Punishing The Innocent

[Politico]

[ This piece was written on 9/16/2003. I wrote it in response to several stories of innocent citizens that had served years behind bars before being proven innocent. This speaks to freedom and justice, or the lack thereof. ]

Punishing The Innocent


In the United States of America, only the guilty are punished. In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Of course, these two statements are far from being true. The examples and stories of lost freedom, and injustice, are too numerous to list in this article, but the “many” that are unjustly imprisoned and jailed bear this out. Too many times an innocent person is jailed for hours, weeks, even months before charges are dropped or a jury finds them not guilty. Too many times an innocent person serves years in prison before DNA evidence clears them of the crime that put them behind bars. Too many times an innocent person is held for hours, even days before it’s decided that there’s not enough evidence to hold them on charges. Of the several reasons this injustice happens, the main one is obviously “A LACK OF PROPER INVESTIGATING”.

The “standard operating procedure” for law enforcement is to arrest a likely suspect, then try to build their case around that person. More often than not, this results in a circumstantial evidence case where solid evidence is nonexistent. A “proper investigation” would either produce solid evidence, or it wouldn’t, resulting in either an arrest of the guilty or no arrest at all. A person’s guilt, or innocence, is like a woman claiming to be pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or she’s not, there’s no gray area. The same can be said for guilt or innocence, either the solid evidence is there or it isn’t, there’s no gray area. Solid evidence, and only solid evidence, can produce the “Absolute Truth”. Why law enforcement arrest someone first, without solid evidence, and looks for evidence afterwards, is beyond moral, ethical, and civilized reasoning. This, in reality, is legalized kidnapping. In some cases, not only does the innocent person lose their freedom, but lose their marriage, employment, home, and the relationship with their children. How can this, under any circumstance, be justified or rationally excused?

When a wrongfully imprisoned person is released, they get nothing but an “I’m sorry” from the court. They get absolutely no restitution for being imprisoned, yet they’ve lost everything. We send our men and women, serving in the armed forces, all over the world to fight in the name of “Freedom”. Our national anthem has a line that says we’re the “land of the free”. The “Pledge of Allegiance” says we’re a nation “with liberty and justice for all”. In reality, we have conditional freedom and justice that can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye by “a false accusation”, or by “being at the wrong place at the wrong time”. This immoral and uncivilized imprisoning of the innocent will continue as long as our judges allow circumstantial evidence cases in their courtrooms. We’ll continue to have the innocent arrested and held, as long as law enforcement has the legal authority to do so, without first having solid evidence proving their guilt.

As long as judges, district attorneys, and law enforcement are not required to pay restitution to the innocent, this legalized kidnapping and confinement will continue. We’re not innocent until proven guilty; we’re guilty until we can prove our innocence. Two well-known attorneys, who were part of the O J Simpson defense team, are gaining the release of imprisoned innocent men and women by using DNA testing. Other attorneys are fighting hard for the same cause by doing what should’ve been done at the beginning, doing a “Proper Investigation”. A lot of effort is being spent to free the innocent, but nothing is being done to stop the innocent from losing their freedom. Until district attorneys and law enforcement start doing “Proper Investigations” before they take someone’s freedom away, we’ll continue to “ PUNISH THE INNOCENT “.

You wrote it eh? Link us to the original article and credit yourself with the article by name.

 

[Agit8r]

The problem is that fascism took over most state and local governments. They call it conservatism, but of course it can't be, because:

"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved; never, that I know of, controverted."
-- Benjamin Franklin; from letter to Benjamin Vaughn (March 14th, 1785)

 

[Sonny Clark]

[ This piece was written on 9/16/2003. I wrote it in response to several stories of innocent citizens that had served years behind bars before being proven innocent. This speaks to freedom and justice, or the lack thereof. ]

Punishing The Innocent


In the United States of America, only the guilty are punished. In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Of course, these two statements are far from being true. The examples and stories of lost freedom, and injustice, are too numerous to list in this article, but the “many” that are unjustly imprisoned and jailed bear this out. Too many times an innocent person is jailed for hours, weeks, even months before charges are dropped or a jury finds them not guilty. Too many times an innocent person serves years in prison before DNA evidence clears them of the crime that put them behind bars. Too many times an innocent person is held for hours, even days before it’s decided that there’s not enough evidence to hold them on charges. Of the several reasons this injustice happens, the main one is obviously “A LACK OF PROPER INVESTIGATING”.

