Innocence Project
Introduction
The United States records the biggest number of prisoners in the world, with over two million people incarcerated. This is a result of changes in law and sentencing policy, including longer jail terms (Laporte). However, not all people in prison are guilty; some were wrongfully convicted for wrongdoings had nothing to do with. According to the Innocence Project, 2.3%- 5% of the inmates in the US were erroneously convicted (About).
The Innocence Project goes a long way in ending cases of unjust incarceration in the US and improve the criminal justice system to be the better. This paper looks at some of the ways it has succeeded in this endeavor. The paper will first give an overview of the Innocence Project, cite some of the criticisms leveled against it, and then give the rationale for the project. The paper will provide some of the factors contributing to wrongful convictions as cited by the Innocence Project and the suggestions it offers towards ensuring that no one is sent to jail undeservedly.
The Innocence Project
The Innocence Project is a nonprofit organization founded in 1992 and works towards trying wrongful conviction cases and ultimately overturn them to free the innocent party. According to their official website, their charge is to exonerate the wrongly convicted serving time in US prisons. The Innocence Project also aims at bringing reform to the law enforcement and judicial system to curb the many cases of unjust imprisonment (About).
Criticism on the Innocence Project
Due to the media attention erroneous sentencing cases receive, the Innocence Project critics are concerned that people are concentrating too much on what may not even be the worst problem facing the criminal justice system. One such critic is Abbe Smith, who argues that although wrongful convictions can be termed as the worst atrocities meted upon individuals by any court, they are not the only problem faced by the system (Smith). He argues that attention should be given to far worse problems such as mass incarceration, which are found to be affecting the nonwhite communities more. Secondly, he calls for reform on the bad conditions of the prisoners, arguing that confinement conditions in prisons do not equip prisoners with tools and skills to survive once released. Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
As such, he concludes that exonerating innocent prisoners has done little if not nothing to change these problems in the system. He argues that the growing dominance of the Innocence Project may distract us from addressing these issues.
The rationale for the Innocence Project
The Innocence Project uses DNA evidence to prove the innocence of a wrongfully convicted person in cases where it is accessible for retesting. However, it also works to free those whose DNA evidence is not available for their cases. Through DNA testing, it has helped free about 367 people who had been wrongfully convicted of serious crimes (Laporte). In a bid to reduce the incidences of unjust sentencing, the Innocence Project sensitizes and educates the general public about some of the risks of wrongfully convicting a person (Irazola).
However, the Innocence Project is not only about exonerating people, but it also investigates the reasons leading to erroneous sentencing. Because of its activities, problems facing the criminal justice system are foregrounded. For instance, there has been a reduction of death sentences imposed by juries. This is after the Innocence Project proved the innocence and exonerated 21 convicts who had been previously sentenced to death (About).
Factors Contributing to Wrongful Convictions
The Innocence Project names six contributing causes resulting in erroneous convictions. These are; mistaken eyewitness identification, false confessions, forensic error, inadequate defense representation, government misconduct, and inaccurate informants, and snitch testimonies (“Issues”).
Mistaken Eyewitness Identification
About three-quarters of erroneous conviction cases are as a result of eyewitness misidentification. Although eyewitness testimony provides essential evidence in many cases, it is not always reliable. Two variables are said to influence how an eyewitness identifies a suspect. These are estimator and system variables. Estimator variables are factors such as lighting, whether it was well lit or dim. The distance of the suspect from the eyewitness during the crime is also a variable that is considered. These variables significantly affect the accuracy of eyewitness accounts. Stress has also been found to alter a witness’s memory about the crime. For instance, if a weapon is used by the perpetrator to threaten the witness, one may concentrate on the weapon and not the perpetrator. This may lead to the misidentification of the suspect. The justice system controls system variables, which include how eyewitness memory is extracted (“Issues”). This entails the instructions given to the eyewitness before they identify the suspect, which can be confusing at times. The lineup type employed can influence how accurate the testimony will be. The Innocence Project calls for the following reforms that will help end cases of identification errors by eyewitnesses. For instance, the double-blind lineup can be used. Here both the witness and the officer do not know the suspect. Therefore, the eyewitness choice will not be influenced by the officer either intentionally or unknowingly.
False Confessions
Innocent people have been reported to confess and even plead guilty to crimes they had not committed. This can be as a result of external factors such as threats and coercion. For example, children and people with mental disabilities can be easily manipulated to confess. In some cases, where the police are convinced that one is guilty, they may use harsh interrogation tactics that compel the suspect to admit wrongdoing even when innocent. In other cases, suspects are promised a lesser sentence if they confess (“Issues”). The Innocence project calls for reform on the interrogation techniques used. For instance, all interrogations should be recorded to make sure the correct techniques are used, and no one is harassed. This reduces the number of false confessions.
Forensic Error
According to the Innocence Project, errors in forensic evidence provided had contributed to about half of the wrongful conviction cases they had overturned. DNA evidence in arson cases, hair, and bite-mark comparisons in many cases were proved to be unreliable (Laporte). The testimony given by forensic experts can also be biased. Hence, the Innocence Project states that forensic investigations should be independent of law enforcement.
Inadequate Defense Representation
Incidences of bad lawyering have also been found to contribute to erroneous sentencing. Defense lawyers can be ineffective and incompetent. When they fail to investigate cases adequately, innocent defendants may be convicted (“Issues”). This is contributed by the reduced funding available for appointed lawyers. To solve this problem, the Innocence Project states that the funding for public defenders should be increased and new ones hired. This will reduce the number of cases per lawyer, giving legal personell enough time to prepare and investigate cases.
Government Misconduct
Misconduct, whether intentional or not, by prosecutors and police officers, has also contributed to wrongful convictions. For instance, police officers may use interrogation techniques, which result in false confessions by innocent suspects. Some lie on the stand, while others may withhold relevant evidence. Prosecutors may mishandle or destroy evidence, withhold crucial evidence from the defense attorney, or even allowing untruthful witnesses to testify. Few of these face any consequences for their actions (“Issues”).
Inaccurate Informants
The Innocence Project reports that in about 15% of wrongful conviction cases, informants have been found to give false testimonies. Some were paid, others testify to get their sentences reduced or even be released (“Issues”).
Conclusion
This paper has shown the critical role the Innocent Project performs both in society and the criminal justice system. By fighting to exonerate those erroneously convicted, it promotes justice for all. Its activities have reunited many families separated by uncalled-for circumstances. The police were able to find the original offenders in the overturned cases, and they were brought to justice. As such, the Innocence Project should be deservedly celebrated for its role in bringing reform in the criminal justice system.
Works Cited
“About.” Innocence Project, 7 Feb. 2016, www.innocenceproject.org/about/. Accessed 21 Mar. 2020.
Irazola, Seri, et al. “Addressing the Impact of Wrongful Convictions on Crime Victims.” NIJ Journal, no. 274, 11 Dec. 2014. http://nij. gov/journals/274/pages/victim-impact-wrongful- convictions.aspx.. Accessed 21 Mar. 2020.
“Issues.” Midwest Innocence Project, 31 July 2016, themip.org/issues/. Accessed 21 Mar. 2020.
Laporte, Gerald. “Wrongful Convictions and DNA Exonerations: Understanding the Role of Forensic Science.” NIJ Journal, no. 279, Apr. 2018.
Smith, Abbe. “In Praise Of The Guilty Project: A Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Growing Anxiety About Innocence Projects.” Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository, scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jlasc/vol13/iss3/4.