Senator Ted Stevens
Yesterday the news came out that the Justice Department was asking the courts to not only stop the appeal process in the case of Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska but also to reverse the conviction because of what was termed “shocking” prosecutorial misconduct. The judge himself had already found the prosecutors guilty of contempt of court at least once. Now the prosecutors have been removed from the case and are, themselves, under investigation. Unfortunately, Sen. Ted Stevens lost his re-election bid in Alaska, following his conviction right before the elections.
On Wednesday, March 4th, the case of another ex-official took front and center. Governor Don Siegelman of Alabama was convicted in 2006 on various charges. He was convicted and sent to prison, but was released by an appeals court last year after the judges ruled that his appeal raised “substantial questions.” On that Wednesday, finally, two of the witnesses subpoenaed by the Congress of the USA agreed to testify to avoid being jailed for contempt. So, that case is still going on and may yet result in the exoneration of Gov. Don Siegelman, who already lost his re-election bid several years ago, as a result of this case.
And, yes, both of those cases raise substantial and frightening questions. We often say that only those who are rich get true justice. Well, that quite appears to be true in both of these cases. Had these men not been rich and with extensive warchests, it is unlikely that the prosecutorial misconduct in both of the cases would have been uncovered. But, there is an even stronger issue involved and that is summed up in a question. What has happened to our system of justice?
We have already had a decade of news from the Innocence Project, and others, showing the number of people who have been exonerated once the DNA evidence was tested. People were in jail or on death row for decades for crimes that they had never committed. In almost every case, there was prosecutorial misconduct involved. What has happened to our system of justice?
Part of what has happened has been a long-running campaign in this country that pushes any candidate for public office to declare this the “greatest country on earth” and to not criticize it too much. “America–love it or leave it,” the cry of the “anti-hippie” crowd of the 1960’s equated any questioning of techniques in America to disloyalty and ungratefulness. Now, forty years later, we are seeing the result of that type of campaign, which still goes on. Our justice system has serious flaws and we are still being urged to ignore those flaws because it is un-patriotic to acknowledge our faults too much.
Couple that with the overwhelming emphasis of the last couple of decades on being “tough on crime,” and we created an atmosphere ripe for prosecutorial misconduct. One need only watch shows like “Law and Order”–of which I am a fan–to see periodic episodes in which some of the decisions to prosecute a person are based more on gut feeling than on the conviction that the person is guilty. Our atmosphere of being “tough on crime” pushes prosecutors to prosecute even those for whom they have only the lightest of circumstantial proof. This is because if they do not, then in the next election their opponent will accuse them of being “soft on crime.” And, so, it is easier to take on the attitude that the jury will sort it all out than to do the type of work needed to ensure that they are not prosecuting an innocent person.
Here is the sad part. We have applauded that attitude. I have had people comment on this–and other–blogs that if an innocent person or two go to prison, it is not that bad, provided that the overwhelming majority are guilty. After all, our being “tough on crime” is more important than one or two innocents. And, so, we finally came to the point that a Governor and a Senator were taken down. In the case of the Senator, it appears that he may very well have been innocent of the charges. In the case of the Governor, it is yet to be determined.
But, here is something sad. How many Christians among us backed the “get tough on crime” emphasis, the stronger sentencing laws, the loosening of the “unfair” restrictions on law enforcement officers, the push for prosecuting and sending everyone to jail, that led directly to this modern setting where justice is in the eyes of the prosecutor? St. Augustine of Hippo, in his day, thought that the use of judicial torture was justified in the finding of the truth. He was mistaken. But, we have made a similar mistake in backing the removal of restrictions that we were told were allowing criminals to go free. After all, those were the claims of the campaigns of various candidates since the 1980’s. We were soft on crime; the courts were letting criminals go free; criminals had too many protections. But, now, guess what? Just as those “liberals” and “pointy-headed intellectuals” were warning us, it is not just the guilty that are being convicted. No, the “removal” of the restrictions and the push towards not being “soft on crime” have led to the innocent being convicted also.
But, here is the sadder part. There are still too many Christians who are still talking as though we need to get even tougher on crime and remove even more restrictions. I wonder just how many innocent people must be sent to jail before they will change their mind? I wonder how many members of Congress or Governors will need to be falsely accused before they will see the danger to our democracy? Let us remember that removal of Senators–or others–on trumped up charges was a favorite game of the Roman Emperors and of people like King Henry VIII. I wonder if it will take their being falsely accused before they will realize that the protections they disdain are the only thing between them and prosecutorial misconduct. In fact, here is what I find most ironic. Many of the Christians who support the lowering of the “unfair” restrictions on law enforcement and the prosecutors are Dispensationalists who believe that an all-powerful government will rise up and take away our freedoms. Would it not be ironic if their very attitudes on “restrictions” help bring in that very all-powerful government they dread? Would it not be just like Satan to use their very blindness on civil rights to bring in the government they most dread, so that their very sin becomes the gateway for Anti-Christ? [Note: I am not a Dispensationalist and I do not believe in that timeline.]
Leave a Reply