The “standard operating procedure” for law enforcement is to arrest a likely suspect, then try to build their case around that person. More often than not, this results in a circumstantial evidence case where solid evidence is nonexistent. A “proper investigation” would either produce solid evidence, or it wouldn’t, resulting in either an arrest of the guilty or no arrest at all. A person’s guilt, or innocence, is like a woman claiming to be pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or she’s not, there’s no gray area. The same can be said for guilt or innocence, either the solid evidence is there or it isn’t, there’s no gray area. Solid evidence, and only solid evidence, can produce the “Absolute Truth”. Why law enforcement arrest someone first, without solid evidence, and looks for evidence afterwards, is beyond moral, ethical, and civilized reasoning. This, in reality, is legalized kidnapping. In some cases, not only does the innocent person lose their freedom, but lose their marriage, employment, home, and the relationship with their children. How can this, under any circumstance, be justified or rationally excused?

When a wrongfully imprisoned person is released, they get nothing but an “I’m sorry” from the court. They get absolutely no restitution for being imprisoned, yet they’ve lost everything. We send our men and women, serving in the armed forces, all over the world to fight in the name of “Freedom”. Our national anthem has a line that says we’re the “land of the free”. The “Pledge of Allegiance” says we’re a nation “with liberty and justice for all”. In reality, we have conditional freedom and justice that can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye by “a false accusation”, or by “being at the wrong place at the wrong time”. This immoral and uncivilized imprisoning of the innocent will continue as long as our judges allow circumstantial evidence cases in their courtrooms. We’ll continue to have the innocent arrested and held, as long as law enforcement has the legal authority to do so, without first having solid evidence proving their guilt.

As long as judges, district attorneys, and law enforcement are not required to pay restitution to the innocent, this legalized kidnapping and confinement will continue. We’re not innocent until proven guilty; we’re guilty until we can prove our innocence. Two well-known attorneys, who were part of the O J Simpson defense team, are gaining the release of imprisoned innocent men and women by using DNA testing. Other attorneys are fighting hard for the same cause by doing what should’ve been done at the beginning, doing a “Proper Investigation”. A lot of effort is being spent to free the innocent, but nothing is being done to stop the innocent from losing their freedom. Until district attorneys and law enforcement start doing “Proper Investigations” before they take someone’s freedom away, we’ll continue to “ PUNISH THE INNOCENT “.

You wrote it eh? Link us to the original article and credit yourself with the article by name.

Yes, I wrote it years ago. I believe that I gave the date at the top of the article. I posted it on a forum called "e-thepeople.org" which is no longer on the internet. The site folded after 8 or 10 years. Why? Why do you want the original site and my name? My name is Sonny Clark.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Aside from divine intervention, the U.S. system of justice is the best legal concept on the planet. Try getting an automatic judicial review or the Constitutional right of a prisoner petitioning the government in any other country. Keep whining and criticizing the greatest Country in the world while you consider that there are more potential lawyers in US law school today than ever walked the earth.

Wow, I get my post in hours before this guy shows up and it still doesn't make a difference

Sorry Sonny Clark I tried

Sorry about what? You tried what?

 

[Politico]

[ This piece was written on 9/16/2003. I wrote it in response to several stories of innocent citizens that had served years behind bars before being proven innocent. This speaks to freedom and justice, or the lack thereof. ]

Punishing The Innocent


In the United States of America, only the guilty are punished. In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Of course, these two statements are far from being true. The examples and stories of lost freedom, and injustice, are too numerous to list in this article, but the “many” that are unjustly imprisoned and jailed bear this out. Too many times an innocent person is jailed for hours, weeks, even months before charges are dropped or a jury finds them not guilty. Too many times an innocent person serves years in prison before DNA evidence clears them of the crime that put them behind bars. Too many times an innocent person is held for hours, even days before it’s decided that there’s not enough evidence to hold them on charges. Of the several reasons this injustice happens, the main one is obviously “A LACK OF PROPER INVESTIGATING”.

