The Justice System today vs. The Justice System in The Crucible
While reading The Crucible I realized that the justice system today has changed dramatically. Although similar in several ways, they are very different. The justice system today is very different then the one in The Crucible: they differ in how trials are conducted, how the jury and judges are selected, sentencing options and procedures.
In The Crucible, during the witch hunt convictions, there was no hard evidence to convict any of the people on the stand. It was simply a “he said she said” type of trial. Nobody had substantial evidence nor did the have multiple witnesses. This crime is what we call an “Invisible crime” whereas only the victim and the criminal know the details.
Trials today are conducted in a more sophisticated manor. Representatives must show appropriate evidence in order for the suspect to be cleared of all charges or found guilty. The criminal or person on trail must provide an alibi or credible witness. If not they are most likely found guilty in a court of law. They jury however generates the final outcome and answers the question: Guilty or not guilty?
During the jury selection in The Crucible, Proctor was at a disadvantage; although he was liked, many people loathed him because of his poor church attendance. The jury selected in The Crucible consisted of mainly towns’ people and the judge was also from the town. Proctor was found guilty; moreover this biased decision is equivalent to that in a more modern day trial; Gideon vs. the Court. The jury selection was very simple. The towns’ people filled up the court room and the presiding judge was that one of the town. Biased decisions filled the room and the jury found Gideon guilty. Sometimes in this situation trials are moved to neighboring cities and or states to remove biased juries and judges. Sentencing is an even harder decision to make when it comes to the jury.
In the past the only sentence was either life in the barracks or a hanging, which ultimately led to death. In The Crucible, however their only idea of a satisfying sentence was in fact to be hung. The way a sentence was decided depended on you pleading guilty or pleading innocent. In The Crucible if you pled guilty you were basically set free. No questions asked and no evidence. On the other hand if you pled not guilty and there was also no evidence, no one believed you and you were automatically found guilty and hung. Sara Good pleaded guilty saying “…I did it, I did it…” and she was set free. Others who were in denial were hung.
The justice system today provides many other sentencing options. The criminals could receive jail time for some odd amount of years, probation, and even a death sentence. This has a similar outcome to the one in The Crucible. The conclusion of the sentencing relies on the guilty or innocent factor. Today the person who is guilty is the one to receive sentencing. The innocent person is set free. There is no “he said she said” or biased groups to conclude a trial. Sentencing is simply based on evidence or lack of evidence.
In conclusion, over the years the justice system has made a vast change. Some might suggest it was a change for the bad. However, in my opinion it was a gratifying change. The justice system today is similar to the degenerate ways of the system in The Crucible; however, they differ in how the trials are conducted, how the jury and judges are selected, sentencing options and procedures.
