World, Writing, Wealth discussion
World & Current Events
>
Guilty until proved innocent?
date
newest »
newest »
Graeme wrote: "Unbelievable (Well kinda...): REF: Twitter: Glen Greenwald: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status...
Brennan, declares "people are innocent, you know, until alleged to be involv..."
Graeme, the sad fact is that only too many see that an allegation means guilt - especially in US politics, which is ridiculous because there are more allegations there than anywhere.
Ian wrote: "Scout, I don't know the man, of course. My information here was from the NY Times, and it seemed to be of the opinion that the republicans wanted Roe vs Wade overturned. If in fact he is liberal on..."Women's rights as to employment, equal pay and similar issues is really separate from abortion. There are many women in our country who do not see abortion as a women's rights issues but rather as a right to life issue. Who has the primary right - the woman or the the fertilized egg? Since many women see the fertilized egg as an actual baby/life in their mind it has the primary right. So a justice could be perceived as being a supporter of women's rights and at the same time be willing to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
The allegation of guilt is not just a US political issue. I have heard police for 30 years of my career state we wouldn't arrest them if they weren't guilty. I have heard the public watch the news or the paper and determine that a person must be guilty based on a news release. When I started working in the legal field in my early 20s I came to the realization that a) the system throws as many possible charges under as many laws as they can at a persons; b) that those who can't afford expensive lawyers will plead guilty to a lesser charge even when they are not guilty because being in jail is miserable an they just want to get out as quickly as they can and bail is beyond their capability while at the same time losing their employment; c) jurors bring their own personal baggage into the jury room; d) sentencing varies from defendant to defendant, yet mandatory minimums do not solve the issue either; e) we know from the recidivism rates that prison does not work because we fail to rehabilitate, we only punish.
The 2nd realization I came to is how much information is is files that no one ever sees except the lawyers because of how our rules work. Our justice system is about proof not truth. They are not the same thing.
Lizzie wrote: "The allegation of guilt is not just a US political issue. I have heard police for 30 years of my career state we wouldn't arrest them if they weren't guilty. I have heard the public watch the news ..."Well said
Lizzie wrote: "The allegation of guilt is not just a US political issue. I have heard police for 30 years of my career state we wouldn't arrest them if they weren't guilty. I have heard the public watch the news ..."A very interesting comment, Lizzie. It's always great to hear from someone with direct and personal experience of the topic at hand.
Even though I worked as a paralegal, my employment did not keep me out of the jury room. I served as a juror 3x in 2 states on state criminal cases. So I have experienced it from both defense table and jury box. In a DUI case several jurors stated that he must be guilty or the police wouldn't have arrested him and he wouldn't be on trial.As part of my job a drive by shooting where I have no doubt our client was guilty, but he could afford a $50k trial with an excellent criminal defense attorney which got him a not guilty verdict. It didn't make me happy but I do believe in the statement attributed to Benjamin Franklin that better 10 guilty men be acquitted than 1 innocent man be convicted. (He was restating Voltaire.)
The presumption works as a legal principle, abused sometimes, but it's a bit more complex to look at it only one-dimentionally. Being a suspect is also a serious thing. Still presumed innocent, but needs clarification either way.
As I've mentioned previously, an existence of a criminal record may mean nothing, however a person having it may be denied a visa to another country, and be not eligible to certain positions.
If police finds a dude with a knife at a homicide scene, they lock him away, as a prime suspect and it'd take time before the suspicion is proven or refuted.
Having said that, I agree with Lizzie that legal truth and actual truth may be very different beasts and that the system is very far from being faultless. And unfortunately, sometimes maintenance of basic rights entails lots of expenses, so sometimes: more dough = more rights.
Lizzie wrote: "I do believe in the statement attributed to Benjamin Franklin that better 10 guilty men be acquitted than 1 innocent man be convicted. (He was restating Voltaire.).."It's a basic value statement.
Of course, there are societies built on the opposite principle. But, I'm glad I don't live in those societies.
It is also a bit unreasonable that if accused, an innocent person with modest wealth can end up free but financially ruined, while an innocent but poor person ends up with a public defender who came from the bottom grade at law school, for a very good reason.
I agree. The system favors those with money.Neil deGrasse Tyson, a famous and beloved astrophysicist, was accused by 2 women of sexual misconduct and has been exonerated. This proves that allegations aren't always true, but they can sure put a man's career and life on hold for a year or more for no reason.
Now a woman has accused Matt Lauer, a disgraced former news anchor whom I never liked, of rape when she went drunk to his hotel room. This woman went on to have a consensual affair with him. At this late date, she comes forward with rape accusations. What the heck? If her story is true, she had free will to report the rape at the time and cut off further contact.
Ian wrote: "It is also a bit unreasonable that if accused, an innocent person with modest wealth can end up free but financially ruined, while an innocent but poor person ends up with a public defender who cam..."Not all PDs are from the bottom of the barrel. I know some who do it because they believe in it. I know others who worked in private practice for many years and after a certain age they didn't want that type of stress and hours anymore. That being said, I agree that generally they are less experienced and are from less exemplary schools.
The one thing that I feel is completely unfair and adds to the weight of the prosecutors side of the table, is the finances. County attorneys (aka prosecutors) are paid more, have better paid staff, have more access to and funds for experts and investigators than the Public Defenders' Offices. In many jurisdictions there are not enough PDs so the county contracts it out to private practice attorneys at a flat fee. Those are your worst offenders in being piss poor at doing the job. Successful attorneys in private practice don't take those cases.
I believe a system run by the state/government that provides more funding for one side of the table than the other is inherently unfair and that is very true of how our criminal justice system is run.
Lizzie wrote: "The one thing that I feel is completely unfair and adds to the weight of the prosecutors side of the table, is the finances. County attorneys (aka prosecutors) are paid more, have better paid staff, have more access to and funds for experts and investigators than the Public Defenders' Offices...."They are almighty versus a small fry, but imagine they suspect and need to prove tax evasion of a global corporation and its officers with cross-border depositions, collecting evidence in different jurisdictions, obtaining bank statements from somewhere where banks would just shrug at any request from foreign authorities, etc - mission impossible for them, for it's very rare that someone gets the resources that Muller had at his disposal
REF: Twitter: Glen Greenwald: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status...
Brennan, declares "people are innocent, you know, until alleged to be involved in some kind of criminal activity."
An allegation is a determination of Guilt?
AS I state here, https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/..., such a position is barbarous.
The fact the news hosts do not bat an eye is telling about how invested they are in the same values/belief system that supports Brennan's statement.