NCJ Number
54753
Journal
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology Volume: 11 Issue: 4 Dated: (DECEMBER 1978) Pages: 219-232
Date Published
1978
Length
14 pages
Annotation
VARIOUS TECHNOLOGICAL AND SCIENTIFIC ADVANCES USED OR RECOMMENDED FOR USE IN THE COURTS ARE EXAMINED AS TO POSSIBLE EFFECTS ON JUSTICE FOR DEFENDANTS.
Abstract
CRIMINAL COURTS HAVE USED SCIENTIFIC REASONING AND TECHNOLOGY TO IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF THEIR OPERATIONS AND THEIR CONTROL OF OFFENDERS IN THE FOLLOWING THREE AREAS: (1) THE GATHERING AND PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE, (2) SENTENCING, AND (3) COURT ADMINISTRATION. EXAMPLES OF NEW MEANS OF EVIDENCE GATHERING AND PRESENTATION ARE ILLUSTRATED BY THE USE OF BREATHALYZERS BY THE POLICE, THE USE OF VIDEO AND TAPE RECORDING, THE INCREASED USE OF EXPERTS AND SOCIAL BACKGROUND REPORTS, AND THE USE OF MATHEMATICAL EVIDENCE. SOCIAL BACKGROUND REPORTS ARE ALSO USED INCREASINGLY IN SENTENCING AND THE EMERGENCE OF THE SCIENTIFIC IDEAL OF REHABILITATION IDEAL HAS CREATED A TENDENCY FOR MEDICAL AGENCIES TO CLAIM PRIORITY IN DEALING WITH OFFENDERS WHILE INSISTING ON IMMUNITY FROM LEGAL RESTRAINTS DUE TO THE THERAPEUTIC NATURE OF THEIR WORK. THE USE OF SOCIAL BACKGROUND REPORTS IN SENTENCING BORDERS ON AN ABDICATION OF JUDICIAL RESPONSIBILITY, AS THE PERSON WHO PREPARED THE REPORT IS IN EFFECT DEEMED AN EXPERT IN SENTENCING. THE USE OF THE BREATHALYZER TO INCREASE DRUNK DRIVING CONVICTIONS AND SENTENCE OFFENDERS TO VARIOUS THERAPEUTIC SCHEMES HAS MADE CONTROL OF OFFENDERS MORE PERVASIVE WHILE FAILING TO DEAL WITH THE SOCIAL PROBLEM EVIDENCED BY DRUNK DRIVING. THE APPLICATION OF MATHEMATICAL TECHNIQUES TO COURT DECISIONMAKING CAN BE OBJECTED TO ON THREE GROUNDS: (1) PROBABILITY BASED UPON RELATIVE FREQUENCY MUST BE CONCERNED WITH POSSIBLE PAST EVENTS RATHER THAN POSSIBLE FUTURE EVENTS; (2) MATHEMATICAL DATA REQUIRES TRANSLATION FROM DATA ABOUT CASES IN GENERAL TO EVIDENCE ABOUT ONE CASE IN PARTICULAR; AND (3) RARELY CAN MATHEMATICAL EVIDENCE ALONE ESTABLISH THE PROPOSITON TO WHICH IT IS DIRECTED. THE USE OF VIDEOTAPE AND COMPUTERS IN COURT DECISIONMAKING IN THE INTEREST OF EFFICIENCY DECREASES THE SIGNIFICANT AND VALUABLE IMMEDIATE INTERACTION OF PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE ADVERSARIAL PROCESS DEEMED SO IMPORTANT TO THE SECURING OF JUSTICE. TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENTIFIC DECISIONMAKING SHOULD ONLY BE INTRODUCED INTO THE COURT PROCESS WHEN THEIR VALIDITY IS SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISHED AND PARAMETERS FOR THEIR USE HAVE BEEN SET SO AS TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF THE DEFENDANT. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)