17 ms·

What does an innocent man have to do to go free? Plead guilty

216 points by radmuzom 9y ago

maxxxxx 9y ago
I thought that's pretty much standard procedure for low level drug offenses: "please guilty and get only a few years or go to trial and risk 30 years". The rational decision is most likely to go for a few years and not risk the 30. In my view plea bargains should be abolished and everyone should go to trial.
- damnfine 9y ago
  But very few go to trial because the courts cannot afford to try that many cases. So, like most social issues, where does the money come from? Edit: I want to be clear. I agree with your point, but observing the obvious roadblock to implementation.
  - Retric 9y ago
    Trials are actually not that expensive. What's expensive is risking sending someone to prison for 30+ years. We simply can't enforce the laws as written, but it's considered easier to avoid enforcing them than to come up with reasonable laws.
    - trendia 9y ago
      Misdemeanor trials cost $20,000 in an exemplar US county [0]. And that's only for the prosecution... take into account the salaries of court employees (judge, steganographer, etc) and utilities and things add up. Whether that is cheap or expensive depends on what you're comparing it to. Cost of pleading? Maybe a couple hundred dollars. Cost of ruining someone's life over a drug charge? Maybe worth tenz of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars. [0] https://www.news-journal.com/news/2011/nov/01/court-costs-over-19700-for-prosecuting-misdemeanor/ https://www.news-journal.com/news/2011/nov/01/court-costs-ov...
      - Retric 9y ago
        These prices are very regional. New York State spends ~60,000$ per prisoner per year. So, a teen spending 60 years in prison (ignoring inflation) = 3.6 million directly + plus lost wages.
  - jinfiesto 9y ago
    I don't know, taxes? Fair and speedy trials are enshrined in the Constitution. Presumably it's in the public interest to actually provide them...
  - RightMillennial 9y ago
    Frankly, if the courts can't handle the load of the minor cases, those cases should be dropped in favor of pursuing the more severe ones. The courts should be damn well certain someone is in fact guilty before convicting him instead of copping out and allowing plea bargains.
    - SuperGent 9y ago
      Which then brings up the thorny issue of which cases to drop, and why make those things illegal in the first place. I don't know what the alternative is though. Maybe Judge Dredd style law enforcement of police, judge and jury in one job..
      - RightMillennial 9y ago
        That's a good point. Others have answered that and I agree with them. But we also have to work with what we have. Petty things like drug possession should be decriminalized. However, good luck getting Congress or state legislatures to decriminalize minor things that aren't en vogue like marijuana. Taxes should be raised to fund the courts and other vital services. But everyone hates taxes so I doubt that will happen either. I'd really like to avoid the Judge Dredd style enforcement that we seem to be slowly approaching.
      - CogitoCogito 9y ago
        If plea deals were not allowed and cases had to go to trial (with adequate support for public defenders), we (as a society) would find satisfactory answers to those questions. It doesn't mean it would be easy, but if the pressure were there, we'd find a solution. Fewer cases would be heard, fewer people would be jailed, and a truer justice would be served. Plea bargains allow the justice system to effectively ignore all those costs and instead push them onto a non-representative subset of society.
      - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
        Good point. Maybe if we made fewer things illegal we wouldn't have more people incarcerated per capita than any other country ever.
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    If you can't afford to deal with the consequences of laws you either need less laws or put more money into the system. Also, sending innocent people to prison because of please bargains costs a lot of money. It's very possible that having real trials and not sending innocent people to jail is cheaper overall.
  - h2olover 9y ago
    There are far too many cases being brought into our courts for silly or erroneous charges. We need to end the war on drugs, for one, and stop prosecuting low-level offenses so harshly. This would reduce a huge amount of the load on the court system. There are a lot of companies that make a ton of money off of having more people in prison. Maybe we should just tax them. In any case, I think it's important to realize we cannot let widespread Constitutional violations go unchecked. It's not that there's no money. The real problem is that there are so many entities profiting from this unjust system that no one bothers to look for solutions in the first place.
  - 24gttghh 9y ago
    The Eighth Amendment requires that citizens be given a speedy and public trial. Very few go to trial because of false-carrots-on-a-stick plea deals to throw someone away without the trial, because the prosecutors know the trial may not go for them. I wonder if it could be argued that plea deals deprive a citizen of their right to a speedy trial, and are therefore unconstitutional?
    - vacri 9y ago
      Some amendments are more strongly enforced than others. Also, it's the 6th that's a speedy trial. The 8th is the equally-ignored excessive fines and punishment. At least the 3rd is still going strong!
      - 24gttghh 9y ago
