Framing innocents: the wrongly convicted as victims of state harm

Abstract

Abstract:We adapt the victimology of ‗state harms' framework outlined by Kauzlarich et al. (Critical Criminology, 10(3), 2001) to understand the post-exoneration experiences of 18 death row exonerees. Kauzlarich et al. develop six points of commonality shared by most victims of state crime. Application of this framework to death row exonerees highlights the role the state plays in creating and exacerbating the harms they suffer. This analysis also lays a foundation for further theoretical inquiry into the wrongful conviction of the innocent as a form of state crime. Article:In 2003, we began interviewing death row exonerees about their post-exoneration lives. This inquiry was prompted by the substantive growth in academic attention to cases and causes of wrongful convictions since the publication of Radelet, Bedau, and Putnam's In Spite of Innocence [28] 10 years prior, and a substantive dearth of attention to the experiences of exonerees after their release from prison. We began with one primary question-What is the impact of a wrongful capital conviction and incarceration on those individuals who have been exonerated and released?-and several sub-questions: What are the primary issues and obstacles they confront when released? How do they cope with these issues? How do they rebuild their lives? What factors affect their abilities to cope and rebuild effectively?The initial guiding theoretical frameworks in this investigation were drawn from the social psychological literature on trauma management and recovery. We did not explicitly aim to contribute to the state crime literature. But, because the approach has been inductive, rather than deductive While not a fully formed theory of wrongful convictions as state crime, the analysis offered here is a hopeful step in that direction. As noted by Leo [18; p. 213], the scholarly study of wrongful convictions is -theoretically impoverished.‖ Research is dominated by case studies, analyses of legal causes, and calls for reform but falls short of providing theoretical understanding of the production and consequences of wrongful convictions. Leo [18; p. 215] urges social scientists to -draw on existing social science frameworks . . . to identify the various levels of analysis on which comprehensive theory . . . might be built.‖ Here, we use Kauzlarich et al.'s [13] analysis of state crime victims to identify how the state produces and exacerbates the harms exonerees suffer after release. Analyses available in the state crime literature may provide inroads into theorizing wrongful convictions in response to Leo's criticism.Similar to Leo's assessment of the wrongful conviction literature, Kauzlarich et al. [13; p. 174] criticize the rate of -theoretical and empirical‖ development in the study of state crime, especially with regard to the victimology of state crime. While a wide range of state crime victims have been identified [13; p. 175], the sub-field lacks

Self Reports of Being Falsely Accused of Criminal Behavior

“…The first is literature that focuses specifically false accusations of sexual offenses (Berliner & Barbieri 2010;Kanin 1994). The second is a growing body of research specifically on false accusations that result in wrongful conviction, particularly in capital punishment cases (Acker 2009;Miller 2006;Stack 2006;Westervelt & Cook 2010). Both areas of research are important, yet both are very specific.…”

The Impact of an Exonoree’s Guest Lecture on Students’ Attitudes toward Wrongly Convicted Persons

“…Applying these ideas to the criminal justice system, after a person is convicted of a crime they carry the stigma of being a criminal--something that is not easy or always possible to disassociate from oneself (Adornato 2009;Campbell and Denov 2004;Clear, Rose, and Ryder 2001;Westervelt and Cook 2009;Winnick and Bodkin 2008). Once a stigma is acquired, a person's integrity is questioned and they come to be viewed as "not quite human" (Goffman, 1963, p. 5) and seriously flawed.…”

“…For example, Darryl Hunt, who spent 19 years in prison for a crime he did not commit, claimed that his stigma remained long after exoneration (Adornato 2009). Others, such as Kirk Bloodsworth and Ken Wyniemko, still feel they are treated as though they are guilty of murder (Roberts and Stanton 2007;Westervelt and Cook 2009). For example, although Kirk Bloodsworth was the first to be exonerated from death row through post-conviction DNA testing, he has found "child killer" written on his truck on multiple occasions (Innocence Project 2010; Westervelt and Cook 2009).…”

“…In the case of the wrongly convicted, stigma theory may arise to account for the reason a person was initially convicted, the danger said person may now represent, and the fears people have about exonorees. The limited research in the area (Campbell and Denov 2004;Grounds 2004;Westervelt and Cook 2009) suggests that once someone is wrongly convicted, others may continue to impute a variety of undesirable characteristics onto the exonoree and may discriminate against him or her. For example, Westervelt and Cook (2009) found that exonoree Sabrina Butler was terminated in the middle of applying for a job, once she was recognized by an assistant manager.…”

“…The limited research in the area (Campbell and Denov 2004;Grounds 2004;Westervelt and Cook 2009) suggests that once someone is wrongly convicted, others may continue to impute a variety of undesirable characteristics onto the exonoree and may discriminate against him or her. For example, Westervelt and Cook (2009) found that exonoree Sabrina Butler was terminated in the middle of applying for a job, once she was recognized by an assistant manager. Further, research has documented that many exonorees have difficulties finding gainful employment and fully participating in society after their release from prison (Campbell and Denov 2004;Grounds 2004;Westervelt and Cook 2009).…”