Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 04:36 PM) Our justice system "just happens" to disproportionately prosecute, convict, incarcerate and kill minorities. So you really truly believe that the police, prosecutors, and juries are just a bunch of racists? Come on.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 04:35 PM) It's not whether they're good, capable people. It has to do with resources and caseloads. The caseloads for most public defenders are incredibly high. Much higher than the prosecutors. When they've got 150 felonies on their plate, it's not likely that each and every individual is getting representation on par with the state's resources. Eh, to a degree I suppose. But again, if we're talking about death penalty cases or really severe felonies the representation is going to be more than adequate. You're not working on 150 felony trials every month. I think the real problem is a public defender with 100 small drug offenses and he talks people into taking deals and getting a record versus potentially fighting the charge, all in order to clear his docket/make his monthly report look good. That kind of stuff certainly needs to be cleaned up and probably is a disadvantage over those who have access to private lawyers. But hey, don't do the crime and it's not a problem.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 04:29 PM) I don't care what you think is overblown. The disparity in conviction rates, especially for capital crimes, is abundantly clear. Poorer people accused of a crime, many of whom are black, are going to be relying on our woefully underfunded and overburdened public defenders. All more likely to be blamed on other societal factors, not the way our justice system operates.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 04:31 PM) You do a lot of guessing and supposing that just happens to confirm your pre-conceived ideas and dismisses contradictory evidence. What evidence? That article (at least in terms of the access to the system portion) is based on a survey of people's beliefs, not the system itself or the ACTUAL access to the system.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 6, 2013 -> 04:12 PM) What you don't realize is how completely different this is from the public defender system that the poor wind up having to rely on. I say bollocks to that. I know two public defenders very well and both are incredibly smart and take a lot of pride in what they do. I also worked with a couple others during my internship at a states attorney's office during my last year of college. Are they the best of the best? No. But they're entirely capable. It's not like they throw out unseasoned 1st year law students to try a triple homicide death penalty case.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) No, not by a long shot. Our criminal system is pretty unfair and unequal (see: conviction rates by class, color, especially death sentences) and we imprison far, far too many people in overcrowded prisons with crap conditions that breed our high recidivism rates. The list of countries with capital punishment isn't exactly a list of "best countries in the world," by the way. Most of the world has abolished this barbaric form of 'justice' that doesn't actually serve any wider purpose (it's effects as a deterrent are non-existent). http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article...e_of_law_index/ at least we're not Italy, though! Ha. This makes me laugh: The entire system is set up to make it incredibly easy to file a legitimate case. Attorneys bank roll the entire process, on a gamble essentially that they'll win for you, and you don't have to pay for hardly anything. Not to mention we have to be at or near the top of the list for the number of cases filed. Since the data is based on a survey, i'm guessing that is typical American "I want what I want and I want it now and for free!" mentality.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 03:45 PM) No, not by a long shot. Our criminal system is pretty unfair and unequal (see: conviction rates by class, color, especially death sentences) and we imprison far, far too many people in overcrowded prisons with crap conditions that breed our high recidivism rates. The list of countries with capital punishment isn't exactly a list of "best countries in the world," by the way. Most of the world has abolished this barbaric form of 'justice' that doesn't actually serve any wider purpose (it's effects as a deterrent are non-existent). I was referring to our justice system in that you're provided (generally) more rights and guarantees and fair trials. But I agree we imprison far too many people for BS crimes (drugs, specifically). And the race component I think is overblown. The justice system plays its role independent of that. Go to the courthouse at 26th and Cal and you have black officers arresting black men who are convicted by black juries. As to the death penalty, the guy that murders an entire family in cold blood deserves to die. The guy that shot up the Colorado movie theater deserves to die. I don't care if it has a deterrent effect or not. That sub-human individual shouldn't be allowed to sit in a jail cell and watch TV for the rest of his life. If you want a different system, I'd be all about letting those monsters free on a deserted island to fend for themselves.

I'm in agreement that speeding up the death penalty (in most cases) is a pretty dumb policy, but I see no reason why we should rid ourselves of the death penalty completely based on the fact that a small number of people have been exonerated. If that's the argument we should also get rid of long term prison sentences. Our system is not perfect by any means, but it's the best in the world. And we should be diligent in making it as efficient and accurate as possible. I don't think we should throw up our hands and automatically assume that every verdict was a result of corruption or bad evidence.

