Abigail Alexis Ramirez, Criminal Justice B.S 

University of Texas at Arlington

March 30, 2021

Making Our Justice System Just

Over this past summer, the Black Lives Matter movement was enormous because of the saddening cases of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. This movement gained so much attention that the Washington Post called it a “Global Cause”. For me that means that this “global cause” is a world event. We see a plethora of injustice in America, and we will be analyzing what it looks like, how it could be changed, and if it were to change, what effect it would have.  I will be rewriting the 4^th, 5^th, and 6^th amendments to reflect the society we live in today, because when it was written before it not written for the times we would like to live in today.  

Breonna Taylor and the Fourth Amendment 

Let’s talk about Breonna Taylor and how unfair this whole situation was. Breonna Taylor’s home was raided in the middle of the night startling her and her boyfriend Mr. Walker. It is truly unknown whether the police announced themselves prior to bursting in however, they only gave Ms. Taylor and Mr. Walker about 45 seconds to get themselves together and answer the door. Mr. Walker states that they asked who was at the door and no one responded. After officers burst into the apartment, Mr. Walker was in fear for his life and the life of his girlfriend and in self-defense he grabbed his licensed weapon and shot once at the individual in the doorway. Immediately after this, police returned fire with a total of thirty-two bullets. Ms. Taylor was hit six times on both sides of her body, and over a dozen neighbors said they did not hear the police announce themselves.

After this, prior to ultimate court rulings, Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Annie O’Connell ruled that, “any grand juror who chooses to disclose their identity to do so with extreme caution, for to do so may result in a level of public attention and scrutiny over which this Court will have no control.” This meaning maybe many people would not like the ending results of the case. 

The question now posed is, was the warrant properly obtained? According to many professionals, no, the warrant was not properly obtained because warrants obtained by use of intentional or reckless misrepresentations are invalid under the Fourth Amendment. Keep in mind the drug the officers were in search of, was not found and would have belonged to Ms. Taylors ex boyfriend. The way the warrant was executed in the first place was horrific, in a video posted by NYTimes you can see a commanding SWAT officer explain just how poor of a job the officers executing the warrant did. This was originally a no-knock warrant that then changed before the execution of it. Of course, one of the pros to a no-knock warrant is that none of evidence will be destroyed because there is not enough time for it to be destroyed in the first place. I understand that officers want to catch the bad guy and get all the drugs from his house, but after executing no-knock warrants so many times I believe it may leave room for error when knocking and announcing is needed. In the book, The Law of Criminal Investigations, the example of the court ruling in Illinois V. McAuthur is given. With this court ruling we see that the officers in this situation did legally seize all evidence properly. There is a high value for drugs but low value for human life and I believe that is the main issue with no-knock warrants. There is a need for more specifics when executing no-knock warrants.

So, let’s truly take a look at the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment gives “the rights to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized.” If I were to rewrite the Fourth Amendment today I would change it to; “the rights to be secured in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their other property including curtilage, from all unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated by warrants issued without probable cause and due time for persons to respond to such, supported by oath or affirmation, or not particularly describing the places to be searched, or the persons or things to be seized, the scope of any warrants must use technological advancements to prove their doings with all features in use”. 

This is how I would rewrite the Fourth Amendment because of the uncertainty in whether the Police did announce themselves and just how long Mr. Walker and Ms. Taylor were given to open the door. This is Ms. Taylor’s story, but many others have faced situations in which immediately following the incident body cams go black and silent. This continues a code of silence within departments across the nation. I believe that if police tamper with their body cameras and yes, that includes simply muting the mic, then they should be charged with the tampering of evidence as well as violating citizens’ rights. Evidently, they had to mute it because it is something, they did not want the court to hear so it must be something worth hiding. The real question is how effective I believe them to be. According to research, body cameras are not as effective as we would all hope. The research as to whether the cameras are effective are mixed. George Mason University conducted research, “The study, which looked at 70 other body-worn camera studies published through June 2018, found the cameras have not had statistically significant effects on most measures of officer and citizen behavior or citizens’ views of police”. The common thought is that body cameras should protect the citizens from the cops and vice versa. Of course, this idea makes sense, and the research shows that officers who use body cameras typically use less force, but eight others showed no significant difference. Based off the research more studies need to be conducted. Although the research is mixed, I know body cameras can benefit us in the future and they need to be implemented into the Amendment as I rewrote. There have been countless cases where citizens’ rights have been violated and bystanders have taken it upon themselves to document it via videos. The belief and hope is that officers may react to situations differently when they have body cameras and mics on because they can and will be punished. An officer’s decision-making skills can change when you know that your video and audio footage will be reviewed by superiors.

