41–50 of 85 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bet there were people who campaigned for the innocent man to be executed based on exactly this state of mind.
In Texas, there is always some idiot[1] campaigning to have some poor bastard executed. [1] usually a prosecutor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great. Now you know exactly how the jury felt when they ruined this persons life based on a complete lack of evidence that he committed a crime (never mind the withheld evidence against it). Quoth the article: "We all felt so strongly that this was justice for Christine and that we were doing the right thing," says Mark Landrum, who was the jury foreman. Righteous fury is the worst enemy of justice.
I agree with your last sentence, but I think it's a bit out of place here. The OP didn't call for a disproportionate sentence. Prosecutor Ken Anderson deliberate falsified a case that cost Mr Morton 25 years of his life. A 25 year sentence for Ken Anderson would seem perfectly reasonable to me.
> Morton was freed in October 2011. He was 57 years old. "I thank God this wasn't a capital case," he said. I don't mean to turn this into an atheism debate, but personally, as someone who is an atheist, I find it fascinating how people still manage to have faith in God after such a case even after they spent 25 years of their life for a crime they did not commit. Don't get me wrong - the faith people have really ama…
Easier to deal with for some people, rather than accepting the inherent randomness that exists in life.
Re proesecutor: "He also agreed to a $500 fine, 500 hours of community service, and the loss of his law license, according to the Innocence Project, a legal clinic affiliated with Yeshiva University's Cardozo Law School." Sorry not enough. This is one place that "an eye for an eye" should be used. Screw Ghandi's opinion on the subject. The guy was an asshole through and through who ruined two people's already ruined…
His career was destroyed. That seems like a large enough disincentive to me. I cannot imagine that worse punishment would lead to better outcomes.
It seems to me rather that if you want to fight this you should look elsewhere. Punishing this person harder doesn’t seem like a solution to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are offering an opinion that has no basis in fact. Innocent people going to jail isn't a modern problem. We must certainly try to solve the problem but complaining that "power hungry police and prosecutors are getting worse" adds no value or intelligence to the conversation, and you can't even prove that we are worse off today than 100 years ago, for example. Also, why would you be surprised that the prosecutor w…
The OP itself says that the prosecutor (now Judge) being convicted was a huge change in procedure. It never happens. Based on your posts here, I'm getting the feeling that you are okay with the criminal justice system in the USA. You ask a lot of questions, I want to know what your stance is (honestly, I do!).
> Morton was freed in October 2011. He was 57 years old. "I thank God this wasn't a capital case," he said. I don't mean to turn this into an atheism debate, but personally, as someone who is an atheist, I find it fascinating how people still manage to have faith in God after such a case even after they spent 25 years of their life for a crime they did not commit. Don't get me wrong - the faith people have really ama…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There appears to be no shortage of evidence that Ken Anderson is a criminal. "The State Bar’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline wrote in its court filing that Anderson knew of the evidence and withheld it. The filing also alleges that Anderson made a false statement to the court when he told the judge he had no evidence that could be favorable to Morton’s claims of innocence." [1] [1] http://www.texastribune.org/2012/…
I'm sure that those who lynched some black dude whenever a white woman was murdered in the 1900s South also often sincerely believed there was no shortage of evidence. The problem is that people let outrage over the seriousness of the crime guide both their evaluation of evidence and demand for punishment. Their want their offended sense of justice to be assuaged, but this leads to greater and greater injustice, as p…
More to the point, without consequences for their actions, prosecutors have an incentive to do this stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your last sentence, but I think it's a bit out of place here. The OP didn't call for a disproportionate sentence. Prosecutor Ken Anderson deliberate falsified a case that cost Mr Morton 25 years of his life. A 25 year sentence for Ken Anderson would seem perfectly reasonable to me.
The OP is calling for a disproportionate sentence. 25 years is more than many murderers get. It seems reasonable to you because you are in fact judging this case emotionally, not reasonably. Your empathy towards the victim causes you to want revenge, believing it to be justice.
Oh, and by gunning for Mr Morton, the actual murderer went free, and killed someone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great. Now you know exactly how the jury felt when they ruined this persons life based on a complete lack of evidence that he committed a crime (never mind the withheld evidence against it). Quoth the article: "We all felt so strongly that this was justice for Christine and that we were doing the right thing," says Mark Landrum, who was the jury foreman. Righteous fury is the worst enemy of justice.
I'm not angry, I'm upset. More to the point, the prosecutor is guilty, which is why he received 10 days in jail. I'm expressing that that should have been a larger punishment for the anguish he caused, and admitted to. On top of that, this time they have a stack of evidence, enough to exonerate someone, and the prosecutors actions got another person killed . Very different circumstances, in my opinion. I do agree wit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you be more specific? What minor crimes are you talking about? What's the breakdown of crimes for the the current prison population? Have any references to articles that have a deeper discussion so we can come up to speed?
Frankly, if you've got the highest per capita incarceration rate in the entire world, and is nearly 7X that of countries that are other first-world democracies (Canada, Australia, etc)... something tells me there is an issue, somewhere.
Do you think we should reduce the length of our sentences for burglary, for instance?
"To give an example, the average burglary sentence in the United States is 16 months, compared to 5 months in Canada and 7 months in England"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rat...