5 ms·

I think we also need to put this in historical context. I remember a few years ago an Australia jailed for drugs in Indonesia explaining that she pleaded guilt

by netcan 11y ago

I think we also need to put this in historical context. I remember a few years ago an Australia jailed for drugs in Indonesia explaining that she pleaded guilty while maintaining innocence in Australian media because "this is how it works here." IE, the system expects you to admit guilt and apologize, else face a much worse outcome. I thought "That's how it works everywhere." This is not just across countries, it's across time. Confession has almost always been a part of the legal process. It's been necessary for mercy (plea bargain) and it's been extracted through torture, manipulation and any other means possible. Nearly every witch during the English witch hunts pleaded guilty and grassed on other witches. I suspect that the same thing was going in the squares of Jericho 400 generations ago. The concept of a trial where the accused defends, prosecutors accuse and the juries or judges decide is an idealization and/or a back-up plan. Even if we wanted to do this in all cases, we couldn't afford to. Modern judicial processes are too expenses to be used in all but a minority of cases. I don't think we can fix this wholesale at this point.

nefitty 11y ago
grass, noun (PERSON): UK slang a person, usually a criminal, who tells the police about other criminals' activities
- netcan 11y ago
  Mildly amused at being subtitled.
  - balabaster 11y ago
    Are those subtitles?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WS65tPb2Cs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WS65tPb2Cs ;)
graycat 11y ago
> I don't think we can fix this wholesale at this point Fix: Put me on the jury. E.g., the OP mentions that at the start of a trial, the judge can issue an "ethical rule order" which says that the prosecutor and police must provide to the defense all evidence that might help the accused. No ethical rule order? With me on the jury, tough to get a conviction. Prosecutor offered the accused a plea bargain but now wants to convict of a much more serious crime? Nope: On the jury, I won't convict of anything more serious than the plea bargain offer. Prosecutor presents evidence from the police lab? I will have to work really hard not to LOL. Prosecutor presents DNA evidence? Just shake my head and know that the chances of that evidence being correct are zip, zilch, and zero. Prosecutor talks about probabilities? Accused goes free. Even if 20 million people have jaywalked, even if from a simple random sample 99 44/100% of people have jaywalked, that still is zip, zilch, and zero evidence that the accused jaywalked. Police give testimony? Ha! In practice the police are perfectly free to lie under oath without any risk of being accused of perjury. Ignore all testimony of police. E.g., police found drugs in the accused car? Might have been planted by the police. Maybe the situation is just that the accused had some cash and the police just wanted to steal it. Can't trust the police. Accused is poor? Police love to go after poor people, guilty or not.
- ikeboy 11y ago
  Under what circumstances, if any, would you convict?
  - Lawtonfogle 11y ago
    Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
  - graycat 11y ago
    Got to come up with some darned good proof. Data has to be solid from objective, trusted sources -- right, tough to find.
- Tomte 11y ago
  So you're an even bigger problem than all those "unfair" prosecutors.
  - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
    Is s/he? It's one person, the majority just convict whatever they see.
    - Tomte 11y ago
      Yes, he is. He replaces an imperfect legal process with his personal whims and his "fuck the authorities" attitude. If others followed him they'd be starting a new age of "la terreur".
      - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
        That's a scary prospect. I guess that the judicial had better work hard to earn and keep the respect of citizens.
      - Zigurd 11y ago
        Excuse me but fuck the authorities. They're not stopping a terror, in the US they are running it. They need a lesson in humility.
pbhjpbhj 11y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Execution_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Execution_statistic... Suggests that either most witches didn't confess or that those proven by confession to be witches were not executed. It gives ~5000 in UK and America brought to trial and ~1500-2000 executed. In the case of the trials I can find easy documentation for - Pendle and North Berwick - it seems all who confessed were executed but that some of those executed maintained their innocence. Not all of them implicated others. At least one maintained innocence under torture and apparently to death. Anecdotal contradiction of your assertion but it does put some doubt about it; could you cite your source then for this?
- netcan 11y ago
  I don't have a source ...busted. ;) In any case, the relevant ration should be confessions/convictions, not convictions/accusations.
Lawtonfogle 11y ago
>Modern judicial processes are too expenses to be used in all but a minority of cases. Then don't punish except in the minority of cases. We put too many people in prison as is.

by netcan 11y ago

nefitty 11y ago

grass, noun (PERSON): UK slang a person, usually a criminal, who tells the police about other criminals' activities

netcan 11y ago
Mildly amused at being subtitled.
- balabaster 11y ago
  Are those subtitles?! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WS65tPb2Cs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WS65tPb2Cs ;)

graycat 11y ago

> I don't think we can fix this wholesale at this point Fix: Put me on the jury. E.g., the OP mentions that at the start of a trial, the judge can issue an "ethical rule order" which says that the prosecutor and police must provide to the defense all evidence that might help the accused. No ethical rule order? With me on the jury, tough to get a conviction. Prosecutor offered the accused a plea bargain but now wants to convict of a much more serious crime? Nope: On the jury, I won't convict of anything more serious than the plea bargain offer. Prosecutor presents evidence from the police lab? I will have to work really hard not to LOL. Prosecutor presents DNA evidence? Just shake my head and know that the chances of that evidence being correct are zip, zilch, and zero. Prosecutor talks about probabilities? Accused goes free. Even if 20 million people have jaywalked, even if from a simple random sample 99 44/100% of people have jaywalked, that still is zip, zilch, and zero evidence that the accused jaywalked. Police give testimony? Ha! In practice the police are perfectly free to lie under oath without any risk of being accused of perjury. Ignore all testimony of police. E.g., police found drugs in the accused car? Might have been planted by the police. Maybe the situation is just that the accused had some cash and the police just wanted to steal it. Can't trust the police. Accused is poor? Police love to go after poor people, guilty or not.

ikeboy 11y ago
Under what circumstances, if any, would you convict?
- Lawtonfogle 11y ago
  Proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
- graycat 11y ago
  Got to come up with some darned good proof. Data has to be solid from objective, trusted sources -- right, tough to find.
Tomte 11y ago
So you're an even bigger problem than all those "unfair" prosecutors.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  Is s/he? It's one person, the majority just convict whatever they see.
  - Tomte 11y ago
    Yes, he is. He replaces an imperfect legal process with his personal whims and his "fuck the authorities" attitude. If others followed him they'd be starting a new age of "la terreur".
    - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
      That's a scary prospect. I guess that the judicial had better work hard to earn and keep the respect of citizens.
    - Zigurd 11y ago
      Excuse me but fuck the authorities. They're not stopping a terror, in the US they are running it. They need a lesson in humility.

pbhjpbhj 11y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Execution_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt#Execution_statistic... Suggests that either most witches didn't confess or that those proven by confession to be witches were not executed. It gives ~5000 in UK and America brought to trial and ~1500-2000 executed. In the case of the trials I can find easy documentation for - Pendle and North Berwick - it seems all who confessed were executed but that some of those executed maintained their innocence. Not all of them implicated others. At least one maintained innocence under torture and apparently to death. Anecdotal contradiction of your assertion but it does put some doubt about it; could you cite your source then for this?

netcan 11y ago
I don't have a source ...busted. ;) In any case, the relevant ration should be confessions/convictions, not convictions/accusations.

Lawtonfogle 11y ago

>Modern judicial processes are too expenses to be used in all but a minority of cases. Then don't punish except in the minority of cases. We put too many people in prison as is.