|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoople
#7967659 - 02/02/08 05:22 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Interesting read. W/ hindsight knowledge of the innocence of certain people, Columbia took a look at how they were treated by the system, with predictable results. Full text not available, but a summary is, posted below.
One thing worth harping on: if we know these people were demonstrably innocent, and were treated unfairly, what about those who don't have the benifit of DNA evidence? Those who were convicted of crimes where it wasn't available, or the state lost it? Shouldn't those w/ reasonable doubt as to their guilt be as concerning as those actually innocent?
Perhaps not, but legally, they should still be entitled to release if in retrospect the case against them isn't strong. Unfortunatly most / all states have high standards for the overturning of a jury verdict or a retrial. Usually something like "no reasonable juror could have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendnat's guilt"... I think a better standard would be a judge simply isn't convinced beyond a reasonable guilt (edit: doubt). Jurors aren't reasonable, and what's it matter, if an independant reviewer isn't 'convinced, letem go... state can and will appeal. a de novo review is appropriate, methinks
Edit: oops, here's the summary:
Quote:
This empirical study examines for the first time how the criminal system in the United States handled the cases of people who were subsequently found innocent through postconviction DNA testing. The data collected tell the story of this unique group of exonerees, starting with their criminal trials, moving through levels of direct appeals and habeas corpus review, and ending with their eventual exonerations. Beginning with the trials of these exonerees, this study examines the leading types of evidence supporting their wrongful convictions, which were erroneous eyewitness identifications, forensic evidence, informant testimony, and false confessions. Yet our system of criminal appeals and postconviction review poorly addressed factual deficiencies in these trials. Few exonerees brought claims regarding those facts or claims alleging their innocence. For those who did, hardly any claims were granted by courts. Far from recognizing innocence, courts often denied relief by finding errors to be harmless. Criminal appeals and postconviction proceedings brought before these exonerees proved their innocence using DNA testing yielded apparently high numbers of reversals—a 14% reversal rate. However, that reversal rate was indistinguishable from the background reversal rates of comparable rape and murder convictions. Our system may produce high rates of reversible errors during rape and murder trials. Finally, even after DNA testing was available, many exonerees had difficulty securing access to testing and ultimately receiving relief. These findings all demonstrate how our criminal system failed to effectively review unreliable factual evidence, and, as a result, misjudged innocence.
Edited by johnm214 (02/02/08 01:49 PM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: johnm214]
#7967773 - 02/02/08 07:40 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said: Jurors aren't reasonable
jurors are the general populace, what makes a judge more reasonable? do they surgically remove thought and opinion before swearing him to office? what makes and independent reviewer any more reasonable. I've always questioned the 'independent' review, isnt it the state that selects this person?
Quote:
state can and will appeal.
if the state is the defendant, they certainly can appeal, if they are the prosecution, it's double jeopardy
|
Chemy
Jesus is Lord

Registered: 10/05/07
Posts: 6,276
Loc: A Church
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop *DELETED* [Re: Prisoner#1]
#7967783 - 02/02/08 07:48 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by ChemyReason for deletion: delete
-------------------- Alcoholics Anonymous Narcotics Anonymous Get help, help is free and available 24/7/365. God bless you all and I hope you receive the help you need to turn away from your lives of sin. Mushrooms and drugs make you gay, you can reverse this homosexual condition with rehab, get help! Stop being gay!
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Chemy]
#7967795 - 02/02/08 07:52 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
this may help to shed a little light
Quote:
I think a better standard would be a judge simply isn't convinced beyond a reasonable guilt. Jurors aren't reasonable, and what's it matter, if an independant reviewer isn't 'convinced, letem go... state can and will appeal.
|
PilzeEssen


Registered: 12/24/07
Posts: 7,312
Loc: USA
Last seen: 12 years, 9 months
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Prisoner#1]
#7967816 - 02/02/08 08:03 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
what state are you talking about?
-------------------- "The soul has greater need of the ideal than of the real. It is by the real that we exist, it is by the ideal that we live." If you want to get a hold of me, my email address is in my profile. Just click on my screen name. I got banned from using private messages cause I didn't follow the rules...
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: PilzeEssen]
#7967828 - 02/02/08 08:09 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
as far as I ca tell, it's the state of stupor
|
Chemy
Jesus is Lord

