Skip to main content

View Diary: How Do You Compensate 27 Years of Unjust Imprisonment? (130 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Compensation money should come from the woman (0+ / 0-)

    who falsely testified against him and the jury who falsely convicted them. The prosecutor may have been over jealous, but the blame ultimately lies elsewhere.

    •  s/over jealous/ overzealous/ (0+ / 0-)
    •  The blame lies with the prosecutor. (0+ / 0-)

      If there is any blame, it lies with the prosecutor. It is the prosecutor's job to seek justice.

      The woman who testified against him didn't testify falsely, not according to anything I've heard. She honestly believed he was her rapist. The jury convicted on the evidence presented to them. Even today eye witness testimony is treated as highly reliable. The jury at the time had no reason to doubt her testimony. In the case I mentioned in a previous comment, where a black man was convicted on eye witness testimony despite the fact that there were witnesses who could testify that he was at work, it was the prosecutor who manipulated the system to keep that testimony out. When these things happen it's almost always because a prosecutor placed conviction above justice or because of unjustified but legally sanctioned opinions on the validity of certain kinds of evidence, such as eye witness testimony. (There's also a lot of forensic evidence that's not as valid as the law claims it to be.)

      If you punish juries and witnesses for doing the best they can you'll completely destroy the justice system. Witnesses will simply refuse to testify and jurors simply refuse to convict. What we need is a better understanding of the reliability of the evidence presented and prosecutors more interested in justice than in their win/loss records.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site