The “standard operating procedure” for law enforcement is to arrest a likely suspect, then try to build their case around that person. More often than not, this results in a circumstantial evidence case where solid evidence is nonexistent. A “proper investigation” would either produce solid evidence, or it wouldn’t, resulting in either an arrest of the guilty or no arrest at all. A person’s guilt, or innocence, is like a woman claiming to be pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or she’s not, there’s no gray area. The same can be said for guilt or innocence, either the solid evidence is there or it isn’t, there’s no gray area. Solid evidence, and only solid evidence, can produce the “Absolute Truth”. Why law enforcement arrest someone first, without solid evidence, and looks for evidence afterwards, is beyond moral, ethical, and civilized reasoning. This, in reality, is legalized kidnapping. In some cases, not only does the innocent person lose their freedom, but lose their marriage, employment, home, and the relationship with their children. How can this, under any circumstance, be justified or rationally excused?

When a wrongfully imprisoned person is released, they get nothing but an “I’m sorry” from the court. They get absolutely no restitution for being imprisoned, yet they’ve lost everything. We send our men and women, serving in the armed forces, all over the world to fight in the name of “Freedom”. Our national anthem has a line that says we’re the “land of the free”. The “Pledge of Allegiance” says we’re a nation “with liberty and justice for all”. In reality, we have conditional freedom and justice that can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye by “a false accusation”, or by “being at the wrong place at the wrong time”. This immoral and uncivilized imprisoning of the innocent will continue as long as our judges allow circumstantial evidence cases in their courtrooms. We’ll continue to have the innocent arrested and held, as long as law enforcement has the legal authority to do so, without first having solid evidence proving their guilt.

As long as judges, district attorneys, and law enforcement are not required to pay restitution to the innocent, this legalized kidnapping and confinement will continue. We’re not innocent until proven guilty; we’re guilty until we can prove our innocence. Two well-known attorneys, who were part of the O J Simpson defense team, are gaining the release of imprisoned innocent men and women by using DNA testing. Other attorneys are fighting hard for the same cause by doing what should’ve been done at the beginning, doing a “Proper Investigation”. A lot of effort is being spent to free the innocent, but nothing is being done to stop the innocent from losing their freedom. Until district attorneys and law enforcement start doing “Proper Investigations” before they take someone’s freedom away, we’ll continue to “ PUNISH THE INNOCENT “.

You wrote it eh? Link us to the original article and credit yourself with the article by name.

Yes, I wrote it years ago. I believe that I gave the date at the top of the article. I posted it on a forum called "e-thepeople.org" which is no longer on the internet. The site folded after 8 or 10 years. Why? Why do you want the original site and my name? My name is Sonny Clark.

Cool. Post the article again with your name here and take credit for it.

 

[Sonny Clark]

[ This piece was written on 9/16/2003. I wrote it in response to several stories of innocent citizens that had served years behind bars before being proven innocent. This speaks to freedom and justice, or the lack thereof. ]

Punishing The Innocent


In the United States of America, only the guilty are punished. In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Of course, these two statements are far from being true. The examples and stories of lost freedom, and injustice, are too numerous to list in this article, but the “many” that are unjustly imprisoned and jailed bear this out. Too many times an innocent person is jailed for hours, weeks, even months before charges are dropped or a jury finds them not guilty. Too many times an innocent person serves years in prison before DNA evidence clears them of the crime that put them behind bars. Too many times an innocent person is held for hours, even days before it’s decided that there’s not enough evidence to hold them on charges. Of the several reasons this injustice happens, the main one is obviously “A LACK OF PROPER INVESTIGATING”.

