November 17, 2007

More international news

Since we're on an international kick today, here are a few other interesting criminal justice stories from around the world.

Major overhaul of South African justice system
South Africa's criminal justice system is in for a series of far-reaching changes after the Cabinet last week approved a turnaround strategy that goes to the heart of the problems with the country's anti-crime methods and structures.
The story, with lots of relevant links, is here.

Dire prison overcrowding in Great Britain
Since you read the news, you already know about prison overcrowding in the United States. And I've previously blogged about the problem elsewhere in the world, including in New Zealand. Yesterday's Times reported on the dire situation in England these days, with prisoners being driven around for hours in search of a cell to squeeze them in. It sounds like the crisis situation in hospital emergency rooms here in the United States!

Britain’s most senior judge has given warning that the shortage of prison spaces was now "critical" as a result of ministers' failure to take account of the cost implications of their sentencing policies.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, said that the present prison overcrowding could not continue. And he delivered a stark message to ministers — either they should fund the sentences that judges impose or change the sentencing framework that requires them, often, to jail offenders.

"We are in a critical situation," he said. "The prisons are full to capacity." Prisoners who went to court did not know if they would return to the same cell or even the same prison. Cells designed for one were being used for two and prisons were being forced, literally, to close their doors to more admissions. "Prisoners are being driven around for hours on end in a desperate search for a prison that can squeeze them in," he added. "As often or not 200 or 300 are spending the night in police or court cells. We simply cannot go on like this."
The full article is here.

Expert calls for overhaul of Brazilian criminal justice system

The criminal justice system in Brazil is in fare more dire straits than those in South Africa or England, according to a United Nations expert.
Brazil's police engage frequently in extrajudicial executions and many moonlight in death squads or militias involved in racketeering, an independent United Nations human rights expert said today, calling for wholesale reform of the country’s culture of policing.

Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, said in a statement detailing his preliminary observations after conducting an 11-day visit to Brazil that its prisons are also severely overcrowded, leading to riots and numerous killings by both guards and inmates.
While Brazil's authorities, especially in its biggest cities, face enormous pressure in protecting citizens from the threats of gang violence, drug trafficking and other forms of organized crime, he said the criminal justice system must be overhauled to stop the routine abuse of human rights.
The U.N. news release is here; the full report is here.

Expert witness scandal rocks Canada

Louise Reynolds of Ontario was incarcerated for three years for stabbing her 7-year-old daughter more than 80 times with a pair of scissors. She served most of her prison time in solitary confinement to protect her from other prisoners and guards who wanted to kill her for her vicious crime. Her only visitor was the spirit of her dead daughter, who brought her ghostly comfort from the grave.

Then it turned out Reynolds had been telling the truth when she denied guilt. A pitbull had mauled her daughter to death.

William Mullins-Johnson spent more than 12 years in another Ontario prison for sodomizing and strangling to death his 4-year-old niece.

Then it turned out the little girl had died of natural causes, possibly from complications of a chronic stomach ailment.

The unifying factor identified in these and at least a dozen other wrongful convictions in Canada was the testimony of Dr. Charles Smith, one of Canada’s most renowned pediatric forensic pathologists. The revelations of Dr. Smith's erroneous findings in multiple high-profile cases has severely tarnished the image of the judiciary in the eyes of the Canadian public.

This week, Canada began a judicial inquiry into what went wrong. The hearings, expected to last several months, will examine not only the practice of pediatric forensic pathology but the broader issues of prosecutorial tunnel vision, overreliance on expert testimony, and public overconfidence in forensic science as a result of the "CSI Syndrome."

One commonality among many of the cases is the socioeconomic status of the accused, who included racial minorities, aboriginals, and single mothers, which likely stacked the deck against them.

The scandal follows a highly similar scandal in England over Sir Roy Meadows' testimony falsely accusing dozens of mothers of harming their children due to so-called Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy. Other scandals involving expert scientific testimony have erupted in the United States, including one that I've previously posted about involving forensic odontologist Michael West of Mississippi.

Overall, these scandals are driving home the fact that experts are not infallible.

"We give great deference to experts," said Bill Trudell, chairman of the Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers. "The [Canadian] inquiry will change that and start people thinking that these experts are human and can make mistakes."

The Toronto Star has all the latest on the hearing, including a detailed list of the cases and the known facts underlying them.

Photo: Pediatric forensic pathologist Charles Smith.

Gory details sway jurors to convict

That's the fascinating finding from new research out of Australia. As reported in today's Sydney Morning Herald:
JURORS given gruesome evidence including pictures of a murder victim or descriptions of torture and mutilation are more than five times more likely to convict than jurors not given gory details, Australian research shows.

Findings from mock criminal trial studies by University of NSW researchers provide the first direct link indicating that juries might be prejudiced by such evidence and might make biased decisions influenced by a desire to punish.

One researcher, a university PhD candidate, David Bright, said both those studies, and a third with similar results involving a mock civil accident damages case, were the first in which "emotional reactions were directly measured in response to gruesome photos which were then shown to have an impact on decisions" of the mock jurors. The results underscore concern expressed more than 20 years ago by the Australian Law Reform Commission that allowing gruesome evidence could be prejudicial to defendants.

Mr Bright, soon to submit his PhD in forensic psychology, said Australian judges were more likely to override defence objections and admit gruesome evidence because its probative value, or ability to prove or disprove a controverted fact, outweighed any potential negative influence.

The story continues here.

Nov. 26 UPDATE: The jury consultation blog DELIBERATIONS has more detail on this topic.

