|
Guilty: The Collapse of Criminal Justice | 
| Author: Harold J. Rothwax
Publisher: Grand Central Publishing
Category: Book
List Price: $13.99
Buy New: $0.01
You Save: $13.98 (100%)
New (7) Used (63) Collectible (3) from $0.01
Avg. Customer Rating:  17 reviews
Sales Rank: 562149
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 256
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.6
Dimensions (in): 8 x 5.3 x 0.6
ISBN: 0446673048
Dewey Decimal Number: 345.7305
EAN: 9780446673044
ASIN: 0446673048
Publication Date: January 1, 1997
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: good condition
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com Review
Judge Rothwax was a defense lawyer before becoming a New York trial judge 25 years ago, and now his nickname among defense lawyers is "the prince of darkness." He is known as one of the hardest judges on the bench, extremely unsympathetic to the accused. This book will reinforce his reputation. Rothwax is convinced that procedural scruples are causing appellate judges to release large numbers of dangerous criminals, and that this is threatening "the collapse of criminal justice." In this strident polemic he calls for a loosening of rules of evidence in favor of the prosecution, a limiting of a suspect's right to a lawyer during the investigative phase, a complete repudiation of the police Miranda warning, and technical changes to speed trials.
Product Description
A judge on the New York State Supreme Court hands down a stinging indictment of the nation's bureaucratized legal system and offers ten major reforms, including the elimination of Miranda rights. Reprint. NYT.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 12 more reviews...
 The Gripes of Rothwax September 21, 2006
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
It is dishonest to claim that criminal justice has collapsed. This one-sided book should not be read by people who do not understand Rothwax's perverse criticisms. He is arguing against the Constitution and the Bill or Rights (p.234), and for features of the European Civil Law system (which derive from royal rule). There is no index in this book so you can't reference the many topics. In Chapter 11 Rothwax suggests "basic changes" to our Common Law system that subverts it. He says the Miranda ruling is unnecessary because of video tape. But isn't that the result of the Miranda decision? Speedy trials are required by the Bill of Rights. No "right to an attorney"? Shame on you, Rothwax! Logically and legally people are innocent until proven guilty; you can't prove innocence. Rothwax would change that to require a defendant to testify (p.237). Allow judges a "more active role" (p.238)? The experience of America has been to restrict judges, and make them elected, not chosen by political bosses. The reversals on "technical" grounds usually means some law was violated in the trial. Any trial which disregards law is not justice, which involves applying the laws. If the justice system is a search for the truth, why does Rothwax object to that? Something is wrong here. Maybe he needs a new career?
Rothwax claims our justice system was "relatively simple" in the past (p.24). F. Lee Bailey can explain about Dr. Sam Sheppard. The right to a speedy trial is to prevent mischief by the clique running the government (p.25). The "reliability of an identification" is to prevent wrongful conviction from unreliable eyewitnesses (p.26). Rothwax complains about suppressing evidence but admits it is impossible to establish clear rules to govern all future cases (p.49). Rothwax explains the Miranda decision as evolving from earlier cases (pp.76-77). Miranda requires objective facts, not opinions (p.82). Rothwax admits it was used against "unlawful police conduct" (p.86). The examples on pages 112-119 suggest political and personality conflicts in the judicial system.
Chapter 6 doesn't tell you that the Canon of Ethics requires a lawyer to use all lawful means to defend a client. This system of advocates developed from Trial by Combat in Medieval times. Plea bargaining greases the wheels of justice and provides more production of guilty defendants at a lower cost to the public. Rothwax doesn't mention the European Civil Law system here (Chapter 7). In Chapter 8 Rothwax argues for reciprocal discovery but admits the Fifth Amendment forbids this (p.179)! Do not be fooled by Rothwax's "Sealed Envelope Proposal" (p.184). It violates the Common Law (innocent until proven guilty). In Chapter 9 Rothwax again attacks the Fifth Amendment to force a defendant to testify (p.189)! Can an innocent person explain something they didn't do (p.191)? Ordinary people can't match a skilled lawyer. Rothwax's disdain for the Bill of Rights suggests philosophical subversion (p.196).
In Chapter 10 Rothwax criticizes the jury system (p.200). His opinion about a "too knowledgeable" juror can be another name for bias (pp.203-204). Or someone likely to be trapped in minor details? Rothwax wants to abolish peremptory challenges (p.205). Will that help a search for truth? Rothwax attacks the requirement of a unanimous jury verdict (p.213)! Wasn't this amount developed over the centuries as an optimal size? The complaint about "annotated" verdict sheets seems wrong-headed (p.217). Printing only "some of the statutory elements of the counts" is misleading to jurors. "Jurors have the power to ignore a judge's instructions and do whatever they please" (p.218)? Rothwax has a strange love of the Civil Law system (p.220) considering he has never lived under it! You should read Marshall Houts' book "King's X and the Common Law System ..." to be better educated than by this tabloid-style story about laws. The photographic angle for the back-cover picture tells something.
 Amazing Book June 2, 2005
1 out of 5 found this review helpful
I read the book "Guilty" by Judge Rothwax for a book report for my grade 11 high school law course. I began reading and soon found that I could not stop. This book is very interesting, and although I live in Canada, we have the same problems as the U.S Courts do.
Judge Rothwax points out many problems and solutions to each. He recognizes that the number of peremptory challenges, (rejecting prospective jurors without cause), should be reduced, and that the need for a consensus in the jury is leading to several unnecessary hung juries. People are making ludicrous decisions, and he uses the example of a woman who said the defendant was "too good looking" to commit the crime.
