![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
untonugganI have a problem with the way the criminal justice system is portrayed in a lot of shows that otherwise could be possibly entertaining maybe (and sometimes are entertaining, I'm looking at you, Elementary).
Take Lie to Me, for example. OK, yes it is a "smart white guy shows everyone how smart he is all the time while other people do emotional labor" show. However, it does kind of do some interesting stuff with the crime-solving PI genre with "how do I tell if someone is lying" kind of bent. But when that dude is questioning people, there are no Miranda rights. No one has a lawyer present. It is implied (pretty explicitly, I think) that if someone being questioned by this "consultant" wants to have a lawyer present, that means they are somehow admitting guilt. There's also an episode where I think he basically kidnaps someone and sticks them in a room and asks them lots of questions without a lawyer present til he gets a confession, and we as the audience are supposed to cheer because they did terrible bad things. (I think that episode was a serial killer or something.) BUT that kind of confession shouldn't stand up in a court of law, and if it does stand up in a court of law, we shouldn't be cheering about it.
Similarly, in Elementary, which I actually do love (because of many reasons like Lucy Liu and "look they show someone dealing with addiction on screen in a non-stigmatizing way") ... there's lots of times Joan and Sherlock obtain evidence illegally. Searches without warrants (in physical space), searches without warrants (digitally), witness intimidation ... like, I basically would be more happy if there were no cases and it was just a Joan and Sherlock piece.
I think Criminal Minds tries to do a better job of "okay we actually do need to follow procedure on obtaining warrants", and I DO love some of the characters. But. There are times when agents *clearly* have PTSD or addiction and are somehow still on the job *with a fucking gun* ... or are investigating cases which involve them personally, where they should be pulled but are pulling strings so they are not pulled from the case. I like that the show portrays these things as messy, but OMG can we not show people who are allegedly knowledgeable about psych telling their coworkers to get psych help, or doing the actually hard thing and reporting them for a psych eval so that they're pulled from active case duty and getting help?
There are many many more examples I could use, some more egregious than others. (Why does anyone still live in Midsomer, when apparently something in the water makes everyone a killer and there's only two detectives looking into things?) I have also lost track of the number of shows where waterboarding and torture is shown as a matter of course, as in, of course the bad guys use this, but also so do government agents. Maybe our protagonist disagrees ("they know it doesn't work!"), but they are mostly powerless to stop it. Or maybe they instigate it because it's so important to stop these bad people from doing a bad thing to US citizens.
The flip side of this is shows that offer examples of justice being carried out perfectly, every time. "Nothing to see here, folks! Look at our courtroom working perfectly." I don't actually watch that many courtroom shows, but there are a lot of "wishful thinking" narratives. "We caught the bad apple cop" or "this raping asshole got put away for good" or "this punchy public defender stands up for what's right."
Why is this a problem? The US Criminal Justice system needs serious work. If you would like more info on this, kindly follow the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag on Twitter, open your eyes, or look at statistics on the criminal processing of rape testing kits (or how rape victims are questioned in courtrooms). When television shows us that it's perfectly normal to break Miranda rights, torture or coerce a confession out of someone, search and obtain evidence without a warrant, etc. as long as the victim is this super bad person and also tells us that the people who are breaking all these laws are "just doing their job," are "unfairly targeted" even though they are "putting their lives on the line every day" ... it's easier to believe those things are what's happening in reality.
There is a ton of criticism leveled at shows that don't pass the Bechdel-Wallace test, or don't have enough diversity of characters (with varying definitions of diversity), or have too many rape tropes. What do we call tropes that play into a narrative that props up a failing criminal "justice" system? I think that, however dear our fandoms are, we have to call those out too.
I don't have a snazzy name or a snazzy hashtag, and I doubt it will be profitable for producers unless enough people ask for it and even then it will be "controversial" because these narratives are comfortable as they allow those of us with white privilege to pretend that the system is working just fine. But it's not, and we need to stop pretending that it is (even in make-believe TV shows).
(Note if necessary I will break out the banhammer on this one, but I am hoping that will not be necessary. Signal-boosting okay for this entry, though please don't post it outside dw without checking with me.)
Take Lie to Me, for example. OK, yes it is a "smart white guy shows everyone how smart he is all the time while other people do emotional labor" show. However, it does kind of do some interesting stuff with the crime-solving PI genre with "how do I tell if someone is lying" kind of bent. But when that dude is questioning people, there are no Miranda rights. No one has a lawyer present. It is implied (pretty explicitly, I think) that if someone being questioned by this "consultant" wants to have a lawyer present, that means they are somehow admitting guilt. There's also an episode where I think he basically kidnaps someone and sticks them in a room and asks them lots of questions without a lawyer present til he gets a confession, and we as the audience are supposed to cheer because they did terrible bad things. (I think that episode was a serial killer or something.) BUT that kind of confession shouldn't stand up in a court of law, and if it does stand up in a court of law, we shouldn't be cheering about it.