The “standard operating procedure” for law enforcement is to arrest a likely suspect, then try to build their case around that person. More often than not, this results in a circumstantial evidence case where solid evidence is nonexistent. A “proper investigation” would either produce solid evidence, or it wouldn’t, resulting in either an arrest of the guilty or no arrest at all. A person’s guilt, or innocence, is like a woman claiming to be pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or she’s not, there’s no gray area. The same can be said for guilt or innocence, either the solid evidence is there or it isn’t, there’s no gray area. Solid evidence, and only solid evidence, can produce the “Absolute Truth”. Why law enforcement arrest someone first, without solid evidence, and looks for evidence afterwards, is beyond moral, ethical, and civilized reasoning. This, in reality, is legalized kidnapping. In some cases, not only does the innocent person lose their freedom, but lose their marriage, employment, home, and the relationship with their children. How can this, under any circumstance, be justified or rationally excused?

When a wrongfully imprisoned person is released, they get nothing but an “I’m sorry” from the court. They get absolutely no restitution for being imprisoned, yet they’ve lost everything. We send our men and women, serving in the armed forces, all over the world to fight in the name of “Freedom”. Our national anthem has a line that says we’re the “land of the free”. The “Pledge of Allegiance” says we’re a nation “with liberty and justice for all”. In reality, we have conditional freedom and justice that can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye by “a false accusation”, or by “being at the wrong place at the wrong time”. This immoral and uncivilized imprisoning of the innocent will continue as long as our judges allow circumstantial evidence cases in their courtrooms. We’ll continue to have the innocent arrested and held, as long as law enforcement has the legal authority to do so, without first having solid evidence proving their guilt.

As long as judges, district attorneys, and law enforcement are not required to pay restitution to the innocent, this legalized kidnapping and confinement will continue. We’re not innocent until proven guilty; we’re guilty until we can prove our innocence. Two well-known attorneys, who were part of the O J Simpson defense team, are gaining the release of imprisoned innocent men and women by using DNA testing. Other attorneys are fighting hard for the same cause by doing what should’ve been done at the beginning, doing a “Proper Investigation”. A lot of effort is being spent to free the innocent, but nothing is being done to stop the innocent from losing their freedom. Until district attorneys and law enforcement start doing “Proper Investigations” before they take someone’s freedom away, we’ll continue to “ PUNISH THE INNOCENT “.

You wrote it eh? Link us to the original article and credit yourself with the article by name.

Yes, I wrote it years ago. I believe that I gave the date at the top of the article. I posted it on a forum called "e-thepeople.org" which is no longer on the internet. The site folded after 8 or 10 years. Why? Why do you want the original site and my name? My name is Sonny Clark.

Cool. Post the article again with your name here and take credit for it.

The article was posted using my name. I didn't sign the article at the bottom though. Was I suppose to sign the article? Did I break a site ( forum ) rule? Post it again where? I thought that double posting was against forum rules. I'm not sure that I'm allowed to post it twice. If I did something wrong, please let me know. Thanks.

 

[ChrisL]

[ This piece was written on 9/16/2003. I wrote it in response to several stories of innocent citizens that had served years behind bars before being proven innocent. This speaks to freedom and justice, or the lack thereof. ]

Punishing The Innocent


In the United States of America, only the guilty are punished. In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Of course, these two statements are far from being true. The examples and stories of lost freedom, and injustice, are too numerous to list in this article, but the “many” that are unjustly imprisoned and jailed bear this out. Too many times an innocent person is jailed for hours, weeks, even months before charges are dropped or a jury finds them not guilty. Too many times an innocent person serves years in prison before DNA evidence clears them of the crime that put them behind bars. Too many times an innocent person is held for hours, even days before it’s decided that there’s not enough evidence to hold them on charges. Of the several reasons this injustice happens, the main one is obviously “A LACK OF PROPER INVESTIGATING”.

