Women Defenders on Television: Representing Suspects and the Racial Politics of Retribution Joan W. Howarth* I. INTRODUCTION This Essay is about Ellenor Frutt, Annie Dornell, Joyce Davenport, and other women criminal defense attorneys of prime time television. It examines how high-stakes network television presents sympathetic stories about women working as criminal defense attorneys while simultaneously supporting the popular thirst for the harshest criminal penalties. Real women who choose to represent criminal defendants are fundamentally out of step with angry and unforgiving attitudes toward crime and criminals. Indeed, women defenders' have chosen work that puts them in direct opposition to the widespread public willingness to incarcerate record numbers of Americans, often young African- American and Latino men, for longer and longer sentences.2 Their prime time counterparts, however, are creatures of popular taste and conventional ideology, and therefore, perhaps inevitably, readily reinforce rather than resist the popular punitive and racialized incarceration policies. Even the most heroic of the television women defenders support and ratify the dominant public perception of a frightening and irredeemable criminal class-mainly young African-American and Latino men-that requires the harshest and most vengeful sanctions. * Professor of Law, Golden Gate University. I thank the organizers of and participants in this Symposium, and the editors of The Journalof Gender, Race & Justice, especially Amy Weismann. I am very grateful to the various women defenders, friends and strangers, who agreed to tell me about their work. I am especially appreciative of the help I received from Terry Diggs, Kendall Goh, Elizabeth Grossman, Isabelle Gunning, Susan Rutberg, Susan Ten Kwan, Robin Kalman, and Ruth Spear. Jenn Crittondon (UC Hastings, Class of 2001) and Ayana Cuevas (UC Davis, Class of 2000) provided excellent research assistance. 1. In using the phrase "women defenders" for women criminal defense attorneys, I am borrowing from, and honoring, the organization Women Defenders, a vibrant and important association of California women in criminal defense work. 2. Between 1990 and 1998, the nation's prison population grew at an annual rate of 6.7%, with a total of 1,302,019 prisoners under the jurisdiction of federal or state adult correctional facilities by December 31, 1998. Allen J. Beck & Christopher J. Mumola, U.S. Department of Justice Report: Prisonersin 1998 (visited Nov. 15, 1999) <http:l www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/p98.htm>. Another 592,462 persons were incarcerated in jails, local facilities which typically hold people awaiting trial or sentenced to less than one year. Id. "In 1997 the rate among black males in their late twenties reached 8,630 prisoners per 100,000 residents compared to 2,703 among Hispanic males and 868 among white males." Id. "A major source of prison growth is increasing time served." Id. HeinOnline -- 3 J. Gender Race & Just. 475 1999-2000 The Journalof Gender,Race & Justice [3:2000] This Essay is intended to be a form of a spectator's civil disobedience to the retributivist work of prime time women defenders? Part II discusses the power in our engagement with television. To set the standards to which the television characters can be compared, Part Im describes the work of actual women defenders. Part IV turns to the world of television criminal defense attorneys, describing the defense attorneys' role on police and prosecutor shows, as well as the contrasting television tradition of heroic criminal defense attorneys. Finally, in Part V, this Essay focuses on the most sympathetic women defenders on television-i.e., the ones who are true protagonists, such as Annie Dornell on To Have & To Hold,4 Veronica Gilbert on Courthouse,5 and Ellenor Frutt and Rebecca Washington on The Practice.6 Close analysis of those characters reveals the patterns by which those potentially subversive women defenders are tamed. Political purposes for choosing criminal defense work are erased in prime time.7 When sympathetic, the clients are often middle-class and white.8 Sometimes the real woman defender's solidarity with criminal defendants is replaced on television by contempt.9 Often the worthy client is exceptionalized, distinguished from the unseen but truly frightening and racialized criminal element." With this reshaping of their role, even the strongest, most passionate television defense attorneys do little to dislodge the dominant cultural portrayal of a throw-away criminal class composed primarily of young men of color. 3. See Margaret M. Russell, Rewriting History with Lightning: Race, Myth, and Hollywood, in LEGAL REELISM: MovIEs AS LEGALTEXTS 172, 180 (John Denvir ed., 1996) (referring to BELL HOOKS, The Oppositional Gaze, in BLAcK LOOKS: RACE AND REPRESENTATION 115, 117 (1992)). 