If our Fourth Amendment was to change, this would effect the way courts interpret search and seizure cases on a day-to-day basis. This new interpretation of the laws by the courts would impact the enforcement of the laws in everyday situations such as Terry Stops, Traffic stops, or any stop honestly. In Mapp V. Ohio the court declared that all evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible in a state court and I believe the same would apply to the rewritten Fourth Amendment.

Cyntoia Brown and the Fifth Amendment 

Let’s dive into Ms. Brown’s story that began way before the crime she committed, and the crime I feel was committed against her. At the young age of sixteen, Cyntoia worked as a prostitute for her pimp named Cut-Throat. Within the days leading up to her incident Ms. Brown had been drugged and raped repeatedly before being bought for sex by the man she would then end up killing in 2004. Johnny Allen picked up Ms. Brown for sex near a Sonic Drive-In in Nashville, then he was shot by Ms. Brown when she believed that he was reaching for his gun in his home. Ms. Brown was scared and did what she thought was best for herself by fleeing with Allen’s guns and money. Brown was a victim of an abusive relationship with a drug dealer and pimp who forced her into prostitution, making her a victim of sex trafficking as well. I am not saying this to defend her actions per se, but to make a point within the violations of her rights. Ms. Brown waived her Miranda Rights and told investigators that Allen had solicited her for sex on August 6 and driven her to his home where he showed her guns and became violent. Why would someone who properly understood their Miranda Rights waive them? I do not believe that Ms. Brown was properly represented, nor do I believe that her situation was fair. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that mandatory life sentences without parole for juvenile offenders are not constitutional. This ruling helped Ms. Brown’s case and she is now free and a published author. 

In the book, The Law of Criminal Investigations, the court ruling in Ashcraft V. Tennessee is given and states that the very existence of inherently coercive information is irreconcilable with the possession of mental freedom by a lone suspect against whom its full coercive is force is brought to bear. In the Netflix documentary Murder to Mercy: The Cyntoia Brown Story, it is very evident that Ms. Brown was still in shock when interviewed, and she did not know what waiving her Miranda rights meant. With this court ruling in mind, it is clear that this process was unfair to Ms. Brown. 

The Fifth Amendment states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”. When analyzing this amendment, a right against forced self-incrimination is obviously not displayed in Ms. Browns case. If I were to rewrite this amendment, the amendment would be as follows. “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation; nor shall officials swear under oath and lie; government figures who violate these rights will be charged.”

Everything stayed in the Amendment, but it is what I added at the end that I feel will make all the difference. If this amendment were to change, this would effect the way courts interpret who to convict in instances such as this. This new interpretation of the laws by the courts would impact the enforcement of the laws in everyday situations because officers would think twice in the way they approach different situations, as they should be doing already. This would also effect due process positively by allowing people the chance to reflect on their thoughts and actions before being coerced into saying anything self-incriminating. 

This would then effect criminal investigating techniques. There would be a need for change because if they were to violate these rights they could be tried and convicted. I feel like this is a necessity because it means holding people (officers) accountable for their actions. There will not be a blind eye when these situations are brought to light. This will then help prevent police from covering up their actions if they do their due justice and do not violate anyone’s Four Amendment rights. The rewritten Amendments will help fight injustice because they will work together to protect citizens and officers as well. “In 2010, a New York City police officer named Adil Polanco told a local ABC News reporter that “our primary job is not to help anybody, our primary job is not to assist anybody, our primary job is to get those numbers and come back with them.” This statement is found in an article titled Why Police Lie Under Oath.

Officers are supposed to serve and protect, and I feel like the title Police Officer may give too much authority or maybe gives a feeling of more power. The code of silence, regarding police covering for one another, was mentioned in the article and this needs to be broken. This all needs to be dismantled, and I believe after rewriting a few things then we could see a change and this change similarly ties in with the Sixth Amendment limit on police questioning. In fact, Ms. Browns case can be tied to the Sixth Amendment as well.  