        Oh whoops I read them out of order in the list talking about the drafting of The Constitution. It may have been the 8th in an original list but two below it were not ratified. I am not worthy!
    - ringaroundthetx 9y ago
      regardless of the amendment number, there has been zero clarity from the Supreme Court about what fair and speedy means. As such, there are people in prison for almost a decade without a trial because they couldn't afford bail, see the Riker's Island cases. This is not what I had in mind and I think this result undermines the social contract people have in mind for this country.
  - eeZah7Ux 9y ago
    > the courts cannot afford Most countries in the world manage to have due process. Also the US is one of the wealthiest countries.
    - vacri 9y ago
      Of the 200 or so countries in the world, most of them do not have an effective, fair justice system, available to all. Without that as a minimum, have a defined process is largely meaningless.
  - BearGoesChirp 9y ago
    You get rid of all those pointless laws.
  - geofft 9y ago
    You let them go free. "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." If you actually have so many people committing crimes that there are actually too many guilty people for the courts to properly try, you have a societal engineering problem, not a courtroom efficiency problem - you need to get people to stop committing those crimes in the first place, since clearly the justice system isn't working as a deterrent. There are lots of options, including changing social conditions, reclassifying the behavior at issue as not a crime, etc.
    - asdfjklasdfjkl 9y ago
      This mentality is hard to get to for a lot of folks. It doesn't just hit this issue. Let's talk about race. When a white supremacist wants to kills some folks, sure, that's a problem and we should try to detect, prevent, mitigate, and punish (in that order) their actions. However, the real issue to solve at a higher level is the societal engineering one where large segments of the population feel a need to turn towards white nationalism. Note: I don't mean "let's make thoughtcrime a thing". I assume the issue is that racially homogeneous rural areas end up with a combination of little welfare and little economic opportunity. In the medium/long-run, these sorts of issues require UBI, an improved education system, public transportation, and universal healthcare of some sort. That's a tall order and hard sell, so we're left demonizing individuals (treating symptoms).
      - tptacek 9y ago
        White rural areas in fact get more federal welfare benefits than urban areas.
- kakarot 9y ago
  Yup. And when this happened to me with a bogus possession case, I fought the law and the law won. Sentenced with maximum jail-time and fines :)
superjustice 9y ago
I often think there should be a superhero archangel comic character that is a ruthless defender of justice. I don't understand the mentality of prosecutors, nor the judges, public defenders and others who are also complacent in an evil system. I have had three encounters with law enforcement, the first ended in similar fashion to this story. I was charged with a crime I didn't commit which happened to occur on video. After 18-months, and threats of serious felony charges, I refused to accept a plea. I asked my lawyer if it was illegal to plead guilty to a crime I didn't commit and he said it was. The prosecutor then says, "the state moves to drop the case citing lack of evidence". Again, the crime (theft) was recorded on videotape and two other guys I didn't know clearly stole the items involved. I won but the court wouldn't actually let me win. Another time I was caught in an unfortunate incident where a security guard pushed me into a street. I was tackled, tasered, later choked, threatened to be killed and then powerslammed head first on concrete by Detective of the Year, Glenn A. Ritchie, of the Broward County Sheriff's Office. Ritchie charged me with non-violent misdemeanors and then a day later, alleged felonies in a contradictory and clearly false 2nd police report. I spent 34-days in jail until the charges were non-filed but not until the felony was refiled as a misdemeanor, sent to the wrong address, resulting in a still standing capias warrant for my arrest. The system is flawed. People who work in the courts, especially in major cities, are not to be celebreated but derided. It's an insane system of high bails, boilerplate plea deals and cold indifference.
- epmaybe 9y ago
  A mentor of mine who used to work for a government agency once told me something that I hadn't really appreciated until recently. To paraphrase, sometimes the best way to change a system that is flawed is to work from within. It's harder, sure, since it takes time to get enough power to make effective change, but it's an idea nonetheless.
  - ashark 9y ago
    > A mentor of mine who used to work for a government agency once told me something that I hadn't really appreciated until recently. To paraphrase, sometimes the best way to change a system that is flawed is to work from within. It's harder, sure, since it takes time to get enough power to make effective change, but it's an idea nonetheless. I believe this is formally called the "SLC Punk Maneuver"
ArchReaper 9y ago
Our legal system is a giant pile of shit, and anyone who thinks otherwise is either woefully misinformed or trying to line their own interests.
- visarga 9y ago
  The proper way to use it is to be rich. The justice lady might be blind but she can hear the sound of money. /s
- moretai 9y ago
