18 years in jail - guilty until proven innocent

**baddog** · 08-03-2005, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by basschick

maybe it's time dna testing becomes a requirement because human error will kick in every chance it gets.

i briefly knew a woman who shot her lover to death. it's true the woman begged to be shot, but still - dead. the woman who shot her did a whopping 18 months. this guy didn't do anything, and did 18 years. and all this time, they could have done a test to find out if he was actually guilty...

Then you will have the ACLU saying it is unconstitutional to force someone to give up their DNA.

That is why states are enacting these laws, but it is being fought all the way.

I am sure I have read on GFY, people here that think it is wrong to force someone to give up their DNA unless the person has been convicted, and even then, someone will bitch about it.

**baddog** · 08-03-2005, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Matt 26z

I think the wrongly convicted should get $250,000 per year plus extra restitution for every crime committed against them while in prison.

Let me guess . . . . 18?

Where did you come up with this number? People would be turning themselves in for crimes they did not commit, right and left.

**Due** · 08-03-2005, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by baddog

Let me guess . . . . 18?

Where did you come up with this number? People would be turning themselves in for crimes they did not commit, right and left.

Then they turn themself in, can't really sue anyone then.

$250K / year would be around $5 million (4½ but who is counting the pennies anyway?)
He would need to have a extremely stupid lawyer not to get that

**Drake** · 08-03-2005, 05:52 AM

Not the first time that's happened

**Deej** · 08-03-2005, 05:56 AM

50....

_Vagina

**tristan_D** · 08-03-2005, 07:33 PM

better late than never.

**Kevsh** · 08-03-2005, 07:37 PM

Originally posted by hottoddy

Dude, look at that guy. How many other crimes did he get away with?

That's nice. Real classy thing to say.

**Kevsh** · 08-03-2005, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by baddog

For what? He was convicted by a jury of his peers. They can't prove malice.

Very naive statement. That's what he'll get lawyers for - to go over the entire case, including the investigation. When a guy gets put away for a crime that he likely wasn't anywhere near there's a fair chance that there were some "administrative" or investigation "oversights" along the way.

If you've ever been charged with a crime you'd know how the police manipulate evidence, testimony and anything else they can. It's not hard - 95% of the people charged don't bother to fight. But if every charged person had a good lawyer dedicated to their case, charges would be getting dropped more than you can imagine.

**hottoddy** · 08-03-2005, 07:43 PM

On a serious note (ok, you all know I wasn't being serious), I went to law school with a hispanic man who spent 3 years in prison for rape before DNA evidence later cleared him. I think he ended up with 2.1 million from the state.

**Spunky** · 08-03-2005, 07:44 PM

A major lawsuit is brewing on that blunder

**pornguy** · 08-03-2005, 07:46 PM

the only people that he could sue, would be anyone that did any blood or semen tests, providing they test at the time showed that he was not the person. Other than that the lawyers are protected, and so is the judge, and the jail system.

**hottoddy** · 08-03-2005, 07:53 PM

Originally posted by spunky

A major lawsuit is brewing on that blunder

It really depends. Was there a blunder? A lot of people are being exonerated by DNA evidence these days where the trials were procedurally perfect. For damages, they need to prove some type of misconduct on the part of the state (ie, District Attorney). If for instance, withholding DNA evidence that could have exonerated him earlier, etc. The fact that he didn't do it does not make the state liable.

18 years in jail - guilty until proven innocent

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment