Sympathetic bad guys?

Today’s post is a result of conversations I’ve had with a couple of author friends—and a situation I’ve faced myself. Suppose your plot demands that your protagonist has been charged with a crime. Maybe he’s even been convicted. But you also want to make sure that the protagonist remains a sympathetic character. You don’t want your readers to reject him due to his background. How can you pull this off?

One obvious answer is to make sure the readers know he’s innocent. The poor lamb has been wrongfully accused. This can make a juicy plot driver in itself, but it has also been done a lot (as in The Fugitive), and if not handled well can come of as trite.

I think there’s much more potential when your protagonist is actually guilty. He did the deed. Ah, but why? Maybe he was desperate. Maybe he was young. Maybe he foolishly let himself get pulled in by the wrong crowd. Maybe he had a really rough background and the crime seemed, at the time, his best choice. Not only are all of these realistic and interesting, but they also reflect true life: most criminals aren’t especially different from the rest of us. They just made some bad decisions.

It’s probably easier to rehabilitate your protagonist for some crimes than for others. It’s harder to sympathize with a violent offender, for instance. And some offenses, such as rape and child abuse, are probably just about hopeless. If your guy commits one of those, it’s unlikely you’ll ever endear him to readers. But never say never, I guess. Hannibal Lecter comes to mind.

Whatever crime your guy has committed, you may also face the issue of how to keep him from doing hard time. If it was a relatively minor offense and he didn’t have much of a record, you can probably get away with giving him probation. If someone else committed the crime with him, perhaps your guy will testify against him in exchange for immunity or a plea deal. If his circumstances were really extreme, he might even seek clemency (which in most states can be granted by the governor; the president can grant it for federal crimes). But in real life, clemency is an extremely rare event.

 

 

Prison tour

If you’ve been following this blog lately, you won’t be surprised that I love touring places related to the history of law and criminal justice. Last month, my older daughter and I did a 10-state, 4500-mile road trip. And as we were zooming through Wyoming (at a gloriously legal 80 mph) I was delighted to see a sign advertising the Wyoming Frontier Prison. We exited the freeway in Rawlins so we could take a tour, and I’m so glad we did.

 From 1901 until 1981, this was the Wyoming State Penitentiary (a new state pen eventually opened in the same town; that’s where Wyoming’s felons are now incarcerated). It must have been a miserable place to do time. In the early years, there was no electricity or running water, and our guide said the temperature inside was never more than 20 degrees warmer than the outside temp. Picture that during a Wyoming winter, when the thermometer regularly drops below 0F. Two or even three men would share a single 5 by 7 cell—which at least might have added a bit of body heat.

The state also executed people here. At first they hung them using an interesting—and pretty horrifying—contraption called the Julian gallows. Later they switched to the gas chamber. Which I got to sit in. Yes, some of us have weird vacation thrills.

As you might suspect, many of the prison’s inmates had colorful histories. Train robbers, gunslingers, outlaws of all stripes, the desperate and the downtrodden. Women were housed here too. Some inmates escaped or were released, only to end up back behind these walls. Others were murdered by their fellows.

Nowadays it makes for a fascinating tour. As a bonus, we even got to see a couple of the marmots that live in the exercise yard.

Here are some more photos. If you’re ever in Rawlins, Wyoming, I recommend a stop.

Summer vacation 6: Death

I’m nearing the end of a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. This is the final Wednesday vacation posting.

Humans are very creative about finding ways to harm one another. This carries over to capital punishment, which has been inflicted a variety of ways. Here are some historical examples.

 Garrote. This was used as an execution method in Spain and some Spanish colonies. The criminal’s neck was secured in the loop and the screw was tightened into the spinal cord.

 The gibbet. This was used in a variety of ways. A living prisoner could be locked inside until he died of dehydration, exposure, or starvation. Or the body of an executed prisoner could be displayed. This was often used for pirates.

 The rack. Technically, this was used to torture people rather than execute them. But death was a common result, either immediately or eventually, since the device dislocated limbs.

 The wheel. Criminals were tied to the wheel and usually all their limbs were broken. If they didn’t die right away, they might be left to die of exposure, shock, or dehydration.

 It’s debatable whether the iron maiden was ever actually used. This replica has rubber spikes, fortunately for me.

 Decapitation. Quick and easy, and doesn’t require much equipment. (I’m thankful to various Croatian tour guides and museum employees for encouraging me to play with their exhibits.)

Summer vacation 5: Torture

I’m in the middle of a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. I’ll be posting those on Wednesdays until July.

Torture was widely used in most European criminal justice systems, largely because you couldn’t convict someone without a confession. Some torture devices would eventually kill the prisoner, but all of them were intended to look terrifying—all the better for extracting confessions. Here are some examples.

 This is a restraint device called a scavenger’s daughter. The head went through that ring at the top, hands through the middle arches, and feet through the bottom loops. A few hours spent in that position would get very uncomfortable.

 The throne. A suspect could be attached to it in a variety of positions and then flogged or otherwise tortured.

 Interrogation chair. Okay, not the comfiest of seats, but not as awful as it looks. But it does look scary, and a suspect’s legs or arms could be smushed into the spikes.

Head crusher.

 And the thumbscrew.

 

Summer vacation 4: Punishment

I’m in the middle of a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. I’ll be posting those on Wednesdays until July.

Prisons are a relatively new form of punishment. For much of human history, criminals were executed for more serious offenses. People who committed minor offenses were often given some form of public humiliation. Not only was this inexpensive, but it meant the miscreant could return to work instead of leaving his family destitute. A lot of creativity went into these punishments. Here are photos of a few.