James K. Batson, Winston Massiah, and the Sixth Amendment

James was not initially a bad kid however the life he began looking up to ending in him leading to a road of petty theft. In 1982, he was pulled over by officers and charged with second degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the jury selection prosecutors have the right to strike any persons off the jury without reason. The jury began with a diverse set of jurors and ended with all four black jurors being striked off by the prosecutor. The ending result of this was Batson’s jury being solely made up of an all-white jury. Batson was convicted on both charges against him. I am not giving this example because I think he was innocent, but rather because this was a crime against him. 

In the case of Winston Massiah, Massiah was indicted on federal narcotics charges, he retained counsel, pleaded not guilty, and was released on bail. When Messiah was released on bail, he had a conversation with one of his codefendants in the absence of counsel. His codefendant had allowed police to install a radio transmitter under his seat in which they used to listen in on Massiah’s conversation. Massiah incriminated himself and did not know that he was even doing so. Once at trial, the agent who listened to the conversation testified and the jury convicted Massiah and the U.S Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. 

When we look at the Sixth Amendment it states, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense”. 

If I were to rewrite the Sixth Amendment it would be as follows: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense throughout his whole process since detainment; if prosecutors would like to strike a juror it must be proven that the striking is in regard to bias and not in regard to race.” Once again, everything stayed, but what I added needs to be looked at.

First, I included that if prosecutors would like to strike a juror it must be proven that the striking is regarding bias and not in regard to race.  I added this so that the jury can be made up of peers in a general sense. This system is not broken. This system was simply not built to protect everyone. There is an overabundance of biases within our system all throughout. This is seen the case of Batson V. Kentucky for example. It is an unjust situation that needs to be taken seriously. 

You can also see that I added to have the assistance of counsel for his defense throughout his whole process since detainment. I added this because of people like Ms. Brown or Massiah. They need counsel to assist them as soon as possible. They do not understand due to their education they have been given or rather the lack there of. The minority communities need more help and need more education. Massiah was guilty of what he did, but the investigative techniques were not fair in my opinion. Legally, I can see how any conversation with anyone can be used against you, but this was purposeful in getting the information that officers were in search of.

 In general, people do not know what they are up against and that is a problem from the get-go. We look at instances such as an Orlando lawyer denying an officer from searching his vehicle as he has the right to, and we see the officer still trying to find something else to charge the driver with. Even though a stop may be pretextual, and he pulled over the subject for multiple reasons, the officer had no reasonable suspicion for asking to search the vehicle. I say this because the stop did not correlate to anything possibly being in the vehicle nor was the subject acting suspicious. If the driver permits the search under duress, at that point I believe the driver would still have grounds to challenge the search. This is not the case here, but it is the case for people who do not know their rights, so there is also a need for an implementation of everyone knowing their rights before becoming a licensed driver or a homeowner or pretty much anything in today’s society. With the efforts in rewriting these Amendments I would like to think there is more hope. This new interpretation of the laws by the courts would impact the enforcement of the laws due process. When we take a look at the court’s opinion in Massiah V. United States I do not believe that the court would agree with my changes to the Sixth Amendment.

What else needs to be fixed?

There could be a series made on the issues in the Criminal Justice system. The expansion on it could be as big a season each issue. The list can go on and on, it can range from Police Brutality, Mass Incarceration, Ethics in Policing, The War on Drugs, and so on and so forth. The injustice even goes beyond the criminal aspect but also into the social and educational aspects that can be linked to it. Discrimination, ageism and homophobia are three common examples of social injustice.

According to Quora.com, “Social injustice issues would be things like unfair labor practices, racial discrimination, discrimination due to gender, orientation, ethnicity, age.”  Quite frankly many of these if not all unjust situations in our system can be tied in some way, shape, or form. Sadly enough, this system was not built for an equal world.