Similarly, in Elementary, which I actually do love (because of many reasons like Lucy Liu and "look they show someone dealing with addiction on screen in a non-stigmatizing way") ... there's lots of times Joan and Sherlock obtain evidence illegally. Searches without warrants (in physical space), searches without warrants (digitally), witness intimidation ... like, I basically would be more happy if there were no cases and it was just a Joan and Sherlock piece.
I think Criminal Minds tries to do a better job of "okay we actually do need to follow procedure on obtaining warrants", and I DO love some of the characters. But. There are times when agents *clearly* have PTSD or addiction and are somehow still on the job *with a fucking gun* ... or are investigating cases which involve them personally, where they should be pulled but are pulling strings so they are not pulled from the case. I like that the show portrays these things as messy, but OMG can we not show people who are allegedly knowledgeable about psych telling their coworkers to get psych help, or doing the actually hard thing and reporting them for a psych eval so that they're pulled from active case duty and getting help?
There are many many more examples I could use, some more egregious than others. (Why does anyone still live in Midsomer, when apparently something in the water makes everyone a killer and there's only two detectives looking into things?) I have also lost track of the number of shows where waterboarding and torture is shown as a matter of course, as in, of course the bad guys use this, but also so do government agents. Maybe our protagonist disagrees ("they know it doesn't work!"), but they are mostly powerless to stop it. Or maybe they instigate it because it's so important to stop these bad people from doing a bad thing to US citizens.
The flip side of this is shows that offer examples of justice being carried out perfectly, every time. "Nothing to see here, folks! Look at our courtroom working perfectly." I don't actually watch that many courtroom shows, but there are a lot of "wishful thinking" narratives. "We caught the bad apple cop" or "this raping asshole got put away for good" or "this punchy public defender stands up for what's right."
Why is this a problem? The US Criminal Justice system needs serious work. If you would like more info on this, kindly follow the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag on Twitter, open your eyes, or look at statistics on the criminal processing of rape testing kits (or how rape victims are questioned in courtrooms). When television shows us that it's perfectly normal to break Miranda rights, torture or coerce a confession out of someone, search and obtain evidence without a warrant, etc. as long as the victim is this super bad person and also tells us that the people who are breaking all these laws are "just doing their job," are "unfairly targeted" even though they are "putting their lives on the line every day" ... it's easier to believe those things are what's happening in reality.
There is a ton of criticism leveled at shows that don't pass the Bechdel-Wallace test, or don't have enough diversity of characters (with varying definitions of diversity), or have too many rape tropes. What do we call tropes that play into a narrative that props up a failing criminal "justice" system? I think that, however dear our fandoms are, we have to call those out too.
I don't have a snazzy name or a snazzy hashtag, and I doubt it will be profitable for producers unless enough people ask for it and even then it will be "controversial" because these narratives are comfortable as they allow those of us with white privilege to pretend that the system is working just fine. But it's not, and we need to stop pretending that it is (even in make-believe TV shows).
(Note if necessary I will break out the banhammer on this one, but I am hoping that will not be necessary. Signal-boosting okay for this entry, though please don't post it outside dw without checking with me.)
no subject
Date: 2015-12-17 11:24 pm (UTC)Elementary occasionally has the consequences of those consultant actions come back to bite, and also acknowledge that what is being done is wrong, even if it is expedient. I think Marcus and Tobias have both hung some very firm lampshades on the practice, but they don't do anything because Sherlock and Joan both don't leave enough evidence to prove they acted illegally.
Unfortunately, it seems like the shows where we see the court system breaking down are the ones that focus specifically on court cases instead of the ones that focus on officers. Blue Bloods occasionally flirts with this, but doesn't always go all the way.
Of course, if someone made a more realistic show, the audience would probably complain about the unreality of reality and demand that things be better resolved and the villains properly punished.
no subject
Date: 2015-12-18 01:41 am (UTC)and yet I watch these things anyway and very rarely have the spoons to say anything about it (and don't when i do have the spoons, honestly)
am likely interested in engaging more on this when I'm not falling asleep, spoons-willing and you-willing
\o/
Date: 2015-12-18 05:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-12-18 11:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-12-18 05:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-12-19 05:57 am (UTC)