How My Mom, a Former Prosecutor, Influenced My Views of the Criminal Legal System
By Elizabeth Beveridge
Before I was born my mom worked as a criminal prosecutor at the Fulton and Hall County district attorney’s office for six years. These experiences, I imagine, partly explain why my mom has a persistent sense of worry and paranoia. My brother experienced this at its height since he is 11 years older than me. For example, one day he cracked open the window in the bathroom and it triggered my mom - reminding her of the Vine City Serial Killer, who would climb through windows to kill older women. My brother, eight years old at the time and who could tell this story much funnier than I, says our mom yelled at him as he stood staring up, wide eyed and mouth open slightly a gap as he learned all the graphic possibilities that could happen with the window left open.
Even though my mom is no longer a criminal prosecutor and now works as a tax litigator, her paranoia and worry has remained. We are all a product of our experiences, and by extension, I am a product of hers. Growing up we were constantly reminded that there were people who did bad things, and that danger could happen at any time. As a prosecutor, she was part of a system that believed law and order was necessary, so naturally, this was impressed upon my brother and me. I don’t blame her, a single mom with two small kids, who bore witness to horrifying scenarios of murders, rapes, and kidnappings daily, for putting her faith in the legal system. In that way, if not her, something would keep us safe. These crimes were common to her because she was exposed to them constantly. These violent crimes needed a solution, which to her meant convictions and prison sentences.
In a similar way, the news feeds the public a constant stream of crime, giving the impression that danger is both ever present and always worsening (even when crime rates may be decreasing). The media often concludes with reassurance that everything is okay because the perpetrators will be arrested, tried, and sentenced. By centering pro-police, pro-carceral narrative, this reflects the idea of Copaganda. Civil rights attorney Alec Karakatsanis describes Copaganda as havingng three functions: (1) it narrows our definition of crimes to burglaries and theft committed by vulnerable populations, (2) it exaggerates the frequency of these crimes, and (3) it promotes the notion that the solution is undoubtedly to increase funding for police and prisons. Beyond just news media, policing in popular culture is everywhere with shows from Law and Order to Paw Patrol. The narrative of policing, prosecution, and prisons as systems to be lauded is consumed at all ages. These shows and many more reinforce that police are heroes, jails are for “bad” people, and that together they will protect us. Copaganda, as Karakatsanis puts it, “creates a gap between what police actually do and what people think they do.” From a young age, we learn to think in black or white, overlooking nuance. Copaganda reinforces a binary view: there are good and bad people, and the criminal legal system can protect us from the bad.
Recently I spoke with my mom about her experiences as a prosecutor and thoughts on the carceral system. Her response focused on what she would classify as violent and nonviolent crimes. For those that commit violent crimes, she believes that some are just bad people and even went so far as to say “evil” and “psychopath”. While she doesn’t believe in the death penalty, she does believe that those that commit violent acts of crime should go to prison to protect the public. In this way, she believes in the system because it can keep those that commit violent crime from the public and presumably from repeating this behavior. Then there are non-violent crimes. She believes this is where the flaws of the system lie. Most of the time minorities or poorer individuals would be unable to afford bail and eventually receive longer sentences. She felt this was partly because they did not have access to a proper defense attorney. She emphasized that this should be the opposite in that everyone should have access to affordable bail, a quick trial, and a strong legal counsel. She also endorsed programs of rehabilitation for those using drugs rather than prison or jail.
Like my mom, I agree that one of the current system’s largest flaws is around non-violent crimes. Considering that a majority of those arrested are for non-violent crime, this is a big flaw of the system. While I also acknowledge there are exceptions and purely “evil” people may exist, I would like to think that most people are inherently good, and many crimes (both violent and non-violent) can probably be explained by circumstances such as mental health, housing insecurity, trauma, addiction, etc. It is known that marginalization and trauma can drive violence, so responding with punishment like jail and prison does not treat the root of the issue. Angela Davis captures this best by saying “prisons do not disappear social problems, they disappear people.” This is particularly important for two reasons: first, every person deserves dignity and second, because the current system has not shown to be effective at reducing harm. So, instead of responding with punishment, we should find ways to prevent the violence by addressing the deeper issues within our society. Alec Karakatsanis’ concept of the Punishment Bureaucracy expands further upon Angela Davis’s quote.
He argues that the current system chooses punishment as opposed to prevention or rehabilitation and does so through complex bureaucratic procedures that often hinder justice. For example, there are nearly 2 million human beings confined in prison and jail in the US and 500,000 of those are awaiting trial. It make more sense, both from a humane and economic perspective, for those 500,000 to continue with their jobs, families, and homes or provide opportunities to fill those gaps in care as opposed to time behind bars. Instead, many of those 500,000 may be coerced to take a plea bargain, forever tainting their record and now a necessary explanation in future job interviews among other consequences.
While I do not know the solution, nor is there one single solution to the current systems excesses, I believe like my mom that the biggest opportunity for impact is to focus on how the system treats non-violent crimes. It is imperative that we find a solution that emphasizes compassion and focuses on reform as opposed to only punishment. It is more humane and reasonable to focus on the root of the problems themselves by offering mental health resources, affordable housing, and directly decreasing the number of interactions with police by sending mental health responders or using unarmed traffic enforcement in routine traffic. There must be an avenue that finds a balance between acknowledging accountability and maintaining public safety but is more just. One that does not focus on oppression and control but instead finds compassionate solutions that center rehabilitation and prevention.