November 16, 2007

California court upholds indeterminate commitment of Sexually Violent Predators


An appellate court yesterday denied a challenge by a group of civilly committed sex offenders to the state's new Jessica's Law.

The sex offenders had argued that the indeterminate commitment provision of Jessica's Law did not apply retroactively to them. Prior to last year's passage of the Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act (Proposition 83, or Jessica's Law), civilly committed sex offenders were entitled to a jury trial every two years on the issue of whether they remained mentally disordered and dangerous. Now, commitments are for an indefinite period. A group of previously committed sex offenders whose recommitment petitions were pending when the law passed had argued that they should either be released or, at minimum, should remain entitled to a new hearing every two years. A new law cannot be applied retroactively unless it specifically says so in the text of the law, they pointed out.

In the ruling, Bourquez v. Superior Court, the Third District Court of Appeal disagreed. Using rather strained logic, the court held that it is not a retroactive action to apply the new law's commitment criteria, because an extension hearing is "a new and independent proceeding" aimed at determining the person's current mental state. Under California's SVP law, a sex offender may be civilly committed if he has a mental disorder that keeps him from controlling his sexually violent behavior, making him dangerous and likely to sexually reoffend. (See Hubbart v. Superior Court, 1999, 19 Cal.4th 1138.)

The intention of both Jessica's Law and a similar bill passed by the state Legislature earlier last year (the Sex Offender Punishment, Control, and Containment Act of 2006, SB 1128) was to increase the punishment and control of sex offenders, not to let some SVP's go free, the court pointed out.

Much of the media coverage of Jessica's Law has focused on its residency restrictions banning sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of schools or parks, its longer periods of parole, and its requirement that sex offenders be monitored for life using global positioning technology.

But the changes in the SVP laws under which people may be civilly committed after serving their criminal sentences were also significant. The previous requirement of two separate victims was reduced to only one victim. The single offense may have been committed as a juvenile. And the requirement of "substantial sexual conduct" in crimes against children was eliminated. Theoretically, then, the new law might allow lifetime commitment of a 16-year-old who had fondled a child on a single occasion.

Yesterday's ruling will likely further foment the unrest I've been reporting (here and here) among the men being held at Coalinga State Hospital.

The full text of the ruling in Bourquez v. Superior Court (2007 SOS 6712) is available here. The changes to California statutory law made by Jessica's Law are viewable here. (The SVP provisions fall under Welfare & Institutions Code sections 6600 et seq.) California's Department of Mental Health also has a listing of related statutes and legal cases, online here.
Photo credit: lyzadanger - "The End of Coalinga, California" (Creative Commons license)

November 15, 2007

L.A. Times investigates "Titanic State Hospital"


"BREAKDOWN"


California's sex offender treatment and detention center in shambles

Two days ago, I posted about the continuing problems at Coalinga State Hospital, California's expensive new detention facility for civilly committed sex offenders. Today's L.A. Times features an in-depth look at the institution's problems. The article, "Breakdown: Turmoil replaces treatment at Coalinga hospital," is written by Scott Gold and Lee Romney, who have been covering California's troubled state hospital system over the past couple of years. Astonishingly, the reporters found a former psychiatric technician from the hospital who was willing to assert on record that many of the men being detained at Coalinga pose little risk to the community if released.

Excerpts of the hard-hitting article follow; the full article (plus a photo gallery) is available online.
Two years after California opened the nation's largest facility designed to house and treat men who have been declared sexually violent predators, Coalinga State Hospital is described by both patients and staff as an institution in turmoil.

Convinced that they stand little chance of being released and angry about perceived deficiencies at the hospital, patients are engaged in a tense standoff with administrators, according to interviews with more than 40 patients and staff members.

… "We're calling it the Titanic State Hospital," said a psychiatric technician who, like most other current employees, spoke on condition of anonymity, fearing reprisal from administrators. "We've lost control. I've been saying for a couple of months now that the monkeys are running the circus."

Patients, meanwhile, are despairing.

"It's hopeless," said Robert Bates, 41, who was sent to Coalinga after serving a 10-year prison term for committing a lewd and lascivious act. "This is a therapeutic setting, supposedly. But it's nothing more than a mock-up prison. They can call it what they want. But it's prison."

… Michael Feer, a psychiatric social worker with more than three decades of experience, worked at Coalinga for a year before leaving this spring. He now works in San Diego County with recently paroled sex offenders, men who in some cases committed the same crimes as those at Coalinga but who are being released into the community, he said.

Feer said that although all Coalinga patients qualify as violent predators on paper, he believes that more than a third of them would pose no threat if released.

"They did their time, and suddenly they are picked up again and shipped off to a state hospital for essentially an indeterminate period of time," Feer said. To get out, he added, "they have to demonstrate that they are no longer a risk, which can be a very high standard. So, yeah, they do have grounds to be very upset."

The hospital, Feer said, "is a setup" - ostensibly a treatment hospital but one built with a wink to a public that has little compunction about locking up sex offenders forever....

Article continues here.

Oregon high court clarifies drug-free school zone law

Prosecutor need not prove defendant's knowledge

A drug dealer need not know of his proximity to a school in order to be convicted under a drug-free school zone law, the Oregon Supreme Court has ruled. The ruling follows similar case law in other states.

Oregon's law is intended to protect children "regardless of whether the dealers know they are within 1,000 feet of a school," the ruling states.

"That's typical with drug crimes when you're looking ... at the social harm as opposed to the mental intent of the seller," commented law professor Laura Appleman.

A 2001 study by the Boston University School of Public Health found that a similar drug zone law was not effective in reducing drug sales near schools.

The full AP story is online at the Oregon Statesman Journal website.