Another Wrongly Convicted Finally Freed
- Thread starter Pangloss
- Start date
''I'll be doing my bit to try to see to it that such idiotic judges and lawyers face serious jail time for criminal negligence''
Don't know what the part of the world you live in but here in Gopherland (and presumably all throughout the USA) judges and prosecutors are exempt from prosecution when making what they call errors in the course of their duty. A couple of years back one of the Chicago newspapers had a series on prosecutor misconduct in the Chicago area. The evils these bassturds committed would make people either cry or puke. Yet, those criminals got away with some of the most wicked sh*t I have ever seen in my life - just like Mark Fuhrmann got away with in Los Angeles.
Don't know what the part of the world you live in but here in Gopherland (and presumably all throughout the USA) judges and prosecutors are exempt from prosecution when making what they call errors in the course of their duty. A couple of years back one of the Chicago newspapers had a series on prosecutor misconduct in the Chicago area. The evils these bassturds committed would make people either cry or puke. Yet, those criminals got away with some of the most wicked sh*t I have ever seen in my life - just like Mark Fuhrmann got away with in Los Angeles.
I basically agree with your response to me. However. I would put it a slightly different way. Prosecutors and judges are "theoretically" exempt from prosecution when making what they call errors in the course of their duty.
The problem as I see it is that judges and prosecutors (and often defence lawyers too), often mistake court procedures from enforceable law. That's basically how they keep on getting away with gross incompetence that really could be proven to be criminal negligence if we could just put the bassturds (as you so craftily put it) on trial.
That's similar to a suggestion I made, but apparently "got lost" in cyberspace. :smile:
I have spent time with prosecutors as they unwind at the end of the week, and a standing joke is that it is more fun to convict the innocent. Their jokes aside, I think prosecutors are very aware of the dangers of tunnel vision, and of the limitations they have within their own jobs. Even when a suspect is arrested and convicted, the justice system limits the consequences, and there is little in the way of thanks from the victims family. Often the family wants the person to spend the remainder of their life in jail - and that simply is not an option. The prosecutor is not thanked, but is criticized for not doing more.
Guy Paul Morin is a poster case for tunnel vision, and every prosecutor in the country should be aware of the mistakes made from beginning to end. Clifford Olsen is an excellent example of lack of cooperation between police departments and the bungling that came from that conflict. Bernardo and Homolka are another example of lack of cooperation between departments, and incompetence when it came to following up on DNA collections. Mistakes are made at every level of the investigation before anyone is wrongfully convicted.
Guy Paul Morin is a poster case for tunnel vision, and every prosecutor in the country should be aware of the mistakes made from beginning to end. Clifford Olsen is an excellent example of lack of cooperation between police departments and the bungling that came from that conflict. Bernardo and Homolka are another example of lack of cooperation between departments, and incompetence when it came to following up on DNA collections. Mistakes are made at every level of the investigation before anyone is wrongfully convicted.
Much of these problems can be easily overcome if judges would allow defense attorneys to ask questions regarding past police misconduct such as bringing in evidence of Mark Fuhrmann's many hundreds of instances in which he was accused of abuse or planting evidence. In the case of that woman who made false accusations of rape, if her name and face were presented in newspapers as were her victims she would never have gotten away with her crimes against them. This may sound harsh in other instances but just consider the terrible fate suffered by those innocent men and put yourself or your family in the same position as they suffered - you would demand the same procedural process.
False accusations of sexual assault and molestation against a parent during divorce have been used for at least 30 years. Police and social workers have an obligation to follow through and treat each case as an authentic complaint. What needs to be in place are serious consequences for the false accusers, but I suspect that after someone has been cleared of such serious allegations, they want the whole thing to disappear ... so there is no follow up or consequences for the accuser. I know of a guy that was falsely accused and he could not do enough to distance himself from his wife and children so that he was never in a position to be accused again.
Looks to me as though I'm the only one posting here who's actively concerned about cases where innocent people end up being inadvertently wrongly accused due to the bad logic, or bad reasoning, or false memory of their accusers. Therefore there's really doesn't seem to me to much point in me posting comments any more.
Sorry Ariadne, I didn't mean to quote you in my last post. I'm not familiar with this site yet, but I assure you that it wasn't my intention to single your comment out to disagree with it.
Falsely accusing a person of child molestation is so heinous, that the penalty should be the same as perjury- 14 years imprisonment with requirement to serve the full term.