4. To Have & To Hold was a prime time drama broadcast on CBS from September through December 1998, featuring a sexy marriage between a Boston police officer and a "loud, feminist public defender." TIM BROOKS & EARLE MARSH, THE COMPLETE DIRECTORY TO PRIME TIME NETWORK AND CABLE TV SHOWS: 1946-PRESENT 1031 (7th ed. 1999). The public defender character is described by her father-in-law as "a woman you want to ravish one moment and strangle the next." Id. 5. Courthouse was a prime time legal drama broadcast on CBS between September and November 1995, featuring Nia Peeples as public defender Veronica Gilbert. BROOKS & MARSH, supra note 4, at 213-14. 6. The Practiceis an award-winning prime time legal drama set in a criminal defense firm and broadcast on ABC since March 1997. Id. at 818. Camryn Manheim plays Ellenor Frutt, described in one television directory as a "heavy set, rather pushy attorney," id., and Lisa Gay Hamilton plays Rebecca Washington, the law firm's former office manager who recently took the bar and joined the law firm. Id. 7. See infra text accompanying notes 109-13. 8. See infra text accompanying notes 134-5 1. 9. See infra text accompanying notes 124-32. 10. See infra text accompanying notes 136-53. HeinOnline -- 3 J. Gender Race & Just. 476 1999-2000 Women Defenders on Television II. TELEVISION MATTERS Why use television characters to address a public crisis as serious as current incarceration policies? Television, too, is serious. I love to watch television" and I am not alone. One study suggests that Americans spend two- thirds of their waking time watching television. 2 Another finds that the "average" American spends more than seven years watching television. 3 As cultural studies scholar John Storey explains, "[t]elevision is the popular cultural form of the late twentieth century. It is without doubt the world's most popular leisure activity."' 4 Television is important because culture is important. We understand ourselves and our world through the images and concepts available to us through our culture. As cultural studies and television scholar John Fiske puts it, "[c]ulture is a struggle for meaning as society is a struggle for power."' 5 Culture is a site where unequal social divisions along race, gender, class, and 6 age lines, for example, are established and contested.' We learn through culture, including television, what it means to be a man or a woman, what it means to be white or Black or Asian American, what criminals look like, or what counts as beauty. We learn what emergency room doctors or criminal defense attorneys do. We learn how to dress, and what we consider to be attractive. We know what it is to be rich or poor or to be happy 11. In confessing to enjoying television, I take solace from Dutch feminist cultural critic fen Ang, who writes about the pleasures of television for feminists. Ang sees pleasure "as the key concept in a transformed feminist cultural politics" and argues that representations "can still be condemned for being reactionary in an ongoing cultural politics. But to experience pleasure from them is a completely different issue: 'it need not imply that we are also bound to take up these positions .... ' JOHN STOREY, CULTURAL STUDIES AND THE STUDY OF POPULAR CULTURE: THEORIES AND METHODS 24,25 (1996) (describing and quoting from IEN ANG, WATCHING DALLAS 135 (1985)). 12, Id. at 9 (citing Robert C. Allen, Introduction to the Second Edition:More Talk About TV, in CHANNELS OF DISCOURSE, REASSEMBLED 1, 12-13 (Robert C. Allen ed., 1992)). 13. Id. (citing ROBERT KUBEY & MIHALY CSIKSZENTIMHALYI, TELEVISION AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE Xi (1990)). 14. Id. (emphasis in original). Engagement with television also has pedagogical justifications. In this essay, I am taking up Stanley Aronowitz's challenge: If writing is to become part of the critical process, deconstruction of mass audience culture is the first priority.... [T]he job of the teacher is to legitimate mass audience culture in order to criticize and transcend it--or to discover whether genuine expressive forms are repressed within it. For those teachers who claim their personal indifference to these forms and refuse to validate this type of investigation, one can only reply that such a stance may be tantamount to abandoning their students and the critical project as well. Stanley Aronowitz, Mass Culture and the Eclipse of Reason: The Implications for Pedagogy, in AMERICAN MEDIA AND MASS CULTURE: LEFT PERSPECTIVES 465,469 (Donald Lazere ed., 1987). 15. JOHN FISKE, TELEVISION CULTURE 20(1987). 16. STOREY, supra note 11, at 4. HeinOnline -- 3 J. Gender Race & Just. 477 1999-2000 The Journalof Gender,Race & Justice [3:2000] or afraid