It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)When will the USA fix their garbage legal system?(104 posts)(104 posts)
(104 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
awalterj: Ultimately, there's not one place on Earth that has a legal system and laws that I consider ideal. Which is why I would probably volunteer for the Mars Mission, but only if there are no asshats on the spaceship with me.
There will always be one, so ready your shotgun steady in case for chaos
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
awalterj: *snip*
Thank you for taking the time to write such a verbose response. I hope I find the time and energy to respond and need to wait for a calmer moment before doing so. It has nothing to do with what you have written, other life factors require my attention and are quite emotionally challenging, hence it is not the best time for me to reply.

We definitely have points of agreement with what has been written :) I wasn't as clear or comprehensive as I could have been with my previous posts. I have favourited this topic so I can return to it later.
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
hudfreegamer: Probably when we develop superior artificial intelligence that assumes control. Of course, humans will probably be deemed as inferior, imperfect, and flawed, so we'll all be destroyed. But then the legal system will be fixed because we won't be here to screw it up.
An imperfect machine created by imperfect beings. I can't wait to see how that turns out.

But I feel no fear. John Connor will save us.
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
KoreaBeat: As a defense attorney, I frequently have to defend against prosecutions based entirely on one person's uncorroborated accusation. Generally speaking, I think this is wrong; when all you have is two people testifying against each other, how can there not be reasonable doubt?

I have never defended a sex abuse case such as in this article, but the problems with prosecutors' use of "child sexual abuse syndrome", where virtually anything a child does can be considered consistent with a history of abuse, make for interesting/disturbing reading.

And this is not even get into the dangerous and filthy environments in many prisons and the daily humiliations people are put through while in prison/jail. Punishment can be warranted, yes, but I believe conditions there frequently go beyond what is warranted.
FYI, I called the U.S. legal system garbage but I didn't call the people who have to work with it, garbage. So please don't think I called all lawyers, garbage or all judges, garbage or everyone who has done jury duty, garbage. I agree with your post and kind of envy you because of your awesome job. :) It must be really cool being someone who makes a living by fighting for people in court. Whenever, you win you make a real difference because you basically saved someone's life.
Post edited November 24, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
Tarnicus: Hopefully I get back to replying in full to your post, as you eloquently address multiple issues that open up some interesting discussions, especially if people are able to discuss the topics calmly(something I struggle to do at times).

Your first sentence(bolded) raises an issue that I have been thinking about of late, namely the notion of the Social Contract: "Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision of a majority), in exchange for protection of their remaining rights" It is something that I have always had issue with, namely that I haven't agreed to any contract, and therefore I cannot comprehend the notion of living by laws that:

a/ I have not consented to
b/ I do not agree with
c/ I do not have any power to change
d/ Are used selectively to determine criminal action based upon police 'discretionary powers', and finally
e/ Are applied inequitably based upon power (usually money and connections)

With that said, I see self justice as the only alternative when institutions and their "safeguards" fail to adequately meter out justice. I understand that justice is subjective, and the only person who can truly determine what is a just punishment for a crime is the individual(s) who are the victims of the crime(s). When systems fail, and have continued to fail, what choice is one left with?

"They promise him obedience, while he promises his protection and good government. While he keeps his part of the bargain, they must keep theirs, but if he misgoverns the contract is broken and allegiance is at an end." J. W. Gough, The Social Contract (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936

This may be an archaic quote regarding the Social Contract, but I find it quite appropriate to this topic and the nature of law and governance. The contract that I never agreed to has been broken constantly by those in power, so why should I adhere to it?
avatar
awalterj:
Ultimately, there's not one place on Earth that has a legal system and laws that I consider ideal. Which is why I would probably volunteer for the Mars Mission, but only if there are no asshats on the spaceship with me.
You know there are going to be at least two or three asshats with you on the spaceship. Asshats are everywhere. :P There are impossible to avoid. They usually have parents with enough power to pull strings for them so they can get all kinds of positions. LOL your words remind me of the 1997 movie RocketMan. Thanks. :) The movie is about an asshat who gets to go to Mars. The movie has some hilarious scenes in it.


avatar
HereForTheBeer: Say, if you'd like to get involved in fixing these problems, a decent place to start is http://www.innocenceproject.org/

Some states are also undertaking similar measures as part of their justice system. Might want to check into the things that your own state is doing, and then contact your representatives to encourage them to change policy so your Attorney General looks into these old cases. Granted, at this point it's mostly DNA testing old evidence, but it's a start to help those incorrectly incarcerated.
Thanks for sharing this. I appreciate it.
Post edited November 24, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
paladin181: How would you improve the legal system so that innocent people don't get convicted when there is enough circumstantial evidence exists to legally convict? Better, how many guilty people go free on technicalities and how would you prevent that? Calling a legal system GARBAGE because a very small minority are convicted when innocent is ludicrous. Are you even old enough to vote? Do you understand the depth of the political environment and the intricacies of the legal system enough to demonstrate which laws are not only superfluous, but detrimental to the overall operation of the system?

