Man chokes out woman and sexually assaults her -- zero jail time

[kc78]

We've basically got a criminal justice system engineered for the social norms of the early 1800s that hasn't been modernized and at this point appears draconian, cruel, ineffective, wasteful, and highly incapable of being unbiased.

Not sure how you go about fixing that other than some serious federal soul-searching (read: studies, scientific analysis, etc...) and subsequent funding mandates or constitutional amendments to force the same at the local and state levels.

We aren't hurting anyone but ourselves with the system as it stands now.

Exactly, Especially when you look at how we choose to reform people by throwing them in solitary confinement, treating them cruelly, and putting them often in sub-human conditions.

Brain science clearly shows that when you put people in those conditions, that you actually modify their brain in a manner that makes them more aggressive, more selfish, more violent, and more dangerous. So if the goal of our justice system is to make people worse criminals, then we're doing a really good job of that. If our goal is to reform people, then well, we are terrible.

 

[Fijimn]

We've basically got a criminal justice system engineered for the social norms of the early 1800s that hasn't been modernized and at this point appears draconian, cruel, ineffective, wasteful, and highly incapable of being unbiased.

Not sure how you go about fixing that other than some serious federal soul-searching (read: studies, scientific analysis, etc...) and subsequent funding mandates or constitutional amendments to force the same at the local and state levels.

We aren't hurting anyone but ourselves with the system as it stands now.

This is nonsense. The criminal laws and procedure have constantly adjusted--through statute or common law--to society's belief of wrong vs. rights and the rights of the accused. We have the right to a unanimous jury. Most countries have a tribunal system for criminal courts. From the Warren Court forward we have developed the right to an attorney on appeal, Miranda rights, cruel and unusual punishment to execute a mentally challenged individual; cruel and unusual punishment to execute a minor and, latest, cruel and unusual to sentence a minor to life in prison.

 

[KitingHigh]

This is nonsense. The criminal laws and procedure have constantly adjusted--through statute or common law--to society's belief of wrong vs. rights and the rights of the accused. We have the right to a unanimous jury. Most countries have a tribunal system for criminal courts. From the Warren Court forward we have developed the right to an attorney on appeal, Miranda rights, cruel and unusual punishment to execute a mentally challenged individual; cruel and unusual punishment to execute a minor and, latest, cruel and unusual to sentence a minor to life in prison.

In theory we have those. In practice it's quite the opposite and those tasked with law enforcement and criminal justice are the most corrupt lying pieces of crap in this country. Officers lie routinely and prosecutors overcharge and threaten obnoxious charges and sentences with the aid of judges if people actually utilize their rights. The whole system needs to be flushed and started over. We actually have far and away the most overzealous criminal justice system in the world. We not only imprison more people per-capita than all other countries, we even have the largest overall prison population by a pretty decent margin. In fact other than China no other country has even 1/3 as many prisoners. Not to mention we are one of the only first world countries in existence with the death penalty.

 

[Hopkins Medicine]

Brain science clearly shows that when you put people in those conditions, that you actually modify their brain in a manner that makes them more aggressive, more selfish, more violent, and more dangerous. So if the goal of our justice system is to make people worse criminals, then we're doing a really good job of that. If our goal is to reform people, then well, we are terrible.

The problem is that the alternatives to incarceration don't work, or at least don't work to a satisfactory degree that will overcome public concern about repeat offenders.

There was a study in Sweden years ago showing that murderers age 50 and above that are put into counseling/therapy instead of prison "only" have a 5% repeat offender rate for murder.

So you can look at that two ways -- would you be OK with a "cure rate" of 95% for murder?

 

[kc78]

The problem is that the alternatives to incarceration don't work, or at least don't work to a satisfactory degree that will overcome public concern about repeat offenders.

There was a study in Sweden years ago showing that murderers age 50 and above that are put into counseling/therapy instead of prison "only" have a 5% repeat offender rate for murder.

So you can look at that two ways -- would you be OK with a "cure rate" of 95% for murder?

Yeah, I'd say a 95% cure rate is pretty good compared to what we have now.

And my biggest concern is in how we handle juveniles who's brains are still developing over 50 year olds. Once someone is 50, if they've led a life of crime, they probably are beyond redemption. But when someone is 16 or 17 they are not.

