Is Conviction Integrity a Fashion Accessory?

Conviction is a legal term that refers to a judgment of guilt in criminal cases. Convictions are the result of decisions made by judges and juries. Prosecutors work to get convictions, and defense attorneys try to prevent them.

A conviction can be a guilty plea, a finding of guilt by the judge or jury, or a deferred judgment or probation. It can also include a no contest plea, bail forfeitures, Nolo Contendere pleas, and Alford pleas. Some people are wrongfully convicted of crimes they did not commit. Organizations like the Innocence Project help free people after they have spent time in prison.

Researchers have identified a number of factors that contribute to wrongful convictions: eyewitness error, false confessions, faulty testimony, police and prosecutorial misconduct, and poor forensic science. In approximately half of the wrongful convictions analyzed, improved technology, testimony standards, or practice standards could have prevented a wrongful conviction at the time of trial.

The growing interest in “conviction integrity” seems to be motivated by a sense of responsibility for these errors, but is it really about the right thing? Or is the phrase a mere fashion accessory, a flashy label that gives public relations value to elected officials but does not really change the way the criminal justice system does business?