18. "American Violet" (2008)

"I'll tell you what made this arrest so different. I've only spent one night in jail before this. I was 16 years old, was arrested for stealing diapers and milk for my babies. I did it. They kept me for one night. I knew I was getting right out. To be locked up for 21 days away from my girls, not knowing if I was gonna get out to see them again, 21 days in a cage... I may not have all your schooling, but it seems pretty different to me!"

(Nicole Beharie as Dee Roberts)

"American Violet" features a young, African-American single mother named Dee Roberts (played by Nicole Beharie in her film debut) struggling to get by. She works as a waitress at a restaurant and her mother helps by watching her three young daughters when she is at work. She lives in the projects of Melody, Texas - a small, predominantly white town with a smaller black population that lives mostly in subsidized housing.

The film chronicles her arrest as a part of a drug sweep through her housing project (Arlington Springs) and subsequent legal battle. She is captured as a part of the sweep, though the police must look for her at her job because she was not at home during the sweep. She was arrested and assigned a public defender during her arraignment. The public defender was assigned to all of the arrestees in the Arlington Springs sweep, and subsequently urged them all to agree to a plea agreement. Dee was arrested for selling drugs in a school zone, a significant offense given that a school zone is a particularly "protected" area (more serious than selling drugs on a regular street corner). Eventually, her case was chosen by the ACLU to challenge the racially-motivated drug sweeps in this particular county in Texas. The film documents her struggles with the county district attorney, who made it almost impossible for her to get a job by telling all prospective employers of her legal concerns. She also had troubles with her ex-boyfriend, who was continually fighting her for custody of her two youngest daughters.

The climax comes during the depositions in preparation for the civil trial. Dee's attorneys (including two New York lawyers from the ALCU and a local attorney retained to "help navigate Texas courthouses") needed to find a way to demonstrate that the drug sweeps were racially-motivated, and the best way to do that was to prove that the district attorney was so blinded by racial prejudice that it would call into question the "racial neutrality" of the busts that he ordered. I don't want to give away any of the good parts, but it is an excellent look at the struggles attorneys face in proving someone's intentions or prejudices.

The film has several social goals. First, the film is intended to demonstrate that we are not a "post-racial" society, as much as we all would like to think we are. A great deal of drug enforcement is racially motivated, as most people have racial prejudices regarding drugs and drug use. Second, the film is intended to show that social class matters. When you cannot afford a good lawyer, you are not sure that you're getting the best legal advice. If you are uneducated, you don't know what "good advice" is, so it's even more difficult to get a fair shake-down. Some public defenders are exceptionally good at their jobs, but are overworked and underpaid, which will obviously affect their ability to give good quality legal advice to each person. Third, the film discusses a legal procedure that was later changed, partially due to the events depicted in the film. In Texas, grand jury indictments could be secured with corroboration of only one informant, meaning that one person could indict multiple people. In this case, one person was cornered by the district attorney and coerced into providing false testimony to the grand jury to obtain the indictments against more than 20 people, all for drugs. The audio tape that supposedly proved Dee was selling drugs is mentioned in the film as being "very hard to make out and the voice doesn't even sound female," but the testimony of one person was enough to secure a grand jury indictment. This is a serious issue, as corroboration is essential to ensure that indictments are not frivolous. In this instance, Dee's name is only added to the list because the informant's sister is the new girlfriend of Dee's ex-boyfriend, and the sister dislikes Dee and wanted her out of the picture. However, the stakes of even being indicted for drugs are very high, as an arrest for drugs - even if no charges are filed and you're later released, or you're acquitted or charges are later dropped - is viewed quite negatively by employers and others.

The film was captivating, and I would highly recommend it to everyone. I like this film for a number of reasons - and I loved it so much I show it to my students - but probably the best reason I love this movie is that it is real. I'm sure there is some sort of agenda, and that it's not completely accurate, but I know that it is at least somewhat accurate because I know that not only are minorities vastly disproportionately caught up in drug enforcement (though whites use drugs more than minorities - they just use different kinds of drugs that "are less important" to drug enforcement agents), but they are generally pushed through the system in ways that are simply unfair. This film shows that innocent people do get caught up in the mix, and that inevitably the justice system is about people, not about statistics. I liked when we are urged to remember that we are a system of people, not a system of cogs and wheels.

Note: This film was based on the true story of Regina Kelly in Hearne, Texas.

17. "Magnum Force" (1973)

"I hate the goddam system! But until someone comes along with changes that make sense, I'll stick with the system." 