 

[Lurker1999]

In theory we have those. In practice it's quite the opposite and those tasked with law enforcement and criminal justice are the most corrupt lying pieces of crap in this country. Officers lie routinely and prosecutors overcharge and threaten obnoxious charges and sentences with the aid of judges if people actually utilize their rights. The whole system needs to be flushed and started over. We actually have far and away the most overzealous criminal justice system in the world. We not only imprison more people per-capita than all other countries, we even have the largest overall prison population by a pretty decent margin. In fact other than China no other country has even 1/3 as many prisoners. Not to mention we are one of the only first world countries in existence with the death penalty.

The fact that we imprison more people than other countries just tells me that in other countries, it's much easier to get away with crime and that our technology and policing is better.

If you think American cops are corrupt, you should go to other countries I've been to like Mexico, Costa Rica and Ukraine.

But, I'm very cynical about humanity overall

 

[nynole1]

In theory we have those. In practice it's quite the opposite and those tasked with law enforcement and criminal justice are the most corrupt lying pieces of crap in this country. Officers lie routinely and prosecutors overcharge and threaten obnoxious charges and sentences with the aid of judges if people actually utilize their rights. The whole system needs to be flushed and started over. We actually have far and away the most overzealous criminal justice system in the world. We not only imprison more people per-capita than all other countries, we even have the largest overall prison population by a pretty decent margin. In fact other than China no other country has even 1/3 as many prisoners. Not to mention we are one of the only first world countries in existence with the death penalty.

I am a fan of the death penalty, assuming they get it right of course.

 

[KitingHigh]

I am a fan of the death penalty, assuming they get it right of course.

It's scary how often they don't and how police, prosecutors and even judges will ignore and or break the law to convict innocent people and fight against justice even when it is obvious that an innocent person has been convicted.

 

[nynole1]

It's scary how often they don't and how police, prosecutors and even judges will ignore and or break the law to convict innocent people and fight against justice even when it is obvious that an innocent person has been convicted.

I think DNA evidence has greatly reduced the frequency of this, no?

 

[KitingHigh]

I think DNA evidence has greatly reduced the frequency of this, no?

It certainly helps.

https://www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/

Of course that's why prosecutors try to block DNA tests that may prove they wrongfully prosecuted and convicted someone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us/18dna.html

More examples:

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...ve-refused-to-admit-wrongful-convictions.html

 

[nynole1]

It certainly helps.

https://www.innocenceproject.org/dna-exonerations-in-the-united-states/

Of course that's why prosecutors try to block DNA tests that may prove they wrongfully prosecuted and convicted someone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us/18dna.html

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but you'd have to be evil to ban dna evidence you know would exonerate a person, that the equivalent of murder.

 

[KitingHigh]

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but you'd have to be evil to ban dna evidence you know would exonerate a person, that the equivalent of murder.

I agree.

 

[SKSnole]

Sure, but if your jury pool is primarily white it's not that hard for the prosecution to weed all the people of color out, or for a defense attorney for a male to try to remove as many women as possible from the jury.

Female jurors are less likely to convict in rape cases than male jurors.

 

[kc78]

The fact that we imprison more people than other countries just tells me that in other countries, it's much easier to get away with crime and that our technology and policing is better.

If you think American cops are corrupt, you should go to other countries I've been to like Mexico, Costa Rica and Ukraine.

But, I'm very cynical about humanity overall

No, what it tells us is that we've made an industry out of putting people in jail. In the late 70's we imprisoned only 700,000 citizens and we were talking about it being too many. Then we decided to start the war on drugs and begin broken window policing. In the 40 years since, we've moved to arresting over 2.7 million people, most of them for non-violent drug offenses.

It's time that we stop this.

 

[Lurker1999]

No, what it tells us is that we've made an industry out of putting people in jail. In the late 70's we imprisoned only 700,000 citizens and we were talking about it being too many. Then we decided to start the war on drugs and begin broken window policing. In the 40 years since, we've moved to arresting over 2.7 million people, most of them for non-violent drug offenses.

It's time that we stop this.

The population of the United States has increased by 100 million since 1975, so that accounts for some of the increase in incarceration rates.

Technology like surveillance cameras makes crimes easier to solve in 2018. Crime has dropped dramatically in 2018 when compared to the 1970's. Experts think some of that is due to our high incarceration rate.

I agree that many people are in prison for non-violent drug crimes but marijuana is rapidly being legalized or decriminalized all across America so that number should plummet pretty soon.

