Forum Post: The biggest myth in America is that anybody gets justice.
Posted 11 years ago on May 7, 2012, 9:40 a.m. EST by factsrfun
(8310)
from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
With 95% of the cases being settled in plea bargains, what does that mean to our legal system?
Zimmerman new layer has said it will cost about a million dollars to defend his case, who has that kind of money? In a world where we don’t have enough teachers, does anybody really think pay for enough lawyers for criminals to get off?
I mean I understand the reasoning the cops wouldn’t have arrested them if they weren’t bad people, but is it a good ideal for a society to allow politicians decide who and how many go to jail and then accept money from the people who run the jails?
Yes - another sadly sick system - for profit attorneys/predators and apathetic/ineffective public defenders and cost to prosecute wary prosecutors etc etc etc ET-ad-nausiem.
As we allow this to continue, the 1% turn our government into nothing but an enforcement arm for their will.
This is beginning to be seen with more clarity day by day. They truly fucked up when they caused the economic meltdown.
Now as the movements against this greed corruption and crime move forward - they are getting more frantic - they are now starting to really get people asking just WTF is going on - and so we have more who are beginning to look at the protests with clearer eyes. News blackout? That may have been their 1st fatal mistake.
Yes when people are thrown in jail for relatively minor offenses, some of them victimless, and then at the same time bankers who have caused untold human misery get off scot-free....that is a big problem, and it is the height of hypocrisy
Yep. Time for the understanding to spread.
I totally agree!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTQ1WOC9RgY
yes, it is, they seek to use the prison system as a means to control the people, just as kings have done for ages
Yes the news black-out of the May Day events around the world may indeed be one of their fatal mistakes, as it will awaken more and more people. My local paper did not have bad coverage. It simply had no coverage.
That's been about the safest approach that any have taken. I am waiting for the people who lost their homes due to lost jobs from the meltdown to start speaking up. I am waiting for those whose businesses went under due to the meltdown to speak up.
I believe we are doing fine but I think we have a lot of untapped power/potential that needs to be brought out into the light.
"I agree we have that untapped power/potential.... needs to be brought out into the light." That is being addressed with the many OWS affinity groups. From morning until night they email each other collaborating on a whole host of projects with the purpose of reaching out to the timid, or unconvinced. It's dizzying for me, how much energy, and determination these young people have.
OMG - I know this is impressive drive. Now if we can coordinate into a suit like is being served on The NYPD - go after the criminals civilly while pushing for justice department charges. Well - Who knows?
there is so much heat being put on these criminal bankers from people out in the streets...to civil suits brought on by towns and cities throughout the world and refusing to do business with them anymore ......to people closing their bank and credit card accounts....to people filling their credit card offer enveloes up with junk mail, and sending them back, etc., etc. And amazingly...it all goes unreported for the most part. It is laughable almost.
I love that - send em coupons and other shopper savers items. Include a little note - It is better to go cash and carry. Try it.
I would be interested to know how the credit unions are doing for business across America. Occupy and close Bank accounts and transfer to a Credit union. Well that is a process which would be impossible for them to stop. I love to think that people will pick-up on and continue the trend.
I covered mine
http://occupywallst.org/forum/may-day-san-diego/
Looks like San Diego is today what Berkeley was in the '60s. Was that you in the picture?
no..I have some from earlier
I would think action at TV stations would be hard not to cover, maybe we're going to wrong place to make our points.
There has been talk of protesting at TV stations. I don't think that would work as well as what is being done right now. Though I could be mistaken. But some programs do a show outside - like that one with Al Roucker? Show up there with a few signs about blackout in the media or some news programs do their show in front of a window looking out on to the street. These would be kind of like nuisance actions and they might just stop doing outdoor or window shows. But????
they do hate to be embarrassed it might get at least a mention then who konws, I like the Today show line and such might work.
Simple easy to read sign.
Ows/Occupy
Media Blackout!
Why!?!
And anyone who does do this could carry leaflets to handout - explaining/listing what the issues are so that people could educate themselves on the issues.
I like it.
Short and says a lot.
yes and might make them defenisive, they feel like they have to respond, that's what we want
Yep - then let a real debate on issues begin.
"With 95% of the cases being settled in plea bargains, what does that mean to our legal system?"
That it is an adversarial system. It also means that the prosecutor can act like the odds are stacked against you even when they don't have jack.
