Discource Community Article Review

Brandy Hendon

ENG 3310-01

September 30, 2011



A Call for Change to Help the Innocent



         In the research article “Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful Conviction and the Criminal Justice System” printed in the Law and Human Behavior journal, Arye Rattner, professor of sociology and criminology at the University of Haifa in Israel, discusses the problem of wrongful convictions in the United States and what the reasons are for them. In doing so, he addresses the need for legal professionals to look further into why innocent people are not only being convicted, but many have also been executed. Rattner's article includes his own primary research findings as well as the results of several previous studies, and indicates that there is a definite need for a change in the justice system in order to prevent any more innocent people from being incarcerated or put to death. With modern technology, how is it possible that a person can be convicted of a crime they did not commit? Unfortunately, where DNA testing has come a long way and has become extremely helpful in these types of cases, DNA evidence is not always the issue that causes the problem.

         From the beginning of his article, Rattner sets out to present how his evaluation criteria was created and how he intends to present his results. He describes those who are categorized as “convicted innocents” by proclaiming “if some reasonable doubt exists as to their guilt (that is to say, if they have been convicted even though the evidence does not demonstrate guilt beyond a reasonable doubt), then the verdict of guilt was, from a legal point of view, erroneous,” and notes that while there are many documented cases of convictions that were overturned by higher courts due to denial of due process, those cases were excluded from the current study so as to keep the results “pure” (284). When taking into account the various grounds for wrongful convictions,

Rattner cites Wrongful Imprisonment: Mistaken Convictions and Their Consequences by Brandon and Davies that was conducted in England in 1973, that showed eyewitness misidentification as the leading source of wrongful convictions.

         From the data gathered, Rattner compiled a list of the top six “major sources of error” in these cases and stressed “that only seldom is a listed source the sole one in a particular case,” then proceeded to explain his method of analyzing the information (285-86). By utilizing the Case Survey Method he was able to evaluate “historical and legal documents” to combine with his own analysis. In doing so, he set up a series of questions to determine if the cases fit his specific case study requirements (286).

         The results of Rattner's findings showed that nearly half of the cases they studied (46%) took place prior to 1940, while he reports that “45% of the 205 known cases of wrongful conviction were for murder...The second most frequent occurrence of wrongful conviction in the sample is in the category of robbery...which usually occurs in the presence of the victim” (287-88).

         Although he concedes that it is virtually impossible to “eliminate the falsely convicted from the criminal justice system entirely,” Rattner emphasizes the need to significantly reduce the number of occurrences in the first place (291). He maintains that the findings of his research should “provide a beginning” of future studies on the subject, as well as ways to reduce the number of cases, by also scrutinizing the causes (292).

         Rattner makes a very compelling case as to why he has conducted this research project and how it can benefit the criminal justice system. Clearly, there is an issue that needs to be addressed where wrongful convictions are concerned. The evidence provided in Rattner's research shows that because eyewitness error is so often the main culprit in these cases, implementing safeguards against such errors is the best defense, and something that should certainly be considered. Allowing a judge or jury to hear the evidence prior to the trial, when eyewitness testimony is in question, would assist in determining reliability and validity of the evidence. The benefit of this alone makes Rattner's findings extremely valuable.

         It is extremely unfortunate that a research study on the subject of wrongful convictions even has to be conducted. However, because humans make mistakes, many individuals are convicted of crimes they did not commit, and something must be done to limit the number of wrongful convictions. If more studies like Arye Rattner's were conducted, and the suggestions made from the findings taken into consideration, perhaps we would not have innocent people incarcerated—or worse—executed.



Works Cited

         Rattner, Arye. "Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful Convictions and the Criminal Justice System." Law and Human Behavior 12.3 (1988): 283-93. JStore. Web. 10 Sept. 2011.