The 'Innocent Prisoner's Dilemma'

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Dante, Jun 7, 2010.

  1. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
  2. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,319
    Thanks Received:
    2,088
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,326
    Hence why the idea of professional jurors was put forth some years ago. Our justice system is one of the best on the planet but has a long way to go go before it can even be considered good. Revamping the jury is most likely the best place to start.

    I hate to say it but the average person is a complete idiot and the average person that is placed on a jury even more likely so. THAT is what we are contending with.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Here's a test, would anybody in their right minds want a random sampling of people from the community they live in to judge them? I mean come on. Way back when, people knew each other and one had to be very careful about how they judged their neighbors, their peers. No more. We're all either strangers or worse -- viewed as enemies because of a bumper sticker we have on our car. :cuckoo:

    The system is antiquated.

    another test question: would anyone in their right minds want a random sampling of internet message board posters to sit in judgment of them? :eek:
     
  4. Father Time
    Offline

    Father Time I'll be Still Alive

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,130
    Thanks Received:
    438
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +438
    Reminds me of a quote from the movie let's go to prison.

    "Juries are made up of 12 people who are so dumb they couldn't even think up an excuse to get out of jury duty."
     
  5. George Costanza
    Offline

    George Costanza A Friendly Liberal

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,087
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Location:
    Los Angeles area.
    Ratings:
    +1,187
    The issue here isn't so much about a failure of the jury system in this case but, rather, the failure of parole board policies and how parole boards consider someone eligible for parole.

    The Innocent Prisoner's Dilemma is a glaring example of the gross stupidity of the system. The fix is simple: change parole board policy to allow the parole board to consider remorse if the prisoner is admitting guilt in the first instance, but prevent the parole board from considering remorse in the event the prisoner is not admitting guilt.

    There are plenty of other factors that are relevant to a grant or denial of parole.
     
  6. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,319
    Thanks Received:
    2,088
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +4,326
    The problem with that is the prisoner has already been identified as guilty. They were already awarded all the protections that we could offer. The system may not be perfect but the whole idea is that once you have been given that fair trial your guilt has been established. That is why I believe it is the jury that needs the true reform because the true answer to the problem is to make locking up innocent people so rare that it is no longer an issue.
     
  7. Liability
    Offline

    Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    35,447
    Thanks Received:
    5,049
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mansion in Ravi's Head
    Ratings:
    +5,063

    If you were to get arrested, Dainty, you only have a few very limited choices. Unless you can get the case dismissed by the prosecutors or the Court without a trial, you can do ONE of the following, but they are the only options open to you:

    1: go to trial before a judge, by waiving your right to a jury of your peers,

    2: go to trial before a jury of your peers, or

    3: plead guilty (or, in some jurisdictions, you can plead nolo contendere or no contest).
     
  8. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    I was a witness. Guy called for a jury trial. I testified before the jury. I was thanked and outside i was told the guy's lawyer ended up changing the plea right then and there. Cambridge, Middlesex County Court.

    ---

    side bar: If he had asked for a trial by a Judge, maybe the Judge would have went easier on him then he did (guy had priors and was in violation of parole/probation during arrest). The guy wasted everyone's time.
     
  9. Liability
    Offline

    Liability Locked Account. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    35,447
    Thanks Received:
    5,049
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mansion in Ravi's Head
    Ratings:
    +5,063
    If you go for a trial by judge, then the issue of whether or not the "finder of fact" sees a "reasonable doubt" is decided by just one person.

    By contrast, if you take a jury of your peers (at least in a felony trial), then ANY one of twelve sticking to a determination of "reasonable doubt" can prevent a conviction.

    If you are charged with a crime, the jury is supposed to determine whether the government proves it beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence that you did it. Very often, the question of a guy's prior criminal record shouldn't even be HEARD by the jury since it can lead to the invalid (illogical) conclusion that "once a criminal, always a criminal." It would be a miscarriage of justice to convict a guy who didn't commit the crime (and whom the evidence doesn't really prove guilty) merely because he used to commit crimes.
     
  10. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Today's juries are anachronisms.
     

Share This Page