Improving the Legal System

[Tech_Esq]

No, I never heard of it until today, but as the title states, it is impossible for every adult in the country to commit 3 felonies a day.

He does not even say the "average person".


The title just says 3 felonies a day, but you said very adult commits them, is this what the book actually says?

OK. So you're just talking out your ass.
Understood.

I dont know whether what he says is true or not. I do know there are lot of things that are felonies that used to be misdemeanors. And a lot of things that people get charged with are crimes only by the furthest stretch of the imagination.
For example, an acquaintance of mine was charged with creating child porn. Bad, true. But part of the charge made it a federal crime because he used a camera that was made in Japan and imported here.
That is just dumb.

It would be interesting to read how he came up with such a theory.

Three felonies a day? You might be able to convince me of three misdemeanors per day especially if you were speaking to me while I was driving. Are traffic infractions (yes, I have a lead foot) considered misdemeanors?

Immie

3 Felonies a day is complete bullshit. Not saying there aren't some bush league felonies in some jurisdiction, but most people don't even violate those much less 3 per day.

As a practicing attorney, I rarely represented someone on a serious offense that had never committed another crime. And, I never represented someone in court who was "treated unfairly by the system." Most people got less than they deserved to get and more people got off than is probably conscionable. Not proud to say that I did my part to make that a true statement. (However I will say that we made it a practice to never represent a rapist or sexual batterer).

Having said all that, it is mid-day and I have yet to commit one felony (and I'm pretty sure I know what most of them are).

 

[JD_2B]

I think the best way to improve the legal system is simply this: If the judge sentences you to 20 years in prison, you do 20 years. If the judge sentences you to death, you receive that sentence within 30 days. No time off for good behavior. No early paroles because of the crowded conditions or for "good behavior". No tv's, newspapers, books, etc., etc. No nice weight rooms or game rooms. Let's make prison a place that nobody wants to go to. That will help improve the legal system.

Well Gawd knows we don't need any money to build SCHOOLS. Tell me where will the money come from to keep people in prison for the MAX sentence?

This has been the law in Virginia for over 15 years. Guess what? It works. It's called "Truth in Sentencing." It was found that juries were confused by the system where criminals could get parole much earlier than the sentence they received. Now, if you get a 20 year sentence and you a model prisoner, you do 18.5 years.

We also have project Exile (or its successor. Exile was the pilot project). You commit a crime and possess a gun while doing it, more time. You brandish the gun, more time still. You fire the gun even more time. You actually hit someone, extra bonus time. Guess what, that one works too.

It doesn't take too long before "the street" knows what happens when the punishment is swift and sure. And, word on the street, especially in DC and Maryland is: "If you want to commit a crime, you better stay out of Virginia, cuz they don't play."

DC supposedly has one of the highest crime rates in America..

Guess "the street" AINT SKEERED...

See, heres how to break it down.. People are generally not killed based on some bizarre street thug mentality that is commonly equated with murders. The victim generally knows their attacker..

Expanded Homicide Data Table 10 - Crime in the United States 2008

In 2008, Victims ranged from:

1- Acquaintances killed by acquaintances- 3,068
2- Stranger killing another stranger- 1,742
3- Wives killed by husbands- 577
4- Friend killing a friend- 504
5- Boyfriend killing a Girlfriend- 492
6- Family that is not immediate killing family that is not immediate- 314
7- Son killed by a parent- 270
8- Daughter killed by parent- 211
9- Boyfriend killed by girlfriend- 145
10- Father killed by child- 120
11- Husband killed by wife- 119
12- Mother killed by child- 117
13- Neighbors killed by neighbors- 106

(I didnt add in any of the stats under 100)

And on and on.. but it should be mentioned that for another 6,268 victims of homicide, the vic's relationship to the attacker was unknown or unreported. (Not a stranger, necessarily, just either a cold case or unreported!)

14,180 Victims on this site- which says not to rely too heavily on their statistics, due to variances..