Should laws be changed to make it harder to convict people when a far larger number of guilty parties are already able to walk free and cause even more havoc compared to the small number of innocent people who are convicted.

I'd personally like to hear your ideas on how to improve the system without further causing more people to go free on technicalities.
Yes because letting guilty people walk away is a lesser evil compared to sending innocent people to HELL(on earth).

Calling a legal system "garbage" because a very small minority are convinted when innocent is ludicrous? You wouldn't think it is ludicrous if it was you or someone you care about forced to spend 19 years in prison because someone said something. A small minority of people is a small minority of people too much...
Post edited November 24, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Who said, our legal system has to be 100% perfect? I don't even think perfection is possible when it comes to a legal system.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: Nobody did, including me. I said that to eliminate the problem that you highlight by linking the story - incarcerating the innocent - the system needs 100% accuracy in determining guilt or innocence. Because that's what happened: the system wasn't 100% accurate.

avatar
monkeydelarge: Make it so our legal system can't send people to prison or murder people(death penalty) without evidence.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: I fully agree, within the bounds of the rights of the citizenry. Have you dug into the original case to see what other evidence was presented? I admit I have not so I don't know what other evidence made its way into the proceedings. Maybe it was a sham, or maybe there WAS a bunch of evidence that happened to support her story.

avatar
monkeydelarge: It doesn't need to be perfect. It just needs to something that doesn't allow innocent people to get put in prison and raped or murdered. And all it takes is a single case to reveal to people that a legal system is garbage. I really don't get your "If something can't be made to be 100% perfect, then why bother doing anything." mentality.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: Again, I never said the whole thing needed to be perfect, nor did I say (or imply) that it is not worthwhile to pursue a reduction of this problem. But to avoid putting innocent folks in prison then we need the system to be 100% accurate (or perfect, which means not even a single case) in determining guilt or innocence. Without that, by definition, there will be more cases like this. That's why I ask what you would propose to achieve that accuracy.

Nobody said that you MUST provide a solution, but I'm trying to get you to consider your position that the system is garbage because some folks are wrongfully sent to prison, and then have you understand that it's all but impossible to eliminate that possibility without some sort of 1984 thing going on. By that yardstick - no false imprisonment - EVERY nation's justice system is garbage because what you ask simply can't be done.

avatar
monkeydelarge: And all it takes is a single case to reveal to people that a legal system is garbage.
avatar
HereForTheBeer: See, you set the bar at perfection, and anything less than perfection is garbage - even if it's just a single case. Or you could simply have said that there are some problems that need fixing without throwing the entire justice system into the trash can. Is it a problem? Sure. Is the entire justice system like this? Far from it.
The system doesn't need to be 100% accurate when it comes to finding out if someone is guilty or not. It just has to take the words, innocent until proven guilty, seriously. That is all. If there was evidence to support her story then that means he did molest her unless of course the 11 year old girl is an evil genius and created fake evidence but I highly doubt that. I didn't set the bar at perfection. What I'm basically saying is any system that doesn't take seriously, the words, innocent until proven guilty is garbage. Most civilized peoples in the history of the world had legal systems that adhered to innocent until proven guilty. Why? Because it's the best option. It might not be 100% perfect but it's the best option. And if our legal system started being more civilized and less barbaric, it would be a huge step in the right direction even if the system wasn't 100% accurate at delivering "justice". So that is how the US legal system can be improved. But how to get there? That is a difficult question because in the end, it all comes down to power. Not what is right and what is wrong. :(
Post edited November 25, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted November 24, 2014
avatar
awalterj: Ultimately, there's not one place on Earth that has a legal system and laws that I consider ideal. Which is why I would probably volunteer for the Mars Mission, but only if there are no asshats on the spaceship with me.
avatar
monkeydelarge: You know there are going to be at least two or three asshats with you on the spaceship. Asshats are everywhere. :P There are impossible to avoid. They usually have parents with enough power to pull strings for them so they can get all kinds of positions. LOL your words remind me of the 1997 movie RocketMan. Thanks. :) The movie is about an asshat who gets to go to Mars. The movie has some hilarious scenes in it.
You know what I'm even more worried about than if there are 2 or 3 asshats on the mission with me? The possibility that I myself might turn out to be one of the asshats! That would be even worse.

