|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..7..11..15..19~20~21~22~23..27~28~29 [Next] | ||||||||||
lunatik Inner circle 3225 Posts 
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: No, you are 100% wrong. It's not just law enforcement and prosecutors problem, it's the innocent members of society that have to be subjected to being victims.
"Don't let your Dreams become Fantasies"
|
|||||||||
slowkneenuh Regular user After 5,278+ posts, only credited with 133 Posts
|
Sigh! I thought I was free....
Defense Attorneys Role in the Criminal Justice System Defense attorneys play an important role in the criminal justice system. A defense attorney aims to help prevent innocent people from going to prison. Defense attorneys also safeguard constitutional protections, ensuring that due process of the law is followed before a person is convicted of a crime. MY COMMENT: No Issue Confidentiality Defense attorneys must maintain confidentiality in nearly all situations. If you tell your defense attorney where "the bodies are buried" either figuratively or literally, your defense attorney must keep that information secret and cannot disclose it to anyone. The only exception to this rule is you tell your attorney you are planning to commit future harm to another person and your defense attorney believes it is reasonably likely that you will actually commit this harm, in which case the attorney then has a duty to warn the victim. MY COMMENT: Major Issue with confidentiality Defense attorneys must vigorously represent you, even if they know you are guilty. A defense attorney must present any possible defenses, and ensure that the prosecutor respects all of your constitutional rights when prosecuting a trial. The only limits to a defense attorney's obligation to present your defense are that a defense attorney cannot knowingly present false information or ask a question that he knows you are going to lie to under oath. An attorney can request that you not tell him certain information, so that he will be unaware of whether you are telling the truth or not when you are put on the stand, but he cannot knowingly help you to lie. MY COMMENT: Major issue with attorney avoiding the unpleasant facts by not wishing to be told.
John
"A poor workman always blames his tools" |
|||||||||
|
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Bob if you noticed I put ha, ha after each use of shadow of a doubt. If it is not an opinion what is it?
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Did you read the study? Apart from a questionable conflict of interest waiver (Professor Gross is a longtime capital punishment opponent and has at least a philosophical vested interest in reporting a relatively high number of innocent defendants on death row; this of course doesn't mean that he's wrong, but it does mean that he's biased), it also makes quite a few assumptions. It's certainly not Adam Silver telling you how many electoral votes Obama and Romney will get.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
What Slowkeenuh is mostly guilty of (pardon the pun) is intellectual honesty. We'd all like to pretend that any nonzero number of innocent prisoners is "unacceptable," because that sounds like the moral high ground. But in reality, what's "unacceptable" to us is a 0% incarceration rate of guilty prisoners. Because that's the trade-off. There's one way to make sure that no innocent people are sent to prison - do away with prisons. Anyone who will honestly say, "Let's do away with prisons altogether" is of course exempt from my analysis, but I doubt we're going to see many who really advocate that position.
So we (those of us who want prisons) keep prisons knowing but not intending that some innocent people will end up in them - that may be unpalatable, but it's certainly not "unacceptable" because we've rejected the one way to guarantee that it won't happen - do away with prisons. Innocent prisoners, like it or not, are the collateral damage in the equation. Most people probably think that too many innocent people are in prison, but changing the system to make convictions harder also makes convictions of guilty defendants harder, too. Whatever the percentage of innocent prisoners is, most people want it to be lower; Slowkeenuh is ok with it being higher if it means that more guilty people are in prison, too, because that means they're not out in the streets committing further crimes (including murder). We can act like that's a barbaric and horrible position to take, but we have to admit that we're ok with a nonzero percentage of innocent prisoners, and now we're like the hooker in the old joke - we're not talking about principle; we're arguing over price.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
I for one never said it won't happen. I said it was a cavalier attitude.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
rockwall Special user 762 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote: The joke is great cause she wasn't a hooker. 
|
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Lol. Oops!
