Punishing The Innocent

[Politico]

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.

With all due respect how can you be so dense? The 'every reason' is it is the internets where anyone can say anything.. It is that simple. I did not challenge the article. I would ask why you only felt it was important enough to post on one site 12 years ago. Every other author would make sure their article appeared in 100 other places.

Why don't you address the topic instead of being a douche?

Because I don't disagree with the article douche.

 

[Sonny Clark]

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.

With all due respect how can you be so dense? The 'every reason' is it is the internets where anyone can say anything.. It is that simple. I did not challenge the article. I would ask why you only felt it was important enough to post on one site 12 years ago. Every other author would make sure their article appeared in 100 other places.

Why don't you address the topic instead of being a douche?

Because I don't disagree with the article douche.

What do you disagree with?

 

[Politico]

Nothing in the article.

 

[Sonny Clark]

Nothing in the article.

Outside the article? Exactly what?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

[ 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 “.

punishing the innocent is right.thats what goes on in this police state country we live in everyday. cops punsih the innocent everyday going into backyards of homeowners shooting dogs just cause they dont like their barking,kicking handicapped people out of wheelchairs at peaceful protests,sounds like punishing the innocent to me. and people here say we are are not one.

 

[airplanemechanic]

You have no idea how many "innocent" people there are behind bars. Although there are such cases, they are not the norm. The police have to follow procedure. A grand jury has to indict, etc., etc.

That sentence right there tells me you have no clue what you're talking about or how the justice system works.

A grand jury doesn't indict someone BEFORE they are arrested, they indict AFTER. The guy can sit in jail for years before a grand jury indictment, and its not necessary for him to be charged with the crime. Only in very few instances is a grand jury indictment used.

And what if its not someone who raped or killed anyway? What about the other 95% of people in jail? You failed to address it last time I asked, so I'll ask again. Do you think its right to lock someone up for writing a bad check for YEARS while their case sits in a docket somewhere? And then charges are later dropped for lack of evidence? You think that's right? Please address the example I gave just now in your answer. Do not mention murder or rape.

 

[ChrisL]

[You have no idea how many "innocent" people there are behind bars. Although there are such cases, they are not the norm. The police have to follow procedure. A grand jury has to indict, etc., etc.

That sentence right there tells me you have no clue what you're talking about or how the justice system works.

A grand jury doesn't indict someone BEFORE they are arrested, they indict AFTER. The guy can sit in jail for years before a grand jury indictment, and its not necessary for him to be charged with the crime. Only in very few instances is a grand jury indictment used.

And what if its not someone who raped or killed anyway? What about the other 95% of people in jail? You failed to address it last time I asked, so I'll ask again. Do you think its right to lock someone up for writing bad checks for YEARS while their case sits in a docket somewhere? And then charges are later dropped for lack of evidence? You think that's right? Please address the example I gave just now in your answer.

Where does this happen? Post some examples please.

 

[ChrisL]

I have NEVER heard of a person being held for YEARS for writing a bad check.

 

[airplanemechanic]

There are tons of people held in jail for non violent crimes. I asked you specifically. I don't care whether you heard of it or not. It's obvious you haven't heard of much.

Someone can be held for up to 4 years on any felony charge without ever seeing their arraignment, and that includes writing bad checks. So please address this issue.

This article talks about people held for years, sometimes multiple times, without being indicted.

These Mississippi Defendants Have Been In Jail For As Long As A Year Without Even Being Charged ThinkProgress

And Mississippi does not impose any time limit on how long defendants can be held without indictment.

That right there is scary as hell.

 

[ChrisL]

There are tons of people held in jail for non violent crimes. I asked you specifically. I don't care whether you heard of it or not. It's obvious you haven't heard of much.

Someone can be held for up to 4 years on any felony charge without ever seeing their arraignment, and that includes writing bad checks. So please address this issue.

This article talks about people held for years, sometimes multiple times, without being indicted.

These Mississippi Defendants Have Been In Jail For As Long As A Year Without Even Being Charged ThinkProgress

And Mississippi does not impose any time limit on how long defendants can be held without indictment.

That right there is scary as hell.