That said, there are prosecutors that exist that will not pick up a case unless there is enough evidence. They aren't going to waste money on something that will be thrown out and they aren't out to just screw people. There are judges that are completely and totally aware that every decision has the capacity to not just make or break that individual but that it will have a ripple effect. These people exist all across the US and hundreds of cases are being heard today.
I think that it is imperative that people check to find out if the funding for public defenders in their state has been slashed. Budget cuts have severely impacted the courts across the nation like Massachusetts for example
Thank you for this supportive link, I think you make the very good point that people are people, and most really do try to do good as they see it, most. What I am speaking to is the system itself, I feel we place too much power in the executives in our lives, esp. where they may have personal pressures placed on them. This is just one of those areas.
Headlines are to grab attention, each thing serves it’s purpose. I do get your point and agree.
It's a very important area. One that I don't think gets enough attention. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the greatest case in the last decade was the Duke lacrosse case. If those young men did not have money then they would have so been in prison. Secondly, Mike Nifong was disbarred. I bet every prosecutor in the US went.......hmmmm or alternatively.....saw that coming.
Maricopa County Attorney (ex) just got disbarred for going after political enemies on the County Board of Supervisors. Funny side note, he is not appealing because county will not pick up costs. (one supervisor just picked up little less than a million from the county taxpayers because of this, needless to say the attorney was working with Sheriff Joe)
I am hoping every mf backing Sheriff Joe goes down into an eternal fiery pit of hell with him. Take the clown down. He should have been done and over with a long time ago.
I had to get that out of my system.
I am glad the county isn't picking up those costs. It's even better that someone got a backbone and started fighting back.
Mary Wilcox has been tough on him for a long time, he went after her, now she has the bank to stay on his ass till he's gone, huh-RAH!
Good deal. He needs to go to prison.
When you combine your post about private prisons and all the pleas it seems just built for wide spread abuse, joe becomes an example to show people how corrupt the system can be and make them want a transparent fair one, least it fall on them.
I totally agree!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTQ1WOC9RgY
Do you think injustice in criminal cases harms more people than civil cases?
I had not meant to make a more/less argument, but I will say this, I believe that gag orders/nondisclosures are unconstitutional and all should be overturned, I think that would help a lot.
I speak to this other places, money should not be allowed to buy government, health care, education, and now I’ll add silence.
Distinguishing between civil and criminal courts is vital when it comes to justice.
A SCOTUS decision in "Wilson v. Garcia", a civil rights lawsuit of perhaps 1985 is what removed the temporal permanence of your constitutional rights. Prior to that if your rights were violated and you could prove it you could sue 20 years later.
The SCOTUS decided that all civil rights claims were "personal injuries" and therefore should have the statute of limitations of states related to personal injury claims. Completely left out is the aspect of compelling government to respect civil rights at all costs which was developed in the post civil war reconstruction era.
TRF posts that link to Browns site, I've been over those pages. A travesty, MAJOR harm to all citizens. It's really mind boggling. The f'nnnnn public defender resigned 3 days after being served with the appellant reply brief rather than associate with a county that was colluding with the 9th circuit and a secret rule revision to deprive citizens of the best possible medical care.
It also deprives ALL pre se plaintiffs of a new magistrate and judge when new co plaintiffs in the case refile. Major permanent loss of civil rights there.
There can be only one reason. Browns treatment works with the unconscious mind. What is unconscious is better than secret. They are protecting secret societies.
You obviously have a legal mind, may I share two links, one is to a decision involving Arizona Clean Election which I think revivals Citizen’s United in it's attack on democracy the other is a piece by Nate Silver reflecting the state of the current Robert's Court (I think it is very important to say "Robert's Court" to remind him that people always will)
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-238.pdf
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/29/supreme-court-may-be-most-conservative-in-modern-history/
That reminds me of what I found searching Christopher Browns site. He's posted at the articlevconvention.org forum some stunning strategy for Americans. A newspaper was bought by a new owner to gag reporters when he filed a lawsuit in federal court against the county he's in for failing to follow health and safety codes.
http://algoxy.com/law/no_free_press/sbsecretsofmedia.html
Very interesting legal actions trying to get government to follow laws that direct them to create the best medical care.
Very interesting thank you this, I was at a medical conference a couple of weeks ago, ran by a RN with background in addiction therapy, she found that her most effective treatments were being blocked by the federal government. The buying of the media to prevent that which you don’t want out there, the first and biggest case I know of is when Time-Warner bought CNN, and Ted Tuner should of know better, it was a dark day, and still we pay.
