Rating: 
Summary: A scathing verdict on the U.S. criminal justice system.
Review: "Our procedure has been always haunted by the ghost of the innocent man convicted." -- U.S. v. Garsson, D.C., 291 F. 646, 649 (1923) (Judge Learned Hand)While you may find "Actual Innocence" in the "true crime" section of your bookstore, this is not your typical fare of a more or less well-written and soon-to-be-TV-movie account of a harrowing crime, or series of crimes. And while the book undeniably shows the hands of two lawyers who know how to craft a closing argument, and a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, this is at heart, as the authors point out - and disturbingly so - a "work of nonfiction." "Actual innocence" an account of the work of Scheck's and Neufeld's "Innocence Project," describing some of the Project's most prominent and successful cases, and a scathing condemnation of the shortcomings of the American system of criminal justice - particularly, under the Supreme Court's holding in Herrera v. Collins, 506 U.S. 390, 404 (1993) (Rehnquist, C.J.) that "a claim of `actual innocence' is not itself a constitutional claim." Under Herrera and the cases following it, a federal court can reject a defendant's petition for relief even if it is based on proof of innocence, even if that proof is, as in the cases represented by the Innocence Project, of a scientific nature (DNA evidence showing that the defendant cannot have committed the crime he has been convicted of), and even if the deadlines for submitting that proof are so short that it is virtually impossible for a defendant to present evidence obtained post-conviction in time for a consideration at least in the state court system, which review has to precede a review by the federal courts. In Herrera, the Supreme Court upheld a Texas death sentence after the defendant had missed the state law's 30-day deadline to get a new trial based on new evidence. And while that particular case involved questions of the reliability of circumstantial evidence, admissions of guilt and eyewitness identifications (briefly, at night and without live testimony by one of the witnesses), these exclusionary rules apply regardless of the type of evidence presented. In the cases that Scheck, Neufeld and Dwyer describe here, this sometimes meant that DNA evidence which, due to scientific advances, had only become available years after the conviction, was not admitted, even if it conclusively proved that the wrong person had been convicted. The defendants were left to petition for executive clemency, which is discretionary and, more often than not, depends on the amount of political pressure exercised. It is often argued, particularly by proponents of the death penalty, that the criminal justice system functions well, and that even in the best system, regrettable errors cannot be prevented. The authors of "Actual Innocence" make a compelling case for the contrary. Even if a lawyer's shortcomings in the representation of his client may, in theory, lead to the reversal of a conviction, the bar here is almost as high as that for the presentation of proof of innocence. In Texas, e.g., not even a lawyer sleeping during the trial or showing up drunk is considered ineffective and, like in other states, most mistakes made out of inexperience with the handling of murder/felony trials will not be enough to support a reversal, either. Moreover, scientific evidence, such as a "DNA fingerprint," is often not available to indigent defendants, who are most likely to be hurt by inefficient trial attorneys because they lack the means to hire counsel experienced and sophisticated enough to handle a trial of that nature. These more often than not are the ingredients of a cocktail which, without timely and forceful intervention, can be as lethal as the death penalty itself; even if there is not, in addition, abuse on the prosecutorial side - failure to fully investigate and/or disclose the evidence available in the case (including exculpatory evidence), racial bias in the jury selection, misconduct by scientists acting as the government's experts, etc. I think we have all seen, repeatedly, TV reports on persons released from prison, sometimes only days before their execution, based on belated proof of their innocence. All of these cases expose, in differing ways, the inherent weaknesses of the criminal justice system. While I have not been practicing in the U.S. long enough to echo the verdict handed down by the Scheck, Neufeld and Dwyer, who declare this country's criminal justice system "a shambles," many facts recounted by them ring true to me even now. I also stop to consider if not only a Democratic president (Clinton) imposes a moratorium on the death penalty but a Republican governor, a declared proponent of capital punishment, takes the same action and orders an investigation because "since the reestablishment of the death penalty in Illinois in 1977, there have been persistent problems in the administration of the death penalty as illustrated by the thirteen individuals on death row who have had their death sentences and convictions vacated by the courts" and "the number of death sentences and criminal convictions being vacated or overturned has raised serious concerns with respect to the process by which the death penalty is imposed." (Illinois Governor H. Ryan, Executive Order Creating The Governor's Commission On Capital Punishment, May 4, 2000). Of course, not every claim of innocence is justified. But any criminal justice system should be able to allow for the presentation of conclusive proof of innocence, regardless how belatedly. And while the question of guilt or innocence may not dominate the discussion on the recent developments in the McVeigh case - to many people, even those otherwise opposed to the death penalty, the poster child for its application - I am not exactly comfortable with the assessment by President George W. Bush, who in 6 years as governor of Texas oversaw more than 150 executions, that McVeigh "is lucky to be an American. This is a country that will bend over backwards to make sure that his constitutional rights are guaranteed, as opposed to rushing his fate." (N.Y. Times, May 12, 2001.)