But just as a crude estimate, Percentage wise- if 6,043 were KNOWN to be family members, out of the 9,111 that I listed alone (to which you can easily add a few more hundred and get higher percentages, but I am only illustrating a point, because who knows if the stranger was also a hit man in some cases, too) then you get 66.33% of the relationships of homicide victims as FAMILY or at least having a RELATIONSHIP of some sort with their killers.

See, I am against the death penalty, ESPECIALLY some fast-track that will get someone there in a hurry.. because people need to be educated on domestic violence, dating violence and other such things that can make a bad relationship become deadly..

This isn't about sending street thugs off to the death chamber. This is about sending families and people who were once considered closer to being friends than foes to a speedy death, without getting a fair fucking trial, first.

It is EASY to let our emotions get in the way of fairness.. But if we are to uphold ANY individual freedoms whatsoever, WE MUST put our feelings aside, if only for a moment, and if nothing else, IMPROVE the rules of evidence, to the extent of not allowing more and more of it to be taken illegally and used towards an innocent person's detriment during a trial.

We hold 5% of the worlds population within our US borders.. and 25% of the world's prisoners, as well..

It is FUCKED.. MORE THAN FUCKED it is a down right SHAME, and blasphemous to the 4th amendment that ANYONE would cheer this shit on.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK. So you're just talking out your ass.
Understood.

That was not nice, why was that necessary, so I will not discuss it anymore.

Good.
I have no problem with informed arguments but when someone spouts BS just because he goes against his own personal experience then I have to dismiss what that person says.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Well Gawd knows we don't need any money to build SCHOOLS. Tell me where will the money come from to keep people in prison for the MAX sentence?

This has been the law in Virginia for over 15 years. Guess what? It works. It's called "Truth in Sentencing." It was found that juries were confused by the system where criminals could get parole much earlier than the sentence they received. Now, if you get a 20 year sentence and you a model prisoner, you do 18.5 years.

We also have project Exile (or its successor. Exile was the pilot project). You commit a crime and possess a gun while doing it, more time. You brandish the gun, more time still. You fire the gun even more time. You actually hit someone, extra bonus time. Guess what, that one works too.

It doesn't take too long before "the street" knows what happens when the punishment is swift and sure. And, word on the street, especially in DC and Maryland is: "If you want to commit a crime, you better stay out of Virginia, cuz they don't play."

DC supposedly has one of the highest crime rates in America..

Guess "the street" AINT SKEERED...

See, heres how to break it down.. People are generally not killed based on some bizarre street thug mentality that is commonly equated with murders. The victim generally knows their attacker..

Expanded Homicide Data Table 10 - Crime in the United States 2008

In 2008, Victims ranged from:

1- Acquaintances killed by acquaintances- 3,068
2- Stranger killing another stranger- 1,742
3- Wives killed by husbands- 577
4- Friend killing a friend- 504
5- Boyfriend killing a Girlfriend- 492
6- Family that is not immediate killing family that is not immediate- 314
7- Son killed by a parent- 270
8- Daughter killed by parent- 211
9- Boyfriend killed by girlfriend- 145
10- Father killed by child- 120
11- Husband killed by wife- 119
12- Mother killed by child- 117
13- Neighbors killed by neighbors- 106

(I didnt add in any of the stats under 100)

And on and on.. but it should be mentioned that for another 6,268 victims of homicide, the vic's relationship to the attacker was unknown or unreported. (Not a stranger, necessarily, just either a cold case or unreported!)

14,180 Victims on this site- which says not to rely too heavily on their statistics, due to variances..

But just as a crude estimate, Percentage wise- if 6,043 were KNOWN to be family members, out of the 9,111 that I listed alone (to which you can easily add a few more hundred and get higher percentages, but I am only illustrating a point, because who knows if the stranger was also a hit man in some cases, too) then you get 66.33% of the relationships of homicide victims as FAMILY or at least having a RELATIONSHIP of some sort with their killers.

See, I am against the death penalty, ESPECIALLY some fast-track that will get someone there in a hurry.. because people need to be educated on domestic violence, dating violence and other such things that can make a bad relationship become deadly..