And that particular institution is being sued for doing this. THAT is not the norm.

Most people who are arrested (exempting perhaps murder charges) are seen by a judge within a few days of their arrest who will set a reasonable bail. UNLESS they are considered to be a potential danger.

Do you really want accused child molesters being set free??? That's just nuts. The good of society has to come first in such instances.

 

[airplanemechanic]

So when a father who had a nasty divorce gets accused by his ex wife of molesting their daughter for the simple reason that she wants full custody of the child, that's ok with you? You do know that happens all the time, right?

Of the allegations determined to be false, only a small portion originated with the child, the studies showed; most false allegations originated with an adult bringing the accusations on behalf of a child, and of those, a large majority occurred in the context of divorce and child-custody battles

Ney, T (1995). True and False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse: Assessment and Case Management. Psychology Press. pp. 23–33. ISBN0-87630-758-6.

You need to understand that the nature of the offense against the accused plays absolutely no part in the true guilt or innocence of the accused party.

Just to make sure you understand how often this happens:

Researchers More than 2 000 false convictions in past 23 years - U.S. News

So do you admit you're wrong or you still don't give a shit, and "home of the free" only applies to people lucky enough to avoid what conservatives love to call our "justice" system, where there is no justice whatsoever?

 

[ChrisL]

So when a father who had a nasty divorce gets accused by his ex wife of molesting their daughter for the simple reason that she wants full custody of the child, that's ok with you? You do know that happens all the time, right?

Of the allegations determined to be false, only a small portion originated with the child, the studies showed; most false allegations originated with an adult bringing the accusations on behalf of a child, and of those, a large majority occurred in the context of divorce and child-custody battles

Ney, T (1995). True and False Allegations of Child Sexual Abuse: Assessment and Case Management. Psychology Press. pp. 23–33. ISBN0-87630-758-6.

You need to understand that the nature of the offense against the accused plays absolutely no part in the true guilt or innocence of the accused party.

Just to make sure you understand how often this happens:

Researchers More than 2 000 false convictions in past 23 years - U.S. News

So do you admit you're wrong or you still don't give a shit, and "home of the free" only applies to people lucky enough to avoid what conservatives love to call our "justice" system, where there is no justice whatsoever?

The safety of society has to come first in these types of situations. That is the bottom line here. You are saying that society can go to hell for the comfort of the individual. WRONG. When someone is suspected of a committing a SERIOUS crime, then we don't have a choice. In this case, the good of society would come before the rights of the individual. Besides, 2000 false convictions in a 23 years is NOT that many.

Your insinuations here are just utterly ridiculous, and I am quite sure if it was someone you knew or was close to who was raped or murdered, you would feel completely different if they just let that person go.

 

[Politico]

I have NEVER heard of a person being held for YEARS for writing a bad check.

No they get held for up to a year for writing the checks or other misdemeanor. Then they get thrown back in because they can't afford to pay the fines that were levied. It can go on for years. The court system is a racket.

 

[airplanemechanic]

No I wouldn't. If someone I knew was raped or murdered I would want justice, but I NEVER would want to sacrifice someone else's freedom for my feelings. If you have evidence, arrest him, charge him and try him in front of his peers. But don't keep him locked up without a trial. I don't care what the charge is. Why? Because if I was falsely accused I would want the same thing.

And I'll flip it around. How would you feel if someone you knew was FALSELY accused of rape or murder, spent years in jail, and was found either not guilty or charges dropped? You ever thought about THAT? There are two sides to everything. One is the victim, the other is the accused. BOTH have families.

Unlike some, I don't let emotions get in my way.

So answer this, how many years is appropriate for someone to serve who was falsely accused of a crime and locked up without a trial while the wheels of justice turn? You don't want to answer because you HAVE NO ANSWER. You keep harping on SERIOUS CRIMES. Well, you can be falsely accused of a SERIOUS CRIME as easily as a NOT SERIOUS ONE. So answer the question. You do know that people accused of murder sometimes are denied bond, or receive a bond in the millions, and if found not guilty, served time in jail for a crime they didn't commit? Do you even care? It seems readily apparent you don't give a damn about anyone.