Rating: 
Summary: I expected better. . .
Review: Although the information contained in this book is really essential for people to learn, especially those in the fields of law and criminal justice, the book read like a badly written true crime novel. What is up with that? The book is essentially about the authors, why didn't they write it like an autobiography of their endeavors with the Innocence Project? I suggest a rewrite you guys, because you message won't be heard when its putting people to sleep!
Rating:
Summary: An invaluable resource for wrongful conviction research
Review: As a reader of at least ten books on wrongful conviction and an advocate for the wrongfully convicted, this book is definitely the best mass-produced resource on wrongful convictions. This book is the most comprehensive look at the causes of wrongful convictions and the benefits of DNA testing. It is also a compelling book that uses real stories and makes you question whatever you think you knew about the criminal justice system and its "infallibility." Other reviews on Amazon.com for this book say that it is boring and slow moving. I really don't think these reviewers read the same book that I did. I guess maybe these readers were expecting an intiguing story with a cliffhanger at the end. I think that the book does provide that and more, it just happens that real life is scarier than fiction.
Rating:
Summary: An invaluable resource for wrongful conviction research
Review: As a reader of at least ten books on wrongful conviction and an advocate for the wrongfully convicted, this book is definitely the best mass-produced resource on wrongful convictions. This book is the most comprehensive look at the causes of wrongful convictions and the benefits of DNA testing. It is also a compelling book that uses real stories and makes you question whatever you think you knew about the criminal justice system and its "infallibility." Other reviews on Amazon.com for this book say that it is boring and slow moving. I really don't think these reviewers read the same book that I did. I guess maybe these readers were expecting an intiguing story with a cliffhanger at the end. I think that the book does provide that and more, it just happens that real life is scarier than fiction.
Rating: 
Summary: MISCARRIAGES OF JSUTICE
Review: DNA has uncovered a number of truths. Not since finger print identification became main streamed has science had such a tumultuous impact on criminal investigation. The truth of DNA, according to the authors, is that an alarming number of innocent people have been sentenced to death. While the book serves as a sounding board to discuss the benefits of DNA its merit rests more in its overall discussion of the criminal justice system. This book is a non stop series of accounts of justice gone wrong. While Shceck and his cronies are heavy with their opinions, the problem is that even if you dont like them, you cant argue with the science. Through their accounts they relay stories of men wrongly convicted by mistaken identity, misled witnesses, shabby defense attourneys, police bumblings, and even law enforcement and prosecutorial misconduct. All of these grievous errors were realized due to DNA testing. More alarming than the number of innocents convicted and possibly executed is the trend for prosecutors and judges to disallow DNA testing after convictions. The facts according to the authors are that there are thousands more that could be freed with DNA testing. Although science is not the stop gap for flaws in any criminal justice system, the authors convincingly argue that it would be a beneficial start. The opinions and accounts in this book are both informative and entertaining. The book reads well and holds interest throughout. It loses a star due to the more often than not preachy tone of the authors. There point is better taken with the facts and not the lecturing. However it is a book well worth reading and must have for true crime and sociology fans.
Rating:
Summary: *FUTURE LAWYER OR CRIME SOLVER*
Review: I FOUND THIS BOOK BORING AT TIMES SO IF SOMEONE CAN'T STAND BOOKS THAT GET REALLY SLOW I SUGGEST U DON'T GET THIS BOOK, I READ THIS BOOK DURING THE S.A.T.S (BIG TEST) AND OVER ALL I THINK THE STORY'S IN THE PACKET WERE MRE INTERESTING THIS BOOK WAS GREAT THOUGH I SUGGEST IT FOR ADVANCE READERS OTHER WISE IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO READ AND COMPREHEND.
