Profman

When an innocent person is wrongly accused and then wrongly convicted, we shake our collective heads and say “that’s a shame, someone should really do something about that”. Diffusion of responsibility and lack of accountability are the hallmarks of injustice. Motivational in the sense that some prosecutors believe that their role in the criminal justice system is to win cases, not seek the truth. However, this frame of mind in fact are in conflict with their oath to office and violation of California and State Laws. However, NO ONE does anything about this issues. What are the remedies and or solution ??
Prosecutors put up with perjury because they need a good working relationship with the police to make their cases. Additionally, at bottom, they probably agree with the police that the end justifies the means. Judicial acquiescence to perjury can be explained to some extent by prosecutorial failure to make the case for it and or Prosecutors need police to lie in order to obtain a "guilty verdict at any cost". This issue and circumstance can cause increase burden on some ones' life, and an "innocent" Defendant, i.e. "victim" in the hands to the Prosecutor, most likely will be found guilty especially when the Defense Counsel does not provide legal "effective assistance of counsel". To the extent judges ignore obvious perjury, it is probably for the same reasons attributable to the prosecutor: sympathy for the police officer's ultimate goal — the fact that "[j]udges simply do not like to call other government officials liars — especially those who appear regularly in court.
The most frequent deficiency in Defense Attorney performance was the failure to conduct an adequate investigation with respect to guilt or innocence. Contributing to this and other “IAC” – Ineffective Assistance of Counsel - failures, however, were systemic factors that obstructed effective representation and a glaring disparity between funding for the prosecution and indigent defense system in most California counties.
Despite the intentional lack of interest for Defense Counsel to assist the Defendant, the “accused”, the following are only a few reasons for the high conviction rate of the “innocent” Defendant who is usually found “guilty”, and or is forced to take a plea bargain for many reasons. Defense Counsel do not get paid enough, so why should they be forced to provide “effective assistance of counsel” ?? The Court System and or even the Bar surly is not going to “ENSURE QUALITY” of “Effective Assistance of Counsel” as defined by the U.S. Constitution, remember no Attorney will go against the “brother hood”.
At present, the requirement under California law that a Plaintiff in an action against an Attorney, i.e. “Legal Malpractice”, who represented the Plaintiff in a criminal case must prove his or her actual innocence in the underlying criminal case. This hurdle is very difficult, if not impossible and the Attorney’s take great advantage of such deficiency in the Leal System. This allows the Attorney to exploit and charge large sums of money, with little supervised, and or “quality” or “effective” performance and with no liability and or accountability. Our Supreme Court has made it clear that a legal malpractice action against a former criminal attorney requires a showing of actual innocence. (See also Mahoney v. Shaheen, Cappiello, Stein & Gordon (1999) 143 N.H. 491, 498.
The issues of guilt and innocence would arise in the context of determining whether Defendant, Defense Counsel, was negligent. In addition, as noted in Wiley, the jury would be faced with applying a preponderance of the evidence standard to issues involving a reasonable doubt standard.
The system for delivering indigent defense services is facing a crisis in many counties due to:
• Excessive attorney caseloads
• Excessive defense investigator caseloads
• Inability to interview prosecution witnesses
• Failure of prosecutors to turn over favorable (Brady) evidence
• Difficulty obtaining DNA testing
• Difficulty in obtaining expert assistance
• Judicial pressure to expedite cases
• County board pressure to keep costs down
• Lack of independence
This compounded with the fact that the Prosecutor's Investigator gave false, misleading, and "perjury" testimony to the Jury allowed the Prosecution to obtain a "guilty verdict". Another "innocent victim" of crime found "guilty" by the Jury, due the hand of the Prosecution.
Defense Lawyers do not have interest and are not at all motivated to “perform for their clients” in any Criminal Cases, especially Public Defenders and or Court Appointed Counsel, despite its “Conflict of their Professional Ethics”, primarily due to the fact that there are NO adverse consequences, in using falsifies evidence, fraud, perjury, and or misrepresentation to win their cases. With this knowledge and enjoyment of absolute immunity even the Riverside District Attorney Rod Pacheco proudly bragged: "Good prosecutors win their cases, but it takes a great prosecutor to put an innocent man in prison".
A criminal trial is stacked against the accused. The State, led by a zealous prosecutor blinded by a moral superiority complex is pitted against the accused, whose only hope for an acquittal is a skilled, committed criminal Defense lawyer. I am not sure which is worse: zealotry, idiocy or greed.
If prosecutor’s are now getting bonuses for convictions, as the ABA Journal reports, the criminal justice system is broken.
Many studies revealed that the overwhelming majority of felony defendants (85%) in California are unable to afford a lawyer and must rely upon a public system for providing indigent defense services that is organized and funded at the county level. Yet for every dollar spent on prosecution, California counties spend on average statewide only 0.53 cents on indigent defense. Indeed one rural county spent more on its county fair than on indigent defense. This lack of parity between the prosecution and defense functions has created a gap in resources that continues to widen, and questions the assumption that such a system can provide equal justice. When the “Innocent” accused Defendant is found “guilty” from the Prosecution because of Police Perjury, Prosecutor’s conduct, and or Lack of any effort by the Defense Counsel, Public Defender or Private Counsel, there is very little remedy to cure this miscarriage of injustice. The Appeal system has very little success and once the Defendant is found “guilty” now one want to provide assistance, and even the Civil Remedies are blocked from the “lack of innocence” regardless, if the Police, witnesses, and or Defense Counsel has in fact violated State and or Federal Laws. Who will prosecute the “DA” Office, for DA misconduct ?? Which DA will prosecute the Police and or Defense Counsel for violation State and or Federal Law ??
Thus due to lack of funds, especially of an indigent Defendant, there is very littler resources and options in order to allowed one to pursue a timely Procedural reversal of an “conviction”, i.e. State and Federal Habeas.
So why you say are our "Jail" and "Prison" System Crowded, we cannot balance our deficit and (State and Federal ) Funds cannot be adequately pay for our Kids in both health and Education. What are the remedies you should ask ?? We need answers ??
This is important stuff. Not only recognizing it exists but understanding the reasons behind it. Face it, the police and prosecutors want to win, and when they loose they not only loose funding, grants, but will tarnish their careers. Especially when prosecuting someone they believe is a "scumbag" and guilty of something anyway. However, what if the Defendant was in fact innocent, and due to Police Perjury coupled with "ineffective assistance of counsel" the Defendant was found guilty. This Defendant(s), could not have much recourse and his life would be damaged forever. Having a "felony" on the record is not a small matter. In most states over 30% of people have a "Criminal Record", many are not because they were in fact guilty but could not fight the system, especially when there is very poor support from the Defense Counsels, especially with a congested court system. Plea bargains, here I come.....most people cannot afford being locked up and have to be patience until the Defense Counsel provide effective assistance of Counsel as defined by the U.S. Constitution.
When this takes place, who will be willing to file "Criminal" Charges and "investigates" the matter. Now a "innocent" person is found guilty and the system is used for illegal means, just to obtain a "conviction". Who has the "guts" to challenge the system ??