This isn't about sending street thugs off to the death chamber. This is about sending families and people who were once considered closer to being friends than foes to a speedy death, without getting a fair fucking trial, first.

It is EASY to let our emotions get in the way of fairness.. But if we are to uphold ANY individual freedoms whatsoever, WE MUST put our feelings aside, if only for a moment, and if nothing else, IMPROVE the rules of evidence, to the extent of not allowing more and more of it to be taken illegally and used towards an innocent person's detriment during a trial.

We hold 5% of the worlds population within our US borders.. and 25% of the world's prisoners, as well..

It is FUCKED.. MORE THAN FUCKED it is a down right SHAME, and blasphemous to the 4th amendment that ANYONE would cheer this shit on.

I must say, that I find your arguments on this issue less than compelling.

Nobody advocates that anyone get less than a "fair" trial. Strawman argument

Who cares if the criminal knows his victim, that makes it worse not better.

We punish people's actions. If you do the crime you should do the time. It doesn't matter who you are or what your relationship to the victim is.

Nobody in this country gets to the death chamber very quickly. Virginia is fairly efficient at it and John Allen Mohommad one of the DC snipers is just going to his death next week when he committed his crime way back in 2002. He has had more than every chance to prove his innocence. Now he is trying to say he's too crazy to die. But, he wasn't too crazy to put a teenager under his spell, give him weapons training, create an ingenious vehicle to carry out the attacks and plan and execute each sniping attack.

And, by the way, I said that people in DC know not to go to Virginia to commit crimes. I didn't say they don't go to DC or MD to commit crimes.

I'll tell you a secret too, if you swear to not tell anyone else. My legislation class was taught by the Chief Counsel of the ACLU, he was pro-death penalty. Shocking isn't it? I know....

 

[JD_2B]

This has been the law in Virginia for over 15 years. Guess what? It works. It's called "Truth in Sentencing." It was found that juries were confused by the system where criminals could get parole much earlier than the sentence they received. Now, if you get a 20 year sentence and you a model prisoner, you do 18.5 years.

We also have project Exile (or its successor. Exile was the pilot project). You commit a crime and possess a gun while doing it, more time. You brandish the gun, more time still. You fire the gun even more time. You actually hit someone, extra bonus time. Guess what, that one works too.

It doesn't take too long before "the street" knows what happens when the punishment is swift and sure. And, word on the street, especially in DC and Maryland is: "If you want to commit a crime, you better stay out of Virginia, cuz they don't play."

DC supposedly has one of the highest crime rates in America..

Guess "the street" AINT SKEERED...

See, heres how to break it down.. People are generally not killed based on some bizarre street thug mentality that is commonly equated with murders. The victim generally knows their attacker..

Expanded Homicide Data Table 10 - Crime in the United States 2008

In 2008, Victims ranged from:

1- Acquaintances killed by acquaintances- 3,068
2- Stranger killing another stranger- 1,742
3- Wives killed by husbands- 577
4- Friend killing a friend- 504
5- Boyfriend killing a Girlfriend- 492
6- Family that is not immediate killing family that is not immediate- 314
7- Son killed by a parent- 270
8- Daughter killed by parent- 211
9- Boyfriend killed by girlfriend- 145
10- Father killed by child- 120
11- Husband killed by wife- 119
12- Mother killed by child- 117
13- Neighbors killed by neighbors- 106

(I didnt add in any of the stats under 100)

And on and on.. but it should be mentioned that for another 6,268 victims of homicide, the vic's relationship to the attacker was unknown or unreported. (Not a stranger, necessarily, just either a cold case or unreported!)

14,180 Victims on this site- which says not to rely too heavily on their statistics, due to variances..

But just as a crude estimate, Percentage wise- if 6,043 were KNOWN to be family members, out of the 9,111 that I listed alone (to which you can easily add a few more hundred and get higher percentages, but I am only illustrating a point, because who knows if the stranger was also a hit man in some cases, too) then you get 66.33% of the relationships of homicide victims as FAMILY or at least having a RELATIONSHIP of some sort with their killers.

