4 ms·
I know this is off topic to the direct question at hand but his case, assuming the talking points found on this page I found[1] are true, is scary. No evidence
by developer2 10y ago
I know this is off topic to the direct question at hand but his case, assuming the talking points found on this page I found[1] are true, is scary. No evidence whatsoever, including fingernail DNA that excluded him? What the actual fuck.
>> Mr. Jennings voluntarily submitted to hours of police interviews and interrogations and a polygraph test without objection or legal representation.
>> The evidence presented against Jennings at trial... statements and snippets of statements taken from the hours of police interrogation of Jennings which prosecutors said pointed to his guilt
It bears reminding, voluntarily speaking to police is NEVER, EVER... EVER!!! the right thing to do. You try to help, but all it does is set you up as a scapegoat. I'll do some more searching to find the answer, but all I can think of now is what kind of judge or jury could have possibly convicted this... unless he accepted a plea.
>> prosecutors called forensic behavioral consultant, Mark Safarik, who testified that it was his opinion that the crime was a sexually motivated encounter which went bad; this, based on the fact that when found, O’Keefe’s tube top was partially pulled down.
A "partially pulled down" tube top means sexual assault?! It couldn't be that the attacker simply was grabbing at the victim?
>> because a security guard was on duty, it was highly unlikely that any other offender would commit such a crime
How does one know whether a particular area is patrolled by security? Does this forensic moron, and the judge listening to this testimony, really think this is relevant?
These kinds of horror stories come up again, and again, and again in the US. Just another reason I haven't crossed the border to that country in over a decade.
[1] http://justiceforray.webs.com/ http://justiceforray.webs.com/
- bbcbasic 10y agoCan a plea conviction be appealed / overturned? I admit my law knowledge is from watching Law & Order. :-). But "Lawyer-up" is the take home from that show (and by that token kids - ask for a lawyer not your mum or dad. you don't need a cuddle you need legal help)
- niccaluim 10y agoYes, in California a judge can allow a plea to be withdrawn if it "serves the interests of justice." This is the same mechanism used to expunge someone's record after, e.g., completing probation. They are required to set aside guilty pleas if they learn that the party isn't guilty—even if the defendant doesn't ask them to.
- colejohnson66 10y agoIt can if you can show you were coerced, but most likely not.
- ClintEhrlich 10y agoIf you are interested in learning about the case, I recommend reading the letter that my father and I sent to the District Attorney's office: http://www.ehrlichfirm.com/jennings/Ray-Jennings-Letter-to-CRU-October-2-2015.pdf http://www.ehrlichfirm.com/jennings/Ray-Jennings-Letter-to-C...
- sago 10y agoThat is a superb document, Clint. Thank you for your efforts.
- ckrailo 10y agoA while back I made an easy-to-remember Bitly link for a YouTube video of a law school lecture featuring a law professor and his criminal investigator (police-side) friend that totally backs up your point. Enjoy! https://bit.ly/dont_talk_to_police https://bit.ly/dont_talk_to_police
- silasdavis 10y agoThanks I enjoyed watching that. I wonder how applicable it is in the UK. You have a right to remain silent, but I believe your silence may be used against you under certain circumstances.
- developer2 10y agoRemaining silent can certainly make you appear as though you have something to hide, but at least you're not saying anything that can be used against you. By talking, everything you say is a potential trap, especially if unrelated statements get weaved together out of context. Even if you are telling nothing but the truth, once you've given the same story over and over again over a period of hours of interrogation, most people are bound to let fatigue and frustration result in misspeaking at least once. You say something differently about the situation once, and suddenly everything you've said must certainly be a web of lies, right? Interrogators - at least in the US - are notorious for overstepping what any person would consider appropriate. Repeatedly hounding someone until they start to admit committing a crime just to get the interrogation to stop, is despicable.
- anonbanker 10y agoDon't speak to police unless you can handle your business.
- drjesusphd 10y agoThis is dangerous advice. Chances are you cannot "handle your business" to such an extent that you can out-maneuver professionals with years of training whose sole aim is to put you behind bars. Don't talk to police.
- gmac 10y agoI'm not qualified to say whether this is good advice from an individual's perspective, but from the point of view of a society that would like justice to be done this is just extraordinarily screwed up. How are the police going to solve crimes if nobody will talk to them?
- drjesusphd 10y agoThey can start by regaining the trust of the public.
- Ntrails 10y agoBy being unable to solve anything at all? I mean, victims gotta talk to the police right, otherwise there are no crime reports? What about witnesses? When do you stop being a witness and start being a suspect? Is that when you stop talking? Or do you let the theoretical rapist walk free because after all you don't talk to the cops? It's a completely unsustainable position, and leads to a worse society in pretty much every measurable way.
- drjesusphd 10y agoSo I'm supposed to take on the immense risk myself and urge others to do the same? All just for the sake of a nebulous "benefit to society" that the police themselves are not willing to take steps toward? No thank you.
- wallace_f 10y agoWhere are you that it's better, and can you get me there?