I've never heard about the Rocket Man movie, it sounds funny and immediately goes on my to-watch list. Can't believe I never heard about it, I swear someone has a time machine and travels back in time to edit in countless movies and games and then I shockingly discover them in the present day. And that's the real reason for me volunteering for the Mars Mission, it's not to serve mankind but so I can chew through my backlog, GOG games alone should last for a Martian decade.
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Yes because letting guilty people walk away is a lesser evil compared to sending innocent people to HELL(on earth).

Calling a legal system "garbage" because a very small minority are convinted when innocent is ludicrous? You wouldn't think it is ludicrous if it was you or someone you care about forced to spend 19 years in prison because someone said something. A small minority of people is a small minority of people too much...
And yet you refuse to answer how you would make it better. This is about the same point in other discussions where I have started to ignore you because you like to bitch and moan and absolutely ignore any attempt at discussion that doesn't further your ability to blindly do so.
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
paladin181: How would you improve the legal system so that innocent people don't get convicted when there is enough circumstantial evidence exists to legally convict? Better, how many guilty people go free on technicalities and how would you prevent that? Calling a legal system GARBAGE because a very small minority are convicted when innocent is ludicrous. Are you even old enough to vote? Do you understand the depth of the political environment and the intricacies of the legal system enough to demonstrate which laws are not only superfluous, but detrimental to the overall operation of the system?

Should laws be changed to make it harder to convict people when a far larger number of guilty parties are already able to walk free and cause even more havoc compared to the small number of innocent people who are convicted.

I'd personally like to hear your ideas on how to improve the system without further causing more people to go free on technicalities.
avatar
monkeydelarge: Yes because letting guilty people walk away is a lesser evil compared to sending innocent people to HELL(on earth).

Calling a legal system "garbage" because a very small minority are convinted when innocent is ludicrous? You wouldn't think it is ludicrous if it was you or someone you care about forced to spend 19 years in prison because someone said something. A small minority of people is a small minority of people too much...
19 years ?


Ohio Man Freed After 39 Years on Wrongful Conviction; Longest-Held U.S. Prisoner to Be Exonerated

An Ohio man has been freed from prison after spending 39 years behind bars for a crime he didn’t commit. Ricky Jackson, a 59-year old African-American man, had been jailed since 1975 on a murder conviction. The prosecution’s case was based on the testimony of a 13-year old witness. After a 2011 investigation, the witness recanted his testimony, saying he had implicated Jackson and two others under police coercion. The witness, Eddy Vernon, said police had fed him the story and threatened him with the arrest of his parents if he didn’t cooperate. On Friday, Ricky Jackson was freed after prosecutors dropped the case.

Source: http://www.democracynow.org/2014/11/24/headlines
Post edited November 25, 2014 by MaGo72
Posted November 25, 2014
When we introduce qualifications that amount to 'You are in servitude of the people of the nation, and cannot have a breach of conflict in your background'.

IE, it'd be incredibly bad to select a Kabletown Lobbyist as head of the FCC because they might be slightly biased, and it'd probably be an incredibly bad idea to have the maker of SOPA to be head of the Science Committee. A young earth creationist would have no place either.

Also, I'd advocate throwing the RIAA into a lake in Tennessee while stripping the MPAA of any power and making them a simple, OPEN ratings board. It probably isn't wise to have either one on capitol hill, and in today's age of internet, it'd actually be simpler to have them located in places of relevance. So the RIAA can go rot at the bottom of a lake, and the MPAA can relocate to Hollywood to make things simple.
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
monkeydelarge: Yes because letting guilty people walk away is a lesser evil compared to sending innocent people to HELL(on earth).

Calling a legal system "garbage" because a very small minority are convinted when innocent is ludicrous? You wouldn't think it is ludicrous if it was you or someone you care about forced to spend 19 years in prison because someone said something. A small minority of people is a small minority of people too much...
avatar
paladin181: And yet you refuse to answer how you would make it better. This is about the same point in other discussions where I have started to ignore you because you like to bitch and moan and absolutely ignore any attempt at discussion that doesn't further your ability to blindly do so.
Who says I have to have all the answers to all the universe's problems just because I complain about them in a forum? Is there a rule somewhere that states, I'm not allowed to say anything about something if I don't have the answer? No there isn't so STFU about me not having an answer(even though I already said the answer several times in this thread). The Romans in ancient times came up with the answer long ago. It's called innocent until proven guilty.

