發(fā)布時間： 2016年06月03日
By almost every measure， Paul Pfingst is an unsentimental prosecutor. Last week the San Diego County district attorney said he fully intends to try suspect Charles Andrew Williams， 15， as an adult for the Santana High School shootings. Even before the tragedy， Pfingst had stood behind the controversial California law that mandates treating murder suspects as young as 14 as adults.
So nobody would have wagered that Pfingst would also be the first D.A. in the U.S. to launch his very own Innocence Project. Yet last June， Pfingst told his attorneys to go back over old murder and rape convictions and see if any unravel with newly developed DNA-testing tools. In other words， he wanted to revisit past victories——this time playing for the other team. “I think people misunderstand being conservative for being biased，” says Pfingst. “I consider myself a pragmatic guy， and I have no interest in putting innocent people in jail.”
Around the U.S.， flabbergasted defense attorneys and their jailed clients cheered his move. Among prosecutors， however， there was an awkward pause. After all， each DNA test costs as much as $5，000. Then there's the unspoken risk： if dozens of innocents turn up， the D.A. will have indicted his shop.
But nine months later， no budgets have been busted or prosecutors ousted. Only the rare case merits review. Pfingst's team considers convictions before 1993， when the city started routine DNA testing. They discard cases if the defendant has been released. Of the 560 remaining files， they have re-examined 200， looking for cases with biological evidence and defendants who still claim innocence.
They have identified three so far. The most compelling involves a man serving 12 years for molesting a girl who was playing in his apartment. But others were there at the time. Police found a small drop of saliva on the victim's shirt——too small a sample to test in 1991. Today that spot could free a man. Test results are due any day. Inspired by San Diego， 10 other counties in the U.S. are starting DNA audits.
注(1)本文選自Time; 03/19/2001， Vol. 157 Issue 11， p62， 1p， 2c， 3bw
注(2)本文習題命題模仿對象2004年真題text 1.
1. How did Pfingst carry out his own Innocence Project?
[A]By getting rid of his bias against the suspects.
[B]By revisiting the past victories.
[C]By using the newly developed DNA-testing tools.
[D]By his cooperation with his attorneys.
2. Which of the following can be an advantage of Innocence Project?
[A]To help correct the wrong judgments.
[B]To oust the unqualified prosecutors.
[C]To make the prosecutors in an awkward situation.
[D]To cheer up the defense attorneys and their jailed clients.
3. The expression “flabbergasted”(Line 1， Paragraph 3) most probably means _______.
[A]excited
[B]competent
[C]embarrassed
[D]astounded
4. Why was Pfingst an unsentimental prosecutor?
[A]He intended to try a fifteen-year old suspect.
[B]He had no interest in putting the innocent in jail.
[C]He supported the controversial California law.
[D]He wanted to try suspect as young as fourteen.
5. Which of the following is not true according to the text?
[A]Pfingst‘s move didn’t have a great coverage.
[B] Pfingst‘s move had both the positive and negative effect.
[C] Pfingst‘s move didn’t work well.
[D]Pfingst‘s move greatly encouraged the jailed prisoners.
答案：CADBC
篇章剖析
本文采用的是記敘文的模式。第一段指出芬斯特作為一位鐵面無私的檢查官的一些做法;第二段指出芬斯特實施“清白計劃”的打算及做法;第三段指出實施“清白計劃”造成的反應以及可能存在的問題;第四段和第五段是實施“清白計劃”的結果和影響。
詞匯注釋
prosecutor n.檢察官 ，檢察員，起訴人，原告
controversial adj.爭論的， 爭議的
mandate v.批準制訂一個訓令，如通過法律;發(fā)布命令或要求：
wager v.下賭注， 保證
conviction n.定罪， 宣告有罪
unravel v. 闡明， 解決
flabbergast v.使大吃一驚， 啞然失色， 使目瞪口呆
indict v.起訴， 控告， 指控， 告發(fā)
bust v.破產或缺錢
oust v.剝奪， 取代， 驅逐
discard v.拋開;遺棄;廢棄
molest v.騷亂， 困擾， 調戲
saliva n.口水， 唾液
難句突破
1.Even before the tragedy， Pfingst had stood behind the controversial California law that mandates treating murder suspects as young as 14 as adults.