(Clint Eastwood as Harry Callahan)

Clint Eastwood reprises his role as Inspector "Dirty" Harry Callahan in this sequel to "Dirty Harry." In "Magnum Force," Callahan is reassigned from homicide to stakeout duty (surveillance, essentially a first or second-year officer's job). His new partner, "Early" Smith, and Callahan begin to surreptitiously investigate homicides around the city of recently acquitted criminals, let off by a technicality. Callahan and Smith begin to suspect that corrupt cops are at the center of the crimes, including their own boss, Lt. Briggs.

"Magnum Force" emphasizes police corruption, an issue of great concern in the 1970s and 1980s (this was also the main event in "Serpico"). Police corruption was rampant in police departments in most major cities because police officers have extremely dangerous jobs but are generally paid very little. The most common form of police corruption is bribery or skimming off the top of monetary evidence such as cash or drugs (so, money-oriented). "Magnum Force" focuses on the lesser-known type of police corruption that is vigilantism. This was an issue in the 1970s and 1980s as police departments were under much greater scrutiny after a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that applied the 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments to the states (and not just the federal government as had been previously interpreted). As judges began holding local police departments to higher standards of search and seizure and other legal issues, more and more criminals were acquitted or had charges dismissed on technicalities. This angered police departments, and some officers took the law into their own hands.

Several noteworthy advances have been made in the decades since "Magnum Force," including the New York City Commission to Combat Police Corruption, created in 1995. As such, while police corruption still exists, it is much less common and much more well contained. Police departments also have hefty consequences for ethical violations of corruption, especially with more transparent internal affairs and ethics review boards.

16. "Capote" (2005)

"It's the book I was always meant to write." 

(Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote)

This film is about Truman Capote's journey as he wrote the novel, "In Cold Blood." It was based on the true story of a murder in Kansas. Two men were charged with murdering an entire family in 1959, when Capote caught wind of the story. He went to Kansas from New York City, originally intending to write an article for The New Yorker, where he was a popular journalist. However, after meeting the accused murderers, especially Perry Smith, he decides that he needs to write an entire novel.

The film is about more than just murder - which is the center-stage event - but about small-town justice and prejudice, and the needs of people to find similarity even in the most uncommon of places. Capote finds that he is very similar to Smith. He forms a bond of friendship with Smith, paying for his attorneys for his many appeals, in exchange for information for his book. In the end, he realizes that Smith is only stringing him along, in hopes that Capote's popularity and prestige could save him from the electric chair.

In the end, the film was a curious look into 1960s culture and its effect on justice and fairness. Smith, like Capote, was a homosexual, and the small town of Holcomb, KS, did not care for that in their town. In some ways, he was condemned from the beginning, regardless of whether he was guilty of the murder itself. Capote is treated with disrespect and contempt, especially as it's viewed that he is protecting a known murderer. The two accused murderers are also condemned to death, thus the inevitable discussion of the death penalty makes an appearance. Even Capote's good friend, Harper Lee (of "To Kill a Mockingbird" fame) is a key character of the film.

I would recommend the film, especially as it is a look at the human aspect to think the best of people and search for the truth.

15. "Dirty Harry" (1971)

"Where the hell does it say that you've got a right to kick down doors, torture suspects, deny medical attention and legal counsel? Where have you been? Does Escobedo ring a bell? Miranda? I mean, you must have heard of the Fourth Amendment."

(District Attorney to Inspector Callahan)

The film Dirty Harry is a classic in the criminological realm, most obviously illustrating how policing used to be done in the 1960s and 1970s. Clint Eastwood stars as the title character, "Dirty" Harry Callahan, an inspector with the San Francisco Police Department. It is the first of the Dirty Harry series and focuses on Inspector Callahan's investigation of a murder in San Francisco. However, the film also is a textbook example of not only how policing was actually done pre-Miranda (and shortly thereafter), but also how media - and society at large - viewed police officers and how they do their jobs.

Dirty Harry often does what needs to be done to get the job done. He works within the law in that he is a police officer, but also works outside the law in that he does not abide by police procedure (as illustrated in the quote above). Many people view Dirty Harry as the embodiment of what's wrong in American policing - police brutality, withholding of legal counsel, and torturing suspects before and during interrogations. These sorts of practices were stopped during the criminal rights cases of the Warren and Burger Courts (1960s and 1970s), but some of these issues still crop up, especially when it involves minority suspects and white police officers.

