Equal Justice Should Be Measurable
Justice should not depend on your name, your wealth, your political connections, your race, your religion, your sexual orientation, your gender identity, or whether you know someone inside the courthouse.
If justice is truly equal, the data should show it.
Our plan calls for a comprehensive, data-driven examination of Oklahoma’s criminal justice system, past, present, and future.
We will examine patterns involving prosecutors and judicial outcomes. We will review appropriate cases involving people currently incarcerated. We will also call for legislation establishing standardized statewide reporting so Oklahoma can continuously measure whether comparable cases are producing fair and consistent outcomes.
Our objective is simple:
Compare comparable cases.
Compare comparable defendants.
Compare comparable outcomes.
Find the disparities.
Ask why.
1. AUDIT THE SYSTEM
We will seek to examine measurable outcomes throughout Oklahoma’s criminal justice system, including:
- Charging decisions
- Charges reduced or dismissed
- Plea agreements
- Deferred sentences and diversion programs
- Bail and pretrial recommendations
- Prosecutorial recommendations
- Sentencing recommendations and outcomes
- Probation and incarceration
- Repeat-offender treatment
- Self-defense and firearm-related cases
- Geographic differences between counties
- Access to effective representation
- Other exercises of prosecutorial or judicial discretion
We will look for unexplained disparities involving race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, economic status, geography, and other relevant factors.
We will also examine whether personal, professional, political, financial, or institutional connections appear associated with different outcomes.
An unexplained disparity doesn’t automatically prove wrongdoing. It tells us where we need to ask questions.
2. REVIEW CASES INVOLVING PEOPLE CURRENTLY INCARCERATED
Our examination will not stop with new cases.
We will seek a systematic review of appropriate cases involving people currently incarcerated in Oklahoma to determine whether their prosecutions and sentences appear fair and consistent when compared with similarly situated defendants.
That review can include:
The charges.
The prosecution.
The prosecutor.
The defense representation.
The plea negotiations.
The sentence.
The judicial outcome.
Comparable cases involving comparable conduct.
We will ask:
Did this person receive substantially the same treatment that another similarly situated Oklahoman would have received?
If comparable defendants received dramatically different sentences, we should understand why.
If one defendant received a plea agreement while another similarly situated defendant didn’t, we should understand why.
If geography, wealth, race, political connections, or relationships inside the system appear associated with different outcomes, those patterns deserve examination.
A finding does not automatically overturn a conviction or establish misconduct. Where credible evidence indicates a possible wrongful conviction, unlawful sentence, constitutional violation, ineffective representation, discrimination, or other miscarriage of justice, that evidence should be directed to the appropriate legal authority and established review process.
3. REQUIRE STATEWIDE CRIMINAL JUSTICE REPORTING
You cannot audit what you don’t measure.
That’s why we will call upon the Oklahoma Legislature to establish standardized criminal justice reporting requirements.
The legislation should require appropriate reporting from district attorneys’ offices and the judicial system so Oklahoma can build reliable statewide data capable of comparing similarly situated cases.
The reporting system should capture appropriate information concerning:
- Original charges
- Amended, reduced, or dismissed charges
- Plea agreements
- Deferred sentences and diversion
- Prosecutorial sentencing recommendations
- Final dispositions
- Sentences imposed
- Relevant offense and criminal-history characteristics
- Appropriate demographic information
- County and judicial district
- Other standardized information necessary to make meaningful comparisons
The system must also protect information that cannot lawfully or ethically be made public, including information involving victims, juveniles, sealed cases, confidential records, and other legally protected information.
We don’t need everyone’s private information published. We need enough reliable information to determine whether the system is operating fairly.
4. ESTABLISH FAIR AND CONSISTENT PROSECUTION
Every county is different, every defendant is different, and every criminal case has individual facts.
Fairness does not mean mechanically giving everyone the exact same sentence.
Fairness means that legitimate differences should explain different outcomes, not wealth, race, political influence, personal relationships, geography, or connections.
When two cases appear comparable but produce dramatically different outcomes, the data should allow us to identify that disparity and ask:
Why?
There may be a perfectly legitimate explanation.
If there is, show the people.
If there isn’t, investigate further.
5. PUT THE RESULTS ON THE PEOPLE’S TABLE
This information will become another important component of the People’s Table.
Oklahomans should be able to see understandable, privacy-protected information showing how their criminal justice system is performing.
We should be able to identify trends across counties and judicial districts.
We should be able to identify unusually large disparities.
We should be able to recognize prosecutors, judges, defense programs, and jurisdictions producing demonstrably fair outcomes.
And when credible evidence indicates misconduct, discrimination, favoritism, corruption, or constitutional violations, it should be referred to the appropriate independent authority.
ACCOUNTABILITY PROTECTS GOOD PUBLIC SERVANTS
This isn’t an attack on judges, prosecutors, law enforcement, or our courts.
Accountability protects the good ones.
A prosecutor consistently treating comparable defendants fairly should have data demonstrating it.
A judicial system producing fair and consistent outcomes should have data demonstrating it.
And when the data identifies a problem, government has a responsibility to examine it.
ONE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE
This isn’t about being soft on crime.
It’s about being consistent on justice.
Victims deserve justice.
Defendants deserve due process.
Law enforcement deserves confidence in the system they work for.
And every Oklahoma citizen deserves to know that their freedom will not depend upon their money, race, connections, political influence, or who they happen to know.
We cannot repair a house divided against itself while people believe there are two systems of justice, one for ordinary Oklahomans and another for the wealthy, powerful, politically connected, or government insiders.
Same Constitution.
Same Rights.
Same Standards.
Same Justice.
If our justice system is fair, the data will help prove it.
If it isn’t, the data will help us repair it.
It’s a WE thing, not a ME thing.
Robert E. Brooks
Independent Candidate for Governor of Oklahoma