See, I am against the death penalty, ESPECIALLY some fast-track that will get someone there in a hurry.. because people need to be educated on domestic violence, dating violence and other such things that can make a bad relationship become deadly..

This isn't about sending street thugs off to the death chamber. This is about sending families and people who were once considered closer to being friends than foes to a speedy death, without getting a fair fucking trial, first.

It is EASY to let our emotions get in the way of fairness.. But if we are to uphold ANY individual freedoms whatsoever, WE MUST put our feelings aside, if only for a moment, and if nothing else, IMPROVE the rules of evidence, to the extent of not allowing more and more of it to be taken illegally and used towards an innocent person's detriment during a trial.

We hold 5% of the worlds population within our US borders.. and 25% of the world's prisoners, as well..

It is FUCKED.. MORE THAN FUCKED it is a down right SHAME, and blasphemous to the 4th amendment that ANYONE would cheer this shit on.

I must say, that I find your arguments on this issue less than compelling.

Nobody advocates that anyone get less than a "fair" trial. Strawman argument

Apparently you need to go back a page or two and read up on some of these peoples posts.. Some are wanting illegally collected evidence to be allowed in court.

Who cares if the criminal knows his victim, that makes it worse not better.

That is subject to opinion.. The opinion of the Jury, in fact.

We punish people's actions. If you do the crime you should do the time. It doesn't matter who you are or what your relationship to the victim is.

I agree- I was making a point about the fucking post that is above mine, especially the bolded part. Someone seems to think that most homicide is "street people" related, and cold blooded, when homicide can happen in any family, and apparently, most commonly does. These are generally crimes of passion or are due to mental illness or substance abuse, and the perpetrators don't generally deserve to die over them, and their families do not deserve having to experience another death, as well.

Nobody in this country gets to the death chamber very quickly. Virginia is fairly efficient at it and John Allen Mohommad one of the DC snipers is just going to his death next week when he committed his crime way back in 2002. He has had more than every chance to prove his innocence. Now he is trying to say he's too crazy to die. But, he wasn't too crazy to put a teenager under his spell, give him weapons training, create an ingenious vehicle to carry out the attacks and plan and execute each sniping attack.

And the evidence weighs heavily against him, particularly the drawings he made up after he was in jail.. but this post was not about random psychos picking off a dozen people, and using a child as his tool of destruction..

And, by the way, I said that people in DC know not to go to Virginia to commit crimes. I didn't say they don't go to DC or MD to commit crimes.

I'll tell you a secret too, if you swear to not tell anyone else. My legislation class was taught by the Chief Counsel of the ACLU, he was pro-death penalty. Shocking isn't it? I know....

So that somehow speaks volumes for the ACLU??? No- it only speaks for his personal opinion, and you know what they say about opinions and their relation to assholes.. Most of them stink! =)

 

[lawbuff]

I would change the exclusionary rule "which holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law."

I would vote to keep it. If they can't prosecute me without evidence obtained legally, they should not, IMO.

3. All police should be required to have liability insurance for said actions, and should be liable in civil suits.

They are potentially liable in civil suits, you just have to overcome the burden of qualified immunity.

" If they can't prosecute me without evidence obtained legally, they should not, IMO."
What did you do?

Does your victim get to have a say?

What did I do? I don't understand the question? The Hudson/Michigan case in 2006 is an exclusionary rule exception I can live with, it is somewhat de minimus in nature.
The victim has a say, sure, but innocent until proven guilty is the law of the land and it is a jury instruction that is generally federally required.

In my state, and is the general legal rule, statutory violations do not trigger the exclusionary rule, just constitutional violations. Are you in favor of the former also?

 

[lawbuff]

Having said all that, it is mid-day and I have yet to commit one felony (and I'm pretty sure I know what most of them are).

I am quite familiar with MY states felony classifications also, and I also am sure I have not committed a felony today, nor in my life, and we have a felony 5 category, at one time it was only at felony 4.


