Crime and Justice Up Close

Last month I got a letter in the mail that was, unlike most things addressed to me, not junk mail. It was, however, not the letter most are excited to receive. I had been summoned for jury duty and I was actually fairly excited about it, disregarding the fact that it was an inconvenience for students.

After realizing I had missed the deadline to request postponing my jury duty service because of my student status, I looked forward to missing classes and work for a good and legal reason. (The only catch was that I had to get to Woodland by 8am.) Most of my day consisted of sitting in the large jury room, anxiously awaiting instruction or dismissal. I eventually was sorted into a panel of potential jurors and we were escorted up to the courtroom. The judge told us about the case and how the jury selection process was going to work. This was a criminal case and the charge was robbery. After the defense and the prosecution asked questions to the first group of 18 potential jurors, we gathered a bit more information: the accused was homeless at the time of the crime, the accused had some kind of problem with substance abuse, and the item he stole was a bottle of soda priced at about $1. The charge was robbery and not shoplifting because the accused had shown "the appearance of a weapon" which was later revealed to mean a bee bee gun that looked like a real firearm.

Many of the potential jurors were dismissed, all of whom had shown sympathy or empathy towards homeless people and people struggling with substance abuse. There were also several people on the panel who had been victims of (or accused of) robbery in the past; these individuals had to tell their stories -- under oath -- to a room full of strangers. I found this to be particularly strange.

When it was my turn to be questioned by the judge, defense, and prosecution I said that based on the information we had been given it seemed like the homeless man was stealing out of necessity, not because he wanted to cause harm. People nodded and agreed with me, and two women who were in the jury box were dismissed because they agreed with my position. Surprisingly, I was not dismissed immediately and it came down to a 50/50 shot at being the alternate juror, and I lucked out in not being selected.

 

When I stated my opinion in the courtroom, the tension in the room grew. The judge then interrupted the prosecution's questioning to explain to the potential jurors that it did not matter whether the accused needs help or prison, our job was only to decide "guilty" or "not guilty," with punishment being left entirely up to the judge. This made sense to me, it would be strange to let a panel of peers create or decide punishments for criminals. However, the question of guilt seemed like it was not difficult to answer -- the man did rob the convenience store, and his lawyer was not disputing that. In my understanding, the only link between knowing that the man did commit the crime and being guilty of the crime was free will.

Whether or not you believe free will is an illusion or is real or controlled by fate or "God" or whatever, I think we can all agree that this man's circumstances had a lot to do with the crime he committed. As I pondered this man's free will and action in committing this crime, I was reminded of Harrington's description of late sixteenth century Europe and the way an economic crisis created more criminals - especially thieves and highwaymen who had to steal to survive. Then I thought of Goffman's teachings and main principles of Labeling Theory. Homelessness is a product of a poor economy; this was true in 1585 and it is still true today. We know this because in countries where homeless people are given free housing and a job, they are able to get back into working life and contribute to the economy and society as a whole. Putting this man away in prison for doing what he felt he had to in order to survive would not be helping anyone -- especially the person who needs the most help: the accused.

Perhaps I am naive to think that this man was truly and innocently trying to survive, but that's what our law says: innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What I wanted to say in the courtroom when the judge asked me about my opinion was that I think crime is a social construction made by humans to stigmatize and punish others as a means of making the non-stigmatized feel more secure in their abilities to control others. But this certainly was not the right place to start an in depth discussion of the theory of crime and punishment (nor was I qualified to have that discussion with a lawyer).

I left my jury duty experience feeling angry, tired, and absolutely maddened and saddened by the lack of progress we have made. I wish I could draw fewer similarities between the effects of economics on crime in the 16th century versus today. I wish we were better at learning from our past and learning from our current and similarly-developed peers. It is absolutely insane that in a world with such a low barrier for global communication, we are knowingly ignoring information that would progress us as a nation, as a society, and as a world. I hope to see that change within my lifetime, but currently I am not terribly optimistic that I will.

A Necessary Evil

I never thought I would get to learn so much about prostitutes and prostitution as I have this quarter.

I LOVE LOVE LOVE that brothels were treated as public services that were necessary to the society, and even run by municipal officers! Of course, maybe the prostitutes felt differently about this. But regardless, this means that there was a time within Christian history when sexuality was considered a normal part of human development -- what a concept! If only we can get our current policies regarding sex and sexuality to have the same maturity...

It's not surprise that this all changed when the plague came through along with the Protestant Reformation and suddenly prostitutes and women in general became the scapegoats on which to place all blame for such a hellish curse. The Catholic clergy made up the majority of the patrons, or "johns," who frequented municipal brothels, and that was a pretty well known fact. People understood the necessity of sex and pleasure, and it wasn't until Protestantism ruined it all (and then Catholicism in response) by placing such strict rules on sexuality.

What's really funny/sad to me is that people still seem surprised today when sex scandals happen among church leaders. It's like, "who would have thought that being brought up in a culture that teaches you to fear your own body and hate yourself for having sexual thoughts would lead to any kind of sexual misconduct???"