What about the onerous burden of an unjust conviction obtained because a police officer made something up to provide justification for his behavior? The pressure to lie comes at the police from all sides. Peers routinely engage in deceit, supervisors stress quotas, and the public wants criminals behind bars without having to hear too much about how they got there.
Most importantly, police lying intended to convict someone, whether thought to be guilty or innocent. Face it, the police and prosecutors want to win. A related reason for police dissembling is the institutional pressure to produce "results," which can lead police to cut corners in an effort to secure convictions. Peer practice may also play a role. A systemic problem in the criminal justice system which criminal defense attorneys must continually combat. Judges let it slide. Prosecutors often encourage it.
Even prosecutors — or at least former prosecutors — use terms like "routine," "commonplace," and "prevalent" to describe the phenomenon. Few knowledgeable persons are willing to say that police perjury about investigative matters is sporadic or rare, except perhaps the police, and, as noted above, even many of them believe it is common enough to merit a label all its own.

Most importantly, police lying intended to convict someone, whether thought to be guilty or innocent, is wrong because once it is discovered, it diminishes one of our most crucial "social goods" — trust in government. Police perjury can cause other systemic damage as well. Presumably, for instance, the loss of police credibility on the stand diminishes law enforcement's effectiveness in the streets. Most significantly, to the extent other actors, such as prosecutors and judges, are perceived to be ignoring or condoning police perjury, the loss of public trust may extend beyond law enforcement to the criminal justice system generally.
Strong measures are needed to reduce the powerful incentives to practice such testifying and the reluctance of prosecutors and judges to do anything about it.

The_Jazz

Your poll questions make little sense. I also see no answers to the great conspiracy you see - one that I don't necessarily agree exists. I'm sure it happens but I doubt the instance is enough to make even a large minority of inmates victims of that conspiracy.

But that's me.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

KirStang

That's a lot of hyperbole...

Remember the whole standard of proof, which falls on the government to prove (beyond a reasonable doubt)..

Not to mention all the procedural errors that police can make, resulting in excluded evidence...

Yes, I am pissed off innocent ppl get convicted. But I will not presume that prosecutors and judges are all a part of a culture that willfully shortchanges the system.

__________________

dksuddeth

that's a shame then, because that's exactly what they do when they instruct the jury that they must judge a case on the facts alone according to the law, as the judge tells them it is. no mention of judging the law itself or the application thereof.

It used to be our system where we demanded the highest degree of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, all we do is determine if the facts are decent enough to vote guilty.

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

KirStang

So when have you seen the 'decent enough to vote guilty' thing in action? If the verdict was wrongly reached defense lawyers in Florida have 10 days to file a JNOV or motion for retrial after a verdict, and 30 days to appeal.

I'm honestly sick of the Fox news type rants against the 'broken' judicial system.

Jury instructions make it pretty clear that the burden is on the state. If you want a high profile example, see the Casey Anthony case. Did the Jury just decide on the basis of 'decent enough to vote guilty?'

