http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/case/cases/
While it's hard to prove in many cases that prosecutors, detectives, judges, and their ilk do anything wrong due to the nature of the system (another horribly wrong thing about the US and many justice systems throughout the world), I have rubbed elbows with DAs and judges. They absolutely will make sure evidence is not presented in court if it contradicts their case.
Last edited by The One Percent; 2014-09-04 at 02:08 PM.
You're getting exactly what you deserve.
There is no such thing as innocent until proven guilty. It is just what people say is supposed to happen. In the next breath they will claim that a person did not have enough evidence to prove their innocence. Innocent until proven guilty means that they should not have to prove their innocence but rather the accuser should have to prove their guilt. The legal system is beyond fucked.
Ok... I read 2 of those and then realized you are full of it.
Clyde Charles: Doesn't even mention the prosecutor? Based off what I read it was a large DNA-based case and as I stated earlier...DNA has come a long way in 30+ years.
Earl Washington: The prosecutor was given a confession....where was his wrongdoing?
I mean yeah it sucks, but I guess I wouldn't put myself in a position to be around places where this can happen. If you are hanging around with people or places where random murder and such can happen. Well then I guess you kinda deserve to be blamed when shit goes south.
But soon after Mr Xi secured a third term, Apple released a new version of the feature in China, limiting its scope. Now Chinese users of iPhones and other Apple devices are restricted to a 10-minute window when receiving files from people who are not listed as a contact. After 10 minutes, users can only receive files from contacts.
Apple did not explain why the update was first introduced in China, but over the years, the tech giant has been criticised for appeasing Beijing.
"The ruling was the latest twist in a notorious case that began with what defense attorneys said were coerced confessions from two scared teenagers with low IQs. McCollum was 19 at the time, and Brown was 15. There was no physical evidence connecting them to the crime."
Confessions being the reason for imprisonment, coerced being the bad wrong bit.
Dwarfs, gods among humanoids, giants among... gnomes...Originally Posted by The Hitch-hikers' Guide To The Galaxy: Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz
Yeah if you live in an overpopulated city where people are desperate or gangs are everywhere. But if you live in Rural areas Murder is very rare. And in most cases there is no doubt of who did it. Wife cheats on husband, husband kills wife and lover, stuff like that. There has been 1 Murder in my area in 27 years and it was easy they found the weapon and evidence along with the confession of the guy that did it in a matter of 2 days.
This is one of the major reasons that we have such long waiting periods on the death penalty.
Better police investigations and make dna testing mandatory for cases involving rape, murder etc. It's cheaper to spend $200-1000 for tests than to pay for someone falsely accused incarceration. Don't proceed forward with cases based on circumstantial evidence and jailhouse "snitch" testimony. Actually build real cases rather than just convict the first person that "could've" did it. I'm still baffled why the investigators didn't try to bridge the second similar murder a month later to the other guy they mentioned without name in the article?
Last edited by Barnabas; 2014-09-04 at 02:40 PM.
A salesperson's job is to sale things. If they don't sale things, they lose their job. A prosecutor's job is to convict people. If they don't convict people they...
The only evidence against these brothers were their coerced confessions which one of them thought he could go home after he finally gave in. Their confessions also implicated two others, who were never charged. If the prosecution were just doing their job and using the evidence presented to them, how come they didn't charge the other two men?
If they seriously want us to take up to a week off of work then we need to be compensated for it. I cannot afford to not work for a week, bills won't get paid and such. So if they want you to basically donate your time for something you couldn't give 2 shit's about then they better cover your lost wages. I for one can never get past the initial screening for jury duty anyway because of my personal beliefs and opinions.
Lots of people get off for crimes they obviously committed as well. OJ anyone.