Julia, I sympathize with your frustration about Frank (and to a certain extent legal realism and deconstructionism) tearing down without offering any ideas for how to build back up. And I really like your critique Frank, and reforms in general. However, I wonder if change is truly impossible

I think on a small scale we can certainly apply Frank’s critique and improve the criminal justice system. For instance, the overriding belief that criminals who convicted are guilty is part of what makes it difficult to release persons who are exonerated by evidence (many times, despite new evidence, prosecutors and judges will still leave those people in jail). The sentiment that criminals must be guilty is also part of what makes the stigma so great upon re-entry into society – perhaps if more people questioned the fallibility of the system, criminals would be welcomed more readily into society upon their release.

On a larger scale, questioning the accuracy and efficacy of the criminal justice system would go a long ways to tearing it down completely. I know some people don’t see that as a goal, but certainly everyone can agree that there are alternatives to incarceration that just might be better for everyone.

I have to run to class now, but I’ll continue this post when I get back. And I’d like to hear what you think – whether, if everyone embraced Frank’s ideas (which is obviously a long shot) any of the things I’ve proposed would be possible.

-- AmandaHungerford - 07 Feb 2008