Current police practices are a far cry from those in Dirty Harry, yet movies and television shows still include these as everyday occurrences in police departments across the country. Just about any episode of The Wire or watching films like American Violet make us believe that things really haven't changed in nearly 50 years, when in reality, things are very, very different. The effect of media on people's perceptions of police is widespread, often persuading people that police engage in brutal tactics on a regular basis, when in fact, that is not the case (for example, only 2% of cases involving officer use of force involve lethal force, and most officers do not use any kind of physical force in their interactions with the public). Incidents that garner widespread news coverage, such as the Rodney King incident in 1992 in Los Angeles, also contribute to these feelings of resentment and distrust.

Dirty Harry also brought to light - as did other films of this era, such as Serpico - the issue of police corruption. In the era of the film, policy corruption was rampant and often extended as high as the mayor or governor. Officers who toed the "thin blue line" were put in their place (or in the case of the New York Police Department, their place in the Hudson River). The very real concern of police officers engaging in unethical - not to mention illegal - practices contributes to the reason why certain segments of Americans still, to this day, do not trust police. Police corruption was vehemently combated during the 1980s and 1990s, especially in large departments such as New York or Los Angeles, but there are still incidents that shake our faith in the men (and women) in blue who are supposed to protect and serve.

Dirty Harry is a classic film for many reasons - Clint Eastwood's excellent performance, the mystifying plotline, the believable antagonist, and more - and should be required viewing for any criminology student or enthusiast. However, one must remember that sometimes films have a greater social impact than we believe, so we must encourage filmmakers, television producers, and music artists to be socially responsible in their production of entertainment material.

14. "The Conspirator" (2010)

"Have you never believed in something far greater than yourself?"

(Robin Wright as Mary Surratt)

The first film from Robert Redford's new venture, The American Movie Company, "The Conspirator" tells the story of Mary Surratt (played by Robin Wright), tried as the eighth conspirator (and lone woman) in the assassinations of President Abraham Lincoln and Secretary of State Seward and the attempted assassination of Vice President Andrew Johnson. Redford does an excellent job of bringing the terror of the country - and the internal moral tension of attorney Frederick Aiken - to light. The film comes at a time when one of the main themes of the film - the moral justice of trying civilians in military tribunals without the protections protected by the Constitution - is especially important, given the moral quandary our country finds itself regarding the disposition of "enemy combatants."

The Film: "The Conspirator" begins with our main character, Frederick Aiken, on the field of battle in the Civil War. We are shown that he is a man of good moral fiber who fought for the Union. We then see the conspirators enacting their plot to assassinate the president, vice president, and secretary of state on that fateful day in April 1865. Soon thereafter, they are rounded up, as is Mary Surratt.

Surratt and the other conspirators are tried in a military tribunal. These tribunals did not allow for the accused to testify in his or her own defense, nor is the prosecution required to give a list of evidence or witnesses in advance to the defense. In other words, the defense is blindsided by the prosecution's case, not having time to prepare an actual defense until they are sitting there in the courtroom. The tribunal is overseen by nine Union generals; guilt is assumed and the defense must prove innocence.

Surratt retains Maryland Sen. Revendy Johnson, who soon asks his friend (and likely his mentee) Frederick Aiken to take over as lead counsel because his loyalty to the Union is questioned (though he once served as U.S. Attorney General). Aiken struggles with this because he does not actually believe that Mary Surratt is innocent of the charges against her, but throughout the film he comes to realize that a person's guilt or innocence does not make him or her less worthy of a strong defense.

The bulk of the film takes place in the courtroom, where Aiken defends Surratt. At several points, Aiken makes objections to the prosecution's case (for legitimate reasons, such as hearsay) but they are overruled. However, when it is Aiken's turn to question the prosecution's witness, he is not permitted to ask questions that would impugn the integrity or credibility of the witness because "the witness is not on trial."

Though the bulk of the film takes place in the courtroom, Redford does an excellent job in portraying the salient political (and social) issues going on as well. Aiken's friends do not understand why he is defending a guilty person, especially one who would dare murder the president (especially a president as beloved by the Union as Lincoln). Secretary of War Stanton often explains that "someone needs to pay for the murder of our president," and insists that Mary Surratt must hang for her crime (which was unheard of at the time). He is adamant that swift and certain justice must happen, or the country cannot effectively mourn its president. At one point, Stanton says that Surratt must hang to maintain the peace that had been garnered by Lee's surrender to Grant - the Union citizens deserve justice, and the Southerners need to know that treason will be punished.

