News (Media Awareness Project) - US TX: Punishment Seen As Deterrence |
| Title: | US TX: Punishment Seen As Deterrence |
| Published On: | 1999-07-10 |
| Source: | Houston Chronicle (TX) |
| Fetched On: | 2008-09-06 02:22:44 |
PUNISHMENT SEEN AS DETERRENCE
What is the purpose of punishment in the criminal justice system?
Seventy-two prospective jurors in state District Judge Denise Collins' court
were asked recently to answer that rather broad question. The answers might
shed some light on public attitudes about crime and punishment.
The question arose during jury selection in the case of a man charged with
aggravated sexual assault of a child. The prosecutor and the defense lawyer
each questioned members of the jury panel about their backgrounds,
experiences and attitudes to determine which would be the best jurors from
each side's point of view.
Most questions were answered by a show of hands. But in one case, prosecutor
Linda Hood went through the panel individually and asked each potential
juror to choose one factor -- rehabilitation, retribution or deterrence --
as the general goal of punishment in a criminal case.
In response to questions, Hood defined retribution as punishment for its own
sake, based on the idea that certain acts are so reprehensible that justice
requires the perpetrator to suffer. She defined deterrence as preventing the
defendant, and perhaps other people, from committing the same acts in the
future. No one asked her to define rehabilitation.
Hood acknowledged that many jurors might believe that punishment should
accomplish all three of the listed goals, to one degree or another. But she
insisted that each juror choose just one. Presumably, the answers reflected
the factor that each juror considered most important.
More than half of the potential jurors -- perhaps 40 to 45 of the 72 on the
panel -- answered, "deterrence." Most of the rest -- 20 to 25 -- answered
"retribution." Only a handful answered "rehabilitation." (These figures are
a rough approximation based on the observations of this reporter, who was on
the panel but was not chosen as a juror.)
Several potential jurors qualified their answers, saying they would like to
answer "rehabilitation," but felt that, realistically, this goal is rarely
accomplished.
Mike Snyder
What is the purpose of punishment in the criminal justice system?
Seventy-two prospective jurors in state District Judge Denise Collins' court
were asked recently to answer that rather broad question. The answers might
shed some light on public attitudes about crime and punishment.
The question arose during jury selection in the case of a man charged with
aggravated sexual assault of a child. The prosecutor and the defense lawyer
each questioned members of the jury panel about their backgrounds,
experiences and attitudes to determine which would be the best jurors from
each side's point of view.
Most questions were answered by a show of hands. But in one case, prosecutor
Linda Hood went through the panel individually and asked each potential
juror to choose one factor -- rehabilitation, retribution or deterrence --
as the general goal of punishment in a criminal case.
In response to questions, Hood defined retribution as punishment for its own
sake, based on the idea that certain acts are so reprehensible that justice
requires the perpetrator to suffer. She defined deterrence as preventing the
defendant, and perhaps other people, from committing the same acts in the
future. No one asked her to define rehabilitation.
Hood acknowledged that many jurors might believe that punishment should
accomplish all three of the listed goals, to one degree or another. But she
insisted that each juror choose just one. Presumably, the answers reflected
the factor that each juror considered most important.
More than half of the potential jurors -- perhaps 40 to 45 of the 72 on the
panel -- answered, "deterrence." Most of the rest -- 20 to 25 -- answered
"retribution." Only a handful answered "rehabilitation." (These figures are
a rough approximation based on the observations of this reporter, who was on
the panel but was not chosen as a juror.)
Several potential jurors qualified their answers, saying they would like to
answer "rehabilitation," but felt that, realistically, this goal is rarely
accomplished.
Mike Snyder
Member Comments |
No member comments available...