 

[kc78]

The population of the United States has increased by 100 million since 1975, so that accounts for some of the increase in incarceration rates.

Technology like surveillance cameras makes crimes easier to solve in 2018. Crime has dropped dramatically in 2018 when compared to the 1970's. Experts think some of that is due to our high incarceration rate.

I agree that many people are in prison for non-violent drug crimes but marijuana is rapidly being legalized or decriminalized all across America so that number should plummet pretty soon.

The percentage of the population has dramatically increased. And it's not dangerous crimes that have filled our prisons up higher than before, it's the increase in drug crimes. For profit private prisons (Which should be illegal) can only be profitable if you have a continuing flux of non-violent offenders. Welcome to the new slavery.

 

[Lurker1999]

The percentage of the population has dramatically increased. And it's not dangerous crimes that have filled our prisons up higher than before, it's the increase in drug crimes. For profit private prisons (Which should be illegal) can only be profitable if you have a continuing flux of non-violent offenders. Welcome to the new slavery.

Lol slavery? What?

As I posted, marijuana is being decriminalized or legalized all across the country so that should drop incarceration rates for non-violent drug crimes.

 

[KitingHigh]

The population of the United States has increased by 100 million since 1975, so that accounts for some of the increase in incarceration rates.

Technology like surveillance cameras makes crimes easier to solve in 2018. Crime has dropped dramatically in 2018 when compared to the 1970's. Experts think some of that is due to our high incarceration rate.

I agree that many people are in prison for non-violent drug crimes but marijuana is rapidly being legalized or decriminalized all across America so that number should plummet pretty soon.

The bolded part is entirely false. The only people that relate our high incarceration rate to anything good are those that profit from it.

Also pot is being legalized in some states, but not in many and it remains against federal law. Other drugs are still illegal with no sign of being legalized.

 

[Lurker1999]

The bolded part is entirely false. The only people that relate our high incarceration rate to anything good are those that profit from it.

Also pot is being legalized in some states, but not in many and it remains against federal law. Other drugs are still illegal with no sign of being legalized.

No, it's not.

The reasons for the drop in crime are debatable across the board. Some experts think abortion plays a large role. I think that's probably true.

 

[MagNoleA]

OJ is out again. Right?

 

[kc78]

Lol slavery? What?

As I posted, marijuana is being decriminalized or legalized all across the country so that should drop incarceration rates for non-violent drug crimes.

The Feds still have it illegal, and it's not just marijuana that gets people put in jail for non-violent offenses. If we would legalize it, that would help, but it's not like that's the only ridiculous reason we arrest people.

And calling it modern day slavery isn't a ridiculous assertion. It primarily targets poor people of color and they're then used as profit for wealthy prison owners and then sold out as dirt cheap labor as well.

 

[Imtotallynottribe]

I agree.

I don’t. You’re both assuming forensic dna is foolproof when it’s not even close.

Yes we are now relatively accurate if I take a swab directly from your mouth and only yours with a medically clean instrument and then say definitively that “yes, that was him”. But forensic dna work is done for sloppier from contaminated samples. Ie there will be multiple dna from random people who just shed skin in the area as we all do naturally that will mingle in with semen, blood etc... And the collection tools at LEOs are seldom up to snuff compared to a medical lab so that might introduce dna as well. Then at the lab rather than giving a single DNA sample, they will frequently blend DNAs from multiple people into a new random assortment.

The problem is when you take now decades old cases and try to run aged and probably contaminated samples and say that PROVES they are innocent. No it is merely suggestive that they MIGHT be innocent. But judges and jurors don’t really know how to take this new flawed information and apply it to decades old testimony and weigh it properly. Instead they simply say “not him set him free” and wipe their hands of it. So I’m sure there are tons of actually guilty murderers and rapists now free because of this.

https://daily.jstor.org/forensic-dna-evidence-can-lead-wrongful-convictions/

Now take that article and reverse it because that’s what’a being done. Old cases being tossed out because the new flawed forensic dna does not match the expected outcome.

 

[Imtotallynottribe]

The Feds still have it illegal, and it's not just marijuana that gets people put in jail for non-violent offenses. If we would legalize it, that would help, but it's not like that's the only ridiculous reason we arrest people.