And so what if I like to bitch and moan? It makes me feel better. It's therapeutic. You like to bitch and moan about my bitching and moaning and everything else you don't like so you are no different when it comes to bitching and moaning. Human beings have been bitching and moaning since the beginning of time too so complaining about people complaining makes you look like some kind of retarded bubble boy. And you are seriously also mental because you are still butt hurt because of my words in the Hatred thread. You need to learn to let go of your butt hurt feelings... It's been like several weeks already... Stop posting here and get some help.
Post edited November 25, 2014 by monkeydelarge
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
awalterj: Nevertheless, in a halfway functioning society we have agreed to live under rule of law - which does not include you going over to a guy's house with a knife in your hand and stab him to death because he wouldn't apologize for having failed in his job.
Sure. But Vitaly Kaloyev didn't actually agree for the alleged killers to be tried under Swiss law. He had no moral requirement to agree to a Swiss court's decision, especially considering the process hadn't even fucking started.

Seriously, check the map and the timeline:
Vitaly Kaloev's family
lived in: Russia (not Switzerland)
was travelling to: Spain (not Switzerland)
via: Belgium (not Switzerland)
and: Italy (not Switzerland)
and the plane crashed in: Germany (not Switzerland) [in 2006, a German court concluded Germany had no right to outsource their airpace to a foreign private company]

2002: plane crashes
2003: nothing happens
2004: Kaloyev murders Nielsen
2005: Kaloyev is convicted of murder
2006: charges against Skyguide are filed
2007: verdict is announced; Kaloyev is released

Note that I'm in no way defending the Russian legal system. Today is exactly one year since my friend was murdered, and another friend was murdered this June. The murderers walked free. The Russian legal system is shit. But even though a strong case could be made for the ethical necessity for the citizens of a country to follow the laws of that country, to prevent the greater harm of vigilantism, you can't actually blame a person for not accepting the verdict of a foreign court they didn't in any way endorse.

I work for a law firm which deals with tourism. It fucking boggles the mind how tourists are willing to fry their asses in human-rights-abusing countries, then demand compensation for the injustices they suffered there. Yes, partially, travel agencies are to blame for downplaying the danger. But holy fuck, if you consciously travelled to a country where rape victims are sentenced to lashings for "adultery" and then get raped there, don't fucking say the law shouldn't apply to you just because you're from another country.

TL;DR: I don't condone murder, and I'm all for social contract, and it was really evil on part of Kaloyev to murder an overworked grunt when he should have blamed the top management of Skyguide. But contracts you didn't agree to, even by omission or proxy, don't apply. If Best Korea decides you are guilty of sharding purplz, you have the full moral right to give them the middle finger.
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
awalterj: ...
avatar
Starmaker: Sure. But Vitaly Kaloyev didn't actually agree for the alleged killers to be tried under Swiss law. He had no moral requirement to agree to a Swiss court's decision, especially considering the process hadn't even fucking started.

Seriously, check the map and the timeline:
Vitaly Kaloev's family
lived in: Russia (not Switzerland)
was travelling to: Spain (not Switzerland)
via: Belgium (not Switzerland)
and: Italy (not Switzerland)
and the plane crashed in: Germany (not Switzerland) [in 2006, a German court concluded Germany had no right to outsource their airpace to a foreign private company]

2002: plane crashes
2003: nothing happens
2004: Kaloyev murders Nielsen
2005: Kaloyev is convicted of murder
2006: charges against Skyguide are filed
2007: verdict is announced; Kaloyev is released

Note that I'm in no way defending the Russian legal system. Today is exactly one year since my friend was murdered, and another friend was murdered this June. The murderers walked free. The Russian legal system is shit. But even though a strong case could be made for the ethical necessity for the citizens of a country to follow the laws of that country, to prevent the greater harm of vigilantism, you can't actually blame a person for not accepting the verdict of a foreign court they didn't in any way endorse.