  So is our medical system. We revere both of these professions.
- subru 9y ago
  This should be downvoted, because one can trivially disagree with your premise, without being misinformed nor with any conflict of interest.
Clubber 9y ago
The West Memphis Three (of whom Paradise Lost) was about entered Alford pleas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three Here's why prosecutors seek it: As part of the plea deal, the three men cannot pursue civil action against the state for wrongful imprisonment.
- caseysoftware 9y ago
  This should be upvoted because it's the key in this whole thing. It's a complete cover-your-ass move that attempts to hide the entire thing as quickly and easily as possible. And if you think about it.. if they really thought this person was a murderer, letting them out would not be on the table. Personally, I believe that if a prosecutor wrongly pursues a case, hides evidence, whatever and gets a conviction. When the sentence is overturned, it should be applied to the prosecution. It might teach some respect for the power they're throwing around. * Yes, I know that won't work. :(
  - Clubber 9y ago
    It's interesting that politicians make things illegal without funding the prosecution and imprisonment that comes as a result of making things illegal. I read somewhere that it costs up to $245K for a state to try a case in court. In Florida, they actually charge the defendant the cost of prosecuting him. What the hell?! https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida_statutes_938-27 https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida...
- abpavel 9y ago
  This is unreal... How is this any different than procedures in North Kore or Burma? I don't care if I'll lose 10 points for this comment. I just feel sad that such a great place as SV is located in a country on a level of Burma, if you travel just 500 miles east.
  - Clubber 9y ago
    This is widespread all across the country. I'm sure it happens in SV as well.
24gttghh 9y ago
Just recently on TAL[0] was a depressingly similar case (from 1980); a kid is accused of a murder he did not commit by a pathological liar (the only "witness"), and who, not seeing the logic in admitting guilt for something he did not do, is therefore not eligible for parole later down the road: [0]https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/diy https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/... The 15 year old who did commit the murder was actually caught too, and also prosecuted at the same trial, but he would not take his own plea deal, which would have freed the innocent accused. edit: some grammar.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  I remember that episode. It's mind boggling that you have all these people in the justice system going through their procedures but nobody does anything when something goes blatantly wrong.
  - 24gttghh 9y ago
    The police and prosecutors in that case are explicitly to blame for basically being lazy and forcing the first suspect they found to be the one they prosecute, irregardless of the evidence which would not support their claim.
randcraw 9y ago
"Ninety-seven percent of [US] federal convictions and ninety-four percent of state convictions are the results of guilty pleas." https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/12/26/plea-bargaining-and-the-innocent#.kS7dr5qFV https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/12/26/plea-bargainin... Definitely time to get the lawyers OUT of government.
- vacri 9y ago
  Perhaps instead it's time to work on prevention, rather than cure?
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  Plea deals need to be ended. Allowing any sort of plea deal is imposing a punishment for demanding one's rights.
  - xeromal 9y ago
    If we end plea deals entirely, will we have to go to court for silly things like speeding tickets?
    - kbsletten 9y ago
      Yes, which would have the effect of cutting down on speeding tickets issued since it's an extra court date for the officer. Many can't be bothered already when you take a ticket to court.
      - KekDemaga 9y ago
        Summary violations are reasonable enough in my opinion as the fine doesn't increase by virtue of attending court.
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      Speeding tickets aren't criminal offenses.
    - 9y ago
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
gourou 9y ago
Did the page receive a HN hug of death? I can't access it
drostie 9y ago
Google cache, as I'm getting a "503 first byte timeout": https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kM07g30KfYwJ:https://www.propublica.org/article/what-does-an-innocent-man-have-to-do-alford-plea-guilty+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kM07g3...
baldfat 9y ago
We need to reinvent our criminal justice system. The wrong people are punished. If you get arrested the best thing is if you are clearly wrong rather than innocent. Trying to defend yourself will only get you in four times more trouble. It appears Judges will through the book at people for having a trial by jury. Plea Bargains are also given to criminals when they are caught red handed on video camera. My adopted children's mom was murdered with a baseball bat by one of my son's biological father. He then knocked on my door at 8 AM but thankfully I was out of town with his biological son. He got 20 - 40 and can have parole in 16. Then I have my friend accused by someone with zero evidence except a changing accusation over 9 months. He was offered 18 months I begged and even cried telling him to take the deal. "Why should I take the deal when I never did anything wrong?" 18 month plea became 12 YEARS!
