The Farm: Angola, Usa, The Thin Blue Line, and Capturing The Friedmans - Wrong Justice in America

Crime and Punishment in the United States

Living in the United States, it is clear to see that justice is a priority in society; but is it executed correctly every time? The answer of course is no, as cases and individuals fall through the cracks as a result of the sheer number of cases. Statistically, with the amount of criminal cases in America, it would be impossible to bring everyone to justice and save innocent people from prison. Examining specific situations is one way to build data and make assumptions, while looking broadly may bring general points. In the United States, justice simply does not always follow through and people’s lives are destroyed in the process. Other times, justice pushes for an answer, with no one to convict, resulting in mass subterfuge. Examining documentaries is a reasonable way to look into how justice is executed all around America, and to see how it affects specific cases and individuals.

With the large scale of cases throughout American history, many have gone wrong, convicting the wrong person or simply avoiding certain facts in favor of race or predispositions. This is clearly evident in three documentaries, The Farm: Angola, USA, The Thin Blue Line, and, Capturing the Friedmans. Within all three of these films, a mistreatment of justice is shown, whether one believes it or not. In the film, The Farm: Angola, USA, directed by Jonathan Stack, the viewer is introduced to six men who are all serving their lives in prison. These men all have their stories, but one in particular stands out. A man by the name of Vincent Simmons who is in jail for rape, claimed to be innocent, as most people do (Stack 00:23). What makes his argument stand out is that the proof simply does not add up. Throughout the film, it is obvious that Simmons and most likely others in the prison are convicted just because of their race. In Simmons’ case, the woman who accused him even stated that all black men look the same to her (Stacks 00:30). That brings up an obvious question. How did she know it was Vincent Simmons? The answer of course is that she did not. There is a clear mistake in the justice system when a man can be found guilty in court just because of the color of his skin, and go to jail for his entire life. Another example of flawed justice comes when examining the film The Thin Blue Line, directed by Errol Morris. This entire documentary set out to accomplish one thing when it was released, and it did so. This film was released to prove the innocence of its protagonist, Randal Adams. In the documentary, dramatic reenactments capture the story of Randal Adams who was convicted for murdering a police officer. Watching the film, it was clear that something was off, but the climax is surly when the truth comes out. Morris waits until the very end of the film to show a clip of a voice recorder playing David Harris basically confessing to the crime, calling Adams a “proverbial scapegoat” (1:35). This enormous miscarriage of the law cost Adams his life, as he stayed in prison for twelve years and died shortly after he was released. The wrongful conviction of a man once again proves that the American judicial system is flawed and that not everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Another example of the mistreatment of law can be seen in Capturing the Friedmans, directed by Andrew Jarecki. In this film, the cameras observe the Friedman family, which is being bombarded with allegations of position of child pornography. Looking at interviews of police officers and investigators, it is obvious that some details simply do not add up. In one scene, a female investigator profoundly explains that the case has flaws and what was reported is not possible (Jarecki 00:31). In the scene, Jarecki captures Francis Galasso explaining that the multiple descriptions of the house do not coincide and must be flawed, even going as far as having photographic evidence (00:32). The truth behind this case, just like in many others, can never truly be discovered, as too many details and allegations have flown throughout the case. In all, the conviction of Arnold and Jesse Friedman may very well be wrongful, but it also might be correct. What truly matters is that the allegations be consistent, and in this case, they are not. The capture of the Friedmans was done incorrectly, and is just an example of the country’s growing carceral state. The carceral state in America can be simply explained as the need to lock up fellow humans. In general, people just feel better when they know someone bad is put away, even if that means that it is the wrong person. For some reason, the possibility of the correct person being detained is enough to satisfy the victim who detained them. This is talked about by Michael Meranze in his article “Pathology of the Carceral State”. In his article, Meranze discusses the overly jailed perspective of America and even goes on to say “The 1980s and 1990s saw expanded, highly expensive prison construction… to restrict inmate access to the courts and legal options, and an increase in the imposition of the death penalty and of life without parole” (Meranze 1). Meranze basically states that justice in America is simply punishing whomever is chosen, and doing so harshly and without mercy. Moreover, restricting inmate access to courts and increasing the death penalty is simply cruel and inhumane. It is quite easy to identify the problems in the American judicial system just by watching a few films and reading some articles, and one can do so to learn much more.