The “standard operating procedure” for law enforcement is to arrest a likely suspect, then try to build their case around that person. More often than not, this results in a circumstantial evidence case where solid evidence is nonexistent. A “proper investigation” would either produce solid evidence, or it wouldn’t, resulting in either an arrest of the guilty or no arrest at all. A person’s guilt, or innocence, is like a woman claiming to be pregnant. A woman is either pregnant or she’s not, there’s no gray area. The same can be said for guilt or innocence, either the solid evidence is there or it isn’t, there’s no gray area. Solid evidence, and only solid evidence, can produce the “Absolute Truth”. Why law enforcement arrest someone first, without solid evidence, and looks for evidence afterwards, is beyond moral, ethical, and civilized reasoning. This, in reality, is legalized kidnapping. In some cases, not only does the innocent person lose their freedom, but lose their marriage, employment, home, and the relationship with their children. How can this, under any circumstance, be justified or rationally excused?

When a wrongfully imprisoned person is released, they get nothing but an “I’m sorry” from the court. They get absolutely no restitution for being imprisoned, yet they’ve lost everything. We send our men and women, serving in the armed forces, all over the world to fight in the name of “Freedom”. Our national anthem has a line that says we’re the “land of the free”. The “Pledge of Allegiance” says we’re a nation “with liberty and justice for all”. In reality, we have conditional freedom and justice that can be taken away from us in the blink of an eye by “a false accusation”, or by “being at the wrong place at the wrong time”. This immoral and uncivilized imprisoning of the innocent will continue as long as our judges allow circumstantial evidence cases in their courtrooms. We’ll continue to have the innocent arrested and held, as long as law enforcement has the legal authority to do so, without first having solid evidence proving their guilt.

As long as judges, district attorneys, and law enforcement are not required to pay restitution to the innocent, this legalized kidnapping and confinement will continue. We’re not innocent until proven guilty; we’re guilty until we can prove our innocence. Two well-known attorneys, who were part of the O J Simpson defense team, are gaining the release of imprisoned innocent men and women by using DNA testing. Other attorneys are fighting hard for the same cause by doing what should’ve been done at the beginning, doing a “Proper Investigation”. A lot of effort is being spent to free the innocent, but nothing is being done to stop the innocent from losing their freedom. Until district attorneys and law enforcement start doing “Proper Investigations” before they take someone’s freedom away, we’ll continue to “ PUNISH THE INNOCENT “.

Of course they have to arrest and detain suspects while they do an investigation!!! They can't just let them escape! There's nothing "wrongful" about it. Our justice system may not be perfect, but there is no such thing as a perfect system. Ours is the best out there, however. We just need to abolish the death penalty which gives the state the "right" to legally kill citizens. Now that is something that should concern everyone. There is no "getting released" once the state has taken your life.

 

[Politico]

The article was posted using my name. I didn't sign the article at the bottom though. Was I suppose to sign the article? Did I break a site ( forum ) rule? Post it again where? I thought that double posting was against forum rules. I'm not sure that I'm allowed to post it twice. If I did something wrong, please let me know. Thanks.

I edited out your long unnecessary multi quote so peoples heads won't explode. No one said anything about forum rules. Just post a link to the original article and your name here. Jeez not a big deal if you wrote it.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The article was posted using my name. I didn't sign the article at the bottom though. Was I suppose to sign the article? Did I break a site ( forum ) rule? Post it again where? I thought that double posting was against forum rules. I'm not sure that I'm allowed to post it twice. If I did something wrong, please let me know. Thanks.

I edited out your long unnecessary multi quote so peoples heads won't explode. No one said anything about forum rules. Just post a link to the original article and your name here. Jeez not a big deal if you wrote it.

There is NO link. The site where I originally posted it is no longer up. The site "e-thepeople.org" is closed down, and has been for about 5 years now. The orginal article is on an old hard drive that I found the other day and downloaded some of my material off of it. My name is Sonny Clark. Why do you want the information? What's so important about the original site where I posted it? Everyone here already knows my name. What's your point?

 

[Sonny Clark]

The article was posted using my name. I didn't sign the article at the bottom though. Was I suppose to sign the article? Did I break a site ( forum ) rule? Post it again where? I thought that double posting was against forum rules. I'm not sure that I'm allowed to post it twice. If I did something wrong, please let me know. Thanks.

I edited out your long unnecessary multi quote so peoples heads won't explode. No one said anything about forum rules. Just post a link to the original article and your name here. Jeez not a big deal if you wrote it.

Why do you doubt that I wrote it? If it had been written by someone else, I would have included that information. I never take credit for others' work, never. Why would you doubt that I wrote it? I have written many pieces over the years, many hundreds of them. I've had several published by newspapers. I have posted them on several forums over the years. What's your point?

 

[Politico]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

 

[Sonny Clark]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

I'm NOT upset, not in the least. I have no reason to be upset. There's no need to present proof that I wrote the piece. I see no reason why anyone would doubt that I wrote the piece. Therefore, no need to give name and address. By the way, what does my address have to do with anything? Telling people where I live doesn't prove nor disprove who wrote the piece. Again, I'm NOT upset about anything. I'm just curious as to why you think that I should give links, name, and address. I have already explained that the site where I originally posted the piece is shut down, no longer on the internet. The site was called e-thepeople.org. My name is Sonny Clark. I live in Dallas, Georgia. What other information would you like? Just curious.

 

[Slyhunter]

I was arrested, held in jail for a week, forced to pay $3,000 to a bail bondsmen which I never got back, all because my wife accused me of attempted rape on our wedding night.

Details. I did not take no for an answer. I argued with her about it. But I never used forced and I never got any.

 

[Politico]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

I'm NOT upset, not in the least. I have no reason to be upset. There's no need to present proof that I wrote the piece. I see no reason why anyone would doubt that I wrote the piece. Therefore, no need to give name and address. By the way, what does my address have to do with anything? Telling people where I live doesn't prove nor disprove who wrote the piece. Again, I'm NOT upset about anything. I'm just curious as to why you think that I should give links, name, and address. I have already explained that the site where I originally posted the piece is shut down, no longer on the internet. The site was called e-thepeople.org. My name is Sonny Clark. I live in Dallas, Georgia. What other information would you like? Just curious.

It is the internets. There is every reason to doubt you. FFS if you claim you wrote it there is no reason you would not provide proof.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

I'm NOT upset, not in the least. I have no reason to be upset. There's no need to present proof that I wrote the piece. I see no reason why anyone would doubt that I wrote the piece. Therefore, no need to give name and address. By the way, what does my address have to do with anything? Telling people where I live doesn't prove nor disprove who wrote the piece. Again, I'm NOT upset about anything. I'm just curious as to why you think that I should give links, name, and address. I have already explained that the site where I originally posted the piece is shut down, no longer on the internet. The site was called e-thepeople.org. My name is Sonny Clark. I live in Dallas, Georgia. What other information would you like? Just curious.

It is the internets. There is every reason to doubt you. FFS if you claim you wrote it there is no reason you would not provide proof.

You can doubt it if you want to, no problem. I couldn't care less whether you believe that I wrote it or not. And, there's no way for me to prove it other than to say that I did. It was never copyrighted, nor published anywhere but the site that is no longer on the internet, it closed down. What is "FFS"? And, what is the "every reason" to doubt it? What reason could you possibly have to doubt it? Just curious. But, I would like to know why you doubt that I wrote the piece, if you don't mind telling me. Thanks.

 

[Politico]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

I'm NOT upset, not in the least. I have no reason to be upset. There's no need to present proof that I wrote the piece. I see no reason why anyone would doubt that I wrote the piece. Therefore, no need to give name and address. By the way, what does my address have to do with anything? Telling people where I live doesn't prove nor disprove who wrote the piece. Again, I'm NOT upset about anything. I'm just curious as to why you think that I should give links, name, and address. I have already explained that the site where I originally posted the piece is shut down, no longer on the internet. The site was called e-thepeople.org. My name is Sonny Clark. I live in Dallas, Georgia. What other information would you like? Just curious.

