“What’s happened over the last 10 years is that prosecutors have seemed to have forgotten that their main job is to see that justice is done and instead focused on winning the case at any cost,” said Michael Madigan, a former prosecutor and Washington criminal lawyer who represented one of the former KPMG partners. (Read more about the railroading of U.S. Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens)Mr. Madigan needs to insert another 0, as in 100 years.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Quote of the day:
Our legal system has run amok. And the jury system, being "judged by our peers", is failing horribly to protect us. The conviction rate in the Federal system is over 95%! Considering how much the prosecutors over indict defendants, that is indeed a remarkable number.
I am guilty of actually having read the U.S. Constitution. It is a beautiful document - and completely inadequate in protecting citizens from prosecutorial over-reaching. The Framers simply could not contemplate the vast resources commanded by our "Justice" system versus how little in the way of resources that defendants have to defend themselves, not to mention the apparent inability of jurors raised on American Idol and People Magazine, hardly the citizen/farmer/legislator of the Framer's era, to think in abstract terms.
The ONLY WAY to fix this, to right this listing ship, is to CUT THE BUDGETS of these politically motivated and ambitious (Mike Nifong of the Duke "Rape" case, anyone?) prosecutors. Most folks don't know it, but the most famous Prosecutor of the past 30 years, Ruddy Giulliani, had EVERY SINGLE ONE of his convictions at trial for Wall Street white collar "crime" OVERTURNED on appeal.
How could this be? Simple. First, he indicted innocent people and our Grand Jury system failed miserably to protect these folks from indictment in the first place, and; the juries were only too happy to convict rich white guys of ANYTHING. After all, they are ALL criminals, right?
Hell of an impartial jury of your peers...
There was a period in the late 1970's and early 1980's when DNA was not available BUT the physical evidence was saved. 20 years later, nearly 1/3 of the defendants convicted of rape that filed an appeal based on the newly available DNA evidence had their convictions overturned based on the fact that their DNA did not match the "physical evidence" on the victim or at the scene. Most were convicted on eye witness testimony of the victim. Anybody out there think that maybe, just maybe, the police and prosecutors manipulated the victim and then destroyed the defendant's life? Of course, the prosecutors are immune from prosecution or civil liability for their wrong doing.
Some good things are going to come about with the restraints on government budgets - I hope. We cannot continue to fund silly social programs and mean spirited "justice".
Mentatt (at) yahoo (d0t) com
Posted by The Short Story Man at 5:57 AM