Since subdivisons of the state as a county/city can NOT pass felonies, there is NO need for ANY person to concern themselves with such laws, so that leaves the federal felonies, and although I am far from a Title 18 scholar, and other titles, sure, I do know some of the felonies out there. I can't think of any I violated today??

 

[Tech_Esq]

I must say, that I find your arguments on this issue less than compelling.

Nobody advocates that anyone get less than a "fair" trial. Strawman argument

Apparently you need to go back a page or two and read up on some of these peoples posts.. Some are wanting illegally collected evidence to be allowed in court.

No, if you look back I commented on that. I think that the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine is may be overly heavy handed. I know they may not teach it like this in law school, but criminal law did exist before the 1960s. I think a judge can balance the equities of whether the evidence should be admitted or not. Bright-line rules are like zero-tolerance rules and the baby often gets tossed with the bath water.

Nobody in this country gets to the death chamber very quickly. Virginia is fairly efficient at it and John Allen Mohommad one of the DC snipers is just going to his death next week when he committed his crime way back in 2002. He has had more than every chance to prove his innocence. Now he is trying to say he's too crazy to die. But, he wasn't too crazy to put a teenager under his spell, give him weapons training, create an ingenious vehicle to carry out the attacks and plan and execute each sniping attack.

And the evidence weighs heavily against him, particularly the drawings he made up after he was in jail.. but this post was not about random psychos picking off a dozen people, and using a child as his tool of destruction..

But your point was that you did not want people to go to their fate too quickly. Virginia does it about as quick as any state. So my point was that even in the case of a slam dunk like JAM, and a state that is willing to quickly move prisoners through the system, it still 7 years. In many states it takes more than 15 and sometimes 20 years.

Those convicted of capital crimes should have all the resources to make whatever case they can, but they should not have forever to do it. The interests of justice are not served by criminals evading justice by entangling the system in spurious claims.

And, by the way, I said that people in DC know not to go to Virginia to commit crimes. I didn't say they don't go to DC or MD to commit crimes.

 

[Contumacious]

If you could do one thing that in your opinion would improve our legal system, what would that be?

I would change the exclusionary rule "which holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law."

Will that apply to you and yours, or will you be hollering like stuck pig when they arrest you?

It really doesn't matter since the police state has effectively abolished the 4th Amendment,

.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If you could do one thing that in your opinion would improve our legal system, what would that be?

I would change the exclusionary rule "which holds that evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights is sometimes inadmissible for a criminal prosecution in a court of law."

Will that apply to you and yours, or will you be hollering like stuck pig when they arrest you?

It really doesn't matter since the police state has effectively abolished the 4th Amendment,

.

Hello from your friends here in America!

Hope you can visit some time.

 

[JD_2B]

No, if you look back I commented on that. I think that the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine is may be overly heavy handed. I know they may not teach it like this in law school, but criminal law did exist before the 1960s. I think a judge can balance the equities of whether the evidence should be admitted or not. Bright-line rules are like zero-tolerance rules and the baby often gets tossed with the bath water.

But your point was that you did not want people to go to their fate too quickly. Virginia does it about as quick as any state. So my point was that even in the case of a slam dunk like JAM, and a state that is willing to quickly move prisoners through the system, it still 7 years. In many states it takes more than 15 and sometimes 20 years.

Those convicted of capital crimes should have all the resources to make whatever case they can, but they should not have forever to do it. The interests of justice are not served by criminals evading justice by entangling the system in spurious claims.

And, by the way, I said that people in DC know not to go to Virginia to commit crimes. I didn't say they don't go to DC or MD to commit crimes.

No my point was that people should not be put down as soon as the gavel hits, as some people on here have firmly asserted themselves wanting to happen. I am not saying that they should have 20 years to appeal a verdict. Don't be ridiculous. I never said or even insinuated such a thing. Do not twist my words.

You are assuming that I am some bleeding heart liberal who wants to give breaks to people based on relation alone, also.

