Attorney General Kamala Harris: Innovation & Evolution in our Criminal Justice System
Summary
TLDRThe speaker, a career prosecutor, emphasizes the need for reform in the criminal justice system, advocating for a 'smart on crime' approach that balances public safety with civil liberties. Born into a family of civil rights activists, the speaker shares their journey into law enforcement, highlighting the importance of metrics and innovation in addressing crime. They call for societal support for law enforcement to experiment with new methods, akin to Silicon Valley's acceptance of innovation with its risks and rewards, to improve outcomes in the justice system.
Takeaways
- π€ The speaker is a career prosecutor and emphasizes the importance of criminal justice reform.
- π The speaker's background includes a family history of activism in the Civil Rights Movement, which influenced their career choice.
- π€ The speaker challenges the dichotomy of being 'soft' or 'tough' on crime, advocating for a 'smart on crime' approach.
- π The need for metrics and data to assess the effectiveness of criminal justice policies is highlighted.
- π‘οΈ The speaker argues that law enforcement should be a voice for the vulnerable and ensure both safety and dignity.
- π The concept of innovation in law enforcement is discussed, with an emphasis on trying new methods and being willing to accept initial failures as part of the process.
- 𧩠The speaker points out the difference between focusing on individual criminal cases versus addressing the broader crime problem.
- π Acknowledging that crime does occur and that there is a need for severe consequences for serious and violent crimes is essential for any reform.
- π« The speaker criticizes the simplistic 'build more schools, not jails' approach, arguing for a more nuanced understanding of crime and its solutions.
- π€ The importance of involving law enforcement in the reform process is stressed, as they are part of the system that needs to be improved.
- π The adoption of technology in law enforcement is identified as a key area for innovation and improvement.
Q & A
What is the speaker's background and why did they decide to become a prosecutor?
-The speaker is a career prosecutor and the child of parents who were active in the Civil Rights Movement during the 1960s. They were inspired by figures like Thurgood Marshall and decided to become a lawyer at a young age. After attending Howard University and graduating from Hastings Law School, they chose to become a prosecutor to have a direct and profound impact on the most vulnerable in society, aiming to be a voice for the vulnerable and to provide safety and dignity.
How does the speaker view the role of law enforcement in society?
-The speaker sees law enforcement as having a crucial role in protecting the vulnerable and ensuring public safety. They believe that law enforcement should not only be about punishment but also about providing dignity and addressing the root causes of crime, such as education, job training, and mental health.
What is the speaker's perspective on the current state of criminal justice policy?
-The speaker believes that the status quo in criminal justice policy is not working and that there is a need for reform. They argue against the false dichotomy of being either 'soft on crime' or 'tough on crime,' suggesting instead that the focus should be on being 'smart on crime,' which involves using metrics and data to assess the effectiveness of policies.
What does the speaker suggest is a better approach to criminal justice reform?
-The speaker suggests that criminal justice reform should focus on being 'smart on crime,' which means using data and metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of policies. They also emphasize the need to consider the broader context of crime, rather than focusing solely on individual cases.
How does the speaker relate innovation to the field of law enforcement and criminal justice?
-The speaker relates innovation to law enforcement and criminal justice by suggesting that new approaches and methods should be tried out, similar to how innovations are tested in other fields. They argue that there should be an acceptance of the possibility of initial failures or 'glitches,' with the understanding that these can be learned from and improved upon.
What is the speaker's view on the potential risks associated with innovative approaches in law enforcement?
-The speaker acknowledges that there are risks associated with innovative approaches in law enforcement, such as the possibility that a low-level offender might commit a serious crime after being given a less punitive approach. However, they argue that the potential benefits of innovation, such as improved outcomes and more effective use of resources, outweigh these risks.
What is the speaker's stance on the relationship between civil liberties and public safety?
-The speaker argues against the false choice between civil liberties and public safety. They believe that it is possible to balance both, and that a smart approach to crime would consider the needs and rights of individuals while also ensuring public safety.
How does the speaker describe the current approach to crime in the criminal justice system?
-The speaker describes the current approach to crime as a 'one size fits all' approach, which they believe is ineffective. They argue that crime is not monolithic and that different types of crime should be treated differently, with a focus on understanding the underlying causes and addressing them.
What is the speaker's view on the role of technology in law enforcement and criminal justice?
-The speaker sees technology as a crucial tool in law enforcement and criminal justice, emphasizing the need for law enforcement agencies to adopt modern technology to improve communication, data collection, and overall effectiveness. They argue that technology can help in implementing and measuring the success of criminal justice policies.
What is the speaker's advice for those involved in law enforcement and criminal justice reform?
-The speaker advises those involved in law enforcement and criminal justice reform to embrace innovation, be open to trying new approaches, and to involve law enforcement leaders in the process. They also stress the importance of community involvement and the need for a collective effort to address the crime problem effectively.
Outlines
π Background and Commitment to Criminal Justice Reform
The speaker begins by expressing honor at being on stage with a distinguished panel and commends the Chicago Ideas Festival for assembling such talent. Acknowledging the challenges and the need for reform in criminal justice policy, the speaker introduces their background as a career prosecutor and child of civil rights activists. They recount their upbringing surrounded by adults advocating for justice and their decision to become a lawyer at a young age. The speaker emphasizes the importance of law enforcement's role in protecting the vulnerable and providing safety with dignity. They advocate for a 'smart on crime' approach that assesses the effectiveness of criminal justice policy and rejects the binary choice between being soft or tough on crime.
π Embracing Risk in Law Enforcement Innovation
The speaker discusses the inherent risks of innovation in law enforcement, particularly the fear of negative outcomes when trying new approaches with low-level offenders. They stress the importance of societal support for such innovation, drawing parallels with the culture of Silicon Valley, where failure is seen as an opportunity for improvement. The speaker criticizes the traditional approach to elected office, which often prioritizes adherence to a plan over flexibility and adaptation. They argue for a shift in focus from individual criminal cases to a broader understanding of crime as a societal issue, advocating for a more nuanced approach to criminal justice policy.
π The Complexities of Crime and Public Perception
The speaker addresses the complexities of crime and the public's perception of criminal justice, highlighting the need to differentiate between violent and nonviolent crimes. They critique the 'build more schools, less jails' slogan, arguing that it oversimplifies the issue and fails to acknowledge the reality of serious crimes that require severe consequences. The speaker emphasizes the importance of a balanced approach that recognizes the need for both social programs and a robust criminal justice system. They also stress the need for a detailed understanding of the criminal justice system to identify areas for improvement.
π οΈ The Role of Technology in Modernizing Law Enforcement
In the final paragraph, the speaker focuses on the importance of technology in modernizing law enforcement and improving communication within the system. They share personal experiences from their time as a district attorney, noting the slow adoption of basic technology and the potential for technology to enhance effectiveness. The speaker calls for public-private partnerships to support the adoption of technology in law enforcement, arguing that it will ultimately save money and improve outcomes. They conclude by emphasizing the need for community involvement, including law enforcement leaders, in reforming the criminal justice system and pursuing innovation.
Mindmap
Keywords
π‘Criminal Justice Policy
π‘Career Prosecutor
π‘Civil Rights Movement
π‘Smart on Crime
π‘Vulnerable Populations
π‘Public Safety
π‘Innovation
π‘Hypothesis
π‘Mundane
π‘Technology Adoption
π‘Community
Highlights
Honoring the esteemed panel and the Chicago Ideas Festival for assembling talent to address criminal justice challenges.
Acknowledging the failure of the Status Quo in criminal justice policy and the need for reform.
The speaker's background as a career prosecutor and child of Civil Rights Movement activists.
The family's surprising reaction to the speaker's decision to become a prosecutor, contrasting with their activism.
The belief that law enforcement impacts the vulnerable and should provide safety and dignity.
Starting a career in Alameda County, known for its strong legal tradition.
The prosecutor's experience with a wide range of cases, from drug offenses to homicide.
The suggestion to approach criminal justice reform by avoiding false choices and focusing on smart policies.
The importance of metrics and return on investment in evaluating the criminal justice system.
The challenge of innovation in law enforcement and the risks associated with trying new approaches.
The need for societal support and understanding of the trial-and-error nature of innovation.
Drawing parallels between the innovation culture in Silicon Valley and the need for a similar approach in law enforcement.
The problem with focusing on individual criminal cases rather than addressing crime as a broader problem.
The analogy of crime as a pyramid, with the most severe crimes at the top and the majority of cases at the base.
The call for a bifurcated approach to crime, distinguishing between violent and nonviolent offenses.
Addressing the misconception that progressive thinking means being soft on crime.
The importance of embracing the mundane in implementing criminal justice reform and technology adoption.
The need for public-private partnerships to support law enforcement technology and innovation.
The speaker's optimism about the potential for community-wide collaboration to improve law enforcement and criminal justice.
Transcripts
[Music]
it is quite an honor to be um on stage
with such an esteemed panel and and
congratulations to Chicago and the ideas
festival for pulling together such
talent because uh we do know and and it
has been clear from each speaker that we
have challenges there's a lot to do and
Status Quo is not working when it comes
to how we have conducted ourselves on
criminal justice policy so I stand here
as a career prosecutor a very proud
career prosecutor and by way of
background I will tell you I'm also one
of two children who was born to parents
who met when they were graduate students
at the University of California Berkeley
in the
1960s and they were both very active in
the Civil Rights Movement which is how
they met my sister and I joke that we
grew up surrounded by a bunch of adults
who spent full time marching and
shouting um about this thing called
Justice and frankly the heroes of that
time we all know among the many were th
Good Marshall and Charles Hamilton
Houston and conston Baker Motley so when
I thought of that I thought that's what
one should do I want to be a lawyer I
decided that at a very young age after
going to Howard and graduating from
Hastings law school was very excited my
family gathered around okay KLA what are
you going to do in your fight for
justice and I very proudly told them I
have decided I'm going to become a
prosecutor you're laughing because you
have a sense of who my family is for
example my sister went on to head the
ACLU so my family at least at best found
my decision a bit curious and with some
of them I had to defend the decision
like one would a thesis and here's what
I said then and now after a career over
at least a couple of of decades as a
prosecutor law enforcement has such a
direct and profound impact on the most
vulnerable Among Us and has as its
responsibility as its job to be a voice
for the
vulnerable and in the process of giving
safety has the responsibility also to
give dignity so I decided that's the
work I wanted to do and I went straight
out of law school to what was considered
one of the best offices in the country
you got a good one here in Cook County
but Alama County Earl Warren once headed
that office and that's where I started
my career and I've prosecuted everything
from low-level drug offenses to homicide
so I stand here with that experience and
that perspective and as we talk then
about ideas and what we need to do to
reform the criminal justice system I
would suggest that we should think of it
in a way that also appreciates the false
choices that have been
presented and in particular not only the
false choice about whether there has to
be some trade-off between civil
liberties and civil rights if we're to
have Public Safety but also a false
choice in general that says on criminal
justice policy you're either soft on
crime or you're tough on crime I suggest
we instead ask are we being smart on
crime which recognizes a number of
factors including as has been discussed
the need to infuse metrics in the
conversation look at what our our
wonderful Business Leaders talk about
all the time in assessing their
effectiveness what is the return on our
investment in particular in a system
that we're putting billions of dollars a
year in this country into our Criminal
Justice System let's look at it and
measure it in terms of its Effectiveness
and in that way build criminal justice
policy but I would suggest to you that
when we do that we cannot Overlook some
of the realities of what we're talking
about because criminal justice policy
and what you do about crime is very
different than what you do in terms of
how many widgets you need to process for
one reason if no
other and I'm going to step back to to
to first put it in in a larger context
what is the purpose of innovation and
why do we engage in it well Innovation
by definition is bringing to Bear some
new device you know who has their new
iPhone 5 um some new approach some new
method right all in the the pursuit of
efficiency and effectiveness and doing
something better we don't engage in
Innovation it's not the a pursuit of
just something new and exciting because
we're bored with the old thing it's
because we want to do better so let's
talk about innovation in law enforcement
and therefore criminal
justice so we do something different for
example in terms of how we approach
someone who is in the system and we
decide looking at the metrics looking at
predictors forecasting we say okay
we're going to do something different
with this guy that we have in front of
us today who's in for let's say a minor
misdemeanor do you know the challenge
for every law enforcement leader every
elected district attorney every elected
Sheriff The Challenge and the concern
the fear always is that we will do
something with that low-level offender
that might be about education and less
incarceration job training Mental Health
and that person will go out tomorrow and
kill a baby and a
grandmother and then everyone will look
at us and they will say Madame district
attorney Mr police chief Mr Sheriff why
did you do something different with them
when you had them because you see when
we engage in Innovation and law
enforcement it necessarily means we're
doing something different with someone
who's on our screen on our radar and the
only reason they're probably there is
they because they committed some kind of
crime so part of what is then involved
in innovation in law enforcement is a
high Assumption of
risk and part of what I would suggest we
need to do to encourage more innovation
in law enforcement is is is set the
table and the plate as a society as as
opinion leaders as as the voting public
to say we encourage you to do that and
we understand how Innovation Works I am
a native California I'm very proud of
what we do in California including what
we're doing in Silicon Valley well the
culture there is very clear you know my
mother was a scientist so so I I have a
full appreciation for what scientists
and Engineers do I grew up in a
household where the word hypothesis was
used all the time okay so when you run
for elected office however you are
expected to have the plan capital T
capital P the plan and then you roll out
the plan and you defend the plan no
matter what its defects because you had
the plan and so it must be
defended versus what
Innovation understands let's start with
a
hypothesis now make sure it's well
intentioned well thought out well
planned but what we know in every
situation almost when we roll it out for
the first time there will be a
glitch but we have accepted that in
places like Silicon Valley as part of
the culture we expect there will be a
glitch don't make the same mistake twice
please but then go reconfigure and let's
tweak it and improve it and roll it out
the next time the luxury of that
experience the reality of that process
is not afforded to people who generally
speaking are in elected office or law
enforcement leaders so part of what
needs to happen is we need to give law
enforcement the ability to try out
experiment and then give them a little
capital a little space to say okay there
may be a glitch fix it let's
reconvene another challenge I think we
have when it comes to innovation in in
law enforcement and therefore in
criminal justice is the the way that we
have approached the issue which has
mostly been centered on the criminal
case instead of the crime problem so I'm
a career prosecute you heard stories
about specific cases and then we heard
statistics in
general so when I was a career
prosecutor I was handed a fine
seiz fire while and child sexual assault
some of the worst crimes you can imagine
my only focus when I got that file was
that case and I'll tell you if I was
ever a vigilante da it was in that case
lock this person up because I believe
the facts are here and the evidence is
here to prove him
guilty that is the right approach for
the criminal
case it's a very different situation
when as the elected da for two terms in
San Francisco and and now the chief
elected law enforcement officer of the
biggest state in the country when I
think about the crime problem very
different from the criminal case but for
too long we have allowed criminal
justice policy to evolve around the
specific case so what ends up happening
is we have a conversation that is fueled
by what we feel here rightly our
concerns here rightly our fears here
based on that case instead of looking at
the numbers looking at the numbers that
you heard already so part of the shift
has to involve one identifying how we
have approached it and realizing that as
I know it as a career prosecutor you
know I see crime as on a
pyramid at the very top of the pyramid
the worst crime there for a obvious
reason homicide child molestation the
worst cases you can imagine they're
there at the top of the pyramid because
they are the most outrageous of
offense it it it it the the cost to the
victim and the community Community is
great and it needs to be a priority
thankfully at the top of the pyramid
also the fewest
number what is occupying the bulk of
what is in the criminal justice system
is at the middle and the base of that
pyramid but we have approached a one
siiz fits-all approach to Crime even
though crime is not monolithic I would
suggest we could make great advances
just by having people automatically when
they hear and Eva did such a beautiful
job of just showing us images and then
challenging Us in terms of what our
immediate reaction is I think we could
go a very far distance if the immediate
reaction the general public had to
criminal justice policy discussions
would be to say okay wait a minute you
person running for office or whoever
else are you talking to me about violent
crime or nonviolent crime let's just
start there just as a beginning let's
bifurcate our brains and our thoughts
into is it violent crime or non violent
crime understanding that generally
speaking the approach should be
different we can't have a knee-jerk
response that's lock them up to every
type of crime as though they are
monolithic or it's a monolith uh the
other piece of it is this so yes I've
already shared with you I mean I was
born in Oakland California my parents
were there Berkeley in the 60s I have
friends like Eva patteron okay so I say
with all love and
warmth that part of concern also for
people who um who are progressive
thinking and liberal-minded or just
Progressive thinking in terms of just
fix it fix it is that we all have these
posters in our
closet that is attached to a stick that
we sometimes will cart out when we're
talking about criminal justice policy
and those statistics that you first
heard when we opened it up incarceration
and we run around with these signs build
more schools like less jails build more
schools less jails and we walk around
everywhere build more school we protest
build more schools less
jails put money into education not
prisons there's a fundamental problem
with that approach in my
opinion and it's this I agree with that
conceptually but you have not addressed
the reason I have three padlocks on my
front
door so part of the discussion about
reform of Criminal Justice
policy has to be an acknowledgment that
crime does
occur and especially when it is violent
crime and serious crime there should be
a broad
consensus that there should be serious
and severe and Swift consequence to
Crime that I think is essential and by
the way it's it when you just break it
down everybody agrees you know all
although I'll tell you a little story
got five minutes um one year it was long
it was many years ago I was speaking
before the San Francisco Democratic
party the annual meeting and it was a
Saturday I'd done a bunch of events so I
got there and I was a little tired and I
got to the podium and I looked out at
the San Francisco Democratic party and I
just stood at this Podium I kind of
leaned over I was just exhausted and I'm
looking at you know the the Glorious
party that it is right so it's like the
black guy with the blonde hair the white
guy with the dreadlocks you know the the
lady there with the purple hair and all
the buttons right and I just looked at
it this fabulous mly crew and I said
okay so who of us as Democrats raise
your
hand is saying people shouldn't have to
go to
jail and you could see these hands just
start to run up I said hold on one human
being kills another human being a woman
is raped a child is molested is that
what we're
saying so the knee-jerk
response was to suggest we don't want
law enforcement and Public Safety but
that's not what we
mean so that has to be part of what we
talk about and challenging ourselves in
terms of where we're coming from when we
talk about what needs to occur to
improve the system to agree that status
quo is not working the next part of it
then has to be okay we can outline
criticism what's the
solution cuz it's not it's not not
having jails because there are people
who do bad things who need to go to jail
and some people need to go to jail for
the rest of their
life but it has to be about looking at
and understanding the system well enough
to know how we can then build into it
those things that can create Improvement
and then that comes down to a number of
issues including what we all need to do
when we want to improve anything which
is have a an ability to embrace and
endure the
mundane right we can talk about broad
policy approaches but let's talk about
some specific issues also and this gets
back to the last discussion about cyber
crime we really need to support the
ability and the desire of law
enforcement to adopt
technology that's a very real issue when
I was first elected district attorney in
San Francisco that was back in 2004 kind
of long ago but still San Francisco
first class City do you know two-thirds
of my lawyers didn't have
email the San Francisco Police
Department department is just now rolled
out
email what many of us who have done law
enforcement or have been in government
can tell you is that when you pull back
the curtain on the way we're operating
sometimes it reminds me of that little
guy at The Wizard of Oz it's amazing we
get anything
done so we can talk about these broad
policy goals but we also have to pay
attention to the mundane which is the
detail of how you would Implement that
we can talk about Gathering statistics
absolutely we have have to judge
criminal justice policy and law
enforcement and Effectiveness based on M
Matrix not based on some blind adherence
to tradition which is how we tend to do
it but how are we going to measure if
literally the technology is not in place
to get that
done so in terms of the details part of
the discussion has to be how we're going
to probably do work that will be public
private
Partnerships because you know I was
going to say bad word shoot um
California is on the verge of
bankruptcy you know I we just we're
looking at huge cuts so you know and I'm
sure that that Rah Emanuel and whoever
else can talk about the same concern
which is we don't have a lot of extra
resources but we also have to realize
that actually we'll end up saving money
in the not so long run by in the
infusion and Adoption of Technology by
all these systems but in particular law
enforcement if for no other reason also
because a large part of what law
enforcement does is communication based
that's how we solve crime that's how we
talk across jurisdictional lines when we
need to talk to law enforcement Partners
be they uh state and federal if you're
talking about from local or just across
jurisdictional boundaries so what we
know about technology is that's one of
the best things it gives us is the
ability to communicate effectively
accurately efficiently and quickly so
I'm going to leave that idea with you as
one of many I wrote a book it's called
smart on crime I've got more there um
but essentially I think that there is a
lot to be done but I also let me just be
more explicit strongly strongly believe
that to have this discussion in a way
that we produce outcomes means having
law enforcement at the
table because you can talk about reform
of a system but sometimes that's from
the outside in we also need Innovation
within the system and we need to rely
and Depend and include and and involve
our law enforcement leaders so that we
can actually see these reforms take
place and that's where I've had a great
experience of working with lots of
sheriffs and Das and police Chiefs who
want to do that same thing and and and I
know that that all of you support them
in their desire to do it but it really
will take a whole Community to fix the
crime problem and to do what we need to
do around bringing smart ideas to law
enforcement in a way that we pursue
Innovation it's going to be a whole
Community working together um and in
that way I feel very optimistic about
what we can do we've done some great
programs in California where we've shown
that we can change the outcomes and um
and with that I want to thank the
Chicago ideas festival for your great
work thank
[Applause]
[Music]
you
Browse More Related Video
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)