Furthermore, Rothwax argues that the Miranda rights and rights regarding search and seizure are causing the police several problems. For the Miranda rights, people are confessing to the police that they committed a crime, some as serious as First-Degree Murder, and they are let off the hook because an attorney was not present. As for the search and seizure rights, there are so many exceptions to the rule, that the police have a hard time keeping track of what they can and cannot do, as anyone would.
I would definitely recommend this book to anyone that is interested in the court system and how it works. It has definitely opened my eyes, showing me that something must be done. Rothwax is a brilliant author who gets his point across clearly, and I am certain that anyone reading this book will strongly agree.
Rothwax for the Supreme Court April 11, 2005
0 out of 3 found this review helpful
I agree that Judge Rothwax is Supreme Court material. (see review below...) We need minds that can reason like this.
I believe this book should be required reading to graduate from high school. We need an informed citizenry. Although parts are a bit tough to get through, the incredible, true cases that are highlighted in this book are eye opening.
We live in a great country but recently it seems we are headed in the wrong direction. This book helps you understand what we are doing wrong. And the recommendations at the end of the book could start a "grass roots" movement to get us turned around and going in the right direction.
Don't hesitate to buy this for anyone who has an interest in how we can improve our legal system. We should all read it and send copies to our legislators.
And thanks to Judge Rothwax for informing us!
Our criminal justice system is in need of substantial reform November 14, 2004
6 out of 11 found this review helpful
Here is a book from a judge that reviews some obvious problems with our criminal justice system. Some of these problems have been most obvious in high-profile cases, but that in no way means that the system is working for low-profile ones, as Rothwax shows.
Rothwax starts by making a very strong point. The main problem is that criminal justice rarely involves a search for the truth. It is all well and good to discuss police misconduct or various extenuating factors, but none of this is proper until you answer what ought to be the very first question: did the defendant commit the crime? If you get that answer right, you can try to make a just ruling. If you can't get that one right, that is a big problem.
And in some cases, the evidence of guilt is simply suppressed. How can that help us produce justice?
One very good recommendation that Rothwax makes is to have defendents come up with their side of the story in a sealed envelope. Defendants would not be required to do this: they'd need to do it only if they wanted to see the prosecution's case via pretrial discovery. As things stand, they change their stories to fit the prosecution case. As Rothwax says, they'll start with "I wasn't there!" And when the prosecution has a video to disprove that, they'll say "It was self-defence!" And when the prosecution proves that the victim had no weapon, they'll say "I was crazy!" Stories are concocted to fit the facts the prosecution has discovered. The Menendez and O. J. Simpson trials are dramatic examples of this.
Rothwax's point is simple: "truth must be the goal of any rational procedural system."
Next we get to laws about search and seizure. These are shown to be hopelessly confusing, particularly when it is vehicles that are being searched or seized. Rothwax says that we should get rid of the mandatory "exclusionary rule," and replace it by a reasonableness criterion, as is done in Germany, for example.
The Miranda rule is discussed after that. While it has been useful in some cases to avoid having people get browbeaten into confessing to crimes, it is sometimes wrongfully applied to voluntary confessions. Once again, the first question ought to be: did the defendant commit the crime? If we answer that one correctly, we can proceed from there. We may even let a guilty person go free because the police mistreated him, but it ought to be with the full legal knowledge that he committed the crime he was accused of. Rothwax points out that the effect of Miranda is to say to a defendant "I urge you not to confess." It helps make trials a kind of game in which any defendant always has a sporting chance to escape, and that is quite a ways from truth or justice.
Two more points that Rothwax makes include the fact that peremptory challenges of jurors should be disallowed (they tend to result in stacking the jury), and that juries should be told to regard the refusal of a defendant to testify to explain what would normally be considered evidence against him as indicating the truth of that evidence.
But perhaps the best point of all that the author makes is that juries simply are very poor determiners of truth.
Astonishing and Frightening July 28, 2001
8 out of 12 found this review helpful
This book pulls no punches and contains no fancy words. Harold Rothwax tells it like it is....When the criminal justice system fails, and the obviously and often admittedly guilty go free to wreak more havoc on innocent citizens, we should feel outraged... and I'd guess that we do, when we hear about it as we do infrequently. But the sympathy extended to the perpetrators of violent crimes is both misplaced and as wrong as the crimes themselves. Rothwax, a judge, sees these decisions made routinely, as he deals with their aftermath. He is outraged. He is beyond outraged. He makes a compelling case for a modification in our criminal justice system. Criminal juries shouldn't need 100% agreement to deliver a verdict, which they already don't need in civil cases. One lone kook shouldn't hold up what's obvious to a clear majority. He suggests forgetting Miranda... if someone is screaming confessions, it's a CONFESSION. What a lot of effort, time, and money those confessions save! Getting criminals off on technicalities -- especially technicalities that lawyers search for painstakingly with the sole goal of getting their clients off -- is a perverse and morally reprehensible function of the court, and it should be inadmissable when the parties involved behaved with logic and discretion to the satisfaction of the court. The cases that Rothwax cites, cases in which innocent adults and children suffered at the hands of a meticulous and ill-advised court, will break your heart and make you scream for justice. For this is a book about justice. It is not a book about law. Unfortunately, the two diverge more than the American public would like to acknowledge.
|
|
|
Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