I don't know much about DNA testing in criminal cases, what are the types of odds it gives you? I know parentage testing can get you 99.9%. I'd imagine in a criminal setting, especially with DNA samples taken in the field and several years ago, the accuracy is put into question. But maybe that's a bad assumption.

FWIW, according to the ACLU all death penalty states have the right to DNA testing.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 6, 2013 -> 01:13 PM) Then here's the link to contribute to the innocence project. My response was to your specific statement about DNA testing and its cost, not the cost of getting a nationally recognized legal aid group to review your case.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ May 6, 2013 -> 01:07 PM) Yeah, unless the court isn't interested in the DNA test: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/05/0...execution-date/ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/2...n-on-death-row/ http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2009/06/1...644/scotus-dna/ http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/nationnow/...row-inmate.html Well, that's a different issue. Again, my point was if you're on death row and believe that you need DNA testing to exonerate yourself, the cost of the test isn't going to stop you. It's probably whether the court would allow it, whether there's a sample to be tested, etc.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 6, 2013 -> 01:01 PM) And yet, the very fact that the innocence project even exists and just keeps piling up the overturned convictions pretty well establishes that your intuition that these tests should be commonplace is completely wrong. I didn't say they were commonplace. I said they're readily available. And the cost isn't a prohibitive factor.

You already have a legal aid team/public defender/private attorney representing you through the appeals process. If there was any chance of you being innocent that person/team would be doing everything they can to get your conviction overturned. Plus, DNA testing isn't really all that expensive. I had some testing done in a case for $100 bucks.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 6, 2013 -> 12:20 PM) Who pays for the exonerating DNA testing when there are 2 witnesses saying the non-white guy pulled the trigger and the public defender's office just had 5% of its staff sequestered? The person with the wrongful conviction on his rap sheet?

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ May 6, 2013 -> 12:00 PM) Henry leaving isn't a done deal yet. Unlike Shaw, Langford and Djimde the staff actually wants him to stay. I'm not sure why he wants to leave unless he doesn't get along with the coaches. He's a key guy for next year.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 6, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) The driver was charged with intoxicated manslaughter. The family does not have money for a funeral. We're having a fundraiser. I can't imagine the pain of not being able to bury your child. I get all choked up just thinking about it. I really hope the driver had an insurance policy with some decent coverage.

Has anyone done a study on the timing of those exoneration (or any on a national level)? I mean, I know that in the 90's and 00's DNA testing got WAY better, so over the last 2 decades you've seen older convictions overturned. Does that still happen with people convicted from, say, 2000 onward?

http://espn.go.com/chicago/nba/story/_/id/...g-vs-miami-heat Why even say that? Just shut up and be a good cheerleader on the bench. So tired of this crap EVERY day.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 6, 2013 -> 09:37 AM) You do it when you've been interrogated aggressively without break for 30+ hours. These kids "confessed" to all sorts of things, many of which were contradictory and didn't match what actually happened. They confessed to helping in the rape, to fondling her, to hitting her, yet they didn't do any of that at all. False confessions can and do happen, even when it's a grown adult and not a 14 year old kid who just wants to go home. Part of it is that the police can openly lie to a suspect about what others have said and what the consequences of a confession would be ("we're just going to use you as a witness, tell us what we want to hear and you can go home!") I guess I can never imagine myself confessing to a crime I didn't commit, regardless of how long I've been questioned or what "promises" a cop provides. If torture was involved, maybe, but simple questioning? No way.

And after reading the Wiki page on this, how on earth do you make up stories to implicate your friends? The whole thing seems really strange to me.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 3, 2013 -> 12:01 PM) http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/centralparkfive/ Some background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Park_Jogger_case Seeing the whole story of how it unfolded, how weak the case against them was, how the police openly lied on the stand, how the whole media and city condemned these kids and called for their death from the start was pretty despairing. The worst part is that the city is still fighting this case. The two main things I took away were the psychological conditions at play in the false confessions (and mirrored by the one hold-out juror) and the fact that you should NEVER, EVER TALK TO THE POLICE. Lawyer-up and don't say a damn word until then. How on earth do you confess to touching someone's clothing when you never touched their clothing? That makes no sense to me.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ May 5, 2013 -> 05:36 PM) The word "current" is unnecessary except to do exactly that. I read that as an affirmation that they liked the coaching staff that took over the program in BP3's last year.

Wtf boozer, at least TRY to sell it. Nets are playing awful and the Bulls are still going to lose. f*** you Derrick.