- Clubber 9y ago
  It seems we've been rotting from the inside for quite a while now.
- jakelarkin 9y ago
  the issue is its impossible for the state to afford to provide a jury trial to everyone that is currently eligible. A trial has >5 paid professionals involved, plus the jurors, there just isn't enough time or money to process the case load. the courts/prosecutors, out of necessity, have set up a shadow system of pressuring most defendants into plea bargains based on the relative strength of their case, which would be fine except the rules around this are weak and its ripe for abuse by the lazy or career/politically motivated. At some point we'll need to admit this and draw up a better system for minor felonies.
  - gjjrfcbugxbhf 9y ago
    I guess I'm not in the majority these days but I believe that no cost is too high to prevent an innocent person being subject to imprisonment. Also if the cost is too high then our society/laws are broken and that is what needs fixing - not by just working out cheaper ways to lock people up.
wonderwonder 9y ago
The major issue with our justice system is that it is connected to a large portion of the economy. Sending people to jail, and making them pay fines generates money for a lot of entities. Until this is remedied the poor will continue to be treated as fuel for the legal machine. If you are poor and charged with a crime you cannot afford a good attorney and you will more than likely be forced to plea and get either fined or jail time. Once you have been convicted your upward mobility will be retarded and the cycle will repeat. On top of that, the bail system is used to enforce this cycle. A poor person is arrested, and bail is set at $5k. They cannot afford it so they sit in jail awaiting trial. They will plea guilty out of desperation just to get out of jail and try to get back to work to support their family. (Guilty plea does not necessitate prison) The whole system is rigged to punish the poor and allow the rich to purchase a get out of jail card.
joeax 9y ago
I have first-hand experience in this area. Someone close to me was accused of a crime she didn't commit. The police officer was hell bent on arresting her on the worst possible charge. At her initial hearing, the public defenders were flippant and detached, and generally unhelpful. After she hired a criminal defense lawyer, he more or less forced her to take a crappy plea deal that he negotiated (and made the prosecutors look like winners). If she did not, it would mean tens of thousands of dollars to defend herself. The flaws I personally witnessed through the ordeal: 1. The police have arrest quotas, and enormous pressure to "make the arrest" regardless of the cost, or whether the person is actually guilty. 2. Criminal defense lawyers love the system as-is and will fight to protect it. More arrests mean more business. An absolute worst conflict of interest that you can imagine. 3. Public defenders will do the minimum amount of work, and will always strong-arm you to take a plea deal. 4. The whole system is rigged against you. You are guilty the moment you first enter the court room. Nobody cares whether you are really guilty or not - judges, lawyers, prosecutors, clerks, cops. 5. The worst part of all - there is a strong groupthink among these power players. They wholeheartedly believe they are living gods, protecting the world from societies ills. My hope is that one day there is true criminal justice reform. The fact that America has the largest incarceration rate is a red flag.
- joeax 9y ago
  I want to extend my comment. The big takeaway from all of this is that to beat the system, you need to be prepared to defend yourself at all costs, to the very end. The system depends on everyone taking plea deals. It's a well-oiled machine where by taking the plea deal, everyone wins but you. The defense lawyer made his money, the prosecutor gets their "win". The judge looks "tough on crime" for their next election. The cop gets a plaque for locking up lots of people. My advice: Save some money. Just like a car accident, or some health or other emergency, it's best to be prepared with some kind of emergency fund.
  - lsniddy 9y ago
    Most people don't take plea deals because they are too broke to defend themselves, by going to court you risk a much higher penalty if you lose. Would you take a guaranteed 12 months in prison or gamble on a 50% chance of 10 years?
mpweiher 9y ago
Did I mention that the US is no longer a country where the rule of law applies?
Shivetya 9y ago
just remember this when watching investigations as well, those tend to only be news worthy when high profile figures are involved but the rules are the same. you don't have to be guilty, just not rich enough to defend yourself.
pc2g4d 9y ago
In the long term I believe it will make sense to treat criminal prosecutions and trials as a classification problem. Given these facts and this evidence, is person X innocent or guilty of the crime? It seems tools are being developed right now to assess the effectiveness of the current system, innocence projects, etc. So there should also now be a possibility of developing a new and better algorithm for trial. A machine learning algorithm that's better than all this human complexity at determining who did it, and can explain why it came to its conclusions. Computational law.
pasbesoin 9y ago
A system that doesn't honestly and unbiased-ly make its best effort to seek the truth, is not justice.

