In Cold Blood and Criminal Justice Essay Example

After reading In Cold Blood, watching the movie, and watching Capote’s film, I think that this book is a necessary read for criminal justice majors. Not only because of punishment, but the book also puts into perspective what it is like to work so closely with criminals. The criminal justice system is no place for personal biases. When judges, defense attorneys, or prosecutors allow their biases to effect their work then they’re doing it for the wrong reasons. In Cold Blood gave a great depiction of how criminals are people too. There is no excuse for the crimes they commit, but sometimes there are reasons behind why they committed their crimes, a reason for why their brain may function “abnormally.” 

One of the biggest statements made by Capote on the criminal justice system was the issue of ineffective counsel. The system failed Dick and Perry. Although, yes, they were guilty, they had the right to effective counsel. Their case was held in the county where the crime was committed, a small town of maybe two-hundred and seventy-eight people, where it was impossible for the people of the town to not know of the murders or have ill-will toward the wrongdoers. The second point of ineffective counsel was to allow someone to be a juror after stating that he is usually not in favor of the death penalty, but in the case of the Clutter family, he is. Their attorney should have the juror removed. The standard of effective counsel is a reasonably competent attorney, if the attorney raises their points at the appropriate point during the trial, then they meet the reasonableness standard of a reasonably competent attorney (Cassel, 2015) Almost everyone involved with the Clutter case allowed their biases to affect their opinions. In the movie, I believe it was Dick who said there are two types of law, (1) for the rich and (2) for the poor, but there is a third for colored/minorities. The judge who presided over their case had been a pallbearer at the Clutter’s funeral, but on appeal that was not seen as serious evidence for bias in the court causing it to be impossible for them to have an impartial trial.  And if I were Perry’s lawyer, I would have motioned to have their cases separated because psychological evaluation Perry showed the presence of a mental issue and that should have been taken into consideration, plus he did not devise the plan, but he was the trigger man due to his mental instability.  

It is hard to find someone in society who sees value in a criminal's life, whose opinion of the death penalty won’t waiver depending on the circumstances. Criminals are at the lowest rung on the later, some people don’t even want their tax dollars to go to the prisons. Criminals are viewed as the worst kind until it is a “respectable” man who committed the crime. Committing a crime doesn’t make you any less of a person or deserving of hate. Committing a crime is the only mistake that follows someone for a lifetime, one of the reasons why we punish is rehabilitation, but how can anyone be expected to be rehabilitated with such hindering labels and opinions against them. I believe that if society could banish or exile criminals they would, I have heard far too often that criminals are a waste of space, but who are we to be judge, jury, and executioner. To protect society is one thing, but to decide someone is deserving of death is another. One thing I found interesting was the prosecution used the Bible in justification of the death penalty, but God does not place the burden on us to decide who lives or dies.  

Lastly, but most interestingly was Perry. Throughout the whole book, Perry had been just the ride-along, the sidekick, the yes man, but in the end he’s the one to commit all the murders. He snapped, he envisioned nice Mr. Clutter as his abusive father. From the reading, it is obvious to see that Perry had no intentions of harming anyone in that family, but after he snapped there was no coming back. Dick took advantage of Perry like he takes advantage of everyone. Perry’s actions were not right, but explanatory. Childhood trauma, such as family abuse has severe adverse effects on children and most effects are long-term. Most male murders have experienced some type of family abuse (Millet, Kohl, Jonson-Reid, Drake & Petra, 2013;).  If Perry had been somewhere, he was loved and cared for someone would have noticed some of the psychopathic traits he was displaying during childhood (Dargis, Newman, Koenigs, 2016).   

In conclusion, In Cold Blood is a pivotal read for those interested in pursuing a career in the criminal justice field. It makes you question yourself and whether you can see past their crime and see the person they still are. Being as though I want to be a defense attorney, I always ask myself how I will place my own biases aside, and for the most part, I believe I can do it, but I’m not sure how to put those biases aside when it comes to rapists. I’m sure there are some who are like Perry with explanations or “reasoning” behind their actions, but the book put into the perspective the influence my own biases will have on someone’s life. I’m glad this was the last book, especially since I am graduating and plan on being a probation officer for some time before going to law school, this made me check myself and remind myself the reasons why I’m pursuing this path.