writers gone
wild! |
Buried Alive On Frederick Wiseman's Juvenile Court The long, astonishing final sequence of Frederick Wiseman's Juvenile Court (1973) details a probable-cause hearing in the matter of Robert Singleton. Just weeks shy of his 18th birthday, Robert stands accused before Kenneth A. Turner, chief judge of the Juvenile Court of Shelby County, Tennessee, on two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon the result of one diabolical night as an unwilling, unarmed wheel-man in dual holdups of a Stop & Go and a Kentucky Fried Chicken in downtown Memphis. The hearing itself is pursuant to a motion by the district attorney's office requesting that the case be remanded to criminal court, where the state can hold the defendant for action by the grand jury, and then try the little bastard as an adult along with his 19-year-old co-defendant. Robert's lawyer, who filed his appearance just hours before the hearing commenced, doesn't dispute his client's involvement in the stick-ups. But he argues that the court's waiving jurisdiction simply because the boy is on the cusp of his majority under the statute would be spectacularly arbitrary. There's no reason for it. This is not some deranged smack freak knocking over fried chicken joints to feed his miserable habit. Besides, the rules governing disposition of juvenile offenders in the state of Tennessee were designed with specific intent by the legislature, were they not? As such, their wisdom ought to be heeded with all due solemnity. As attorneys for both sides proceed to question the lead detective on the case, Judge Turner betrays a measure of impatience. "I think we're wasting time here," he finally declares; then calls a recess to the hearing while everyone the lawyers, the detective, the kid's probation officers; everyone, it seems, but the defendant himself files into the judge's chambers for an off-the-record conference. And that, as Wiseman has already shown us, is where the real work is done.
After some back and forth about drugs being a motivating factor in the robberies and Robert's own seduction by the many-headed Moloch of adolescent rebellion the first hand is played: counsel for the prosecution casually states that they would not be opposed to withdrawing their motion if the court felt it in the young man's best interest to place him in the State Vocational Training School out in Pikeville for an indefinite period while he straightens out whatever it is that causes him to drive around Memphis in the dead of night, getting involved in all manner of malicious mischief. But . . . they have no interest in ceding jurisdiction, none, if the defense intends to contest the charges in open court or request probation at a sentencing hearing. In other words, counsel has to plead his client out now or there's no deal. Understanding the point before it was ever made, Robert's lawyer then says, yes, if the State is willing and the court agreeable, he could see his way toward pleading the boy guilty to a lesser offense right then and there, so long as it's in the best interest of the young man . . . and keeps him the hell away from a criminal proceeding where he'll wind up doing a minimum of 20 years. Judge Turner then speaks to defense counsel in a tone that hovers somewhere between question and instruction: "You wanna plead him guilty to simple robbery . . . two counts . . . and I'll send him to the training school." That's that. Back in the courtroom, however, Robert collapses into a sorrowful state upon being informed of this whirlwind plea bargain. He can't believe it. He wanted to take this to trial and prove he was forced at gunpoint to drive the getaway car and his lawyer comes back with an indeterminate sentence at Crime School for him instead. "I feel like I been trapped," he tearfully appeals to the judge before sentence is passed. "Is there any justice? Is there any justice for me?" He goes on and on about being innocent, to no avail. The naïveté of this kid is touching, really; as though he believes in his own innocence the way he once probably believed in Santa Claus. Amazing.