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
rockwall Special user 762 Posts
|
I think most of us, (obviously, not all), agree that the guilty deserve counsel. I think defense attorney's get a bad name because the impression is that they often are unethical in their defense. Now, you lawyers can tell me if what I describe is unethical. It seems that when defending someone who is probably guilty, the defense will often invent all sorts of excuses, come up with all sorts of lies about why the defendant is not guilty. I don't know how often this actually happens and I don't have any studies, it's just an impression. But is it unethical to invent a defense from whole cloth? Or is that an accepted part of the job?
i.e. defendant: Yeah, I killed my wife cause I didn't want to pay alimony. attorney: But ... isn't it because of years of mental torture she subjected you to? defendant: Uh .... Yeah! .... That's the ticket ... Years of mental torture! attorney: It was probably driving you crazy, right? Messing with your sleep. You probably weren't in your right mind, right? you get the idea. At least that's what a number of high profile cases have looked like to me. (OK, or maybe I've just seen too much of Saul Goodman.) |
|||||||||
|
balducci Loyal user Canada 227 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, LobowolfXXX wrote: Gross was one of four authors, and a number of others (without author credit, but with thanks given) also contributed. Anytime any statistical analysis is performed, assumptions are made. What assumptions do you find objectionable in this paper? In fact, a number of the assumptions were very standard (related to the statistical methodologies used), and some were conservative leading the 4.1% to actually be a conservative underestimate. I'm curious what your objections are, related to the assumptions made in the paper.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
No, it's not ethical to lie or to have a defendant lie. The expert defense counsel know that he doesn't have to prove anything. His job is to force the state prove each and every element of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. And if they fail to do so, his client is entitled to an acquittal.
You're right, though, about one thing. There are Saul Goodman types out there who give the profession a bad name. Lobo- check out the materials on the Innocence Project site if you don't like the conclusions of Gross's peer reviewed study. But again, we're not just talking about innocent people potentially being incarcerated. We're talking about them being executed. What percentage of wrongful executions of innocent convicts is acceptable to you? |
|||||||||
|
slowkneenuh Regular user After 5,278+ posts, only credited with 133 Posts
|
39 folks were executed in 2013. Using your 4% ratio, 2 were not guilty. Measure that against the unconvicted criminals' murder ratio.
John
"A poor workman always blames his tools" |
|||||||||
|
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
Two out of thirty-nine is acceptable to you?
But, for the third time, I ask you to provided information showing us the number of "unconvicted criminals." |
|||||||||
|
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts
|
While I cannot confirm or dispute the 4% I do not believe anyone else can prove these numbers to be correct as positively factual. However I wish 0% could be accomplished. However in reality it cannot. I might add that some of those executed or on death row may not have been guilty of the crime they are being punished for, but often times these people are career criminals and probably have dodged the bullet many times before. However that does not make it right...just saying.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
|
lunatik Inner circle 3225 Posts
|
And just the opposite, is it acceptable for 1 out of 100 child molestors that are guilty to walk scott free?
"Don't let your Dreams become Fantasies"
|
|||||||||
|
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
If they aren't convicted in a court of law, then they're not guilty.
Do you favor doing away with the rules of evidence and the presumption that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: And if they're not acquitted in a court of law, then they're not innocent?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
lunatik Inner circle 3225 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: If evidence is withheld due to technicalities and then an acquittal. I forget who mentioned it, but it seems over in Europe that they have a potential better system to deal with that problem but still let the evidence be admissable. Do you favor people that we know are guilty to get off on a technicality?
"Don't let your Dreams become Fantasies"
|
|||||||||
|
Bob1Dog Inner circle Wife: It's me or this houseful of 1159 Posts
|
Quote:
On Aug 26, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Not being a legal eagle, but from my one business law class in college I learned, and never forgot, that it's not "beyond a shadow of a doubt," but rather it's "reasonable doubt." If there is reasonable doubt you you can't convict. At least not back in 1974 anyway. On second thought, perhaps you can convict, but you shouldn't.
What if the Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?
My neighbor rang my doorbell at 2:30 a.m. this morning, can you believe that, 2:30 a.m.!? Lucky for him I was still up playing my drums. |
|||||||||
|
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
You remember correctly, Bob. The standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt" which is quite different from "beyond a shadow of a doubt," which implies no doubt at all.
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Redskins gesture offensive. (6 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..7..11..15..19~20~21~22~23..27~28~29 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Aug 26, 2014 10:40 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|