Respect Other Participants
The last criteria from Gastil’s chapter on deliberation are respecting other participants by recognizing that each participant has a unique background. Throughout the deliberation, all of the participants were respectful of each other and the facilitators. Even though the number of participants was smaller, I believe that everyone spoke equally, but I would have liked to see every participant add at least one thought to the discussion. Sometimes, I felt like we were receiving the same thought or opinions constantly from the same participants, and I wanted to hear what some of the quieter participants had to say about the topic.
Conclusion
Overall, I believe that all of the deliberations were presented well and were informative. After each deliberation, I walked away with a deeper understanding and fresh perspective on each topic. I look forward to analyzing the takeaways from our discussion in the next part of the deliberation unit.
Introduction
We hear many stories from men about their experiences being wrongfully convicted, incarcerated, and some eventually exonerated, but very rarely do people hear about women being wrongfully convicted. According to the Prison Policy Initiative, women are the “fastest-growing group of incarcerated people” (Selby). Why are women being forgotten when it comes to conversations about mass incarceration? Does gender affect the incarceration and exoneration process? Do wrongfully convicted women face different obstacles compared to wrongfully convicted men? In this blog post, I am going to discuss wrongfully convicted women and the various obstacles they face throughout the exoneration process.
Statistics about Female Exonerees
According to statistics from the National Registry, from 1989 to the present day, about 241 women have been fully exonerated out of 2,750 potential prisoner exonerees, which translates to only about 9% of exonerees (Selby). Sadly, most female exonerees (about 73%) are wrongfully convicted for crimes that never happened, because they were later deemed to be accidents, suicides, or fabricated crimes (Selby). Another important statistic from the National Registry of Exonerations states that about one-third of female exonerees were wrongfully convicted of a crime in which the victim was a child, because of these women caring for these children in the role of mother or primary caretaker.
Factors Against Wrongfully Convicted Women
Two lawyers, Karen Daniel and Judy Royal, who worked at the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University Law School, helped exonerate several people who were wrongfully convicted of horrible crimes (Redden). After looking at several cases, Daniel and Royal questioned how and why not as many women were exonerated compared to men. Daniel and Royal came to the conclusion that many innocence projects across the country are failing to bring justice to wrongfully convicted women, because of several factors that make women harder to exonerate than men. These factors include:
- DNA Evidence – Daniel found that women are usually not convicted of crimes that are able to be overturned due to DNA testing and evidence, which can easily prove that the wrongfully convicted person is innocent (Redden). The majority of men are convicted of rapes and murders in which their DNA is typically found within the crime scene. For crimes where women are accused of murdering someone close to them, their home or place of residence is a crime scene. Because of their daily activities in the home, the female DNA is usually found throughout the crime scene and may or may not be relevant to the crime and is not helpful with the exoneration process.
- No Crime – Daniel and Royal also discovered that in many cases where women were wrongfully convicted that there was no crime in the first place, and that the death of the victim was caused by an accident or suicide. This creates a major problem as innocence projects are designed to help solve crimes. When there is no DNA evidence, investigators establish alibis and turn to witnesses. If a woman is wrongfully convicted of killing a child but it was truly an accident, then there is no real crime, no murderer, no witnesses, and most likely no alibi. This wrongful conviction will fall back on the attorneys to prove and explain incorrect prosecution, any withheld evidence, and to fill in information gaps left by the lack of witnesses.
- Sexist Stereotypes – Many women are wrongfully convicted of harming or murdering children in which they were caring for them as a mother or caretaker. Wrongfully convicted women face several stereotypes while on trial, including stereotypes of women’s roles as caretakers, how to be an ideal mother, and overall criticism of women based on jealousy and being emotional (McDonald). Sometimes women’s emotions are interpreted by law enforcement and prosecutors on how they fit into the “bad mother” stereotype. For example, prosecutors may question why the woman is not more upset about losing her child or why the woman is overly upset about the loss of her child.
- False Confessions – Since wrongfully convicted women are occasionally dealing with the loss of a loved one, they are more likely to confess to committing the crime even though they are truly innocent. Because many women want to help the police and discover the true murderer of their child, wrongfully convicted women may give in and make statements that could potentially be used against her later in the process.
Analysis and Conclusion
Because of wrongful conviction and imprisonment, female exonerees struggle equally as much as their male counterparts. The exoneration process is difficult for many women to face. Women face several obstacles throughout prosecution that negatively impact their lives through the length of their imprisonment, and the level of difficulty to ultimately prove their innocence. Because these factors have been seen throughout many different cases of wrongfully convicted women, I believe that investigators, prosecutors, attorneys, and innocence projects across the United States should consider them and the possibility of seeing one or more of these elements within cases. By considering the statistics on female exonerees and the factors against wrongfully convicted women, unjust imprisonment may be preventable and innocence projects may have an easier time exonerating women in the future as well as providing the necessary resources to support them.
Works Cited
McDonald, Alexandra. “Gender Bias, Stereotypes, and Women’s Wrongful Convictions.” Ms. JD, 2022, ms-jd.org/blog/article/gender-bias-stereotypes-and-womens-wrongful-convictions. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022.
Redden, Molly. “Why Is It So Hard for Wrongfully Convicted Women to Get Justice?” Mother Jones, Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress, 2022, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/wrongfully-convicted-women-exonerations-innocence-project/. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022.