---------- Post added at 09:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 PM ----------

And if you want jury nullification, the option is present at both Grand Jury proceedings and at verdict.

---------- Post added at 09:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 PM ----------

You can talk about 'highest degree of guilt' all you want, but it seems like wrongful convictions on the basis of color were much more prevalent in the past then today. What makes you think it used to be better?

I mean, forget the law. Let's just go by mob rule, right? The law is made by a buncha jackasses way out there in the capital anyway. Let's just string up Jim Crow and feed him his genitalia.

__________________

dksuddeth

maybe you haven't paid enough attention over the last 5 years of the numerous convictions being overturned?

amazingly, the anthony jury was smarter than most that are seated, but that is the exception to the rule.

but how many jurors are made aware of that option at grand jury and verdict proceedings?

no doubt that there were numerous instances of color tainted convictions because alot of times you just get prejudiced people. why do you think prosecutors pick those kinds of people?

__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."

The_Jazz

It did? Really? When, exactly?

Justice has been occassionally perverted since the beginning. Give me an era that you think where your above statement was true, and I'm 100% certain I can find more than one wrongful conviction based on the politics of the time. There was no "great time" when juries were made up exclusively of wise men who never let their personal feelings get in the way of a verdict.

After having reread the OP, I think it's an even bigger trainwreck than I originally thought. Its borderline incomprehensible.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

Confederate

What the crap is going on in here?

KirStang

Trainwreck. Should've refrained from posting.

__________________

Confederate

Also a heck of a first post from someone.

Profman

It is very easy to think the "system" protects the innocence and the Defendant who is accused. The true undisputed facts is that if the Prosecutor uses witnesses, especially the Police and or Investigators who have a vested interest to “win at any costs” and give intentional “misrepresentation” statements to the Jury, “triar of facts”, by LAW this information must be precieved as the “truth”. Coupled with the circumstance when the Defense Attorney does not know the case, does not care to preform, give adequate “assistance” during the trial, and has too many cases to understand the true facts of the case, produces the unjust outcome. The jury can only decide on the information given to them. Thus in fact there is no proper facts presented to the jury and the Defendant does have proper defense during the trial, especially when the Defense Counsel has not spent enough time and effort in conducting proper investigation and communication that is needed to know the Defendants case, and the outcome results in the “innocent” most likely to be found “guilty”. Proper defense and cross-examination during trial is vital to any outcome, even when the burden is against the Prosecution. Remember a great deal of funding goes to the Prosecution, very little goes to the Defense (i.e. Public Defender’s office), and when misrepresentation coupled with inadequate defense during trial, the outcome has no chance. This scenario is more common than anyone will believe and or consider. The Appeal process is even more difficult, to overcome the shortcoming and or the legal issues such as "perjury" during trial and or "IAC" - "Ineffective Assistance of Counsel", both legal issues to difficult to address post-trial.
The system is like “quick sand” and without proper Defense and or money to find Defense, the “innocent” will almost always be found guilty. Noting in the system provides and ensures “quality” of Defense Counsel and or Prosecutes the Prosecutor’s office and or their agents, staff for violating state or federal laws. If you know of any than let us ALL KNOW.

Profman

The Criminal Justice System and Prosecutors have immunity as there is never anything to loose, despite violating State and Federal Laws. Who has the guts to change anything ??

In the end, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Connick v. Thompson slams the door on imposing any §1983 liability on local governments for civil damages arising from a wrongful conviction based upon an action pursuant to “official municipal policy”. Essentially, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a 5-4 margin, rejected establishing a negligence-based “failure-to-train” standard against prosecutors for failing to comply with the Brady v. Maryland, 373 U. S. 83 constitutional requirement of disclosure of exculpatory evidence to the defence.

In Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 (1976), the U.S. Supreme Court established absolute immunity for district attorneys or prosecutors from civil suits resulting from their government duties.

It’s impossible to prove systemic “deliberate indifference.” Yet the courts continue to propagate the myth that wrongful convictions and prosecutorial misconduct are isolated incidents caused by only a few “bad apples”. There is no need to upset the shiny apple cart known as the criminal justice system, so the thinking goes.

Confederate

So are you just going to continue to spout off a bunch of random information about it, or are you going to actually ask a coherent question and generate a discussion?



How many boards and websites are you spamming with this?

The Criminal Justice System and Prosecutorial Immunity: Time to Upset the Apple Cart THE TRIAL WARRIOR BLOG

Innocent Wrongly Accused in our Judicial System

Innocent Wrongly Accused in our Judicial System - Topix

Profman

Just trying to get the public to be aware of the issues. I hope that people care of justice and freedom, since the only party who may be aware of these issues are the Attorney and the Defendant who has to discover it once accused......... By then the process starts and there is on one to turn to. Hope to get any ideas, recommendations, etc.....

The_Jazz

---

-+-{Important TFP Staff Message}-+- This is a discussion board. I see one post - the last one - where you even attempt to answer any of the points anyone else has raised. If you are unable or unwilling to participate in the conversation, then I won't have any choice but to lock the thread. If you want to rant, maybe you want to try our blog section instead.

__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo