Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Alabama Judge borrows from Nazis to sentence Wal-Mart shoplifters

Posted by Guest Blogger at 1:59 PM on May 25, 2007.


AlterNet reader Eddie Torres: "I am a judge; I weakened America."
judgedreddgenscreenshot1

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

This is a guest post by regular AlterNet commenter Eddie Torres.

Earlier this month, Judge Kenneth Robertson Jr. of Attalla City, Alabama, ordered two shoplifters convicted of stealing from a Wal-Mart Supercenter to serve a a 60-day jail sentence or stand in front of the store for 8 hours wearing a sign reading "I am a thief; I stole from Wal-Mart."

After the two shoplifters decided to wear the signs, the judge convinced Wal-Mart to allow the sentence to be carried out. However, after the first 4 hours of the sentence had been served, Wal-Mart abruptly changed its mind, stating "…upon further review, we simply would rather the punishment not be carried out on store property."

Before Wal-Mart's higher-ups reversed their position, the manager of the Attalla City Superstore said that "the only comments we've heard so far have been positive… most of them thought it was a good thing… maybe they [the shoplifters] will think twice about doing it." In contrast, convicted shoplifter Lisa Fithian said some people who read the sign described the punishment as "cruel".

America's protections against "cruel and unusual punishment" have been under constant pressure since well before 9/11, with plea-bargaining that is weighted against the poor and uneducated, an informant system that pays criminals to turn in other criminals in exchange for immunity, and sentencing rules that fill prisons faster than authorities can build them.

But why does shoplifter Lisa Fithian's punishment sound so chillingly familiar? Because similar placard-around-the-neck punishments were used by German judges both domestically and in "People's Courts" in occupied territories after the Nazi party rose to power in the 1930s:

nazi1

"I have allowed myself to be shamed by a Jew"

nazi2

"I am a partisan and I set fire to German buildings"

nazi3

"We are partisans and we shot at German soldiers"

The use of placards around the necks of condemned criminals has historically had two specific purposes: to humiliate the criminal and to send a message to the rest of the population. But Judge Robertson in Alabama is not a member of an occupying regime.

He is a cog in a justice system that uses the US Constitution, a 220 year-old document, as the basis of its authority. And it appears that fear of setting a precedent for "cruel and unusual punishment" was not on Judge Robertson's mind at the time of his decision.

More worrisome is the tolerance of unusual judicial methods by a wider population in this event - including (temporarily) Wal-Mart. It brings to mind the 1961 film "Judgment at Nuremberg," where the accused German judge Ernst Janning (played by Burt Lancaster) describes the climate of fear in pre-war Nazi Germany that enabled judges to justify increasingly extreme decisions:

There was a fever over the land… We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. There was, above all, fear. Fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, fear of ourselves… What about us, who knew better? We who knew the words were lies and worse than lies? Why did we sit silent? Why did we participate? Because we loved our country! What difference does it make if a few political extremists lose their rights? What difference does it make if a few racial minorities lose their rights? It is only a passing phase. It is only a stage we are going through. It will be discarded sooner or later…

Judge Dan Haywood (played by Spencer Tracy) responds to Janning in his closing remarks:

There are those in our country today, too, who speak of the protection of the country. Of survival. The answer to that is: survival as what? A country isn't a rock. And it isn't an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for, when standing for something is the most difficult. Before the people of the world - let it now be noted in our decision here that this is what we stand for: justice, truth… and the value of a single human being.

As long as America tolerates Wal-Mart justice and Jack Bauer methods, the world waits for influential Americans to stand up for a higher purpose. The world has been waiting a long time.


Dems' Godly God-Fest Ends with Prayer by Former Christian Coalition Leader
A leader among the "New Evangelicals."
Post by Joshua Holland. August 29, 2008.
John McCain is Older Than Alaska
23 years older.
Post by Isaac Fitzgerald. August 29, 2008.
Palin Thinks Hillary is a Whiner
These days Palin is all about praising Hillary's efforts, but she used to sing a different tune.
Post by Melissa McEwan. August 29, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Bizarre.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on May 25, 2007 9:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It immediately reminds me of Philip K. Dick's "The Man in the High Castle", an alt-history novel in which Japan and Germany defeated the US in WWII and partition the country in two - one feature of the novel is how the South rallied to the Nazi's side. Only in Alabama... and then there's the recent racism evidenced in the Katrina disaster.

On the other hand, if Bush and Cheney were forced to walk from Washington to Los Angeles with placards around their neck reading "I trampled on the Constitution and betrayed the American people", I'd be reluctant to object - but it'd probably be better to just throw them in the federal pen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Wal-Mart: temporary voice of reason? Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: Bizarre. Posted by: paschn
» BRILLIANT, Eddie: Posted by: citizenjoe
» RE: Bizarre. Posted by: Jack Cohen
New England Puritanism
Posted by: MLO on May 25, 2007 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a punishment that is not in any way, shape, or form new in the USA. It is bad. But it isn't new.

Pax,

MLO

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Not new, just more profitable Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: New England Puritanism Posted by: brasilaron
Wrong caption
Posted by: sapatatanka on May 25, 2007 11:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The correct translation of the placard shown in the first picture is "I have allowed a jew to have sexual intercourse with myself."

Which, of course, is even worse than your incorrect translation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Wrong caption Posted by: sport
» RE: Wrong caption Posted by: Joshua Holland
As an aside...
Posted by: Benjaminsjw on May 26, 2007 12:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...it might be interesting to know that the girl in the picture in the middle, who was identified as Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya, was executed shortly after this picture was taken. She became a hero and a martyr to the people of the Soviet Union. Movies, books and poems about her short life appeared and were very popular. She was an example to young people in the USSR.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: As an aside... Posted by: bimasta
» Not surprising... Posted by: medstudgeek
Seeker
Posted by: sport on May 26, 2007 1:07 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To think standing in a public place with a sign identifying the crime you are guilty of as cruel punishment in relation to serving time behind bars is laughable. To misdirect attention of this event to the larger more political hate Bush campaign betrays the almost religious, and thus blind, devotion to the emotions and not to intellectual reasonings behind the partisan attacks on Bush and Cheney. Why are Americans so blind to the differences between personal foibles and policy?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

find inspiration here - FDR's 1941 message more relevant than ever
Posted by: Suzon on May 26, 2007 6:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think that FDR's 1941 message to Congress is off-topic, but a reminder of the positive values to be found in our history. Below is a brief exerpt...

"As men do not live by bread alone, they do not fight by armaments alone. Those who man our defenses, and those behind them who build our defenses, must have the stamina and the courage which come from the unshakable belief in the manner of life which they are defending. The mighty action that we are calling for cannot be based on a disregard of all the things worth fighting for.

The nation takes great satisfaction and much strength from the things which have been done to make its people conscious of their individual stake in the preservation of democratic life in America. Those things which toughened the fibre of our people, have renewed their faith and strengthened their devotion to the institutions we make ready to protect.

Certainly this is no time for any of us to stop thinking about the social and economic problems which are the root cause of the social revolution which is today a supreme factor in the world.

For there is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy. The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:

Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.
Jobs for those who can work.
Security for those who need it.
The ending of privilege for the few.
The preservation of civil liberties for all.
The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living.

These are the simple basic things that must never be lost sight of in the turmoil and unbelievable complexity of our modern world. The inner and abiding strength of our economic and political systems is dependent uon the degree to which they fulfill these expectations"...end of exerpt

President Roosevelt was unquestionably an inspiring leader who tapped into the common sense and compassion of ordinary people in a very difficult time. Progressives have to restore that combination and by doing this put to shame all the feeble, callous and greedy people currently in power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

curious
Posted by: karyse on May 26, 2007 7:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'll bet the reason Malwort backed out is because many of the patrons congratulated the convict or otherwise badmouthed the behemoth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: curious Posted by: eddie torres
It's just a sign, folks.
Posted by: Janet4784 on May 26, 2007 8:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on, wearing a sign stating your crime for 4 hours is "cruel" punishment? Likening this to the Holocaust? Get a grip. Remember the Scarlet Letter? This is nothing new, and has been used for good and ill for centuries. Let's get the focus back to what matters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» not likened to the holocaust Posted by: brasilaron
» Punishment Park Posted by: citizenjoe
» additionally... Posted by: brasilaron
» RE: It's just a sign, folks. Posted by: babaloo
I wonder if that same judge
Posted by: mdruss42 on May 26, 2007 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
would have the manager of that same Walmart store walk in front of his store with a plaque reading...

I STOLE FROM MY EMPLOYEES.
I HAD THEM WORK OFF THE CLOCK.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shoplifting Specials Aisle 9
Posted by: whyoung on May 26, 2007 9:45 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Guest Blogger would not have written this had they ever served 60 days in county lock-up.

They should also be ashamed for comparing this frivolity to the horrors of Nazi Germany.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Commenters ignoring "unusual"
Posted by: Joshua Holland on May 26, 2007 9:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Several commenters argue that holding a sign isn't "cruel," eg: isn't physicially painful or torturous.

But the Constitution doesn't only bar "cruel" punishment; it also protects us from "unusual" punishment.* That's been interpreted to mean, "persons will not be subjected to arbitrary, humorous, or capricious punishment outside the normal course of the law."

Whether or not it's cruel, you'd have a hard time arguing that the sentence Eddie describes wasn't "outside the normal course of the law," at least in modern America.

*In the U.S, a punishment has to be both cruel and unusual to be unconstitutional. According to English Common Law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a punishment is a no-no if it is either cruel or unusual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Well put, Josh. Posted by: citizenjoe
Another Criminal
Posted by: ccluelessfl60 on May 26, 2007 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No details of the shoplifting were presented and it seems a more fitting punishment would have been restitution and community service hours. I know of one store in the North who prosecuted an 85 year old woman for stealing grapes. She was tasting them so they called the police and then had the nerve to bring th case to court. No one asked did she have any food at home. Just another criminal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Another Criminal Posted by: YogiBear
Shame
Posted by: electriclady281 on May 26, 2007 12:20 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Personally, I have no problem with a shoplifter wearing a placard to that effect. Healthy shame is a powerful deterent to antisocial behavior. But there is so much societal unhealthy shame, such as that which is suffered unnecessarily by victims of "social crimes", that healthy shame has gotten a bad rap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Court Transcript would be helpful
Posted by: DaBear on May 26, 2007 12:48 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
According to one victim/convict (via the AP): Fithian maintained her innocence. She said her conviction was based on a misunderstanding: She said she was taking a $7 item to the service desk because it would not scan. Yeah, I'd like to see the transcript to hear the store's version of the facts and why the Judge (or jury, if there even was one) believed the Prosecution over the Defendant. If Fithian is telling the truth, this is cruel AND unusual, in addition to being downright assinine. Further, CNN's photo caption frames things in typically judgmental Jerry Springer style fashion: Lisa King Fithian, 46, stands outside a Wal-Mart in Attala, Alabama, wearing a sandwich board that allowed her to dodge a 60-day jail sentence for shoplifting. Since when is a public shaming the same as "dodging" jail? WTF?!

Meanwhile the Dims just let the Chimp kill more people in Iraq for the next year and will never have to wear placards or go to jail. Swell, god bless 'Merkuh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

AND STILL WE HAVE CRIMINALS
Posted by: thetruth07 on May 28, 2007 4:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the scarlet letter to public executions and yet we still have crime! Go figure!
I guess in this post 9-11 world anything can warrant a humiliating display of punishment such as standing in public with a written statement of what you did hanging around your neck.
From the usual crimes to different political views or for just standing up for what you know is right, anything is fair game!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Solidarity
Posted by: EKSwitaj on May 28, 2007 4:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wouldn't it have been great if, while they were wearing the placards, a crowd of people had gathered around them wearing similar signs?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shoplifting is an Exercise of First Amendment Rights
Posted by: redbird30328 on May 28, 2007 6:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is truly shameful that the fascist judicial system of one of the most oppressive states in the union, with the implicit endorsement of an unelected President, would trample on the rights of dispossessed citizens to highlight their systemic repression by borrowing merchandise from one of the most brutal and notorious exploiters of global capitalism in history. Obviously they were not guilty of shoplifting, or they would not have been caught. Sustaining and enforcing private property rights in this country must always take a secondary position to the rights of criminals to take whatever they want whenever they want.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And every Walmart should post a sign
Posted by: Ellie1 on May 28, 2007 6:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
saying I have destroyed American democracy by importing cheap goods and destroying any efforts at unionization to make billions for the Walton family, friends of GWBushit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Splendid insight!
Posted by: citizenjoe on May 28, 2007 8:59 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Splendid. Your comparison with fascism is perfect. All fascism is corporatism, the mutual dependency of the state and corporate expansion, domestically and as a basis of world empire. The Nazis were old fashioned fascists who primarily emphasized devotion to military conquest as a nationalist premise. The new fascists of which the Bush -Cheney Regime is an example (like Haider and Fini in Europe), emphasize "free-market" fundamentalism and deemphasize the necessity for the conquest and empire required to make it happen. Both old and new fascists share the combined goal of empire and world conquest needed to serve national corporations.

In your wonderful illustration, you show how the state in the person of this disgusting judge wants Americans to humiliate themselves openly for not embracing the national spirit of the unity between state and corporate power. In the old fascism, the public was sentenced to public humiliation for deviating from the state ethic; in the new fascism, the public is being shamed for not supporting the corporate ethic. In fascism, old or new, the ethic of the state and of the great coporations are inseparable- either element can be emphasized by fascists.It is no wonder that "Malmart" doesn't like revealing that it depends on vicious state power to build its global empire.--Well done! Joe

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

PLV from OZ
Posted by: pvalemont@bigpond.com on May 28, 2007 11:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe that people in the USA get sentenced to jail for shoplifting a $7 item! That's incredible! Aren't there any cemeteries over there that need maintenance, or little old ladies who need their yards mowed or houses painted, any trash to be picked up from the streets? This has been a most informative discussion, and really reveals a lot about the fear and anger that is sweeping America today. It also reveals a lot about the stupidity of the justice system your people are tolerating. Doesn't anyone come out to vote over there? If not, it's time to institute compulsory voting. People have a duty to their country and each other, at least when it comes to voting in their leaders and management of its important institutions. It comes across to me that many Americans have such loathing and disrepect for the corporate giants who trample so readily on the rights of their workers that they are quite ready to align them with fascists for allowing shoplifters wearing a sign around their necks announcing their guilt to be displayed outside their store. You also seem to be saying the judge was guilty of fascism for, in effect, forcing such a judgment. For the judge to have metered out such punishment in the form of a choice between two definitely rotten sentences, is tantamount to giving the shoplifters a choice between eating rotten meat or rotten poultry. Not much difference really. They obviously chose what they considered, or maybe knew to be, the lesser of two evils. The practice of naming and shaming in public is in my view not conducive to building better citizens or a better society long term, and so should be condemned on those grounds. Shoplifting is still wrong, even if it is shoplifting from such people as Walmart. In the end, it is also the consumer who pays, so the shoplifter is still stealing not only from the corporate giant but also his/her fellow citizen. But given the fact that Walmart is guilty of a much greater crime, this punishment is indeed deplorable, and to be condemned if only on those grounds. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, and so until the owners of Walmart wander the cities announcing their shame on placards around their necks, I say "No!" to this kind of punishment for their shoplifters. In a perfectly just society, maybe such punishment could be considered to have its merits, but maybe even then it would still be inappropriate "cruel and unusual" punishment, in that, as aforementioned, it would be unconstuctive in some aspects, possibly destructive in others, and alternatives that build a better citizen and better society can be found in its stead. I thank Alternet and all bloggers for a truly remarkable philosophical and ethical discussion. There should be more of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

On the other hand...
Posted by: Logic's Edge on May 28, 2007 9:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
if they had been sent to prison, it might have hardened them and made repeat offences more likely?

Whereas a good bout of public humiliation might actually be an effective deterent to them in the future.

The Nazis had no monopoly on this sort of approach. It's been around since the village stocks were invented.

I'm not sure where the judges get the leeway to offer such conditions, though. Aren't the laws specific about sentencing? Prison or fines?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Humiliation as punishment...
Posted by: aebartle on May 29, 2007 11:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Personally, I don't see a problem with giving the shoplifter a choice between jail time and wearing a placard in front of the store. Perhaps it would have been more productive to have her do community service or restitution of some kind, but I feel that personal humiliation would be more a effective punishment in many (NOT most or all) cases than jail time, particularly considering the overcrowding of our jails and the non-violence of the crime. I do think that equating the judge's decision with Nazi Germany is going overboard. The placard merely stated the facts. The woman was, in fact, a thief, and she stole from Wal-Mart. It was not racially motivated in the least, as the woman is white and presumably the judge is also white, and maybe she'll think twice in the future about shoplifting. She was not being paraded through the streets, as the photos from Germany imply, and she was not forced to wear the placard for years of her life, as in "The Scarlet Letter." Eight hours in a placard in front of a store, presumably with bathroom access and water and food supplies, is not cruel punishment. Unless you think a few hours of humiliation is cruel. I guarantee, the sixty-day jail sentence for a non-violent crime would have been much more cruel and dangerous for the convicted shoplifter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]