Mediagopoly: The Megacorps that Control Mainstream Media and Much More:
http://veritasvirtualvengeance.com/2012/01/08/mediagopoly-the-megacorps-that-control-mainstream-media-and-much-more/
that's why it's better to come here to decide who to vote for
Most Americans don't believe justice prevails in most cases as far as white collar crime is concerned. So therefore there is no myth. Justice for all is just a theory. When banksters can escape criminal indictments and prosper with impunity while honest Americans suffer the consequences of Wall Street greed, there is no justice. This reality is there for anyone with eyeballs to see and it has been there to see for years. The POTUS of the U.S. said with a straight face that Wall Street banksters may have been immoral and unethical but committed no crimes. That is an insult to everyone with a pulse. He cares more about Wall Street campaign funds than justice for Americans, who have been harmed. Romney is probably no better, but Obama has a proven track record of failing to prosecute banksters. Instead, he thinks he is clever by railing against the wealthy in public while soliciting campaign funds from them in private. That's called selling out America.
I actually disagree, I rarely find anyone who says those in prison might not should be there, and almost all I meet believe that they them selves would be treated fairly, that number goes down as the skin color gets darker, but still most feel that way.
Maybe POTUS was saying "there outa to be a law"
I'm talking white collar crime. Not one executive of a Wall Street bank has been criminally indicted yet. What they did was clearly criminal fraud and market manipulation, which are illegal. Don't buy into the president's bullshit that no crimes were committed. There were. There is no grey area. Obama is running interference for the banksters. If anyone who claims to be in the #OWS movement votes for him, he or she is giving Obama a pass because he and politicians like him are the anti-thesis of what #OWS purportedly stands for.
Wait what. Pres. Obama said Wall Street did not do anything criminal? Do you have a quote on that? I am not aware he said anything like this. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just not aware of it. Can you let me know what you are referring to.
Technically speaking, they haven't been found guilty of any crime. The FHFA case is ongoing. The DOJ says they are still working on cases. Private lawsuits are ongoing or being settled, without any admission of guilt. That I know of. States AG cases are ongoing or being settled.
Technically, they're only guilty in the court of public opinion. I mean, they are still innocent until proven guilty. So whatever the Pres. may have said in this regard is technically correct.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUBUw3e2Gk4
Thanks for the link. I don't see a problem with the President's comments. He chose his words very carefully and is technically correct.
A very large part of the problem were derivatives, that were unregulated, and perfectly legal. The problem was there were too many derivatives/bets/hedges against a decline in the housing market that couldn't be paid off when the housing market declined. Can't prosecute anyone for that.
Banks selling crappy securities that they knew was crap is fraud.
But I believe the President chose his words carefully and was referring to the derivatives since he said it can't be prosecuted. That's correct.
I don't have a problem with what the President said. He's right. He shouldn't comment on the current cases in the DOJ, FHFA or any of the States AG or private cases. I don't know about the DOJ cases. Since I don't believe anything that is happening there is public except that the DOJ is working on cases. But I'm 99% sure the FHFA, States AG and private cases all have to do with the securties fraud and crappy mortgages. Not derivatives.
Adbuster Campaign for Oct. 29 Global March for Robin Hood Tax on Financial Transactions
Posted 6 months ago on Oct. 24, 2011, 1:32 p.m. EST by VoterMarch (34) from New York, NY This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Adbusters has initiated a new campaign for a global march for this Saturday, Oct. 29 in support of the Robin Hood Tax. Oct. 29 is the eve of the G-20 summit in Southern France set for November 3 and 4. The Robin Hood Tax (or Financial Transaction Tax) is a type of sales tax on financial transactions, such as trades of stocks or bonds.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/adbuster-campaign-for-oct-29-global-march-for-robi/
I agree. Obama sold us out.
No he didn't. Should the President cause a shit storm with Wall Street and crash the economy again? Holy hell. It would be 2008 all over again. But worse. Since the banks are bigger. He can't do it. What do you think he should do?
Should there have been conditions on TARP, to get rid of the CEO's/management change, or other such requirements? Perhaps. I give him a wop on the head for that.
But what can he do? That's not gonna cause a hellfire shit storm? If he goes after the banks in any significant way, the banks melt down. That would be completely irresponsible and dangerous to the whole economy.