主體句式：…Pfingst had stood behind …
結構分析：Even before the tragedy是本句的時間狀語;主句是Pfingst had stood behind…;that 引導的賓語從句修飾law;在從句中，as…as是一詞組，意思是“和…一樣”;出現(xiàn)的第三個as是介詞，意思是“作為”。
句子譯文：甚至在這場悲劇發(fā)生之前芬斯特就支持加利福尼亞州的一項頗有爭議的法律。這項法律規(guī)定，以成人身份受審的謀殺嫌疑犯的最低年齡可以降到十四歲。
題目分析
1.答案為C，屬事實細節(jié)題。文中對應信息“Pfingst told his attorneys to go back over old murder and rape convictions and see if any unravel with newly developed DNA-testing tools.”是對第二段第一句的補充說明。
2.答案為A，屬推理判斷題。從上下文我們可以得知，實施“清白計劃”就是使用先進的DNA技術來重新審理過去的案件當中可能存在的冤案錯案。
3.答案為D， 屬猜詞題。從第二段第一句話我們得知芬斯特可能是美國第一個實施非常獨特的“清白計劃”的人，因此他的做法很可能是令人感到吃驚的，從而可猜出該詞的含義。
4.答案為B，屬推理判斷題。從第一段和第二段給出的事例我們可以看出，芬斯特不愿放過任何一個犯罪的人，即便他的年齡還不算大;他也不愿使無辜者蒙冤，即便案件已經審理。
5.答案為C，屬推理判斷題。正因為 “Pfingst‘s move works well”，美國才又有“ten other counties are starting DNA audits”，而且，“no budgets have been busted or prosecutors ousted”。
參考譯文
用任何標準衡量，保羅。芬斯特都不是位感情用事的檢察官。上周，圣地亞哥縣地方檢察官說，他決意對桑塔納高中槍殺案疑犯—15歲的查爾斯。安德魯。威廉斯—作為成人進行審訊。甚至在這場悲劇發(fā)生之前芬斯特就支持加利福尼亞州的一項頗有爭議的法律。這項法律規(guī)定，以成人身份受審的謀殺嫌疑犯的最低年齡可以降到十四歲。
誰也不能保證芬斯特會成為美國第一個實施自己“清白計劃”的地方檢察官。然而，去年六月，芬斯特告訴手下的律師對過去的謀殺罪和強奸罪重新進行審理，看是否有能用最新的DNA檢驗工具揭開的無頭案件。換句話說，他想重新回顧過去的勝利——這回是為了另一方?！拔蚁肴藗儼驯Ｊ劐e誤地理解成了心存偏見?！狈宜固卣f，“我認為我自己是一個講究實際的人。我并無意把無辜的人送進監(jiān)獄?！?
在美國，那些啞然失色的辯護律師及其被收監(jiān)的當事人為他的舉動感到歡欣鼓舞。然而，在檢察官當中卻出現(xiàn)了令人尷尬的沉默。畢竟每一次DNA檢測的費用都高達5，000美元。這其中還存在隱含的風險——如果出現(xiàn)眾多的無罪受害者，地方檢察官肯定會自砸飯碗。
九個月后，并沒有出現(xiàn)資金短缺或檢察官被罷免的情況。只有極少數(shù)案件需要重新審理。該市是從1993年開始進行常規(guī)DNA檢測的，因此芬斯特的手下只考慮1993年前宣判的案件，并排除了那些被告已被釋放的案例。在560份現(xiàn)存檔案中，他們重新審理了200份，主要是尋找那些留有生物證據的案件和被告人仍聲明無罪的案件。
到目前為止，他們只確定了三起案件。其中有一起案件最引人注意。案件的當事人因被控調戲一名在他的公寓玩耍的女孩而被判服刑12年。案發(fā)時還有他人在場。警方在受害人的襯衣上發(fā)現(xiàn)了一小滴唾液—這個樣本太小，無法在1991年檢驗。但在今天，那滴唾液卻能使一個人獲釋。檢驗結果什么時候都可以拿到。受圣地亞哥的影響，美國又有10個縣開始用DNA對案件進行審核。
熱門推薦：
一站式課程咨詢服務平臺