And calling it modern day slavery isn't a ridiculous assertion. It primarily targets poor people of color and they're then used as profit for wealthy prison owners and then sold out as dirt cheap labor as well.

I agree. No country not even China or Russia locks up its citizens at the same rate as “Mericuh Land of the Free". We have 600% times the number of prisoners as China and 150% times the number as Russia. 1-15 (why 15? To get to Russia) worst countries per capita (number is based on currently imprisoned out of 100,000 citizens is:

1) USA 655
2) El Salvador 610
3) Turkmenistan 585
4) Maldives 514
5) Cuba 510
6) Thailand 497
7) Northern Marianna Isles (USA protectorate) 482
8) Virgin Islands (USA protectorate) 470
9) Bahamas 438
10) Seychelles 437
11) Grenada (former USA protectorate) 435
12) Rawanda 434
13) Russia 411
14) Guam (USA protectorate) 404
15) Panama (former USA protectorate) 390

So what about other examples of “bad countries”? Well it’s Afghanistan 88, Iraq 126, Iran 284, Cambodia 176, China 118, Croatia 78, Egypt 116, Haiti 96, isreal 236, Lebanon 126, Mexico 165, South Africa 268, Pakistan 43, India 33, Guatemala 136 and Columbia 237.

What about some examples of “good countries”? Belgium 91, Canada 114, Denmark 54, Finland 57, France 102, and Ireland 82.

Mericuh incarcerates at ridiculous levels and it’s because of the long sentences for nonviolent drug use.

 

[KitingHigh]

I don’t. You’re both assuming forensic dna is foolproof when it’s not even close.

Yes we are now relatively accurate if I take a swab directly from your mouth and only yours with a medically clean instrument and then say definitively that “yes, that was him”. But forensic dna work is done for sloppier from contaminated samples. Ie there will be multiple dna from random people who just shed skin in the area as we all do naturally that will mingle in with semen, blood etc... And the collection tools at LEOs are seldom up to snuff compared to a medical lab so that might introduce dna as well. Then at the lab rather than giving a single DNA sample, they will frequently blend DNAs from multiple people into a new random assortment.

The problem is when you take now decades old cases and try to run aged and probably contaminated samples and say that PROVES they are innocent. No it is merely suggestive that they MIGHT be innocent. But judges and jurors don’t really know how to take this new flawed information and apply it to decades old testimony and weigh it properly. Instead they simply say “not him set him free” and wipe their hands of it. So I’m sure there are tons of actually guilty murderers and rapists now free because of this.

https://daily.jstor.org/forensic-dna-evidence-can-lead-wrongful-convictions/

Now take that article and reverse it because that’s what’a being done. Old cases being tossed out because the new flawed forensic dna does not match the expected outcome.

Three points:

1. The article you reference is valid, but reversing it doesn't hold water. Yes, there are errors that can be made and results can be misinterpreted. However, those errors and misinterpretations almost always lead to false inclusiveness or positives. The errors don't lead to false exclusions. If only a handful of markers match the accused, they also match many other people, but if that same handful do not match the accused then he is reliably excluded. It is far more likely for one to be falsely identified then false excluded. Of course this doesn't affect the other factors such as transference of DNA or residual DNA, but again the likelihood of a false positive is more so than a false negative.

2. The basis of our justice system is that it is more important to not falsely convict innocent people than it is to convict the guilty. If there are going to be errors, the margin of error should favor the defendant rather than the prosecution. It's more acceptable for DNA test errors to exonerate an guilty person than it is for that error to convict an innocent one. There is a reason for the standard of "Beyond a reasonable doubt".

3. The comment about refusing to allow DNA testing isn't even about the infallibility of the test. In every case I've read about the prosecutors refusal to allow a DNA test didn't reference the possibility of an error at all. They all simply claimed that because there were confessions or witness the DNA isn't necessary. For the record, the overwhelming majority of proven false convictions were because of witness mis-identification or false/coerced confessions, often despite hard evidence that the defendant wasn't even near the crime. For a prosecutor to refuse to allow strong new evidence to be obtained is in fact evil, though it's par for the course as many, many cases involve prosecutors destroying or hiding exculpatory evidence. Sadly many prosecutors have the mentality that they are supposed to win all the time, rather than their actual job of serving justice.

Sadly our justice system has been turned on it's head.

 

[DFSNOLE]

This thread has gone off the rails.