What happened until innocent until proven guilty? Since when is an accusation alone enough to ruin someones life and take their freedom without due process of law?

 

[Slyhunter]

I was accused of attempted rape of my wife on OUR WEDDING NIGHT.
What actually happened was I didn't take no for an answer, I argued with her about it. I never got physical. I threatened to divorce her. I did divorce her.

I spent a week in jail and it would've been months longer had I not pulled out my credit card and paid the $3,000 Bail Bondsmen fee for the $30,000 bond.

The criminal system assumes your guilty before you go to court by punishing you and sending you to jail before you are found guilty of anything.

 

[ChrisL]

No I wouldn't. If someone I knew was raped or murdered I would want justice, but I NEVER would want to sacrifice someone else's freedom for my feelings. If you have evidence, arrest him, charge him and try him in front of his peers. But don't keep him locked up without a trial. I don't care what the charge is. Why? Because if I was falsely accused I would want the same thing.

And I'll flip it around. How would you feel if someone you knew was FALSELY accused of rape or murder, spent years in jail, and was found either not guilty or charges dropped? You ever thought about THAT? There are two sides to everything. One is the victim, the other is the accused. BOTH have families.

Unlike some, I don't let emotions get in my way.

So answer this, how many years is appropriate for someone to serve who was falsely accused of a crime and locked up without a trial while the wheels of justice turn? You don't want to answer because you HAVE NO ANSWER. You keep harping on SERIOUS CRIMES. Well, you can be falsely accused of a SERIOUS CRIME as easily as a NOT SERIOUS ONE. So answer the question. You do know that people accused of murder sometimes are denied bond, or receive a bond in the millions, and if found not guilty, served time in jail for a crime they didn't commit? Do you even care? It seems readily apparent you don't give a damn about anyone.

What happened until innocent until proven guilty? Since when is an accusation alone enough to ruin someones life and take their freedom without due process of law?

Sorry. That is the way it is and the way it is going to remain. The safety of society comes first. It is TOO risky to release potential violent criminals. We are TOO soft on crime as it is!

 

[ChrisL]

I was accused of attempted rape of my wife on OUR WEDDING NIGHT.
What actually happened was I didn't take no for an answer, I argued with her about it. I never got physical. I threatened to divorce her. I did divorce her.

I spent a week in jail and it would've been months longer had I not pulled out my credit card and paid the $3,000 Bail Bondsmen fee for the $30,000 bond.

The criminal system assumes your guilty before you go to court by punishing you and sending you to jail before you are found guilty of anything.

And if you were unable to afford that bond, they would have seen you in court in a few days where the judge would have lowered your bond. That is how it usually goes.

 

[ChrisL]

You people are crazy for suggesting that we let potentially VERY dangerous people out of jail because "it's not fair." The alternative is putting society at risk. Ridiculous arguments here, really ridiculous.

 

[airplanemechanic]

[Sorry. That is the way it is and the way it is going to remain. The safety of society comes first. It is TOO risky to release potential violent criminals. We are TOO soft on crime as it is!

So you fail to address my question for the 3rd time. For some reason that doesn't surprise me. Deflection is an indication of a failure to compose an answer.

Soft on crime? We have more people in prison than any other nation, including China. We lock up everyone for everything. How the fuck can you call that soft?

The Prison Crisis American Civil Liberties Union

• THE NUMBERS:
• With only 5% of the world’s population, the U.S. has 25% of the world’s prison population – that makes us the world’s largest jailer.
• Since 1970, our prison population has risen 700%.
• One in 99 adults are living behind bars in the U.S. This marks the highest rate of imprisonment in American history.
• One in 31 adults are under some form of correctional control, counting prison, jail, parole and probation populations.

Our justice system must be EVIDENCE based, not FEAR based.

 

[airplanemechanic]

And if you were unable to afford that bond, they would have seen you in court in a few days where the judge would have lowered your bond. That is how it usually goes.

You really are clueless aren't you?

You really think the judge is going to lower your bond until you can afford to be released?

Hint: A judge doesn't give a rats ass whether you can afford it or not. And bond reductions are very rare, especially for violent crimes.