The looting we witnessed this past summer sent a message that more programs are needed in the areas of housing, health, education, and for better policing and justice system. These communities have continued being neglected and it has been too long. I understand that these riots were taking place for the black communities however it opened a lot of eyes to the racial issues that we still have today in 2021. These riots truly showed others to open their eyes and see the issues in front of them. This made an explosion of social media feeding information of Asian hate crimes to immigrant children in cages. I have never promoted violence and I still do not believe that violence is ever the answer, but I definitely understand why people have gone to this extent time and time again. The unfortunate system we live in calls for this constant reminder that “Hey we’re still here and we haven’t forgotten that the system is still unjust”.  

My Part in it 

To do my part in this system I will create an organization that will revise the justice system. An organization that will have associates in the white house, capital buildings in every state, and advocates in every country. Bearing this in mind I can create a convention on the justice system. I will conduct research studies and make our system better in any way I possibly can. This will be a monumental movement as an organization, some might eventually call it a world event. This is just the first of many revisions in which I will conduct throughout the course of my career in the field of criminal justice and criminology.

Can We Make Our Justice System Just?

In conclusion, I told you about Breonna Taylor and her injustice. You read about Cyntoia Brown and how she was violated. We talked about Batson and Messiah and their situations as well. We talked about the plethora of injustice in America that is being seen, but by a blind eye. We analyzed what injustice looks like, how it could be changed, and if it were to change, what effect it would have.  I rewrote the 4^th, 5^th, and 6^th amendments to reflect the society we live in today, because when it was written before it was not written for the times we are quite literally dying to live in today.  

References

Ishaan Tharoor. (2016, July 12). Black Lives Matter is a global cause. Washington Post; The Washington Post.

Video: How the Police Killed Breonna Taylor. (2021). The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000007348445/breonna-taylor-death-cops.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

‌ Wolfson, A. (2020, May 17). Was a “no-knock” warrant justified to search Breonna Taylor’s home? Several experts say no. The Courier-Journal; Louisville Courier Journal. https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/2020/05/17/breonna-taylor-shooting-experts-say-no-knock-warrant-wasnt-justified/5201805002/

Mizrahi, Stephanie, et al. The Law of Criminal Investigation. West Academic Publishing, 2018.

1 ANNALS OF CONGRESS 434–35 (June 8, 1789).

Body Cameras May Not Be the Easy Answer Everyone Was Looking For. (2020, January 14). Pewtrusts.org. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2020/01/14/body-cameras-may-not-be-the-easy-answer-everyone-was-looking-for

Carroll, L. (2019, August 7). How The Justice System Failed Cyntoia Brown. Refinery29.com; Refinery29. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/12/219015/cyntoia-brown-case-facts-real-story

Cyntoia Brown Released After 15 Years In Prison For Murder. (2019, August 7). NPR.org. https://www.npr.org/2019/08/07/749025458/cyntoia-brown-released-after-15-years-in-prison-for-murder

 Mizrahi, Stephanie, et al. The Law of Criminal Investigation. West Academic Publishing, 2018.

Netflix. “MURDER to MERCY: THE CYNTOIA BROWN STORY | Official Trailer | Netflix.” YouTube, 15 Apr. 2020, www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb2Ce6mj-iI.

Fifth Amendment | Browse | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress. (2021). Congress.gov. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/amendment-5/

‌Opinion | Why Police Lie Under Oath (Published 2013). (2021). The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/03/opinion/sunday/why-police-officers-lie-under-oath.html

‌{{meta.pageTitle}}. (2021). {{Meta.siteName}}. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1985/84-6263

Protection of Constitutional Rights Under the Sixth Amendment | Sixth Amendment. (2019). Bureau of Justice Assistance. https://bja.ojp.gov/program/sixthamendment/sixth-amendment#:~:text=In%20all%20criminal%20prosecutions%2C%20the,of%20the%20accusation%3B%20to%20be

Real World Police. (2020). Orlando Attorney Refuses Police Request to Search Car [YouTube Video]. In YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCzKmNBHzWE

Gardner, D. L. (2017, September 25). Social injustices are not equal. The Clarion-Ledger; Mississippi Clarion Ledger. https://www.clarionledger.com/story/opinion/columnists/2017/09/25/social-injustices-not-equal/699448001/

‌ Biden Announces Actions to Combat Anti-Asian Attacks. (2021). The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/30/us/politics/biden-anti-asian-violence.html

‌