Selby, Daniele. “8 Facts About Incarcerated and Wrongfully Convicted Women You Should Know.” Innocence Project, 2022, innocenceproject.org/women-wrongful-conviction-incarceration-facts-iwd2020/#:~:text=Two%20hundred%20and%20forty%2Done,the%20National%20Registry%20of%20Exonerations. Accessed 8 Feb. 2022.
Introduction
Chester Hollman spent 28 years in jail for a crime he clearly did not commit. Wrongfully convicted of robbery and homicide, he lost 28 years of his life and freedom in prison (Roebuck). He has a chance to rebuild his life after a court overturned his conviction last year. After learning about Chester Hollman and several others who faced wrongful convictions in the criminal justice system, I was shocked that this occurs and impacts the lives of people in Pennsylvania, as well as throughout the United States. I felt stunned and confused about this wrongful conviction. As a white female growing up in a suburban area, I have not given much thought about crime, the justice system, and what happens to all of the people involved.
As I write this blog, I cannot even begin to imagine how the exonerees felt throughout their wrongful conviction, imprisonment, and release, knowing that they were truly innocent throughout the entire process. According to the journal article, “Psychological impact of being wrongfully accused of criminal offenses: A systematic literature review,” in 2019, 362 people in the United States were exonerated since the founding of the Innocence Project in 1992 (Brooks). Even though people who are wrongfully convicted are exonerated every year, they continue to struggle with psychological barriers and difficulties throughout their lives. In this blog post, I will explore the various obstacles and psychological impacts of being wrongfully convicted.
The Mental Struggle
Initially, the wrongfully convicted struggle with the idea that they know they are innocent. One would think that most prisoners who are sentenced to prison for the act or crime they committed eventually come to accept that they are there for a reason and that any sense of doubt as to why they are there fades over time. People who are wrongfully convicted know they are innocent and not true criminals. They are unable to personally resolve the idea that they are in prison for no reason. In the article, “‘It Never, Ever Ends’: The Psychological Impact of Wrongful Conviction,” “…the wrongly accused persons experience feelings of shock and disbelief as if the arrest is a big mistake that will be soon be corrected,” because they cannot understand why this has happened to them (Scott). Typically, these people are normal people who found themselves at the wrong place at the wrong time, and the injustice of the criminal justice system caused their wrongful conviction and imprisonment. Because these people do not have a criminal mentality compared to other prisoners, their experience in prison is terribly difficult, which makes the stresses and trauma of prison life much worse.
Losing Sense of Self
After wrongful conviction and being in prison, people who are wrongfully convicted experience personality changes, including being paranoid, anxious, less confident in themselves, and more. These personality changes were caused by the stress, confusion, and chaos that came along with being incarcerated while they are truly innocent. In addition to personality changes, people who are wrongfully convicted feel like they have lost their dignity and credibility as a person as well as not being able to see their purpose in life. Because of their personality changes and various losses, those wrongfully convicted feel like they have lost who they were before they were accused of committing the crime or illegal act. After being released, many exonerees have a hard time finding themselves again after the traumatic experiences of wrongful imprisonment.
Damage to Psychological and Physical Health
Due to wrongful conviction and imprisonment, many exonerees face extreme mental health problems affecting them after their release and return to normal life, especially negative emotions of feelings of loss, hopelessness, anger, fear, and a loss of freedom. Exonerees experience many symptoms of depression and suicidal thoughts while being imprisoned as well as various anxiety and panic disorders due to the high level of stress during incarceration. In addition to these conditions, many people who are wrongfully imprisoned deal with post-traumatic stress disorder and problems sleeping, including insomnia, nightmares, and sleeplessness. This is particularly prominent after exonerees are released due to their traumatic and horrible experiences throughout the processes of conviction and imprisonment. In addition to more serious conditions, many people felt exhausted, worn out, and stressed that others would not believe them throughout their exoneration process. Due to their mental compression, many exonerees also experienced physical problems, including high blood pressure, weight gain or loss, nausea, and alcohol or drug dependency or misuse.
Analysis and Conclusion
Because of their conviction and imprisonment, exonerees struggle with psychological stress and trauma as well as physical problems long after they are released from prison. According to the article, “‘It Never, Ever Ends’: The Psychological Impact of Wrongful Conviction,” even those who are wrongfully convicted and serve a short time in prison suffer from this psychological and physical damage (Scott). I believe that all states throughout the United States should implement a re-entrance to society program for exonerees by providing the necessary resources, ongoing support, and possible compensation for lost time during imprisonment. Being imprisoned for several years of their lives makes it more difficult for exonerees to get back on their feet, recover from the trauma caused by their incarceration, and return back to their past self before imprisonment. With the addition of a nationwide re-entry program for exonerees and a close examination of the current criminal justice system, exonerees across the country may begin to find inner peace with their pasts and move forward with their lives.
Works Cited
Brooks, Samantha K., and Neil Greenberg. “Psychological Impact of Being Wrongfully Accused of Criminal Offences: A Systematic Literature Review.” Medicine, Science and the Law, vol. 61, no. 1, 17 Aug. 2020, pp. 44-54, https://doi.org/10.1177/0025802420949069.
Roebuck, Jeremy. “Philly to pay $9.8M to man exonerated who spent 28 years in prison after wrongful conviction for murder.” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 2022, http://www.inquirer.com/news/chester-hollman-settlement-philly-exoneration-lawsuit-netflix-undisclosed-20201230.html. Accessed 27 Jan. 2022.
Scott, Leslie. “It Never, Ever Ends”: The Psychological Impact of Wrongful Conviction ” American University Criminal Law Brief 5, no. 2 (2010):10-22.