The idea of accountability is one that someone accountable would disagree with. When time comes to blame someone for crimes or misconduct, the simple solution is always subterfuge. Whether the sacrifice is an involuntary scapegoat or just someone’s upbringing, the results are sometimes fatal or catastrophic. Looking at the three films, Inside Job, Bowling for Columbine, and Lost for Life, one can assume that accountability is important and no matter the situation, someone is to blame. Starting with the film Inside Job, directed by Charles Ferguson, accountability applies to more than just numbers. The financial meltdown of 2008 was one that that truly devastated the world economy and took down a lot of people with it. In this situation, just like any other, accountability was difficult to come to, as everyone pointed fingers to everyone, but people were indeed blamed and punished. In chapter four of the film, tastefully called “Accountability”, the blame was put on big corporations and firms, and the true scapegoat was the Lehman Brothers Firm, which closed in 2008 (Furgeson 1:22). Most fingers were pointing at firms and specifically the Lehman Brothers, so when time came to bail out the banks, the Lehman Brothers got nothing and were forced to close up shop (1:30). Moving to a smaller scale, a question arises regarding accountability for minors. In Bowling for Columbine, by Michael Moore, the question of accountability arises quickly. In the aftermath of the Columbine Massacre the question of who to blame was a hot button issue. Many people chose to blame the children’s upbringing or their general high school stress levels, but there was never a true consensus. One scene in the film shows parents actually blaming musical artist Marilyn Manson, whose seemingly dark lyrics and style attracted attention (00:45). Innocent Manson could not do anything other than take the blame, as his newly found bad reputation grew and people blamed their problems on music. Finding someone to blame was difficult as teenagers and children in general cannot be blamed for their actions, as their minds are supposedly not developed completely. This dilemma arose once again in the film Lost for Life, directed by Joshua Rofé. In the film, Rofé examines the lives of teenagers in prison who will legally never obtain their freedom. The devastating stories of the young adults’ lives truly shows the carceral state of the country, as dozens of teens under the age of seventeen face life in prison without parole. The reality of the situation is that no one person can be accountable for the crimes of these teens, and the blame is not their own. In an early scene, friends explain that many of the teens in the film have committed their crimes under certain circumstances and that what they do is almost justifiable (Rofé 00:15). As a viewer outside of the situation, it is quite easy to pass judgment on the subjects of the film, but once one ponders the situation, the details become hazy. Some would choose to blame the teens, and have them serve their sentences while others may blame the parents or the upbringing the teens received. In all, accountability is important, and with humans, blame is inevitable. While choosing a person to blame seems simple, in practice many cases require much more. Choosing one scapegoat or one individual to claim accountable is simply wrong in certain situations as seen in the films, and finding one entity to blame is sometimes impossible.

In conclusion, the United States today has major flaws in its judicial system and work to be done in the social area of law. While people like to think of America as the most lawful and safest place to be tried, the reality is that mistakes happen, and people pay the consequences. Whether it be someone getting convicted for a crime they did not commit, or another being blamed for something they had nothing to do with, the judicial system in the United States has work to do. Crime and punishment in the country is certainly necessary, as it gives people a reason to stay legal, but sometimes harsh or inhumane practices arise from too much comfort in the wrong system. In all, the documentaries viewed have taught many lessons intentionally and by accident, and one must view and examine the messages given to them in order to truly understand. One cannot simply take in information, nor overthink it, but instead comprehend and opinionate the information given, and form their own views; after all, that is what documentaries are for.