Reader comments
Wrongful convictions spotlighted

Bob G | 4:57 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

The wrongfully convicted should receive a renumeration of the job they held prior to wrongful conviction for their entire incaration. Also they should receive full compensation for any and all posessions lost in defending themselves including their lawyer fees. A full public disclosure for the exonerating a wrongful prosecution. Any lawyer plea bargaing an innocent victim should also face persecution and reimburse cost to the victim. 'Rule of law' justice system should be abolished and returned to truth and right and wrong justice. Prosecutors who cause wrongful conviction should be placed in jail for the same time the wrongfully convicted were incarcerated. Even when there is evidence a person has not commited a crime they are charged with, prosecutors ignore the truth and convict knowing a person is innocent by creating a lot of 'what if's' to convict. This is not justice, it is railroading and kangaroo court justice. Then there is the problem of judges also convicting and sending the innocent to jail knowing of the innocence. 'Collateral casaulaties of the system' should not be tollerated and is not what justice is.

Agki | 9:05 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

I absolutely agree with Bob G on most points. But what do we do when we execute a person and then further evidence exonerates him/her? Execute the prosecutor?

Sometimes wrongful conviction is still a good faith problem. The prosecutor can be absolutely meticulous and give the defense every shred of evidence he amasses, holding back nothing, and the defense can be competent and still a wrongful conviction occur. We need a change in what the responsibilities of each side are.

It happened recently here in North Carolina that two prosecutors held back exonerating evidence (in violation of the law) to get a conviction. Nothing happened to them!

I don't recall the numbers but a recent review of exoneration by DNA evidence found a significant rate of wrongful convictions (many for rape) and cleared about 20 death row inmates of the crime that put them there. Execution is not fixable. That's a strong reason for getting rid of the death penalty, isn't it?

CJ Guy | 9:30 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

K! Let's stop with the witch hunt against prosecutors! Do you really think that they just sit around their office all day thinking about how to twist "truth" just to get a conviction? Hardly! I wish they had that kind of time! Has everyone forgotten about the defense attorney? or the jury? If there is to be a plea bargain, the accused must first convince the judge that he/she is entering their plea both knowingly and voluntarily. Defense attorneys are not as incompetant as most people would have you think. And remember, proof does not need to be a mathmatical certainty, only beyond a reasonable doubt.

Bottom line: yes the system is not perfect, but it is one of the best! And until you can create a perfect system where all criminals are convicted and all innocents are released, how about giving our overworked prosecutors the benefit of the doubt?

Comments continue below

RE: Bob G | 9:44 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

Well put. Prosecutors and Judges both should be stripped of their certifications and incarcerated in the IDENTICAL prison (even if it means Death Row) for the same amount of time. The system would adjust promptly, I guarantee it.

Presumed Innocent | 11:07 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

CJ Guy:

First, under the American system of justice, it is the citizen accused who is entitled to receive the benefit of the doubt, not the prosecutor ... no matter how much you would prefer that it be the other way.

Second, many times a wrongfully accused defendant will take a plea deal to a lesser charge to avoid the costs associated with funding a defense against a more severe charge -- carrying with it a more severe penalty -- if the case goes to trial and the defendant is convicted.

Paul Craig Roberts has an excellent analysis of the extortionate leverage prosecutors have in his book _The Tyranny of Good Intentions_.

swrl | 11:22 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

It's a start but what about wrongfully taken children by the state and its juvenile justice system. What's the price of a dead child?

Well Put Bob | 11:52 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

And DJ Guy, yes, there are some prosecutors who do dream up ways to twist the truth. Most of the injustice would be diminished, and the goals of most posters here accomplished, if we simply removed prosecutorial immunity. Then the courts could judge and punish each case/bad faith prosecution appropriately. This would allow for lost wages to be recouped from the prosecutor, and not the tax payors.

Conclusion: Eliminate Prosecutorial Immunity NOW!

CJ Guy | 11:56 a.m. Nov. 17, 2007

RE: Presumed Innocent

First, I'm not asking the American system of justice to give prosecutors the benefit of the doubt. I'm asking that we as 'lay' people be cautious in our judgement of them. I wouldn't have it the other way around, as you presume.

Second, Yes, SOMETIMES inoccents plead guilty (usually to misdemeanors or lessor felonies). But given imperfect evidence, virtually no time to fully investigate all aspects of the case, plus the support of the defense attorney, how can you lay all blame to the prosecutor?

I say get rid of plea bargaining. It would certainly get rid of a lot of questionable practices, and reduce the power of the prosecutor which should in turn help eradicate the abuses that do happen (I'm not saying they don't). At least then these wrongful convictions will have been decided by a jury.