Rating:
Summary: A Terrifying Glimpse Into Real Life Nightmares
Review: Is there anything more frightening then the conviction of an innocent person? It can happen to anyone and this book shows the ineptitude of our legal system and the frequency with which false convictions occur. This book, comprised of a myriad of criminal cases, is one of the most compelling and fast-paced books you will ever read. If it you don't find yourself with a renewed sense of conviction regarding justice and truth in the legal system, then you might consider checking for a pulse. Given the recent advances in pathology, forensics and DNA, "Actual Innocence" should be required reading. Clear and concise, this book will appeal to everyone from housewife to lawyer alike. Truly one of the most important works written in recent years.
Rating:
Summary: Timely and well written
Review: The authors belong to the "Innocence Project", an organized attempt to determine the innocence or guilt through recently available DNA evidence of those convicted of murder/violent crimes. In over 80 cases the were able to _prove_ the innocence of the wrongly convicted, many on death row. This book results from that project and outlines in each chapter some of the failures of the justice system in these cases including the unreliability of eyewitnesses, incompentant defense lawyers, poor laws and more. The book is straightforwardly written and very easy reading. It is also a strong indictment against our current justice system. Unlike many 'critical' books, the authors also offer suggestions for changes that would help improve our justice system and lower the number of the wrongly convicted. This book has gotten me to think so much about our system of justice and the ramifications, that we have decided to us it as a book in our family book club and I view some experiences now through the prism of this book (recent experience with hearing two very different stories from two people of the same exact event). That a book has affected the way I percieve things is a mark of a good book. The one criticism I have of the book is that there is not enough supporting evidence. Though I know the focus of the book is what they had learned from the Innocence Project and not a research survey, I would like to have seen more collaborative statistics and references in each chapter (perhaps an appendix with a few studies and further reading would have been welcome). Still, it is an important and interesting book and well worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: Compelling and Chilling
Review: The book details the history of ten cases of men who served years in prison for crimes committed by others, and touches briefly on perhaps a hundred other cases. As human interest, it is compelling. As an insight into the "system" it is chilling. Police lie. Laboratories fudge or falsify forensic tests. Prosecutors withhold exculpatory evidence from the defense, and use testimony they know to be untrustworthy without checking it out. (They haven't done anything wrong unless they *know* it to be false. One prosecutor used the "jailhouse confession" testimony of a witness, even though a man put on death row by similar testimony from that same witness had been exonerated and released.) Governors drag their feet in granting pardons to men whom DNA tests have conclusively proven to be innocent. (A prisoner in Oklahoma remained incarcerated for 6 years after the lab results had exonerated him.) Defense lawyers -- often working for very low pay -- don't bother to challenge prosecution witnesses, or introduce solid alibi witnesses. They sometimes become so miffed at their clients' refusal to accept a plea bargain, they refuse to prepare them for the witness stand, or even talk with them. Only a small sampling of criminal cases involve biological evidence, but it is a fair random sample. DNA exonerations are a window into a system afflicted with very deep rot. The book contains many common sense suggestions for improvement. At the heart of many of them is accountability. Police and prosecutors run essentially no chance of getting caught for fabricating evidence or falsifying testimony. Once convicted and in prison, the defendants are buried there. The system is presumed to have worked properly, and the possibility that the wrongdoing will ever come to light is practically nil. The advent of DNA took the system by surprise, and shined an unexpected light on the rot. Officials were surprised and perhaps embarrassed, despite their pronouncements to the contrary. But prosecutors don't prosecute each other or charge witnesses who have testified for the state. And the law gives broad civil immunity to police and prosecutors. When a building collapses, or a hospital patient undergoes the wrong operation, or an airplane crashes, there is an investigation. People are disciplined and procedures are changed to prevent a recurrence. In the analogous disaster for the criminal justice system -- the wrongful conviction of an innocent person -- the system confidently affirms that it did everything right. We are in the golden age of DNA exonerations. The window is open to public scrutiny and the possibility of reform. But we are approaching the day when we will have exonerated all of the wrongfully imprisoned who can be exonerated by DNA -- everyone whose case evidence has not been degraded, lost, or destroyed. The word is out in the law enforcement community to be on good behavior if a new case is among that small minority where there is biological evidence. As to all others, the old rules still apply. The public is more acutely aware than it has ever been of just how many innocent people are sent to prison, and of just how impervious the system is to self-correction. Once the exonerations cease, that awareness will fade. The window will close and the opportunity will be gone.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read
Review: This book is a must read for attorneys and non-attorneys alike. It is a terrifying glimpse at the criminal justice system. However, it is not without hope. The authors have several suggestions about improving the sad state of affairs, and if the book is read by enough people involved in the criminal justice system, it may work!
| 
