Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 457 posts

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#51

Post by sorcerer-mar »

potato3732842 wrote: post #50
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the most inconvenient thing is actually that it’s both (largely) accidental and systematic. If you go looking for the source of “evil” breaking these systems, you’ll surely find a few bad folks purposely fucking it up, but removing them is almost certainly not going to fix anything. The vast majority of these systems’ behavior (good or bad) is effectively not driven by individuals whatsoever.

If good people can't run the system right the system is broken and good people ought to support its reform or replacement.

Of course! If the codebase gets non-performant or hard to maintain, all you have to do is rewrite it to be not-that.

Typically makes sense to fire anyone who wrote the broken version too, just to get a fresh set of eyes on it.

Not sure why there’s any non-performant or unmaintainable code in light of this fact.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#52

Post by geodel »

ceejayoz wrote: post #45
milesrout wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery has existed for all of human history, and is sadly the natural state of things. It was stamped out by the British empire, a colonising power, because of the relentless campaigning of Christian moralists. Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. In the past they chopped off your hand and let fate deal with you, or they just executed you. Nobody was going to feed some peasant who couldn't even work. Imprison…

> Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. Ancient Greece and Rome are "newer"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamertine_Prison was built in the 7th century BC .

I mean those were just centers for vigorous debates on natural philosophy :-)

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#53

Post by DistractionRect »

crooked-v wrote: post #8

Merely "fails"? That sounds like apologetic underemphasis to me, like so many other Times stories. The system described is more like active oppression.

It's amazing how understated some parts are. Like they just casually mention

> Like most Texas county judges, he does not have a law degree.

I'm sorry, what? Anyone off the street can be a judge? That one line begs soo many questions, and at least some outrage, which is simply glossed over.

Doing my own research, I guess I see why it's glossed over, because apparently this isn't uncommon - a quick search says that only 28 states require judges presiding over misdemeanors have a law degree. In 14 of the remaining 22, you can request a new trial from a lawyer-judge if you receive a jail sentence from a non lawyer-judge.

I take it for granted, to me it's common sense, that a judge should a law degree. I mean, how can one preside over and act as arbiter in legal matters without knowing the law?

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#55

Post by newZWhoDis »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #40
AngryData wrote: post #38

Anyone who has ever dealt with the US justice system as just some regular bloke knows it is broken. 90% of it is about extorting the population for funding for the courts and cops. If you can't afford a lawyer, they will provide you with a joke. And if you can afford a lawyer, now its just a question if you are willing to spend more on your lawyer than the state is hoping to extort from you. If you are, you will get…

> Anyone who has ever dealt with the US justice system as just some regular bloke knows it is broken. and just like re healthcare, this is the rub of communicating about this: 90% (to pick a random number out of thin air) of hn's target demo has had perfect/sheltered lives and has never come into contact with the "law". so they believe all the political and institutional rhetoric around it. the other 10% know it's a…

It sounds like… you did get caught?

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#57

Post by TimorousBestie »

almostgotcaught wrote: post #46
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the most inconvenient thing is actually that it’s both (largely) accidental and systematic. If you go looking for the source of “evil” breaking these systems, you’ll surely find a few bad folks purposely fucking it up, but removing them is almost certainly not going to fix anything. The vast majority of these systems’ behavior (good or bad) is effectively not driven by individuals whatsoever.

i wish people, before they commented on really really serious things, did a bit of reflection. > effectively not driven by individuals whatsoever the agency of individuals in totalitarian/authoritarian institutions has been examined/analyzed/written about at enormous length since the rise of fascism in the early 1900s. the short answer is you're wrong but i'm not going to try to convince you (you have to want to lear…

Having it read it again just last year, I’d like to emphasize _Eichmann in Jerusalem_ does support the point being made here.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#58

Post by milesrout »

ceejayoz wrote: post #45
milesrout wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery has existed for all of human history, and is sadly the natural state of things. It was stamped out by the British empire, a colonising power, because of the relentless campaigning of Christian moralists. Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. In the past they chopped off your hand and let fate deal with you, or they just executed you. Nobody was going to feed some peasant who couldn't even work. Imprison…

> Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. Ancient Greece and Rome are "newer"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamertine_Prison was built in the 7th century BC .

The linked article says:

>Imprisonment was not a sentence under Roman statutory law,[2] though detention is mentioned in the Twelve Tables and throughout the Digest.[3] "Detention", however, includes debt bondage in the early Republic;[4] the wearing of chains (vincula publica), mainly for slaves; and during the Imperial era a sentence of hard labor at the mills, mines or quarries.[5] Slaves or lower-status citizens sentenced to hard labor were held in prison camps.[6]

>Incarceration (publica custodia) in facilities such as the Tullianum was intended to be a temporary measure prior to trial or execution; abuses of this principle occurred but were officially censured.[7] Located near the law courts, the Tullianum was used as a jail or holding cell for short periods before executions and as a site for executions.

So yes, as I said, imprisonment is a newer development. Holding people temporarily is jailing. Imprisonment, in the "sentenced to prison for a period of time or indefinitely" is a modern idea. It was considered barbaric by some cultures historically, but it also was just not viable. There was a small surplus of food, which was for the aristocracy to siphon off the top (ostensibly to fund the defence of the realm), not for feeding common criminals.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#59

Post by milesrout »

Terr_ wrote: post #44
milesrout wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slavery has existed for all of human history, and is sadly the natural state of things. It was stamped out by the British empire, a colonising power, because of the relentless campaigning of Christian moralists. Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. In the past they chopped off your hand and let fate deal with you, or they just executed you. Nobody was going to feed some peasant who couldn't even work. Imprison…

> is sadly the natural state of things Sadly, the even-more-natural state of things involves the total extinction of all known forms of life and nothing but the cold vacuum of space. So we should be very careful not to equate that particular kind of "natural" with other concepts like "unavoidable" or "acceptable".

My message was correcting ahistorical misinformation, not talking about what is good or bad or acceptable.

Re: In Jail Without a Lawyer: How a Texas Town Fails Poor Defendants

#60

Post by ceejayoz »

milesrout wrote: post #58
ceejayoz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Imprisonment is indeed a newer development. Ancient Greece and Rome are "newer"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamertine_Prison was built in the 7th century BC .

The linked article says: >Imprisonment was not a sentence under Roman statutory law,[2] though detention is mentioned in the Twelve Tables and throughout the Digest.[3] "Detention", however, includes debt bondage in the early Republic;[4] the wearing of chains (vincula publica), mainly for slaves; and during the Imperial era a sentence of hard labor at the mills, mines or quarries.[5] Slaves or lower-status citizens…

The article goes on to say:

> In general, long-term incarceration was more widely practiced in the later Empire, and from the 4th century, under Christian rule...

I don't consider that recent, either.

(Nor do I really think "prison camp", "sentenced to hard labor", and "debt bondage" are all that meaningfully different from imprisonment.)

Post reply on HN