Submitted by scottreed on Sat, 10/27/2007 - 4:41pm.
I'm excited about getting involved in the many projects our local chapter as well as ACLU Northern California have in the works. In the past month that I've been officially an intern, I've learned a great deal about the organization as well as some of the more pressing legal issues in California. I hope to use this blog to discuss the projects I'm directly involved in as well as speak out on issues that are of particular interest to me. I encourage readers (thanks for reading, by the way!) to use the comment feature to weigh in with their own opinions or correct any factual errors. On with it!
Recently, ACLU-NC sent members an e-mail outlining some of the legislation that has recently been signed or vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger (hopefully I won't have to look up how to spell his name by the time he runs for President). A few that he did not support but ACLU officially endorsed concerned practices that often lead to wrongful criminal convictions. You can read more about that here .
- SB 511- requires recording of criminal interrogations. When an interrogation lasts 14 hours and results in a confession, how can we be sure that this is legitimate? Was the accused given water, bathroom breaks? Were they abused or unfairly pressured to make a false confession? The best way to know might be the ability to listen to the interrogation.
- SB 609- involves the corroboration of jailhouse informant testimony. Often there are certain privileges granted when fellow prisoners provide testimony against each other, and this may not be a reliable way to convict the accused.
- SB 756- encourages a statewide standard based on scientific evidence concerning eyewitness identification.
While recognizing that they address important issues, the governor vetoed these bills because he believes they infringe on the ability of police and investigators to do their jobs. Furthermore, he deems these bills unnecessary due to the very few cases in which we know certain practices have been misused. Our governor simply believes that SB 511, 609, 756 are unnecessary.
At the same time that the Department of Justice seeks to "fast-track" the process of getting a convicted criminal through death row, our Governor does not want to seek the recommendations of the California Commission of the Fair Administration of Justice to work towards a legal system that we can trust. Started by the Senate in 2004, the commission consists of experts who have unanimously agreed that these are much needed reforms. Too bad the governor doesn't seem to agree.
In the end, this equals the continued ill-treatment of poor, uneducated people who are wrongly accused and then have little skills or money to seek proper assistance in investigating their trial and the evidence that was used to convict them. Why not utilize the knowledge that exists so that we can be confident that those in prison are actually guilty? I suppose more rules for police, investigators, and judges is simply too much to bear in the face of a criminal justice and prison system that continues to wreak havoc on economically and educationally disadvantaged people and their communities, especially people of color.
SB 1019 is no different. Legislation that purports to hold officials accountable is not assuming criminal or unjust activity on the part of all those that we trust to protect and serve our communities, however, it does provide a necessary safeguard. No matter ones opinion on prisons or the death penalty, I think we might all be able to agree that prison is for those who have committed crimes, not the innocent. Our governor needs to take a proactive stance in making sure this happens.
hey scott!