You need to not make such asinine assumptions about people's intentions, based on YOUR own bleeding heart feelings that are directed as a rage towards offenders.

Lets see the differences that need to be recognized between the people posting in this thread:

The ones who tend to be pro DP, also tend to lean towards the allowing of evidence that is admitted illegally, or for some, unconstitutionally. They also have a tendency to want the sentence to be carried out in a far more rushed manner, and seem okay with people not having a thorough appeals process.. And for some, the sentencing should be cruel and unusual, as one person cited hanging someone in another thread, for instance.. You do need to realize that this thread is not the only one of its kind. This entire subforum is full of people's opinions on what people deserve and how the justice system works or doesn't work, etc.. ad nauseum..
And the way I see it, this is not a mindset of fairness or equality or even an innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt mindset that ALL American citizens should hold dear.

WHEREAS the people who are anti DP on here seem to be rooting more for fairness, wanting to see justice served properly and with full accountability all around, from investigation and arrest, to trial, all the way up to the day the sentencing is completed.

WHY do you have such a massive problem with that?

 

[Immanuel]

No my point was that people should not be put down as soon as the gavel hits, as some people on here have firmly asserted themselves wanting to happen. I am not saying that they should have 20 years to appeal a verdict. Don't be ridiculous. I never said or even insinuated such a thing. Do not twist my words.

Sorry, I am tired and having skipped plenty of posts in this thread... I only have a slight bone of contention with your statement JD and mostly it is in jest. I think if you are convicted of creating a destructive computer virus or spyware with the intention of extortion, you should be tried and convicted and within the hour taken out behind the courthouse to face a firing squad without a blindfold. IMHO there is nothing lower than a person that creates computer viruses... nothing.

Immie

 

[jillian]

Actually the exclusionary rule itself is not part of the Constitution so no amendment would be needed. But I agree that it would bad policy to eliminate it.

To improve things:
1) English loser pays rule to limit tort suits.
2) No contingency fee arrangements
3) Redefine what is a felony. Currently by one estimate every American commits three felonies a day. That is an absurd situation.
4) Professional jury system. Or some limit. Currently jurors are people too stupid to get out of it. That has to end.
5) No judge shopping. A case gets assigned and thats it, unless there is some conflct or malfeasance.

The 4th doesn't exist if illegally obtained evidence isn't excluded. So the exclusionary rule effectuates the amendment.

your 1 and 2 essentially prohibit anyone but the wealthiest from using the court system...

i can't speak to 3 because i don't know what you're talking about.

your 4? if people are "too stupid" to serve on a jury, they are too stupid to vote... I've found that juries generally do the right thing.... not always, but usually.

5? I actually agree with your number 5. An IAS system is actually quite workable.

If I could change anything, it would be to decriminalize drugs and get rid of the Rockefeller drug laws so that prisons will be for violent offenders and not some yutz who sold an ounce of pot to an undercover.

 

[JD_2B]

No my point was that people should not be put down as soon as the gavel hits, as some people on here have firmly asserted themselves wanting to happen. I am not saying that they should have 20 years to appeal a verdict. Don't be ridiculous. I never said or even insinuated such a thing. Do not twist my words.

Sorry, I am tired and having skipped plenty of posts in this thread... I only have a slight bone of contention with your statement JD and mostly it is in jest. I think if you are convicted of creating a destructive computer virus or spyware with the intention of extortion, you should be tried and convicted and within the hour taken out behind the courthouse to face a firing squad without a blindfold. IMHO there is nothing lower than a person that creates computer viruses... nothing.

Immie

Are you serious?????

 

[manifold]

I think if you are convicted of creating a destructive computer virus or spyware with the intention of extortion, you should be tried and convicted and within the hour taken out behind the courthouse to face a firing squad without a blindfold. IMHO there is nothing lower than a person that creates computer viruses... nothing.

Lower than a child rapist?

Lower than a serial killer?

Lower than Bernie Madoff?