216 points by radmuzom 9y ago

I thought that's pretty much standard procedure for low level drug offenses: "please guilty and get only a few years or go to trial and risk 30 years". The rational decision is most likely to go for a few years and not risk the 30. In my view plea bargains should be abolished and everyone should go to trial.

damnfine 9y ago
But very few go to trial because the courts cannot afford to try that many cases. So, like most social issues, where does the money come from? Edit: I want to be clear. I agree with your point, but observing the obvious roadblock to implementation.
- Retric 9y ago
  Trials are actually not that expensive. What's expensive is risking sending someone to prison for 30+ years. We simply can't enforce the laws as written, but it's considered easier to avoid enforcing them than to come up with reasonable laws.
  - trendia 9y ago
    Misdemeanor trials cost $20,000 in an exemplar US county [0]. And that's only for the prosecution... take into account the salaries of court employees (judge, steganographer, etc) and utilities and things add up. Whether that is cheap or expensive depends on what you're comparing it to. Cost of pleading? Maybe a couple hundred dollars. Cost of ruining someone's life over a drug charge? Maybe worth tenz of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars. [0] https://www.news-journal.com/news/2011/nov/01/court-costs-over-19700-for-prosecuting-misdemeanor/ https://www.news-journal.com/news/2011/nov/01/court-costs-ov...
    - Retric 9y ago
      These prices are very regional. New York State spends ~60,000$ per prisoner per year. So, a teen spending 60 years in prison (ignoring inflation) = 3.6 million directly + plus lost wages.
- jinfiesto 9y ago
  I don't know, taxes? Fair and speedy trials are enshrined in the Constitution. Presumably it's in the public interest to actually provide them...
- RightMillennial 9y ago
  Frankly, if the courts can't handle the load of the minor cases, those cases should be dropped in favor of pursuing the more severe ones. The courts should be damn well certain someone is in fact guilty before convicting him instead of copping out and allowing plea bargains.
  - SuperGent 9y ago
    Which then brings up the thorny issue of which cases to drop, and why make those things illegal in the first place. I don't know what the alternative is though. Maybe Judge Dredd style law enforcement of police, judge and jury in one job..
    - RightMillennial 9y ago
      That's a good point. Others have answered that and I agree with them. But we also have to work with what we have. Petty things like drug possession should be decriminalized. However, good luck getting Congress or state legislatures to decriminalize minor things that aren't en vogue like marijuana. Taxes should be raised to fund the courts and other vital services. But everyone hates taxes so I doubt that will happen either. I'd really like to avoid the Judge Dredd style enforcement that we seem to be slowly approaching.
    - CogitoCogito 9y ago
      If plea deals were not allowed and cases had to go to trial (with adequate support for public defenders), we (as a society) would find satisfactory answers to those questions. It doesn't mean it would be easy, but if the pressure were there, we'd find a solution. Fewer cases would be heard, fewer people would be jailed, and a truer justice would be served. Plea bargains allow the justice system to effectively ignore all those costs and instead push them onto a non-representative subset of society.
    - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
      Good point. Maybe if we made fewer things illegal we wouldn't have more people incarcerated per capita than any other country ever.
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  If you can't afford to deal with the consequences of laws you either need less laws or put more money into the system. Also, sending innocent people to prison because of please bargains costs a lot of money. It's very possible that having real trials and not sending innocent people to jail is cheaper overall.
- h2olover 9y ago
  There are far too many cases being brought into our courts for silly or erroneous charges. We need to end the war on drugs, for one, and stop prosecuting low-level offenses so harshly. This would reduce a huge amount of the load on the court system. There are a lot of companies that make a ton of money off of having more people in prison. Maybe we should just tax them. In any case, I think it's important to realize we cannot let widespread Constitutional violations go unchecked. It's not that there's no money. The real problem is that there are so many entities profiting from this unjust system that no one bothers to look for solutions in the first place.
- 24gttghh 9y ago
  The Eighth Amendment requires that citizens be given a speedy and public trial. Very few go to trial because of false-carrots-on-a-stick plea deals to throw someone away without the trial, because the prosecutors know the trial may not go for them. I wonder if it could be argued that plea deals deprive a citizen of their right to a speedy trial, and are therefore unconstitutional?
  - vacri 9y ago
    Some amendments are more strongly enforced than others. Also, it's the 6th that's a speedy trial. The 8th is the equally-ignored excessive fines and punishment. At least the 3rd is still going strong!
    - 24gttghh 9y ago
      Oh whoops I read them out of order in the list talking about the drafting of The Constitution. It may have been the 8th in an original list but two below it were not ratified. I am not worthy!
  - ringaroundthetx 9y ago
    regardless of the amendment number, there has been zero clarity from the Supreme Court about what fair and speedy means. As such, there are people in prison for almost a decade without a trial because they couldn't afford bail, see the Riker's Island cases. This is not what I had in mind and I think this result undermines the social contract people have in mind for this country.
- eeZah7Ux 9y ago
  > the courts cannot afford Most countries in the world manage to have due process. Also the US is one of the wealthiest countries.
  - vacri 9y ago
    Of the 200 or so countries in the world, most of them do not have an effective, fair justice system, available to all. Without that as a minimum, have a defined process is largely meaningless.
- BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  You get rid of all those pointless laws.
- geofft 9y ago
  You let them go free. "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." If you actually have so many people committing crimes that there are actually too many guilty people for the courts to properly try, you have a societal engineering problem, not a courtroom efficiency problem - you need to get people to stop committing those crimes in the first place, since clearly the justice system isn't working as a deterrent. There are lots of options, including changing social conditions, reclassifying the behavior at issue as not a crime, etc.
  - asdfjklasdfjkl 9y ago
    This mentality is hard to get to for a lot of folks. It doesn't just hit this issue. Let's talk about race. When a white supremacist wants to kills some folks, sure, that's a problem and we should try to detect, prevent, mitigate, and punish (in that order) their actions. However, the real issue to solve at a higher level is the societal engineering one where large segments of the population feel a need to turn towards white nationalism. Note: I don't mean "let's make thoughtcrime a thing". I assume the issue is that racially homogeneous rural areas end up with a combination of little welfare and little economic opportunity. In the medium/long-run, these sorts of issues require UBI, an improved education system, public transportation, and universal healthcare of some sort. That's a tall order and hard sell, so we're left demonizing individuals (treating symptoms).
    - tptacek 9y ago
      White rural areas in fact get more federal welfare benefits than urban areas.
kakarot 9y ago
Yup. And when this happened to me with a bogus possession case, I fought the law and the law won. Sentenced with maximum jail-time and fines :)