Registered: 10/05/07
Posts: 6,276
Loc: A Church
Last seen: 14 years, 1 month
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop *DELETED* [Re: Prisoner#1]
#7967831 - 02/02/08 08:13 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Post deleted by ChemyReason for deletion: delete
-------------------- Alcoholics Anonymous Narcotics Anonymous Get help, help is free and available 24/7/365. God bless you all and I hope you receive the help you need to turn away from your lives of sin. Mushrooms and drugs make you gay, you can reverse this homosexual condition with rehab, get help! Stop being gay!
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Chemy]
#7968802 - 02/02/08 01:42 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
if the state is the defendant, they certainly can appeal, if they are the prosecution, it's double jeopardy
no, the state is only barred from appealing adjudications of not guilty by the trial court
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Prisoner#1]
#7968819 - 02/02/08 01:46 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
johnm214 said: Jurors aren't reasonable
jurors are the general populace, what makes a judge more reasonable? do they surgically remove thought and opinion before swearing him to office? what makes and independent reviewer any more reasonable. I've always questioned the 'independent' review, isnt it the state that selects this person?
straw man argument, I'm not arguing that the judge is any more reasonable, but so what? Unless your arguing that laypeople be reviewing appellate cases or that you shouldn't get an appeal, I don't get your point.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: johnm214]
#7968948 - 02/02/08 02:17 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
johnm214 said: straw man argument, I'm not arguing that the judge is any more reasonable, but so what?
while it may qualify as a strawman it's still valid, juries render verdicts and unless it's a bench trial, the judge cannot, he simply decides the sentance.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Prisoner#1]
#7969149 - 02/02/08 03:12 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
well I think you misunderstand me then, I'm talking about the appellette review of convicted people needs to change, or should change. I wasn't refering to the trial judge, though he should also throw out weak cases.
The trial judge does, of course, have the absolute authroity to overrule the jury and aquit a defendant at any time (unless there is an appeal filed) before or after the jury's verdict (I belive this is pretty standard in all states, and is how the fed. courts run). Only if he throws out the case after conviction or before the trial can the prosecution appeal.
|
Alan Rockefeller
Mycologist


Registered: 03/10/07
Posts: 48,276
Last seen: 13 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: johnm214]
#7986407 - 02/06/08 12:11 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Its also really sad that they give people so much extra time if they plead innocent. If you really are innocent and they don't notice that during trial, they will add a lot of extra time to the sentence just for telling the truth.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Alan Rockefeller]
#7987938 - 02/06/08 05:59 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What can be done to fix the problem? This seems to be an ethics issue with prosecutors.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: Seuss]
#7990356 - 02/07/08 02:31 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
yes, and with judges.
I think we can agree it stems from them not wanting their time wasted.
problem is, there isn't much that can be done short of mandatory sentencing, an evil in its own right.
I think a reasonable start would be to reducing permissible sentencing times. Take a look at the amount of time under state or federal laws that an accused can do... a huge incentive to plea, and a huge tool for the prosecution and judge to punish those who don't with.
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Columbia Law Revue Publishes Study/Review on Innocence Cases... examine treatment of these peoop [Re: johnm214]
#7990511 - 02/07/08 04:41 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
> I think we can agree it stems from them not wanting their time wasted.
I would agree with respect to judges. However, from what I have seen of prosecutors, they often have a "me versus them convict at any cost" sort of mentality. Take cases where a convict is proven innocent through DNA testing, yet the prosecutor of the original case refuses to accept that they might have made a mistake.
I've always wondered what would happen if we removed private defense lawyers from the criminal justice system. Basic idea is that a group of attorneys would be put together, much like prosecuting attorneys and public defenders exist now. When a new case comes up, the next two available attorneys from the group would be assigned to the case, one on prosecution and one on defense. (One case they might be defending and the next case they might be prosecuting.) Both sides would be given an equal fixed budget to spend on the case. Be you a bum on the street or Bill Gates himself, you would get the exact same representation in a criminal trial.
The above idea applies to criminal cases only, not civil cases.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
|