I think they had it all figured out with municipal brothels and open sexuality, maybe we can learn something from the Early Modern Europeans.

Red Shoes: Jews and Sexuality

The other day in class I mentioned the red and black shoes with bells on them that Jewish women were sometimes required to wear. There is some info on red shoes and shoes with bells that I found through Wikipedia, but nothing terribly conclusive. Here's where that idea came from and what I have to say about it:

I'm a huge fan and avid watcher of this show called Transparent. It stars Jeffrey Tambour, who plays a transgender woman and father of three adult children. What I think is particularly interesting about this show is that it explores a wide range of topics and controversies within gender and sexuality studies. One of these topics is how Judaism and sexuality intersect, which explored in the storyline of the youngest daughter, Ali.

Ali explores her heritage and learns of her ancestors who were murdered in the Holocaust, and there are several scenes depicting the destruction of libraries and institutes dedicated to gender and sexuality studies. Sexuality studies seems like a field that is still so new and trying to find its academic footing, but in actuality there were entire libraries dedicated to the film before the 1940s. Just imagine how much more we might know if this information was not destroyed.

Ambivalence for the Blind

Goffman's discussion of societal benefits that blind people have bestowed upon them, like being asked to endorse perfumes and being regarded as having heightened senses, reminded me of my travels to Southeast Asia in 2012.


That's me, circa January 2012, riding in a Tuk-Tuk through Siem Reap, Cambodia.

My best friend, Natalie, moved to Singapore in 8th grade, so in my senior year of high school I flew to Singapore to visit her over my holiday break. Once I got there, her family took me and her on a week-long trip to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and Siem Reap, Cambodia. In Cambodia, it was common to find massage clinics advertising things like this:



My surrogate family for the week (Natalie's family) and I indulged in the cheap massages a few times for two reasons: our feet were sore from traveling and the massage clinics claimed to donate proceeds of their business to help the local blind community. However, when I went back to research these "Seeing Hands" massages today, I found that these massages are sometimes falsely advertised and the massage clinics are actually exploiting the blind workers.

As people from a developed country visiting a not-so-developed country, perhaps we were searching for ways we could participate in the rich culture of Cambodia and at least feel like we were giving back to a community in need. That feeling may be innocent, but the truth is our actions and our money could have easily been spent doing more harm than good.

This is the interesting thing about stigma - we can't seem to function as a society without it. Privileged, upper class, seeing tourists need blind Cambodian masseurs in order to make themselves feel better about the obvious wealth inequality staring American tourists in the face as soon as they set foot in a less fortunate place. This is just like the Saints in Medieval Europe who needed the Black Death to continue wreaking havoc on communities near them so they would have subjects to publicly nurse, kiss, and heal and add holiness to their name.


Saint Francis kissing the stigmata wounds of Jesus

Stigma creates a stratified social hierarchy in which the lines are not always so clear or so set in stone. Labeling theory has claimed that this hierarchy is necessary for societies to progress. If that is true, then it is also true that no society will be without order, class, or other systems of rank. If my experiences in Cambodia and the lessons from Goffman have taught me anything, it's that there will always be people labeled as "other," and there will always be people in the "normal" whose normality will rely completely on the existence of "the other."

Not the Christians We're Looking For

In Huppert's "After the Black Death" the author describes the town of Sennely, using it as a model ordinary Early Modern society. I thought it was surprising that the people of Sennely were not as devoutly Christian as I had thought most in Early Modern Europe would be at the time.

He notes that "religion played a large part in the lives of the peasants, but it was a religion of their own, designed to satisfy local needs." I was surprised to find that universal Christiandom was not as conservative as some of the sects that we have now in the US.

I think there is a modern misconception that pre-modern life was somehow pure and untouched by the evils that plague societies today. And this is clearly not the case. Religion has a purpose according to most sociologists and that is to unite a society enough so it can function and have something of which to base its rules. But clearly, there is no "pure" form of religion because it was always molded into whatever the religious or even secular leaders needed people to believe or do at the time.

In short, this has mostly affirmed my beliefs as an atheist: religion is mostly just rules on how to not be a terrible person, clouded in a bunch of bullshit.

A Map for the Geographically Confused

A friend shared this interactive map of Europe on Facebook today. As a visual learner, I found it incredibly helpful! There are even extra facts in the map that pop up if you hover over a region.

http://www.worldology.com/Europe/europe_history_lg.htm

Slowest Reader in the Class

I was nervous to take this class in the first place, considering I was never any good at history classes through elementary, middle, and high school. But it counted towards my Sexuality Studies minor, it fit well in my schedule, and it sounded like an interesting topic. So I decided to delve outside my comfort zone and, so far, I'm glad I did.

Another reason I was hesitant to take this class, and still worry about, is the slow rate at which I read. As a young child, I was an avid reader. Then school started having required reading and that ruined the fun for me. I like to read, I'm just not very fast. I worry that will hold me back in this class but I plan to engage with the readings regularly through this blog.

Here goes something!