Customer Reviews

Trials Without Truth: Why Our System of Criminal Trials Has Become an Expensive Failure and What We Need to Do to Rebuild It

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is an excellent book by a scholar interested in "thinking outside the box." Pizzi looks at the problems with the American criminal justice system's excessive preoccupation with procedural issues at the expense of substantive justice. The book is an excellent read for anyone who thinks that there has to be a better way to structure our criminal justice system.

Having served as a judge in a large city for the last seven years, I can tell you that this book is exactly on point. Sadly, though, few are willing to engage in the public policy debate Professor Pizzi's book ought to trigger. Pizzi exposes the failures of our criminal justice system with a clean straight-forward style that makes this book enjoyable to lawyers and frustrated citizens alike. By comparing our system to those of other Western democracies, Pizzi not only broadens our perspective; but exposes as nonsense our arrogant and baseless belief that our system is not only best, but really the only way to do things. Even after twenty-seven years as a lawyer and judge, I discover, once again, how much I had to learn. Probably, Pizzi's most important insight is his analysis of the link between our imbalanced system and the rampant dishonesty it has bred among lawyers, judges and police. He describes how the well- meaning effort to produce an honest result in the face of unrealistic court imposed rules, formulated without the benefit of an open public policy debate, has discredited our system. I can only hope that during my lifetime we can begin an honest look at our system and begin to rid it of the cynicism and disrespect which now characterize it.

Amazing book and so true. What in the world happend to our trial system? Excellent excellent reading of how and why our trial system has turned into nonsense.

First of all, I have the paperback version, so the page numbers I reference refer to that version.

The problem I have with this book is that although many of the practical problems that Pizzi addresses may be true in some, many or nearly all circumstances, you'd never know because the book references no real empirical data. Rather, Pizzi makes broad, sweeping generalizations about American culture and our "procedure obsession". He then proceeds to discuss the various ways in which those generalizations, not grounded in empirical data, inform the American criminal justice system in catastrophic ways. Right from the start the book never gets any traction as a trustworthy source of criticism. Although the author has great credentials, the book fails to assert itself as a scholarly, credible criticism of the system. It just doesn't provide reliable evidence to support the conclusions drawn. Furthermore, the simplistic, straw man arguments regarding the legal values that underlie our "procedural obsessions" don't fairly depict the very real harms that those "accused" of crimes suffer today and have suffered historically.

For example, when Pizzi chose to discuss the "right to remain silent" on page 63, in an effort to illustrate the notion that the pressure the police put on suspects to confess can be tremendous, he references "My Cousin Vinny", the movie, and a humorous confusion that occurs between the accused and the police. The reference is sort of light hearted, yet the matter at hand, 5th Amendment rights, is solemn and fundamental to a fair system. Rather than referencing a comical movie to make an oppositional point (which is a bit straw man), why not reference and discuss something more compelling and real, such as Ed Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936)? This is a case where 3 black men accused of murdering a white man, gave confessions procured through torture. The torture consisted of some mock hangings and then a release from the noose just in time to spare the accused from suffocation. It also consisted of bloody whippings. This case makes a far more compelling argument for the "right to remain silent" then does "My Cousin Vinny".

Furthermore, while attempting to illustrate that our trial system is weak, because defendants have all of the advantages and the prosecutors have such a difficult time proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt, the book provides an example for us on page 71; "..the task of the prosecution might be much harder if, for example, a bloody glove were to be suppressed because a police officer was too lazy to get a warrant." Kind of a shameless reference to the OJ trial don't you think? This reference casts doubt on the credibility of the book. I mean, is it really necessary to say 'bloody glove' with regard to a criticism about the remedy for failing to obtain a warrant before a seizure takes place? I think referencing a different object seized would have gotten the point across, but no, the author chose the inflammatory OJ reference. Always a good trial to reference when you want to enrage people about the problems with the American criminal justice system. This statement really hurt the credibility of the argument in my view.

All in all, I believe that much of what Pizzi says is probably true, he has the experience and he is an expert. I don't disagree that the system often seems impractical, wasteful, and frustrating. I just don't think the manner and method of presentation in this book makes a compelling argument. It seems a little unbalanced and biased which hurts its credibility. (On page 68 the author blames police perjury on the Miranda line of cases; those poor policemen have to lie on the stand to get convictions!)

The best thing about the book is it helps you realize just how difficult it is to balance the promises of the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments against the practicalities of the enforcement and administration of criminal justice.

Perhaps this review is too harsh. I should have probably given it two stars but I couldn't figure out how to change that part after I'd already submitted the review.