Miscarriages of Criminal Justice

• Date: 01 August 2005
• DOI: 10.1177/1043986205278811
• Published date: 01 August 2005
• Author: Robert M. Bohm
• Subject Matter: Articles

10.1177/1043986205278811Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice / August 2005Bohm / INTRODUCTION

Miscarriages of Criminal Justice

An Introduction

ROBERT M. BOHM

University of Central Florida

This special volume of the Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice is

about miscarriages of criminal justice or miscarriages of justice, for

short. A miscarriage of justice has been defined as “a grossly unfair outcome

in a judicial proceeding, as when a defendant is convicted despite a lack of

evidence on an essential element of the crime” (Garner, 2000, p. 811). This

definition focuses narrowly on wrongful convictions, which have received

the most interest of scholars writing in this area, but are only one type of mis-

carriage of justice. Miscarriages of justice also include wrongful arrests,

wrongful charges or indictments, andwrongful sentences. They may include

harassment by a law enforcement officer, an attorney failing to file a timely

appeal, or correctional officials failing to release an inmate in a timely fash-

ion when his or her sentence has expired. As such, the police and other law

enforcement officials, defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges, jurors, and

correctional officials commit miscarriages of justice. Some of the miscar-

riages are unintentional or accidental. They are committed by fallible human

beings who are simply attempting to do their jobs as best they can. Other mis-

carriages are intentional and venal. People commit them to further personal

or professional agendas.

Two general types of miscarriages of justiceare errors of due process and

errors of impunity (Forst,2004). Errors of due process involve “unwarranted

harassment, detention or conviction, or excessivesanctioning of people sus-

pected of crime” (Forst, 2004, p. 10). Errors of impunity refer “to a lapse of

justice that allows a culpable offender to remain at large” (Forst, 2004, p. 23)

or, in some other way,escape justice. Errors of due process can cause errors

of impunity.In other words, if a personis arrested, convicted,and imprisoned

196

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 21 No. 3, August 2005 196-200

DOI: 10.1177/1043986205278811

© 2005 Sage Publications