In 1978, New York passed legislation to prohibit criminals receiving money from selling their stories to publishers and movie producers. The legislation, called the "Son of Sam law," resulted from the publicity associated with the 1978 serial murders by David Berkowitz. Subsequently, more than 40 states and the federal government passed similar legislation. Proponents of this legislation hailed it as a step toward victims' rights, but opponents viewed it as a serious encroachment upon the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. In 1991, the U. S. Supreme Court unanimously held this law to be unconstitutional, which victims' rights advocates saw as a serious blow to their movement. However, the law was more complex than a simple conflict between victims' rights and criminals' rights. The law's reach extended to cover a very broad range of literature and even threatened research conducted by social scientists. This essay discusses the Son of Sam law and its ramifications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, R. Jr.1990The Mapp, Escobedo, and Miranda decisions: Do They Serve a Liberal or a Conservative Agenda?Criminal Justice Policy Review4: 39-52.
2.
Barrett, P.M.1991High court rejects 'son of sam' law, citing criminals' rights of free speech. The Wall Street Journal. p. 4a, December 11.
3.
Cox, M.1991Media scramble seen for stories of criminals. Wall Street Journal. p. B1. Decmeber 11.
4.
Dugan, J.E.1991Crime doesn't pay-or does it?: Simon & schuster v. fischetti. St John's Law Review, 65, 981-996.
5.
Ecker, K.M., and M.J. O'Brien1991Simon & Schuster, inc. v. fischetti: Can new york's son of sam law survive first amendment challenge?Notre Dame Law Review, 66, 1075-1110.
6.
Editorial. 1991Son of sam law, rightly reversed. The New York Times, p. A18. December 12.
7.
Epps, G.1992Wising up: Son of sam laws and the speech and press clauses . North Carolina Law Review70:493-552.
8.
Fein, E.B.1991Decision praised as a victory for free speech rights . The New York Times, p. A17. December 11.
9.
Friedman, L.N.1985The crime victim movement at its first decade. Public Administration Review45: 790-794.
10.
Gillard, P.N.1986The expansion of victim compensation programs: Today's 'son of sam' legislation and its susceptibility to constitutional challenge . The University of Toledo Law Review18: 155-194.
11.
Goldberg, A.1970Southern California Law Review43: 1-3.
12.
Greenhouse, L.1991a American & the courts. C-Span , October, 19.
13.
Greenhouse, L.1991b Justice query breadth of the son of sam law. New York Times. p. A10, October 16.
14.
Hagen, F.E.1982Research Methods in Criminal Justice and Criminology . New York: MacMillan.
15.
Kruttschnitt, C. and M. Dornfeld1992Will they tell? Assessing preadolescents' reports of family violence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency29: 136-147.
16.
Lamborn, L.L.1970Remedies for the victims of crime. Southern California Law Review43: 22-53.
17.
Loss, J.T.1987Criminal selling their stories: The first amendment requires legislative reexamination. Cornell Law Review 72: 1331-1355.
18.
Lowe, R.K.1991Ruling wipes out new york ban on criminal profiting from story. Columbus Dispatch. pp. 1a2a December 11
19.
Mauro, T.1991Crime can pay, high court rules. USA Today . p. 11a
20.
December 11. McKinney's Consolidated Laws of New York (1982). St. Paul: West.
21.
Okuda, S.S.1988Criminal antiprofit laws: Some thoughts in favor of their constitutionality. California Law Review76: 1353-1375.
22.
Schafer, S.1965Restitution to victims of crime-an old correctional aim modernized. Minnesota Law Review50: 243-254.
23.
Schafer, S.1970Victim compensation and responsibility. Southern California Law Review43: 55-67.
24.
Schreiber, F.1983The Shoemaker: Anatomy of a Psychotic. New York: Simon & Schuster.
25.
Starrs, J.E.1966A modest proposal to insure justice for victims of crime . Minnesota Law Review50: 285-310.
26.
Streitfeld, D.1991Unlocking barred tales from the pen: Publishers and prisoners on son of sam ruling. Washington Post, pp. C1, C2
27.
, December 11. Vernon's Annotated Missouri Statutes (1979). St. Paul: West.
28.
Ward, R.V.1989A kinder, gentler system: An examination of how crime victims have benefitted from the women's movement. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement15: 171-175.
29.
Wolfgang, M.E.1970Social responsibility for violent behavior. Southern California Law Review43: 5-21.
30.
Wolfgang, M.E.1965Victim compensation in crimes of personal violence . Minnesota Law Review50: 223-241.
31.
Wright, R., S.H. Decker, A.K. Redfern, and D.L. Smith1992A snowball's chance in hell: Doing fieldwork with active residential burglars. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency29: 148-161.
32.
Ziegenmeyer, N.1992Taking Back My Life. New York : Simon & Schuster.
33.
Carey v. Brown, 447 U.S. 455 (1980).
34.
Children of Bedford, Inc. V. Petromelis, 541 N.YS. 2d 894 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. 1989).
35.
Fasching v. Kallinger, 227 N. J. Super. 270, 5 10 A.2d 694 (1988).
36.
Payne v. Tennessee, 111 S.Ct. 2597 (1991).
37.
Simon & Schuster Inc. v. New York Crime Victim Board, 112 S. Ct. 501 (1991).
38.
Simon & Schuster v. New York State Crime Victim Board, 714 F.Supp. 170 (S.D. N.Y. 1989).
39.
Simon & Schuster, Inc. v. Fischetti, 916 F.2d 777 (2nd Cir. 1990).
