Chapter 9
I guess Simon switches between events in the book because he is following the time span in which these events happened.
I understand that, but I think to an extent I'd like it if there wasn't such a long span between related events.
At the end of chapter seven, Simon says Nolan's squad is breaking apart. That still hasn't been addressed, and in this chapter, clearance rate is good and everything seems dandy.
At the beginning of chapter nine, another young girl's body is found. Simon follows Edgerton along on the investigation for a while, then it switches to information about the court system.
Then Frazier's trial, the man who killed Lena Lucas and Purnell Booker in chapter four.
I find the switching around (even though the time frame makes it logical, and more like a year in the life) takes away from the impact. Those deaths occurred 3 chapters (so three weeks for me) ago, and many people have died between then and now.
I found myself waiting to slog through the rest of this chapter so I can find out more about Andrea Perry.
BUT I might just be impatient.
Once bitten, twice shy
"Success is its own catalyst; failure too," page 460.
Even though in this case it seems better that there is only one detective working, I find it sad, and I guess disheartening that because the Latonya Wallace case didn't get solved the detectives don't want to try.
Isn't that their job?
They've given up hope, and it's interesting how it wasn't that hard. Maybe this is the work of a serial killer, or at least be the start of some justice.
(Though again, it seems better that they don't help.)
Expectations vs. Reality
"9A. To a jury, any doubt is reasonable.
9B. The better the case, the worse the jury.
And, in addition to rules 9A and 9B:
9C. A good man is hard to find, but twelve of them, gathered together in one place, is a miracle," page 469.
Simon gives statistics as to how effective* the prison system is. His wording, "And if you factor in those unsolved homicides in which there are no arrests, the chance of being caught and convicted for taking a life in Baltimore is just over 40 percent. All of which is not to say that the unlucky minority then suffers punishment commensurate with their crime," page 472.
Based on this wording it seems that Simon (or the detectives) think that the system is largely ineffective. When you consider that 40 per cent of people who go through the courts system are charged it does seem that way.
But the reasons are things like:
- Death
- Self-defense
- Mental illness (not criminally responsible)
- Lack of evidence
Isn't it good that people aren't being thrown into prison because of these things (minus death.) The prison system shouldn't be something that is used to create money (cough cough), or as a warning to others. It should only be for people who have committed a crime, and if it can't be proven, it sucks but they shouldn't go to jail.
*criminals who are put into prison
Television is misleading part: 9534798347698326
As I've mentioned before, television has impacted my perception of police officers, medical examiners, and detectives. (What? They're not all like Sherlock?)
But it's interesting that the perceptions people form from television can make them bad jurors.They think that decisions should be black and white, evidence is easy to come by.
I wonder what, if anything has been done to combat juror apathy in modern courts. Is there training? Or perhaps the climate is so different (at least in Mantioba) than the climate was in Baltimore in the 70s that it isn't really a problem any more. I'm looking forward to learning more about trials next semester.
No comments:
Post a Comment