I work for a law firm which deals with tourism. It fucking boggles the mind how tourists are willing to fry their asses in human-rights-abusing countries, then demand compensation for the injustices they suffered there. Yes, partially, travel agencies are to blame for downplaying the danger. But holy fuck, if you consciously travelled to a country where rape victims are sentenced to lashings for "adultery" and then get raped there, don't fucking say the law shouldn't apply to you just because you're from another country.

TL;DR: I don't condone murder, and I'm all for social contract, and it was really evil on part of Kaloyev to murder an overworked grunt when he should have blamed the top management of Skyguide. But contracts you didn't agree to, even by omission or proxy, don't apply. If Best Korea decides you are guilty of sharding purplz, you have the full moral right to give them the middle finger.
You are mixing two things, one is the Skyguide trial and the other is the murder of Nielsen by Kaloyev. My post was about the murder of Nielsen by Kaloyev and how Kaloyev got away with minimal punishment. The murder took place in Switzerland and is therefor subject to Swiss law so your listing of geographical and chronological details about the Skyguide case is besides the point as that is another case. Connected story, separate case.

If a country has retarded laws (e.g. punishing rape victims for "adultery"), then simply don't go there. Ignorance of laws is no excuse, even if the law itself is ignorant. If someone got forced to be in a country against their own will that's a more tricky situation but Kaloyev came to Switzerland entirely on his own initiative.
When people travel anywhere, they need to at least familiarize themselves with the basics. If you go to Thailand, don't insult the king. If you go to Singapore, don't throw chewing gum on the street. And so on.

People who support Kaloyev are every bit as uncivilized as Gaddafi who behaved like an angry child when his son Hannibal got arrested in Switzerland for physically abusing his staff.
More details here:
http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2008-07-25/gaddafi-sons-geneva-arrest-causes-crisis-with-libyabusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice

I can understand an individual's desire for revenge outside the law but when that sentiment is supported by officials as it was in the cases of Kaloyev and Hannibal Gaddafi, then that puts their respective places of origin in a bad light. Of course, the opinion of officials doesn't reflect the opinion of the populace, at least not in Gaddafi's case who had to bribe people to protest against Switzerland. Not so in Kaloyev's case who seemed to enjoy wide sympathy from Russians, at least in North Ossetia-Alania.
Kaloyev was made a minister which is adding insult to injury. How do you think Nielsen's innocent family feels about that? Kaloyev himself had to experience how insult to injury feels like when he didn't get (subjectively satisfactory) justice for his own family's death so to put that burden on other people is a testimony of incredibly weak character. Not "badass", as many of his supporters from his homeland thought - proof being that they appointed him a minister.
Posted November 25, 2014
avatar
awalterj: You are mixing two things, one is the Skyguide trial and the other is the murder of Nielsen by Kaloyev. My post was about the murder of Nielsen by Kaloyev and how Kaloyev got away with minimal punishment. The murder took place in Switzerland and is therefor subject to Swiss law so your listing of geographical and chronological details about the Skyguide case is besides the point as that is another case. Connected story, separate case.
I'm not mixing anything. Above, you said:
Nevertheless, in a halfway functioning society we have agreed to live under rule of law - which does not include you going over to a guy's house with a knife in your hand and stab him to death because he wouldn't apologize for having failed in his job. Must add it wasn't just his failure alone, accidents like that are a series of failures usually. And I'm not saying I don't empathize with the Russian guy, but self justice must not be tolerated. It can't be tolerated.
The rule of law means that if your family is killed, you are going to leave justice to the legal system and won't run around stabbing innocent people. However, it's predicated on the legal system actually doing something about the killing and you having implicitly or explicitly accepted it.

Kaloyev killed an innocent person because Swiss law, and international law, failed Kaloyev and did exactly nothing to bring corporate criminals to justice. And he got off lightly because the punishment for unlawfully killing a person varies depending on the motivation. The goal of the criminal justice system is not to jail as many people as possible (highscore!), it's to reduce the crime rate. Extenuating circumstances help to reduce the crime rate.

I don't know dick about Swiss law, except what I can read on the English wikipedia, and it says:
The Swiss equivalent for manslaughter is Totschlag, Meurtre passionel or Omicidio passionale. Killers are sentenced for Totschlag when they committed the crime in a very, and especially excusable, state of excitement (a "crime of passion"). For example, a wife who's been mistreated by her husband for years, and kills him in a fit of rage, would be sentenced for Totschlag. The penalty is one to ten years in prison.
So... Kaloyev got eight years, served four, and was released. Seems appropriate.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)When will the USA fix their garbage legal system?(104 posts)(104 posts)
(104 posts)