superjustice 9y ago

I often think there should be a superhero archangel comic character that is a ruthless defender of justice. I don't understand the mentality of prosecutors, nor the judges, public defenders and others who are also complacent in an evil system. I have had three encounters with law enforcement, the first ended in similar fashion to this story. I was charged with a crime I didn't commit which happened to occur on video. After 18-months, and threats of serious felony charges, I refused to accept a plea. I asked my lawyer if it was illegal to plead guilty to a crime I didn't commit and he said it was. The prosecutor then says, "the state moves to drop the case citing lack of evidence". Again, the crime (theft) was recorded on videotape and two other guys I didn't know clearly stole the items involved. I won but the court wouldn't actually let me win. Another time I was caught in an unfortunate incident where a security guard pushed me into a street. I was tackled, tasered, later choked, threatened to be killed and then powerslammed head first on concrete by Detective of the Year, Glenn A. Ritchie, of the Broward County Sheriff's Office. Ritchie charged me with non-violent misdemeanors and then a day later, alleged felonies in a contradictory and clearly false 2nd police report. I spent 34-days in jail until the charges were non-filed but not until the felony was refiled as a misdemeanor, sent to the wrong address, resulting in a still standing capias warrant for my arrest. The system is flawed. People who work in the courts, especially in major cities, are not to be celebreated but derided. It's an insane system of high bails, boilerplate plea deals and cold indifference.

epmaybe 9y ago
A mentor of mine who used to work for a government agency once told me something that I hadn't really appreciated until recently. To paraphrase, sometimes the best way to change a system that is flawed is to work from within. It's harder, sure, since it takes time to get enough power to make effective change, but it's an idea nonetheless.
- ashark 9y ago
  > A mentor of mine who used to work for a government agency once told me something that I hadn't really appreciated until recently. To paraphrase, sometimes the best way to change a system that is flawed is to work from within. It's harder, sure, since it takes time to get enough power to make effective change, but it's an idea nonetheless. I believe this is formally called the "SLC Punk Maneuver"

ArchReaper 9y ago

Our legal system is a giant pile of shit, and anyone who thinks otherwise is either woefully misinformed or trying to line their own interests.

visarga 9y ago
The proper way to use it is to be rich. The justice lady might be blind but she can hear the sound of money. /s
moretai 9y ago
So is our medical system. We revere both of these professions.
subru 9y ago
This should be downvoted, because one can trivially disagree with your premise, without being misinformed nor with any conflict of interest.