It is the internets. There is every reason to doubt you. FFS if you claim you wrote it there is no reason you would not provide proof.

You can doubt it if you want to, no problem. I couldn't care less whether you believe that I wrote it or not. And, there's no way for me to prove it other than to say that I did. It was never copyrighted, nor published anywhere but the site that is no longer on the internet, it closed down. What is "FFS"? And, what is the "every reason" to doubt it? What reason could you possibly have to doubt it? Just curious. But, I would like to know why you doubt that I wrote the piece, if you don't mind telling me. Thanks.

None as I said.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Jesus I never said I doubted you wrote it. I said if I had wrote the article I would post some proof it was my work along and my name and address. If that is true why are you getting so upset?

I'm NOT upset, not in the least. I have no reason to be upset. There's no need to present proof that I wrote the piece. I see no reason why anyone would doubt that I wrote the piece. Therefore, no need to give name and address. By the way, what does my address have to do with anything? Telling people where I live doesn't prove nor disprove who wrote the piece. Again, I'm NOT upset about anything. I'm just curious as to why you think that I should give links, name, and address. I have already explained that the site where I originally posted the piece is shut down, no longer on the internet. The site was called e-thepeople.org. My name is Sonny Clark. I live in Dallas, Georgia. What other information would you like? Just curious.

It is the internets. There is every reason to doubt you. FFS if you claim you wrote it there is no reason you would not provide proof.

You can doubt it if you want to, no problem. I couldn't care less whether you believe that I wrote it or not. And, there's no way for me to prove it other than to say that I did. It was never copyrighted, nor published anywhere but the site that is no longer on the internet, it closed down. What is "FFS"? And, what is the "every reason" to doubt it? What reason could you possibly have to doubt it? Just curious. But, I would like to know why you doubt that I wrote the piece, if you don't mind telling me. Thanks.

None as I said.

But you did say that there was "every reason to doubt it". Did you not say that? And, if you did say it, which it clearly shows in your comment, why would you say it, and what is the "every reason"? Just curious. Thanks.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Of course they have to arrest and detain suspects while they do an investigation!!! They can't just let them escape! There's nothing "wrongful" about it. Our justice system may not be perfect, but there is no such thing as a perfect system. Ours is the best out there, however. We just need to abolish the death penalty which gives the state the "right" to legally kill citizens. Now that is something that should concern everyone. There is no "getting released" once the state has taken your life.

Ok, what happens to someone arrested when innocent and given a bond they can't make? They sit in jail, lose their job, their house, their families, everything and it can be YEARS later that the courts say "sorry" and let them go.

And you think this is ok?

 

[ChrisL]

Of course they have to arrest and detain suspects while they do an investigation!!! They can't just let them escape! There's nothing "wrongful" about it. Our justice system may not be perfect, but there is no such thing as a perfect system. Ours is the best out there, however. We just need to abolish the death penalty which gives the state the "right" to legally kill citizens. Now that is something that should concern everyone. There is no "getting released" once the state has taken your life.

Ok, what happens to someone arrested when innocent and given a bond they can't make? They sit in jail, lose their job, their house, their families, everything and it can be YEARS later that the courts say "sorry" and let them go.

And you think this is ok?

What does that have to do with anything? Of course sometimes innocent people are jailed. If and when they are found innocent, they are released. That's no different from how they do things now, so I don't get your point.

 

[ChrisL]

Of course they have to arrest and detain suspects while they do an investigation!!! They can't just let them escape! There's nothing "wrongful" about it. Our justice system may not be perfect, but there is no such thing as a perfect system. Ours is the best out there, however. We just need to abolish the death penalty which gives the state the "right" to legally kill citizens. Now that is something that should concern everyone. There is no "getting released" once the state has taken your life.

Ok, what happens to someone arrested when innocent and given a bond they can't make? They sit in jail, lose their job, their house, their families, everything and it can be YEARS later that the courts say "sorry" and let them go.

And you think this is ok?

Are you suggesting we should release people who are convicted of murder after 30 years or so because they MIGHT be innocent? Ridiculous.