|
{{B}}Shaming
Punishments{{/B}} Last month, James Connolly, a junior at the University of Massachusetts, stood in front of a local police station wearing a toga (长袍) as punishment. His crime? He was charged with underage drinking, illegal possession of alcohol and excessive noise while holding a party. This shaming punishment has increased in the US in recent years, mostly imposed by local judges for less-serious crimes, such as drunk driving and theft. They believe shame is the best petty crime deterrent (威慑). For example, in Tennessee, Judge James McKenzie has made shoplifters (商店货物扒手) stand outside Wal-Mart with signs that read, "I am a thief put here by order of Judge McKenzie". "Alternative punishments like community service and fines don't convey moral condemnation (谴责) of the criminal," said Dan Kahan, a University of Chicago Law School professor, in an article published on the university's website. "They aren't shameful enough." Shaming punishments are sometimes called Scarlet (红色的) Letter punishments. The name comes from US author Nathaniel Hawthorne's 1850 novel The Scarlet Letter. In this novel, a woman is forced to wear a scarlet "A" on her clothes as punishment for her adultery (通奸). However, University of Iowa law professor Andrew Hosmanek said there is an important difference between the shaming punishments of colonial America and those assigned in states like Tennessee. "Early societies often had a 're-acceptance' ceremony to welcome the offender back into main society," says Hosmanek. "Contemporary punishments in America lack this." Supporters of shaming punishment argue that public shaming is a good way of expressing community values. Some judges say shamed offenders seldom repeat their crimes. Others aren't so sure. "There is little evidence to suggest that shaming punishments are successful in preventing people from committing specific crimes. And a shamed criminal may face a hard battle to regain credibility in society," said Hosmanek. "So, a shaming punishment may force the offender into more crime to support himself." Experts also debate, shaming punishment's damage to human dignity. "Since the point is to shame, it's of course degrading (侮辱人格的)," said Linda Malone, director of the Human Rights and National Security Law Programme at William and Mary Law School. "US law only prohibits punishment that is 'cruel and unusual' - not 'inhuman and degrading. It's very difficult for a thief to prove that holding a sign in front of Wal-Mart is 'cruel and unusual'." |