Wrongfully Accused.

[froggy]

Should their accusers have to serve the same amount of time as they did?

 

[Avatar4321]

I would think that the accusers, assuming they had malicious intent and were not simply misinformed, would be prosecuted for perjury and obstruction along with other crimes and would be sentenced according to the guidelines of those offenses.

 

[froggy]

I would think that the accusers, assuming they had malicious intent and were not simply misinformed, would be prosecuted for perjury and obstruction along with other crimes and would be sentenced according to the guidelines of those offenses.

I'm speaking of eye-witness accusers who have people locked up for years. and then they're found innocent.

 

[uscitizen]

Yes.

The accusers bear responsibility for their actions.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

There are legal ramifications for false accusations.

 

[Avatar4321]

Problem with that is there are two types of people who could falsely accuse someone of a crime:

Misinformed accusers

Malicious and lying accusers.

And I certainly don't think the first group should be punished equally.

 

[Dr Gregg]

I would think that the accusers, assuming they had malicious intent and were not simply misinformed, would be prosecuted for perjury and obstruction along with other crimes and would be sentenced according to the guidelines of those offenses.

I'm speaking of eye-witness accusers who have people locked up for years. and then they're found innocent.

These days, with forensic evidence, no way should eyewitness accounts alone be good enough to convict without other evidence. Only if the eyewitness knew the person that committed the crime. Eyewitness accounts are very sketchy, and if its someone you have never seen before and maybe didn't get a great look at, it can be wrong

 

[froggy]

I would think that the accusers, assuming they had malicious intent and were not simply misinformed, would be prosecuted for perjury and obstruction along with other crimes and would be sentenced according to the guidelines of those offenses.

I'm speaking of eye-witness accusers who have people locked up for years. and then they're found innocent.

These days, with forensic evidence, no way should eyewitness accounts alone be good enough to convict without other evidence. Only if the eyewitness knew the person that committed the crime. Eyewitness accounts are very sketchy, and if its someone you have never seen before and maybe didn't get a great look at, it can be wrong

But do court appointed attorneys really go that extra mile when eyewitnesses are involved in the case.