NCJ Number
172029
Journal
Judicature Volume: 81 Issue: 2 Dated: (September-October 1997) Pages: 52-57
Date Published
1997
Length
6 pages
Annotation
This article claims that subjecting criminals to public shaming rituals as a sentencing alternative will not work.
Abstract
One of the latest trends in criminal sentencing is the imposition of "scarlet letter" punishments, where the defendant must submit to some type of public humiliation. Shaming punishments have been challenged in the appellate courts on grounds that: (1) they violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment; (2) they violate the First Amendment by compelling defendants to convey a judicially scripted message in the form of forced apologies, warning signs, newspaper ads, and sandwich boards; and (3) shaming punishments are not specifically authorized by State sentencing guidelines and therefore constitute an abuse of judicial discretion. The article claims that there are very few opportunities where shaming would be appropriate, let alone effective. Shame is a fall from grace and, since many offenders lack self-esteem in the first place, they cannot fall very far. A better tactic in fighting crime is to focus on the root causes of crime, to elevate the criminal class to the point where they have something to lose by committing an illegal act. Notes