The FHFA and the DOJ are working on prosecutions. Many many experts believe the banks should be broken up. Most recently the Federal Reserve of Dallas is recommending this. But it will have to be done very carefully. And any major federal prosecutions, naturally won't happen until after the election. Who in their right mind is gonna cause a Wall Street shit storm before an election?
http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/fed/annual/2011/ar11b.pdf
And?
About the only one who didn't sell us out since Nixon was Carter and every "right" winger HATES him.
Jeeze you're new at this.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Allow me to back my comment with a link to my post:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/wal-mart-covers-up-bribery-and-promotes-chief-play/
Where I do agree with you that white collar crime should be pursued, however I believe Romney would be much worst, and I want to take action not just make statements with my vote.
If you can see your way clear of the blatant contradiction and hypocrisy, by all means vote for Obama, since you apparently have made up your mind. The rule of thumb is to vote out the incumbent when he betrays you or fails to deliver on his promises. The alternative may not prove to be any better, but you should not vote for someone who sells you out. Don't get played for a sucker by some jive ass politician who tries to tell you that Wall Street banksters did not commit any crimes because he lacks the courage to have them prosecuted. Basically, Obama is telling Americans and #OWS supporters to move on because he is not going to do a damn thing about it. You can demonstrate on Wall Street and in front of the big banks until the cows come home, he ain't never going to put the collar on the banksters.
Actually the rule is eliminate Republicans at all times and in any matter possible, those unwilling to do that are wantabes and the rest of us can only hope they grow up some day and start helping out with the real work.
Actually, Independents are appalled by the ideologues from both parties. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Didn't know you were empowered to speak for everyone, sorry my mistake.
I'm looking for a case to declare elections holidays
Just saw that in your thread, I agree with you there, hope you see what I'm getting at here, the ideal that everyone deserves their day in court, ok then why do so few get it?
maybe the system is exclusive like medicine
where layers are kept at low count by an elite BAR exam
maybe, I think it's a cost thing and threat thing, if you go to court you cost the state money so the DA tracks on enough to make sure you don't, the result is plead guilty or face big time, how do we know who is and isn't guilty in a system like that? and the new thing is private prisons where the owners can now fund the DAs
a five hundred dollar fine cost a lot more for a poor man
Metallica-And Justice For All
I believe that all fines should be based on amount made, some things a days pay, some things more maybe.
agreed though a days pay may not measure to property owned
I like property for tax and income for fines, pay with your time for small things, pay for what the government protects according to how much you have
In any case a fine should hurt the one receiving it as that is the intent of fining after all. So say an individual makes 36,000/yr receives a fine of 500.00 an individual making 360,000/yr should receive a fine of 5000.00.
Somewhat of a proportional approach.
That's exactly what I am saying, it would cost Letterman about $500,000 to speed but that would get his attention and mean the same as $200 to others.
Yep
As you said the point of a fine is to punish, or at least remind people.
Yes - fining is not meant to be a light burden. It is meant to be a punishment that hurts. So to make people stop and consider if what they are going to do is worth the penalty. These types of things would work better as a deterrent - I feel - if they were broadly publicized. A sliding scale due to income keeps it painful for all. Imagine someone working for a multi-billion dollar conglomerate getting a million dollar or so traffic violation issued to that conglomerate because of a traffic violation while on the job. These corporations are people right (leastways till united gets overturned)? Well then they must be liable in ways that make sense.
A speeding ticket can mean no Christmas for some, for other's it's an appetizer.
There-in lies the issue. Proportional penalties. A DUI for a wealthy person should be as painful as it is for a less affluent individual. Make them sell one of several homes to pay the fine.
and as I started in the post the only people able to get their day in court are the ones for whom a hunderd thousand in legal fees don't equal a month in jail.
Yes the system needs one hell of a lot of work. I believe as it is current and timely we should begin with the demanding of charges to be brought and prosecutions to be begun on the economic criminals of WallStreet - this is a start to redressing inequities in the justice system - white collar crime has millions of victims. These victims to date are seeing absolutely no justice.
Another one is the American dream
oh it's a dream alright......
Thanks for joining the site and for stopping by, hope to see you again.
One of the real problems in our criminal justice system are prosecutors who are more concerned with 'notches on their belt', and conviction rates...because of political aspirations often... and not in pursuing justice. Very often poor people in particular are way over-charged with various offenses, and are thrown in jail. Then they have a choice to plea bargain for time served , or plead not guilty, and remain in jail until their case comes up. This, of course breeds an enormous amount of resentment.
