Nobody disputes that our justice system is imperfect - it is run by human beings.

Here is the question good liberals *NEVER* ask...and don't want the answer to: How many Defendants, because they are innocent until proven guilty - *including mureders* - are let free to commit crimes again, *including murder*.

Anyone can ask open-ended questions. Do you have any hard facts or statistics on "obviously guilty people who were unjustly acquitted", krellin?

And are you advocating for a "guilty until proven innocent" standard to make sure all guilty people serve a sentence for their crimes, even at the expense of hundreds of thousands or millions or tens of millions of innocent people serving long prison sentences (or even being executed) because their overworked and underpaid public defender could not prove their innocence?

Since you ask Krellin what he is advocating, Tolstoy, what are *you* advocating? What's your answer to the issue you raise?

Tolstoy, if you have a modicum of intelligence - and I think you do - then you will understand that you are asking me to prove a negative (i.e. how many guilty people have been let free in the US legal system). If you have a modicum of intelligence - and I think you do - then you will have to admit that the likely answer is a rather significant number.

But let's just play this game: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/

Nearly 95% of cases resulting in a FELONY conviction in the US are settled via plea bargain. This means the murders are getting off on lesser charges (manslaughter, for example) instead of the "proper" charge in order to expedite cases, etc. This means people that *should* get life in prison end up back on the streets.


Old data on this link...but you will get the gist:
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm#reconviction

About 40% of violent criminals get reconvicted within three years. We *should* convict them on the proper charges the *first* time and keep them locked up.

Sing your sad, sad song, Tolstoy....and then let's talk real facts and figures.

To answer your question, Tolstoy, no I am *NOT* advocating a "guilty until proven innocent" justice system. But, I am saying that raving loons like you that want to post links suggesting how terrible and unjust our legal system is are...well, you are just that: Raving loons.

What we *should* do, in our legal system, though, is modify it to remove some of the financial motivations. The underprivileged in the country have, essentially, no defense, while the wealthy can hire a team of lawyers to overwhelm the prosecution and get their cases destroyed and thrown out on technicalities the prosecutors don't have the resources to counteract.

I don't know the solution, but the problem is easy to identify.

"This means people that *should* get life in prison end up back on the streets. "

Not necessarily. A common tactic of prosecutors is to "stack" bullshit charges on a defendant in order to get them to "settle" for a plea to the charge the prosecutor feels they are actually guilty of. If the defendant wants to fight in court, he risks a much longer sentence if the jury finds him guilty of all charges. The end result is that the suspect accused of an armed robbery pleads out to.... armed robbery - in order to mitigate the possibility of also being convicted of kidnapping or attempted murder or whatever other charges have been stacked into his case.

Also, a lot of people accused of minor crimes will plea out even though they are innocent because they can't afford bail. A plea gets them out of jail. Maintaining their innocence and fighting in court results in months of jail time as their trial drags through the courts - usually losing their job and house in the process (and oftentimes their family as well). These pleas oftentimes bite the accused in the ass later on when they find themselves in court again and being hit with a tougher sentence because they are now a "repeat offender".

"But, I am saying that raving loons like you that want to post links suggesting how terrible and unjust our legal system is are...well, you are just that: Raving loons."

It is truly saddening that you think anyone pointing out the injustice of people being wrongfully convicted and spending years or decades in prison for something they didn't do is a "raving loon". Do you have not one ounce of compassion for these people? Not one iota of outrage about cops and prosecutors hiding evidence that proves someone's innocence? Not even concern about guilty people running the streets because the authorities found it quicker and easier to pin the crime on an innocent man?

"what are *you* advocating? What's your answer to the issue you raise?"

For starters, I would:
1) Like to see criminal prosecutions of police and prosecutors who deliberately prosecute obviously innocent people (Michael Nifong from the Duke Lacrosse case is the only time I can think of where this actually happened - and it only happened because the families of the defendants had the financial wherewithal to fight back).
2) An end to the Alford pleadings mentioned in the video clip where the innocent must absolve the police and prosecution of financial liability in order to get out of prison.
3) An end to drug prohibition would free up a lot of court space which would go a long ways to mitigate the plea bargain problem.
4) An end to the shield from personal liability which police and prosecutors have for their misconduct - when they do wrong and are successfully sued civilly, it is the taxpayers (and insurance companies) - not the wrongdoers who wind up paying the bill.
5)And there ought to be a requirement for funding parity between prosecutors and public defenders. In my county, the District Attorney's office has a budget 3 times the Public Defender's. Plus the DA is always assisted by the police in investigating the crime, while the PD has to hire their own investigators. The result is that defendants never get a competent defense at trial - which only results in lots of plea deals and subsequent appeals (at great taxpayer expense) down the road. And a good chance of a guilty person going free because their initial public defender did a lousy job (getting him an appeal), but the prosecution can't find witnesses or evidence years later.

1. I agree that cops and prosecutors should suffer **severe** consequences as you suggest. We agree
2. I agree.
3. I agree. Legalize, regulate and tax it.
4. Agree completely.
5. Agree completely.

:)

Let's add an *end* to plea bargaining, TRUE truth in sentencing, etc. And then, we need to put in place *real* programs for reintroducing convicts to society so that they can obtain work, etc. The cost of providing jobs to ex-cons will be far less than the cost of re-convicting them.

And then let's put true social welform in place to eliminate the lower-socio-economic classes from having a financial benefit from having kids in fatherless homes that have a high-percentage rate of turning to crime....and NOW I'm going off the deep end, right...and yet it all ties together...(and it has *nothing* to do with race, before anyone wants to make that accusation...it's socio-economic...)

That was a bit of a mind-dump rabbit trail...but the solutions to the problem go *well beyond* court reform...

"Let's add an *end* to plea bargaining"

I would ideally like to see this as well, but the number of cases going through the system is so great that there simply aren't enough lawyers, judges, and courtrooms to possibly handle all of it. If all of them went to trial - even after drug prohibition is ended - the overall cost of the justice system would easily multiply by a factor of 5 or 10.

As you suggested earlier, there is a great backlog of "criminal" cases that are drug related, etc. that could be eliminated. Not only could you get rid of the drug offenses, but you could potentially reduce violent crime activity with decriminalization/legalization of certain drugs. Take a step further and start using intelligent and rationale use alternative sentencing strategies, including house arrest, and couple that with a complete reform of counseling and post-incarceration "re-introduction" policy, and you can reform the system and reduce the case load by reducing crime in general.

Reduce crime, free funding, and now you can free capital to work on the social problems and cultural issues that *lead* to crime. Set a cultural example of success, instead of allowing the continual cultural blight of doing time as a 'right of passage' and fait accompli