I won't give away the ending - though, if you know the story, you know how it ends. Aiken does his best and goes the distance, even securing a writ of habeas corpus (essentially, a civilian judge agrees that the military tribunal overstepped its bounds and orders Mary Surratt be transferred to the civilian court). Unfortunately, Secretary Stanton will not be undone - he goes to President Johnson and secures a suspension of the writ, and Mary Surratt's fate remains the same.

The Reality: I was deeply touched by this film. Tom McAvoy (who plays Frederick Aiken) is one of my favorite actors (he will forever be Mr. Tumnus to me!) and does an exceptional job portraying the moral war that Aiken wages, both internally and with those around him. He struggles between his moral duty as an attorney to provide a sound defense, regardless of your personal opinions, and his strong loyalty to the Union and his beloved president, Abraham Lincoln. As the film progresses, he comes to realize that even in times of war, America cannot abandon her ideals, or there is no point to any of it. The same protections in the Constitution that should have been afforded to Mary Surratt during this period are the provisions that could protect me should I be accused of a crime. The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to protect us from tyranny - no matter the form it may come in, even extreme patriotism. It was painful as a criminal justice major to watch the system in which I so firmly believe be warped into such an ugly, unmerciful thing as it became during the years following the Civil War. One only hopes we have learned not to let history repeat itself.

"Those who would give up a bit of liberty for a little security deserve neither liberty nor security." (Benjamin Franklin)

13. "Public Enemies" (2009)

"We're having too good a time today. We ain't thinking about tomorrow."

(Johnny Depp as John Dillinger)

The film "Public Enemies" is based on the criminal career of John Dillinger, specifically once he is targeted by the FBI and Special Agent in Charge Marvin Purvis. There has been discussion as to whether the film is accurate; director Michael Mann attempted to make everything as real as possible, but some critics have argued that he romanticized Dillinger to the point of making people sympathetic to him and his cause. The film stars Johnny Depp as John Dillinger and Christian Bale as SAC Marvin Purvis, along with Channing Tatum as Pretty Boy Floyd, Jason Clarke as Red Hamilton, Stephen Graham as Baby Face Nelson, and Marion Cotillard as Dillinger's girlfriend, Billie Frechette.

The Film: "Public Enemies" chronicles the period during the Great Depression known as the "public enemy era" of crime. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is just coming into prominence under J. Edgar Hoover (in fact, the film shows Hoover's difficulties in securing more power and money from Congress to create a stronger FBI) and Hoover knows that if his agents can catch the big name criminals of the day - Bonnie and Clyde, Baby Face Nelson, Pretty Boy Floyd, and John Dillinger - the FBI will be much more respected. He makes it his mission to take these men down.

The film begins in 1933 with Dillinger going to the Indiana State Prison with friend Red Hamilton to break some of his friends out of prison. Purvis chasing down (and catching - and killing) Pretty Boy Floyd. This apprehension of a "public enemy" brings him to the attention of Hoover, who tasks him with catching Dillinger and his gang. John Dillinger and his gang at this time are bank robbers (as were most major criminals in the public enemy era).

There are a few main points about this movie that deserve being noted. I will do my best not to give away what happens, but it might prove inevitable.

1. A key part of this film - and the real story of John Dillinger - is the effect of the mafia on Dillinger's life in Chicago. Early on, he lives openly in Chicago because the mafia protects him (and he has some of the police officers on his payroll). However, Dillinger's activities (and the activities of other criminals in the public enemy era) anger authorities so much that the FBI urges Congress to make interstate crimes the jurisdiction of the FBI. Since many mafia families conduct activities in multiple states, their operations would come under the scrutiny of the FBI (as opposed to remaining under the radar since no single state could get the full picture of their criminality). This change in policy made the mafia lift its protection of Dillinger, putting him in intense danger.

2. Agent Purvis is promoted to catch Dillinger and his gang, but several mishaps ensue, leading Baby Face Nelson to escape capture. The ineptitude of most FBI agents at the time was due to the fact that a person had to be an agent regardless of their job at the FBI. Thus, many people were agents who were vastly unqualified and untrained. Purvis prodded Hoover to professionalize the FBI, which he did. Purvis adds a Texas Ranger friend to the task force in hopes of professionalizing the agents under his purview. This professionalization of the FBI was the beginning of increased acceptance for the FBI and the beginning of an illustrious career for Hoover.

3. Dillinger was caught only because the FBI found the woman who was housing Dillinger and was able to elicit cooperation in exchange for keeping her illegal immigration status a secret from immigration enforcement. She arranged with the FBI to have Dillinger take her and her friend to a movie that evening. Dillinger took them to a film at the Biiograph Theater in Chicago. After the movie, he was shot in the street by one of the FBI agents after he reached into his pocket (the agent believed Dillinger was reaching for a gun).