 See that pillar to the right of Spike? In Roman times, people would be tied to it and flogged; that space around it was essentially the main square. I took this photo in Zadar, Croatia.

 Branks were metal masks, often in the shape of animal heads. Some had metal flanges that went into the mouth. Branks were often used on women who were considered quarrelsome.

 Some people who violated religious norms might be required to wear these vests. I don’t know what the jellyfish-looking things are supposed to be.

 Branding was a more permanent way of identifying criminals.

 This is a pillory. Some were stationary but some, like this one, could be driven around town. The offender might be flogged while he was locked in it.

 These are stocks. Which would actually be pretty ineffective for a prisoner with no legs.

Summer vacation 3: More places to lock people up

I’m about in the middle of a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. I’ll be posting those on Wednesdays until July.

Over the last two weeks I posted photos of old jails. Here’s something slightly different:

 This is Alcatraz, perhaps one of the most famous prisons in the world. It was a federal prison, housing those who were especially dangerous or high escape risks. But it was very expensive to run, so it operated as a federal prison for less than 30 years. We toured when my kids were younger, and they enjoyed. The littler one was especially taken with Al Capone’s story.

 This is a recent photo of what was once the largest mental hospital in California, the Stockton Asylum. It opened during gold rush times and remained in use as a mental hospital until 1995. It’s now a university campus.

Summer vacation 2: More old jails

The end of the semester is hitting me hard, and then I’ll undertake a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts here will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. I’ll be posting those on Wednesdays until July.

Today I have some more photos of old jails.

 This is a military jail (or gaol, I guess) in Edinburgh, Scotland. This jail cell is in Monterey, California. I think it’s interesting how closely it resembles the Scottish cell.

 

 These are the ruins of the gold rush-era jail in Coloma, California.

 This gold rush jail is in better shape. It’s in Columbia, California. My younger daughter looks happy to be there, doesn’t she?

 This is also from gold rush times, and it’s in Knights Ferry, California. Summer temps regularly get above 100F there–imagine what it would be like locked inside those metal walls.

Summer vacation 1: Old jails

The end of the semester is hitting me hard, and then I’ll undertake a 10-state road trip with my older daughter. And these are big Western states. So my regular posts here will be on hiatus until July. In the meantime, I thought I’d share some photos of historical criminal justice practices. I’ll be posting those on Wednesdays until July.

We’ll begin today with some photos of old jails, which were often built into city walls. That made sense, since the walls were already fortified and guarded. Jails were intended to hold prisoners for only short lengths of time, usually while they were waiting for their trials. This remains one of the primary purposes of American jails (as opposed to prisons, which hold convicted felons).

This jail is in a tower atop the city wall in Ulm, Germany.

 

 One of those flags is flying over a cell in the castle wall in Lisbon, Portugal.

 

 This cell was in the old city wall in Sarajevo, Bosnia & Herzegovina.

 And this one (which contains my daughter in the photo) is in beautiful Dubrovnik, Croatia.

 Finally, another German cell, in Rothenburg.

 

Trapped!

Somewhere along the line, a rumor started that police can’t lie to suspects, especially if the suspect asks whether the undercover officer is a cop. If the cop does lie, the story says, it’s entrapment. This is a myth. Cops can and do lie all the time. It would be hard for them to do their jobs otherwise.

Nevertheless, the defense of entrapment does exist. Its primary purpose is to ensure that otherwise innocent people aren’t lured by police into attempting crimes they otherwise never would have committed. The underlying idea, I think, is that everyone has a price. Given enough incentive, even the most law-abiding among us might be tempted to stray. (This was part of the idea in the movie Indecent Proposal.)

In the United States, standards vary for determining whether entrapment has occurred. Some states use a subjective test, asking whether the defendant was predisposed to commit the crime. Others use an objective test. That asks whether a reasonable law-abiding person, placed in the defendant’s shoes, would have been likely to commit the offense.

Entrapment comes up as a defense most often during sting operations, when undercover officers induce someone to do something illegal. Of course, the intention of the operations (we hope) is to catch people who already planned illegal activity. Sting operations can be very useful in a variety of contexts, such as prostitution, drug trafficking, and auto theft. But if the operation goes too far, innocent people may be drawn in. Police who want to engage in these activities need to be careful not to cross over the line.

For federal cases on entrapment, check out Jacobson v. United States (involving child pornography) and Sorrells v. United States (alcohol during Prohibition). Either could serve as good plot inspiration.

 

Defense attorney dilemma

Today I have a lawyerly plot bunny for you.

Defense attorneys have various legal and ethical duties, some of which may occasionally collide. On the one hand, a defense attorney has the obligation to represent her client to the best of her ability, using all reasonable legal means to get her client off the hook, regardless of whether she believes the client is guilty. On the other hand, she is an officer of the court, charged with making sure no miscarriage of the law occurs.

Really, these duties are toward the same end, since both involve making sure that the justice system runs the way it’s supposed to. But sometimes they can create problems. For example, what if the defendant lies on the stand? Does the attorney let the judge know that perjury has occurred, or does she keep her mouth shut?

If the attorney knows—or suspects—ahead of time that her client will perjure himself on the stand, she has the duty to keep that from happening. The easiest way is to not call him as a witness. The defendant cannot force his lawyer to let him testify. However, if the defendant does testify and unexpectedly lies, the lawyer’s not supposed to say anything—but she can’t intentionally let him continue lying. It can be a difficult balancing act.

So here’s your plot bunny. Your character is an attorney representing a smooth bad guy. The bad guy lies on the stand—implicating someone else—and is found not guilty. Now the cops are after that third party, and your lawyer wants to make sure an innocent party doesn’t go to prison. What does he do? And what complications might ensue if he’s attracted to that innocent third party?