Our Justice System…Without the Justice

Before I begin, I just want to make this point clear. I don’t believe that evil acts of crime such as murder and rape are good. Obviously they are far from good. In many of the court cases that I will mention later on, I agree that the people convicted of these crimes are definitely guilty and their actions are morally wrong. What I want to point out is that the court system can be unfair due to their harsh treatment and cruel punishments toward people convicted of crimes. To an extent, even criminals still deserve equal treatment. Ultimately, I want to focus on the corrupt and unfair side of justice systems and the mistreatment of people convicted of crimes. 

Let’s go all the way back to 1951. Hernandez v. Texas. This court case would become an important moment for the future of civil rights in the United States. One evening, Mexican American, Pete Hernandez, was drinking with friends at a local bar when tension rose between him and Joe Espinosa. After their dispute, Hernandez obtained a gun from his home and returned to the bar where he eventually shot and killed Espinosa. He was arrested and argued that he acted in self-defense. You might be wondering how this demonstrates unfairness in the court system. Essentially, Hernandez’s lawyer objected that Jackson County treated Hernandez unfairly by not allowing Mexican or Latin Americans to sit on the Jury. The court dismissed this objection and Hernandez was found guilty. The turning point came when the U.S. Supreme Court favored Hernandez’s argument that the jury selection was indeed unfair (Vaughn 131). Although Hernandez’s argument won, the initial decision from the court reveals early acts of unfairness within the justice system.  Overall, this court case was a defining moment that brought the unfair and corrupt side of the court system to light. It makes us wonder: In what ways does the justice system treat criminals unfairly? What factors and circumstances are considered when deciding punishments? And how does literature portray an unjust court system?

A fair trial and equal treatment are supposed to be fundamental rights for every single person. Even for those convicted of crimes. But in literature, Jivan’s trial in A Burning and many of the court cases in Just Mercy depict the harsh reality of a corrupt and unfair court system by revealing the blatant mistreatment, inhumane punishments, and unfair conclusions that criminals often receive. 

In A Burning, by Megha Majumdar, after Jivan is falsely accused, her trial decides her fate. For Jivan, it’s either life or death. During this scene, the court does not listen to her and they give her absolutely zero power in her own trial. Jivan expresses her irritated feeling when describes herself as a “straw doll,” (Majumdar 197). Majumdar uses this simile to highlight the inequality in the justice system by showing that Jivan is being treated like a puppet. She is reduced to nothing. The court is the puppet master: they have total control over her, they refuse to let Jivan express her opinions, and they show no empathy toward her. Essentially, this shows how she has completely no power in this decision. Through this comparison, Majumdar is able to effectively draw attention to the corrupt side of the court system by exposing the constant mistreatment against those who are convicted of crimes, such as Jivan. 

Jivan emphasizes her annoyance and frustration by comparing the court administrators and the judge to children (Majumdar 197). This further conveys her anger toward how she is being treated by the justice system. Ultimately, this important scene helps reveal the mistreatment Jivan is receiving. It’s Jivan’s experience and the court refuses to believe anything she admits. She is completely blocked off. She can’t even contribute to her own trial. As a result of this obvious mistreatment, Majumdar effectively exposes the reality of how people convicted of crimes are treated unfairly and poorly in a corrupt justice system. Majumdar uses these comparisons to create Jivan’s powerless and hopeless feeling and frustration toward the unfairness she’s suffering from which points out that harsh treatment against criminals is a substantial part of a corrupt justice system. Jivan’s fate is left to an unfair and corrupt court system. Or in other words, a bunch of “children.”