The Reality: The film does an excellent job of describing the difficulties J. Edgar Hoover had in forming the FBI as we know it today. Most people would not recognize the FBI in its 1930s form, as it has come quite a long way. Now agents are the best of the best, trained for months at the FBI academy in Quantico, VA and are extremely professional. Purvis was the first to insist upon using true investigating techniques, leading the way for scientific method in the FBI.

The public enemy era was the era which most people think of when they think of bank robberies. And John Dillinger (and his contemporaries, such as Bonnie and Clyde) were the reason that interstate crimes were pursued so harshly by the FBI - and continue to be to this day. Without this crucial era, we would not have as strong of an emphasis on interstate crimes, which has been extended from merely bank robberies to include interstate homicide, kidnapping, drug and human trafficking, and organized crime.

12. "Murder by Death" (1976)

"Locked from the inside. That can only mean one thing. And I don't know what it is." 
(Peter Falk as Sam Diamond)

In a tribute to Peter Falk, who died earlier this week, I thought I'd find one of his movies to put on here. Since "The Princess Bride" is hardly a crime movie, I found this gem instead. "Murder by Death" is a comedy murder mystery romp with twists and turns you never see coming. It was penned by the legendary Neil Simon, famous for having finished the script of "The Odd Couple (1968) after his brother, Danny Simon, was unable to finish it. "Murder by Death" was nominated for a Writers' Guild of America award (Best Comedy Written Directly for the Screen - Neil Simon) and a Golden Globe award (Best Acting Debut - Truman Capote), though it won neither.

The Plot: "Murder by Death" begins with Lionel Twain (Truman Capote) inviting the five greatest living criminologists to have dinner at his home. These individuals are intended to be famous detectives from novels, all of whom have a perfect record (no case has gone unsolved or has been solved incorrectly). They are Milo Perrier (James Coco), Sam Diamond (Peter Falk), Jessica Marbles (Elsa Lanchester), Dick Charleston (David Niven), and Sidney Wang (Peter Sellers). Each of them come with someone else: Perrier comes with his chauffeur, Marcel (James Cromwell); Diamond comes with his secretary, Tess Skeffington (Eileen Brennan); Charleston comes with his wife, Dora (Maggie Smith); Marbles comes with her nurse, Mrs. Withers (Estelle Winwood); and Wang comes with his adopted son, Willie (Richard Narita).

The ten of them are seated for dinner, where their host finally reveals himself and outlines the plan for the weekend: He wagers $1 million against their reputations that he can stump them with a murder mystery. One of the people seated at the table will be killed - he or she will be stabbed 12 times with a butcher knife. This is to happen at midnight.

At midnight, they learn that the one who dies is in fact their host. He is stabbed, 12 times, just as he said. The ensuing investigation involves disappearing blind butlers (Alec Guinness), disguises on top of disguises, and an ending you don't ever see coming!

The Relevance: This is another film that centers on the idea of private detectives, though in this case, they are detectives and criminologists from popular novels. It's hard not to see the correlation of Jessica Marbles to Miss Marple or Jessica Fletcher; Sam Diamond is similar to Sam Spade of "The Maltese Falcon" (even the voice and language used by Peter Falk in portraying Sam Diamond is similar to the mannerisms and demeanor of Humphrey Bogart in the film adaptation). Dick Charleston seems to be a connection to all "gentlemen detectives" in the novel world, encompassing names like C. Auguste Dupin (Edgar Allan Poe), Sherlock Holmes (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle), and Lord Peter Wimsey (Dorothy Sayers). Unlike other gentlemen detectives (e.g. Roderick Alleyn and Inspector Morse), these gentlemen detectives are amateur civilians rather than actual police officers. Perrier is an obvious duplicate of Hercule Poirot (Agatha Christie) and Sidney Wang is clearly Charlie Chan (Earl Derr Biggers).

In terms of murder mystery as a genre, "Murder by Death" is much-duplicated in several respects. The idea of a mystery dinner party in which guests must solve crimes is obviously connected to the later film "Clue" (1986), and the use of various aspects (e.g. dinner party, many different detectives in one room, and murder mystery "whodunnits") are found in countless films.

"Murder by Death" is witty in an old-school fashion, often relying on situational or verbal comedy rather than slapstick. It's a more refined comedy that sets it apart from newer comedies that rely on stupidity to make people laugh.