Unless you tell me otherwise, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this is simply the use of hyperbole to try to make a point.

 

[Immanuel]

No my point was that people should not be put down as soon as the gavel hits, as some people on here have firmly asserted themselves wanting to happen. I am not saying that they should have 20 years to appeal a verdict. Don't be ridiculous. I never said or even insinuated such a thing. Do not twist my words.

Sorry, I am tired and having skipped plenty of posts in this thread... I only have a slight bone of contention with your statement JD and mostly it is in jest. I think if you are convicted of creating a destructive computer virus or spyware with the intention of extortion, you should be tried and convicted and within the hour taken out behind the courthouse to face a firing squad without a blindfold. IMHO there is nothing lower than a person that creates computer viruses... nothing.

Immie

Are you serious?????

Highlighted the red for you... does that answer your ????

I am serious about the blue part.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

I think if you are convicted of creating a destructive computer virus or spyware with the intention of extortion, you should be tried and convicted and within the hour taken out behind the courthouse to face a firing squad without a blindfold. IMHO there is nothing lower than a person that creates computer viruses... nothing.

Lower than a child rapist?

Lower than a serial killer?

Lower than Bernie Madoff?

Unless you tell me otherwise, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this is simply the use of hyperbole to try to make a point.

Okay well there are a few (very few) exceptions, but you have to excuse me... two weeks ago either my wife or one of my daugters downloaded "Windows Police Pro" onto one of our lap tops. The culprit wont confess

For the creaters of that piece of shit... I'll pull the trigger myself.

Immie

 

[The Rabbi]

OK. So you're just talking out your ass.
Understood.

I dont know whether what he says is true or not. I do know there are lot of things that are felonies that used to be misdemeanors. And a lot of things that people get charged with are crimes only by the furthest stretch of the imagination.
For example, an acquaintance of mine was charged with creating child porn. Bad, true. But part of the charge made it a federal crime because he used a camera that was made in Japan and imported here.
That is just dumb.

It would be interesting to read how he came up with such a theory.

Three felonies a day? You might be able to convince me of three misdemeanors per day especially if you were speaking to me while I was driving. Are traffic infractions (yes, I have a lead foot) considered misdemeanors?

Immie

3 Felonies a day is complete bullshit. Not saying there aren't some bush league felonies in some jurisdiction, but most people don't even violate those much less 3 per day.

As a practicing attorney, I rarely represented someone on a serious offense that had never committed another crime. And, I never represented someone in court who was "treated unfairly by the system." Most people got less than they deserved to get and more people got off than is probably conscionable. Not proud to say that I did my part to make that a true statement. (However I will say that we made it a practice to never represent a rapist or sexual batterer).

Having said all that, it is mid-day and I have yet to commit one felony (and I'm pretty sure I know what most of them are).

That's the issue. You think you know the laws. You know whether you intend to violate them or not.
But it isn't so.
Many laws are so vague that a prosecutor could charge someone for violating a law they had no idea existed or applied to their case. And mens rea has disappeared as a qualification. Now merely committing the act constitutes criminal behavior.
If you make a mistake on a tax return you could be charged with fraud, conspiracy and a bunch of other things. The fact that it was an "honest mistake" may not enter into it.
I am not saying you will be. But you could be and people have been.
I think that's the issue.

 

[Care4all]

speaking of which, don;t you think that all of us citizens should be supplied with what our laws actually are within our states? they say ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law, but what if it is the gvt that is actually keeping us ignorant?

 

[lawbuff]

speaking of which, don;t you think that all of us citizens should be supplied with what our laws actually are within our states? they say ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law, but what if it is the gvt that is actually keeping us ignorant?

Some states codify "mistake of law/mistake of fact". Yes there is an old legal maxim "One is presumed to know the law", and this is generally practical as a "reasonably prudent person" or the reasonable man doctrine applies. A reasonably prudent person can know if his conduct is likely to violate the law. This is why the US SC has ruled the punishment for a crime MUST be proportional to it. IOW, you can't sentence a man to 25 years for jaywalking.