In addition, the corrupt nature of court systems can also be noticed through their decisions to give cruel and inhumane punishments without taking account of important factors such as age, disabilities, traumatic history, and mental illness. In Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson shares his lawyer experiences about the Eighth Amendment in court cases. In one of Stevenson’s cases he has to defend a 14-year-old girl who suffered from mental illness and a challenging childhood. He states that the court “could not consider Trina’s age, mental illness, poverty, the abuse she had suffered…Trina was immediately shipped off to an adult prison for women,” (Stevenson 153). Stevenson’s case clearly highlights how Trina was tried as an adult and given a cruel punishment without considering her age, mental illness, and traumatic life. Even though she did commit a serious crime, the unfair part of the court is that they didn’t care about her young age and mental illness. These important factors did not play a role in determining how harsh the punishment would be. The court automatically gave Trina an extreme punishment. Ultimately, these inhumane punishments that criminals are given shine a light on the unfair side of the justice system because they don’t consider necessary circumstances and factors when deciding the seriousness of the punishment. Stevenson’s case raises the questions: what factors should be considered when determining the severity of punishments for criminals? And does mental illness and age justify the immoral decisions that these criminals make? These are questions that are still very relevant in today’s society and justice system. The court cases in Just Mercy argue that age and mental illness greatly affect how these criminals behave and process their decisions and actions. Therefore, mental illness and age do have to be considered to some extent. Not considering factors such as young age, disabilities, mental illness, and abuse make it unfair for the person convicted of the crime. Even though these crimes are very wicked, the criminals still have to be treated equally. 

Furthermore, the unjust part of court systems is revealed through instances where they automatically jump to unfair conclusions without knowing the full story. This is evident in both literature and real life. In A Burning, The court is provided with misleading information from the media about Jivan being associated with terrorist attacks. More specifically, the court believed she was seen carrying bombs, when in reality she was carrying books on the train because she teaches English to her friend Lovely. But the court did not listen to any part of the truth. They automatically concluded that Jivan was a terrorist and they gave her the death penalty without knowing her full story. This scene shows that court systems can be extremely unfair due to the fact that they can jump to unreasonable conclusions based on misinformation and without being willing to learn the full truth. Instantly acting on these conclusions shows unfairness and corruptness within the court system because they don’t consider any information on the criminal’s side. In A Burning, the court’s obvious bias toward the media and their own beliefs resulted in the mistreatment of Jivan. The court treated Jivan unfairly by not listening to her full story, and instead immediately accusing her as a terrorist and giving her a cruel punishment. Jivan was falsely accused, and this corrupt court system ignored the truth and was blinded by misinformation.

How does this example in literature compare to the real world? Essentially, these false conclusions happen in real life too. Not only literature. In 1989, five black teenage suspects were convicted of rape and assault. The victim was “unable to recall details of the attack” and DNA samples failed to match the teenagers. You think they would be innocent, right? But they were still arrested and found guilty. Thirteen years later, Matias Reyes confessed that “he alone had committed the vicious act.” (The Forensic Examiner). Similar to A Burning, the court quickly jumped to unfair conclusions and automatically arrested the five innocent teenagers. This shows that court systems can be unfair based off of their unreasonable conclusions and decisions after not looking at the full story. Court systems treat these people convicted of crimes unfairly by immediately viewing them as evil. Instead of exploring the full truth and story, courts impulsively decide on unfair conclusions. Overall, these unfair conclusions show unequal treatment toward criminals and corruption in the court system because they are unreasonable decisions that aren’t supported by the truth and the opinions and perspectives of the criminal.

Now let’s go back to 1989. Penry v. Lynaugh. Johnny Paul Penry was convicted of rape and murder. But what made this court decision difficult was that he was mentally ill. Penry had the ability “to learn of the average child of six to seven years old and the ability to function socially of a ten-year-old.” The court did not consider Penry’s mental disability and the jurors sentenced him to death (Haltom). In essence, the mistreatment, cruel punishments, and unfair conclusions that criminals receive are striking factors that have been revealing the unfair and corrupt side of court systems for decades. This inequality, injustice, and and harsh treatment toward those who have been convicted of crimes is a massive societal and governmental issue that still exists today. For years, people convicted of crimes have been “damaged and traumatized by our system of justice,” (Stevenson 160). Unfortunately, equality and justice are not guaranteed, they are things that people struggle to obtain. They are human rights that have to be battled for. No matter who you are, everyone should be treated equally. In the words of Bryan Stevenson, “the closer we get to mass incarceration and extreme levels of punishment, the more I believe it’s necessary to recognize that we all need mercy, we all need justice,” (Stevenson 18). Justice is being lost in our justice system.

Me when the power goes out as I’m writing this essay