And on their way out of the courtroom, counsel for both sides shake hands and congratulate each other on a job well done. The great legal scholar Lenny Bruce once observed that in the halls of justice the only justice is in the halls, and no one seems to feel the dolorous truth of these words more intimately than the youthful offenders in Wiseman's film. The Singleton hearing, after all, is the summation of everything Frederick Wiseman has shown in its troubling, component parts throughout the preceding two hours. Boy or girl, black or white, angel or sociopath, the kids in Juvenile Court are unmoored, shorn of their will once they enter the building. Herded together, subject to random searches, shuffled from one end of the process to the other, usually left to sit lined up against a wall on ugly plastic laundromat chairs and wait while their destinies are carved into shape by functionaries in service to a system the accused can barely comprehend. In fact, anyone on the outside with a romantic, or even a conventionally cynical, attitude toward the criminal justice system would find it difficult to grasp the double-edged psychology that infests the process Wiseman details for us so skillfully. On one end, the caretakers of this court appear to have a genuine compassion and concern for the basic welfare of their subjects. No one desires to see children maltreated, not even in the name of justice; if that means established courtroom procedure sometimes gets shoved aside, then so be it. Robert Singleton's attorney, while hammering out the plea deal in the final sequence, articulates this ethos more succinctly than anyone: "I feel like sometimes we don't necessarily do, or strictly follow what is prescribed by law books, but the end result of what we're trying to achieve here . . . of what I'm trying to achieve here, is the manifest best interest of this boy." And there can't be a shred of doubt in anyone's mind as to the man's sincerity or the constancy of his heart. How would it benefit society, after all, to have kids spending what's left of their youth in C-block, up to their eyeballs in hard-core felons, learning God-only-knows what? Meting out justice to minors is not a simple enterprise, and it has to be done with care . . . even if the pint-sized malefactors are almost always guilty as sin. Which leads to the second, infinitely sharper edge of the court's mentality: In every case Wiseman trains his camera on and filming was conducted over a period of two months, February through March of 1973 there's never more than a vestigial shadow of that benchmark legal principle, the presumption of innocence. Guilt is presupposed by every adult from the outset, and all procedure seems deliberately geared toward searching for personality disorders, exacting confessions, or cutting plea deals with defense attorneys. That the odd species of justice on display in Juvenile Court is frequently tempered, cushioned by a substantial dose of mercy, doesn't make this fundamental, tacit presumption any less disturbing. Or puzzling. It's only as the film progresses, in those isolated moments when the court is not in a merciful humor, that these seemingly conflicting conditions resolve themselves, and the baseline venality of this system becomes clear.
First broadcast over PBS stations on October 1, 1973, Juvenile Court was the seventh creation in what has been a steady flow of masterful non-fiction cinema from Frederick Wiseman; a canon that now numbers thirty-four films he's recently completed his thirty-fifth, The Garden and is the most (perhaps the only) important body of work in the worn out subspecies known as "cinema verite" (only two of his films are nominal works of fiction). It's a term Wiseman absolutely rejects. When he dilates upon it in interviews, he's more apt to call his work something like "reality fiction" or the more fanciful "reality dream" (he's also more apt, when expounding on his methods, to sound like a cross between Stan Brakhage and Professor Irwin Corey). But Wiseman is not, as so many critics have pegged him, a serial dissector of American institutions in the old muckraking journalist style (an understandable error, given the generic titles most of his films carry). Rather he has been a chronicler of systems many of which are institutional by default and the interaction they have with those subject to their unvanquishable will.
ACCESS: Juvenile Court is available for rent at hipper video stores and for rent or purchase through Wiseman's (right) website. Be warned, though: inexplicably, he's priced it for institutions only ($400), though it's doubtful most of them can afford it, much less those interested individuals who have treasured his work over the years. ALSO: More documentaries |
![]()
New book from the
editor and writers of
Bright Lights Film Journal
Action! Interviews with Directors
from Classical Hollywood to
Contemporary Iran
(Anthem Art and Culture),
by Gary Morris (Editor),
Bert Cardullo (Introduction),
Jonathan Rosenbaum (Foreword).
London and New York:
Anthem Press, 2009.
"I dare anyone to squeeze between
two covers a more varied, useful and
flat out entertaining sampling of
the personalities that make the
seventh art the liveliest."
David Hudson, IFC.com
Interviews
Robert Bresson
Roger Corman (with Bruce Dern
and David Carradine)
Allan Dwan
Clint Eastwood
Douglas Sirk
Robert Wise
Mania Akbari
Lars von Trier
Michael Haneke
Allie Light
Melvin and Mario van Peebles
Otto Muehl
The Brothers Quay
Barbara Kopple
Federico Fellini
Abbas Kiarostami
François Truffaut
Caveh Zahedi
Peter Bogdanovich and
Joseph McBride
on Orson Welles