Having been a public
defender for 17 years, I have been asked the same question
countless times: "How can you represent those people?"
Most people look at
me with a mixture of curiosity and contempt when they
learn what I do for a living. Over the years, I have
responded to this question in various ways, but I am
always left wondering if I could have given a more cogent
answer. When posed this question in the future, I will
be inclined to tell whoever is asking to read "Indefensible"
by David Feige.
Feige worked as a public
defender in New York City for almost 15 years, most
recently as the trial chief of the Bronx defenders'
office. This book, his first, describes one very long
day in the life of a public defender in one of the most
crime-ridden boroughs of New York.
Although nonfiction,
it reads like a novel. With brutal precision, Feige
describes the role of a public defender and why one
may elect to work in a criminal justice system that
often disrespects, even reviles, the public defender
as much as the indigent client she represents.
At the beginning of
the book, Feige describes representing his first client,
who, he believed, was wrongfully charged with murder.
"I'd never felt as alive, as terrified or as righteous,"
writes Feige.
To many public defenders,
fairness is a paramount issue. Most children go through
a developmental stage during which fairness is of utmost
importance. "That's not fair" is a refrain uttered often
by young children. Many public defenders retain their
sense of outrage at unfairness. The thought of someone
being accused and convicted of a crime he did not commit
is so unfair it fuels many public defenders in their
quest for justice.
One of the most important
aspects of a public defender's job is to humanize his
clients in an overcrowded system that refers to incarcerated
defendants as "bodies" that need to be processed in
and out of the courthouse as quickly as possible. Another
facet is to give voice to indigent clients who otherwise
would have no one to speak for them.
"I still fundamentally
believe in the possibility of redemption and the value
of every individual," says Feige. "Fundamentalist Christians
constantly speak passionately about seeing the possibility
of redemption in everyone, and no one bats an eye. But
make this same point in the secular context of the criminal
justice system, and rather than praiseworthy piety it
is heard as liberal gibberish. "
Feige's depiction of
a criminal justice system that is overutilized and underfunded
is simultaneously tragic and hysterical. He describes
a judge who yells during empanelment, "All the Jews
up against the wall," before ordering all potential
jurors who are Jewish out of his courtroom so he does
not have to be concerned about having the trial go forward
during the Jewish High Holidays.
Feige includes some
heart-rending stories of people abused by the system,
such as a homeless woman who was trying to enter the
courthouse to appear on a criminal case. The court officers
insisted that she throw away a sandwich in her pocket
- the only food she had to eat - so as to enter.
The officers seized
her sandwich, and when the woman resisted, they denied
her entrance into the courthouse. This action likely
resulted in a warrant being issued for her arrest for
failing to appear on the case. The court officers then
threw away her sandwich.
Feige vividly illustrates
how the system coerces an overwhelming majority of defendants
to plead guilty rather than risk a trial, irrespective
of their guilt or innocence. He reports that, in 2003,
more than 50,000 misdemeanor cases were processed in
the Bronx, yet only 23 resulted in jury verdicts. If
accurate, this statistic strongly suggests that a majority
of defendants are being denied their constitutional
right to a jury trial.
Although some may accuse
Feige of drawing biased conclusions about the criminal
justice system, the examples he recalls provide substantial
evidence for such conclusions.
With humor and compassion,
he describes a system that has lost its focus on its
duty and original goals. Providing due process to defendants
and meting out justice is often lost in a system that
is forced to process too many cases with woefully inadequate
resources.
This book should be
read by anyone who truly wants to understand how the
criminal justice system treats indigent defendants.
It should be read by legislators who provide funding
to the system. And it should be read by public defenders,
who will find validation for their chosen profession
and a renewed sense of pride in their work.
|
