POWER PLAY: CHECKBOOK JUSTICE ISN'T AS BIG AS PEOPLE THINK

A question that routinely surfaces in regard to the American judicial system is can justice be purchased?

The answer depends on how you define the purchase of justice.

It is a fact more poor people are in jail than rich people. However, is that because the poor commit more crimes or because the more affluent can checkbook their way out of it?

After a poor person is arrested, the likelihood is that he will remain in jail while awaiting trial. The affluent, however, have a better chance of posting bond.

The exception is when the crime is an extremely serious and violent one. In those cases, judges -- if they set bond at all -- tend to set it so high that not even Ross Perot could afford to bond out.

And when it comes to putting up a defense, not everyone can afford a battalion of the best and most expensive lawyers from throughout the realm and purchase the testimony of experts imported from all corners of the known universe.

The wealthy do have an advantage -- that holds true in all aspects of life. However, that advantage is not an unfair one.

It's not like a rich defendant can walk into a courtroom, be quoted a price for his particular offense by the judge, pull out his Visa Gold card and buy a not guilty verdict.

But money makes working toward a goal easier, something all good little capitalists should know.

A penniless individual sitting in the Cape Girardeau County Jail on a burglary charge and represented by a public defender no doubt disagrees with the assessment that money doesn't create an unfair advantage. The definition of "fair" is another which varies depending on perception.

The only way to eliminate any involvement of wealth in the system is to socialize the legal profession. All defense lawyers would be public defenders, appointed at random by the court. Taxpayers would pick up the tab for all defendants as well as all the costs involved with mounting a defense at trial.

It would be interesting to try it for a year just to see how badly things would be screwed up.

The whole money thing is also why proposals to make convicts pay for their confinement will never fly.

To present someone without a cent to their name a huge bill on the day they're paroled may seem fair -- why should taxpayers be responsible for supporting someone who refused to play by the rules? -- but it is not realistic. And if those who cannot afford to pay aren't made to, how can you expect someone who can pick up their tab to do so?

Such a system would be seen as extra punishment for having money. But if people are credited time off their sentence based on ability to pay, it would be seen as buying an early release. That would be reminiscent of during the Civil War when people could buy their way out of military service.

In the final analysis, justice isn't skewed to the rich, but having a fat wallet certainly doesn't hurt.

Marc Powers is a member of the Southeast Missourian staff.