Recently, Brock Turner and the Stanford rape victim have become a common household topic. Brock's prison sentence is a perfect example of how, even though we pride ourselves on our "just" legal system, that isn't always the case. How could Brock Turner get such a short prison sentence for such a large crime? Why is he any different from other males convicted of similar crimes?
It is so wrong and unconstitutional that Brock received a lesser prison sentence due to the fact that he is a white, privileged male who had a lot of promise before he raped a woman. But sadly, Brock isn't the only one who has been treated better by the legal system due to his socioeconomic status. This happens all the time in our country.
This summer, I am interning at a public defender's office. As part of my internship, I have watched many trials, guilty pleas, protection from abuse hearings, the whole gambit. What struck me as fascinating was the day I went to watch juvenile court. That morning, the juveniles were coming in and, with the assistance of the public defenders, pleading guilty to their various crimes.
The first juvenile I saw plead guilty was a white boy, probably around age 14. He was confessing to violating the judge's previous orders of not having contact with his friend, who was another juvenile delinquent that had been a bad influence on him and got him in trouble in the first place. They were there for some marijuana-associated charges. This boy is from one of the poorest towns in the county. He was raised by his mother, and his dad was barely ever in the picture.
Watching him confess to going against the judge's orders, I could see the remorse and guilt in his eyes. He was terrified of where this would lead him. The judge yelled at him, was unsympathetic, and was quick at deciding the punishment. Her mind seemed made up from the moment he walked into court that day. Her final decision was sending him to "juvie" that very day.
I listened to the boy's mother beg and plead the judge before she sentenced him. She begged for him to stay home and continue at his alternative school, where he was thriving. His mom wanted him to stay so he could continue volunteering at his local firehouse. However, because of this judge's harsh sentencing, he has to put all of these good things on hold to sit in a juvenile detention center.
The next juvenile to plead guilty was an 18 year-old girl, who committed her crime at 17, from one of the wealthiest neighborhoods in this county. She was pleading guilty to breaking into a car and when the police saw her doing this, they searched her and found marijuana in her possession.
When the judge spoke to this girl, she saw a lot of "promise", such as the "promise" seen in Brock Turner. Obviously, I am not comparing rape to marijuana possession; all I'm saying is that it seems like people are less harshly judged and penalized when they seem to have promising futures. All this girl had to do was pay reparations for the damage to the car, submit to a few random drug tests, and in three years she could get this expunged from her record.
The legal system favors those from wealthy backgrounds. It is so much easier to deal with the consequences of being convicted when you have money and opportunity. It is incredibly unfair that people can get completely different sentences for the same exact crime just because of how much "potential" they may have.
This needs to end now. Everyone should have to serve at least the minimum time set by the state, and no one should be able to serve below the minimum, no matter how much "potential" they may have, because that demonstrates how corrupt our legal system is.
By treating people differently within the legal system, we completely invalidate the Declaration of Independence. How can we say that "all men are created equal" when we are giving out different prison sentences based on opportunity? Whether it's Brock Turner or that wealthy 18 year-old girl, no one should get special treatment from the law.