Anonymous | 12:58 p.m. Nov. 17, 2007

Executing the prosecutor would be only fair. Miscarriage of 'justice' happens because there is no such thing as a fair trial, just a winner and a loser. Truth has little to do with courts and trials. Shakespeare had it right: "First we hang all the lawyers."

TS768 | 1:30 p.m. Nov. 17, 2007

Ummm, actually, they do. Here's a quote from Tim Wu

At the federal prosecutor's office in the Southern District of New York, the staff, over beer and pretzels, used to play a darkly humorous game. Junior and senior prosecutors would sit around, and someone would name a random celebrityï¿½say, Mother Theresa or John Lennon.
Illustration by Alex Eben Meyer. Click image to expand.

It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her. The crimes were not usually rape, murder, or other crimes you'd see on Law & Order but rather the incredibly broad yet obscure crimes that populate the U.S. Code like a kind of jurisprudential minefield: Crimes like "false statements" (a felony, up to five years), "obstructing the mails" (five years), or "false pretenses on the high seas" (also five years). The trick and the skill lay in finding the more obscure offenses that fit the character of the celebrity and carried the toughest sentences. The, result, however, was inevitable: "prison time."

TS768 | 1:32 p.m. Nov. 17, 2007

Here's a quote from Tim Wu:

At the federal prosecutor's office in the Southern District of New York, the staff, over beer and pretzels, used to play a darkly humorous game. Junior and senior prosecutors would sit around, and someone would name a random celebrityï¿½say, Mother Theresa or John Lennon.

It would then be up to the junior prosecutors to figure out a plausible crime for which to indict him or her. The crimes were not usually rape, murder, or other crimes you'd see on Law & Order but rather the incredibly broad yet obscure crimes that populate the U.S. Code like a kind of jurisprudential minefield: Crimes like "false statements" (a felony, up to five years), "obstructing the mails" (five years), or "false pretenses on the high seas" (also five years). The trick and the skill lay in finding the more obscure offenses that fit the character of the celebrity and carried the toughest sentences. The, result, however, was inevitable: "prison time."

Sometimes | 8:41 p.m. Nov. 17, 2007

Sometimes a plea bargain is the better of two bad choices. When faced with allegations that cannot be proved or disproved by either the prosecution or the defense, such as in a she-said/he-said situation, and the results of taking it to trial and losing would mean 20 years or more in prison for something a person did not do, then accepting a plea deal for a lesser offense is the better solution. For us it had nothing to do with the expense, as the attorney cost the same retainer whether we went to trial or not, but the potential for unjust prison time was too great NOT to accept the lesser plea bargain, rather than risk prison time, which would have meant a death sentence for my husband because of his health. He was wrongfully accused and prosecuted, no investigation was done into the credibility of the accuser, and many months in jail and on probation are the result. The judge and prosecutor will be held accountable at some point. Meanwhile, a Church Disciplinary Council found my husband Not Guilty and took no action. We are grateful. It doesn't restore his good name, damaged health, or depleted savings, however.

blackwhitehuman | 7:47 a.m. Nov. 18, 2007

If anyone in America, and the world for that matter think that prosecutor's don't sit around trying to twist the truth, please satisfy yourself by viewing the documents on freemichaelcobb.com. This post is not to just bring attention to this man's case, but this case in Louisiana proves that from the local police department, the Louisiana State Police Crime Lab, the District Attorney's, Court Reporters, Alleged Victim's, Local - Appellate - and Supreme Court's, all, AND I MEAN ALL (READ FOR YOURSELF) - whose action's are known by the FBI and DOJ, and he still sit's for two rapes, with no DNA (in these day's and times) for justice that has been blocked by aggressively, thick CORRUPTION. Even local reporter's seem to be forbidden to report the facts of this case. Gov. Elect Jindal ran his campaign based on cleaning it up. Now I understand he states "The Corruption was more Perceived, than reality." I beg to differ, and this Case (State of Louisiana v. Michael Jarvis Cobb) by court records and verifiable sources, proves it beyond any doubt!

Anonymous | 5:55 a.m. Jan. 22, 2009

I have grown to despise this country and what it's become as it is so corrupt and money-hungry that I intend to move out of it permanently as soon as possible. It's no wonder more and more people are moving internationally. There is no justice in this country. The media pollutes the minds of the citizens in high-profile cases so there is no such thing as a fair trial. You have murderers like OJ whom kill 2 people and walk and then you have so many innocent people convicted of crimes they did not commit and were exonerated from with DNA testing...I have copies of pages and pages to prove this. In "harrass county", the DWI conviction numbers are astounding. It's all about the conviction. The truth does not matter.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.