I know that this rankles one of my daughters to no end, who is a public defender in Alaska, where at least PDs are given more time to work on cases than in most places, and they are also compensated a lot better too. I know that she works very hard on her cases, and often has them dismissed just by her knowledge of the law, and her writing ability. (gee wish that had rubbed off on me :-) She graduated in the top 10% at Fordham, and then again at Vermont Law School where as a third year law student she taught legal writing to first year law students. She also graciously turned down an offer of help from my niece's husband who is a partner in a very powerful DC law/lobbying firm, and she has stated to me that she would never work in corporate law. As you can imagine, I am very proud of her.
I am sure you are, and I hope you know I did not mean to in any way diminish the quality of the people who do the work as public defenders, or teachers, just to say that to think everyone gets a “fair trial” is a more than a bit off. If any drug charges can be brought in with mandatory sentences a plea bargain is all many can do, and in other cases the over charging makes private defense tough. I live in AZ and I was at court once watching some small traffic cases, a kid was charged with a few criminal driving charges, judge ordered him to get a lawyer, he said couldn’t afford one, need a PD, judge said, sell your car.
I agree with you that the criminal justice system is screwed up. And I do realize that that you know there are public defenders out there that do good though. Out of all my daughter's colleagues in her PD department, she is the only one who comes from a blue collar background. She is very intelligent, and works hard for her clients, but I do know that she gets frustrated by the constraints in the system. She could have very easily have went to work for corporate law, or even went to work at the lobbying firm that her cousin's husband is in a partner in.... with her high grades....3.77 at Fordham (which is an excellent school), and in the top 10% at VLS. Anyone who has her as a PD is lucky.
Recently my daughter won a case, where she proved with an audio recording that the cop was lying. She was elated when she won the case even though the prosecutor stormed out of the court knocking down her evidence display, muttering BS as he did! lol She worked very hard on that case which required her family also to sacrifice, as she had to make more than one trip to Anchorage (about 35 mi.) gathering evidence, as well as doing a lot of research. Her mom (my ex), and her husband were happy to do that because they knew a person's freedom was in jeopardy. Upon her clients release, he walked the half mile to her office, and left her a beautiful Thank You note. She cried when she read it. Later in the day she had flowers delivered to her office with a note saying, "I knew the day that you became a lawyer...the whole profession would be lifted." That note and flowers were from me.
That was really nice to read, thank you.
I had heard a rumor cops call it test-a-lying but don't know ifs that true.
I really can only imagine the burdens put on the system esp. in places like Detroit or Baltimore. But I know that those who strive to do the work do so in spite of the system as often as not.
Thank You for saying that. It was from the heart. I will ask my daughter if she has ever heard of the term test-a-lying.
I have come to the opinion that relationships have a life of their own, because one runs its course does not make it bad, it seems you may have found some peace that many do not, it is good to hear that as well.
Thanks. The relationship that I have with my ex is a good one. Considering how much life that we have shared, and the three enlightended daughters that we raised...neither of us would want it to be any other way. She also forced me to look at life in a different way since she was brought up in New Zealand having British parents who were colonists in Central Africa where she was born, and spent the early years of her life. If either of us tried to screw the other in any way, we would undoubtedly get a phone call from one of our girls after they had networked with each other....and it would not be pretty. I might be repeating myself here, but I do enjoy teasing the ex saying, 'you will never find anyone like me.' She far too readily agrees. Hmmm? I often say that my kids get their beauty, and intelligence from their Mom, and their charm from me. lol
[Removed]
A friend of mine forwarded a story on the early 90's with record executives taking out major stakes in private prisons, right before gangsta rap was about to be blasted across the nation.
Not sure if its true or not, but it shows the level of disgust the 1% have for the rest of society.
Really gangster rap's to blame? How does that explain SB 1070?
Look at the stats, crime has mostly gone down since gangster rap came along. The people are good the government of the 1% is bad putting otherwise good people in jail to profit their friends and scare the rest.
I was saying it was an interesting article.
Check out this link, and look at the prison populations part, its very interesting stuff:
http://pricetheory.uchicago.edu/levitt/Papers/LevittUnderstandingWhyCrime2004.pdf
Looks like a good piece. I had an engineering professor years ago who seemed all proud of being from U. of Chicago, it was several years before I understood. He did help with that scholarship, I think, don’t really know who did that.