Clubber 9y ago

The West Memphis Three (of whom Paradise Lost) was about entered Alford pleas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Memphis_Three Here's why prosecutors seek it: As part of the plea deal, the three men cannot pursue civil action against the state for wrongful imprisonment.

caseysoftware 9y ago
This should be upvoted because it's the key in this whole thing. It's a complete cover-your-ass move that attempts to hide the entire thing as quickly and easily as possible. And if you think about it.. if they really thought this person was a murderer, letting them out would not be on the table. Personally, I believe that if a prosecutor wrongly pursues a case, hides evidence, whatever and gets a conviction. When the sentence is overturned, it should be applied to the prosecution. It might teach some respect for the power they're throwing around. * Yes, I know that won't work. :(
- Clubber 9y ago
  It's interesting that politicians make things illegal without funding the prosecution and imprisonment that comes as a result of making things illegal. I read somewhere that it costs up to $245K for a state to try a case in court. In Florida, they actually charge the defendant the cost of prosecuting him. What the hell?! https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida_statutes_938-27 https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida...
abpavel 9y ago
This is unreal... How is this any different than procedures in North Kore or Burma? I don't care if I'll lose 10 points for this comment. I just feel sad that such a great place as SV is located in a country on a level of Burma, if you travel just 500 miles east.
- Clubber 9y ago
  This is widespread all across the country. I'm sure it happens in SV as well.

24gttghh 9y ago

Just recently on TAL[0] was a depressingly similar case (from 1980); a kid is accused of a murder he did not commit by a pathological liar (the only "witness"), and who, not seeing the logic in admitting guilt for something he did not do, is therefore not eligible for parole later down the road: [0]https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/diy https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/282/... The 15 year old who did commit the murder was actually caught too, and also prosecuted at the same trial, but he would not take his own plea deal, which would have freed the innocent accused. edit: some grammar.

maxxxxx 9y ago
I remember that episode. It's mind boggling that you have all these people in the justice system going through their procedures but nobody does anything when something goes blatantly wrong.
- 24gttghh 9y ago
  The police and prosecutors in that case are explicitly to blame for basically being lazy and forcing the first suspect they found to be the one they prosecute, irregardless of the evidence which would not support their claim.

randcraw 9y ago

"Ninety-seven percent of [US] federal convictions and ninety-four percent of state convictions are the results of guilty pleas." https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/12/26/plea-bargaining-and-the-innocent#.kS7dr5qFV https://www.themarshallproject.org/2014/12/26/plea-bargainin... Definitely time to get the lawyers OUT of government.

vacri 9y ago
Perhaps instead it's time to work on prevention, rather than cure?
BearGoesChirp 9y ago
Plea deals need to be ended. Allowing any sort of plea deal is imposing a punishment for demanding one's rights.
- xeromal 9y ago
  If we end plea deals entirely, will we have to go to court for silly things like speeding tickets?
  - kbsletten 9y ago
    Yes, which would have the effect of cutting down on speeding tickets issued since it's an extra court date for the officer. Many can't be bothered already when you take a ticket to court.
    - KekDemaga 9y ago
      Summary violations are reasonable enough in my opinion as the fine doesn't increase by virtue of attending court.
  - TheCoelacanth 9y ago
    Speeding tickets aren't criminal offenses.
  - 9y ago

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

gourou 9y ago

Did the page receive a HN hug of death? I can't access it

drostie 9y ago

Google cache, as I'm getting a "503 first byte timeout": https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kM07g30KfYwJ:https://www.propublica.org/article/what-does-an-innocent-man-have-to-do-alford-plea-guilty+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kM07g3...

baldfat 9y ago

We need to reinvent our criminal justice system. The wrong people are punished. If you get arrested the best thing is if you are clearly wrong rather than innocent. Trying to defend yourself will only get you in four times more trouble. It appears Judges will through the book at people for having a trial by jury. Plea Bargains are also given to criminals when they are caught red handed on video camera. My adopted children's mom was murdered with a baseball bat by one of my son's biological father. He then knocked on my door at 8 AM but thankfully I was out of town with his biological son. He got 20 - 40 and can have parole in 16. Then I have my friend accused by someone with zero evidence except a changing accusation over 9 months. He was offered 18 months I begged and even cried telling him to take the deal. "Why should I take the deal when I never did anything wrong?" 18 month plea became 12 YEARS!

