The Equal Justice Perspective, Essay Example

The equal justice perspective is concerned, plainly and simply, with fairness and equality. Even more than the due process approach, the equal justice model seeks perfect fairness through perfect uniformity. This is the defining characteristic of the model: the idea that all offenses of any given type should be punished in as uniform and equal a manner as possible. If this is not done, advocates of the equal justice perspective aver, then resentments amongst ill-treated offenders will be the result. Of course, a big part of this is reducing discretion: the courts must treat all offenders, in essence, exactly the same.

Another, related question is how to establish the severity of penalties. Here, a key idea is that of just deserts: the punishment should be proportional to the nature of the offense, and the harm that it has caused to the victim or victims. The punishment should not be too harsh, because this would violate the rights of the offender and favor a primitive, atavistic concept of retributive justice; nor should it be too light, for this would be to diminish the seriousness of the offender’s transgression. The punishment should also take no account of past deeds, because the offender has already paid for those. Nor should it attempt to predict the future, because the future cannot be predicted.

This perspective is best seen in the justice system with civilian review boards for alleged police misconduct, not to mention tort actions in cases wherein civilians believe that police officers have violated their rights. With regards to sentencing, the equal justice model’s focus on uniformity and lack of disparity is best seen in Supreme Court guidelines to structure sentencing. Accordingly, with Pickens’s crime, an equal justice advocate would be focused on ensuring that Pickens gets his ‘just deserts’ in the exact same fashion as every other person convicted of such a crime. However, two concerns would also prevail: the concern that the sentence not be too light, and the concern that the sentence not be too severe. By so doing, the equal justice advocate would be seeking to ensure that Pickens was treated with perfect fairness and equality, and neither given more leniency or undue strictures.

What this would probably mean would be, again, prison and heavy fines. Pickens’s crime was financial, so under the equal justice model, especially the just deserts approach, he should have to pay to compensate his victims. Of course, he should be treated the same as any other convicted offender in his situation, and his past history with substance abuse is completely irrelevant. And the prison sentence should not be unduly long: it should not destroy Pickens’s life. By following this approach, the goal would be to implement perfect justice and fairness. Overall, I find this a very compelling approach indeed, albeit less compelling than the due process approach. I think it is foolhardy to discount past crimes: someone convicted of their third DUI, for example, has a proven track record of this kind of offense. I believe that past offenses can and should inform sentences in some situations, since this indicates a penchant for recidivism in the offender.