Clubber 9y ago
It seems we've been rotting from the inside for quite a while now.
jakelarkin 9y ago
the issue is its impossible for the state to afford to provide a jury trial to everyone that is currently eligible. A trial has >5 paid professionals involved, plus the jurors, there just isn't enough time or money to process the case load. the courts/prosecutors, out of necessity, have set up a shadow system of pressuring most defendants into plea bargains based on the relative strength of their case, which would be fine except the rules around this are weak and its ripe for abuse by the lazy or career/politically motivated. At some point we'll need to admit this and draw up a better system for minor felonies.
- gjjrfcbugxbhf 9y ago
  I guess I'm not in the majority these days but I believe that no cost is too high to prevent an innocent person being subject to imprisonment. Also if the cost is too high then our society/laws are broken and that is what needs fixing - not by just working out cheaper ways to lock people up.

wonderwonder 9y ago

The major issue with our justice system is that it is connected to a large portion of the economy. Sending people to jail, and making them pay fines generates money for a lot of entities. Until this is remedied the poor will continue to be treated as fuel for the legal machine. If you are poor and charged with a crime you cannot afford a good attorney and you will more than likely be forced to plea and get either fined or jail time. Once you have been convicted your upward mobility will be retarded and the cycle will repeat. On top of that, the bail system is used to enforce this cycle. A poor person is arrested, and bail is set at $5k. They cannot afford it so they sit in jail awaiting trial. They will plea guilty out of desperation just to get out of jail and try to get back to work to support their family. (Guilty plea does not necessitate prison) The whole system is rigged to punish the poor and allow the rich to purchase a get out of jail card.

joeax 9y ago

I have first-hand experience in this area. Someone close to me was accused of a crime she didn't commit. The police officer was hell bent on arresting her on the worst possible charge. At her initial hearing, the public defenders were flippant and detached, and generally unhelpful. After she hired a criminal defense lawyer, he more or less forced her to take a crappy plea deal that he negotiated (and made the prosecutors look like winners). If she did not, it would mean tens of thousands of dollars to defend herself. The flaws I personally witnessed through the ordeal: 1. The police have arrest quotas, and enormous pressure to "make the arrest" regardless of the cost, or whether the person is actually guilty. 2. Criminal defense lawyers love the system as-is and will fight to protect it. More arrests mean more business. An absolute worst conflict of interest that you can imagine. 3. Public defenders will do the minimum amount of work, and will always strong-arm you to take a plea deal. 4. The whole system is rigged against you. You are guilty the moment you first enter the court room. Nobody cares whether you are really guilty or not - judges, lawyers, prosecutors, clerks, cops. 5. The worst part of all - there is a strong groupthink among these power players. They wholeheartedly believe they are living gods, protecting the world from societies ills. My hope is that one day there is true criminal justice reform. The fact that America has the largest incarceration rate is a red flag.

joeax 9y ago
I want to extend my comment. The big takeaway from all of this is that to beat the system, you need to be prepared to defend yourself at all costs, to the very end. The system depends on everyone taking plea deals. It's a well-oiled machine where by taking the plea deal, everyone wins but you. The defense lawyer made his money, the prosecutor gets their "win". The judge looks "tough on crime" for their next election. The cop gets a plaque for locking up lots of people. My advice: Save some money. Just like a car accident, or some health or other emergency, it's best to be prepared with some kind of emergency fund.
- lsniddy 9y ago
  Most people don't take plea deals because they are too broke to defend themselves, by going to court you risk a much higher penalty if you lose. Would you take a guaranteed 12 months in prison or gamble on a 50% chance of 10 years?

mpweiher 9y ago

Did I mention that the US is no longer a country where the rule of law applies?

Shivetya 9y ago

just remember this when watching investigations as well, those tend to only be news worthy when high profile figures are involved but the rules are the same. you don't have to be guilty, just not rich enough to defend yourself.

pc2g4d 9y ago

In the long term I believe it will make sense to treat criminal prosecutions and trials as a classification problem. Given these facts and this evidence, is person X innocent or guilty of the crime? It seems tools are being developed right now to assess the effectiveness of the current system, innocence projects, etc. So there should also now be a possibility of developing a new and better algorithm for trial. A machine learning algorithm that's better than all this human complexity at determining who did it, and can explain why it came to its conclusions. Computational law.

pasbesoin 9y ago

A system that doesn't honestly and unbiased-ly make its best effort to seek the truth, is not justice.