5 ms·

A couple great quotes: "I had seen at close range the injustice of sentences one hundred times more severe for crack cocaine than for powder cocaine, a straigh

by yoseph 16y ago

A couple great quotes: "I had seen at close range the injustice of sentences one hundred times more severe for crack cocaine than for powder cocaine, a straight act of discrimination against African-Americans, that even the first black president and attorney general have only ameliorated with tepid support for a measure, still being debated, to reduce the disparity of sentence from 100 to one to 18 to one." I'm honestly surprised (& pleased) he would say that outright. I'm not particularly familiar with the workings of the U.S. justice system but a disparity of 100 to one sounds fairly unjust. "America’s 2.4 million prisoners, and millions more awaiting trial or on supervised release, are an ostracized, voiceless legion of the walking dead; they are no one’s constituency." This quote makes loads of sense when you consider that in the American justice system, prosecutors win over 90% of their cases (a point mentioned by Black). In summary, I love that Conrad Black wrote this article. Most in his position wouldn't have.

d0mine 16y ago
Prosecutors win over 99% (99.2% in 2007 [1]) cases in Russia. [1]: http://www.forbesrussia.ru/forbes/issue/2008-11/7199-nevinovnyh-net http://www.forbesrussia.ru/forbes/issue/2008-11/7199-nevinov...
- mustpax 16y ago
  It's not much of an argument in favor of the status quo to say it could have been worse. The North Korean regime has a worse censorship record than China, but that doesn't make the situation in China any less troubling.
  - jerf 16y ago
    What's your target? In a perfect world, a prosecutor only brings a case if they have enough evidence to have a reasonable expectation of winning. I honestly don't know if 90% is a problem, but the natural knee-jerk "fair" outcome of 50% would actually mean that half the time, a prosecutor is bringing a case that they shouldn't have. That sounds like an awfully high rate of false charges to me. 90% doesn't sound so wrong to me, and I don't think that's where the problem lies. The problem is the breadth and variety of ways in which the prosecutor can bring a successful case against you. (This is important because if we're going to push for reform, we want to push for the right things, not just kneejerk that everything is wrong every time we see a statistic.)
    - mustpax 16y ago
      Agreed, the statistic bears further exploration and analysis. A figure like 99% percent does raise some eyebrows, and I would argue, so does 90%. But we shouldn't leave it there.
- pg 16y ago
  Interesting. I bet this rate would be a useful element in a corruptness index for countries.
  - ZachPruckowski 16y ago
    I'd model a criminal conviction as indicative of one of four possibilities: 1) Defendant is guilty and the police did their job right, bringing strong evidence to the prosecutor. 2) Defendant is innocent, but there's a weight of misinterpreted evidence that his defense fails to overcome. 3) Defense is exceptionally shoddy in the face of an average-to-weak prosecutorial case. 4) Corruption. To disentangle the effects of gains in (1) & (4) on increases in the conviction rate, you need a metric of police efficiency that's unaffected by corruption. For instance, a country with DNA or fingerprint forensics will have a higher conviction rate than one without DNA/fingerprints, but as a result of solid police work, not as a result of corruption.
  - patio11 16y ago
    Over seven nines of charged cases in Japan most years. 100 pct of all jury trials ever. Do we win? (I do not think it is a very useful metric. Japan has a problem, but it is forcing confessions as the sole investigatory tactic, not corruption. The conviction rates for any Western democracy should be ninety plus, or prosecutors are bringing cases they should know are insufficient, to the detriment of the public and innocent alike.)
    - nandemo 16y ago
      I agree that it's not a very useful metric. On the confessions: Japanese police can detain suspects and question them days on end without allowing them to talk to a lawyer.
Mark_Book 16y ago
"I'm honestly surprised (& pleased) he would say that outright. I'm not particularly familiar with the workings of the U.S. justice system but a disparity of 100 to one sounds fairly unjust." You sound prejudiced against American justice if you can be pleased that he takes a certain position on something that you are unfamiliar with. Part of the reason why there's a 90% success rate (if that is the case) might be that prosecutors in many jurisdictions are instructed to only pursue cases they believ are winnable
mynameishere 16y ago
It's all banalities. Standard lefty talking points. And of course, it's a lie. "100 to 1"? http://politics.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01/crack-vs-powder-cocaine-a-gulf-in-penalties.html http://politics.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01... In 2006, crack cocaine sentences were 43.5 percent longer than powder cocaine sentences; the average length of imprisonment for powder cocaine offenders was 84.7 months, while crack cocaine-related imprisonments averaged 121.5 months.
- neilk 16y ago
  Conrad Black would be amused at your description of him as a lefty. This guy founded a newspaper specifically to combat what he called "soft, left pap" in the Canadian journalism scene. He and his wife are so retrograde they are open admirers of the monarchy and nostalgic for the British class system. There is a disease in American politics of attacking the position for potentially being consonant with a particular ideology. Call it the ad ideologicem fallacy. Like, if this statement could be said by a left-winger, it must not be true, even if it's made by someone with actual experience or data. Maybe his 100 to 1 statement is factually wrong, or perhaps that was just hyperbole. The main issue is that there's any disparity at all between drug sentences.
- MaysonL 16y ago
  The 100 to 1 sentencing disparity is in the amount of drug which triggers the five year mandatory minimum sentence: 5 grams in the case of crack, 500 grams in the case of powder. See http://www.drugpolicy.org/drugwar/mandatorymin/crackpowder.cfm http://www.drugpolicy.org/drugwar/mandatorymin/crackpowder.c... for more.
- electromagnetic 16y ago
  If Conrad Black is a 'standard lefty' in the US, you poor bastards must have the most nihilistic hegemonic fascist right-wing government to ever exist. Frankly, if Black is a lefty, it must have taken all of the gods recorded in human history working to their max to suppress the rightist powers in the American system from going supra-Nazi-fascist-zombie-monster and destroying all non-Aryans. Seriously, Black is a super-right wing nut job. Please, check your own facts before making outright ludicrous claims as calling him a lefty. Seriously, I hope Canada doesn't take him back because we've already got enough right-wing fraudsters running our country, we don't need another one to come back and help bolster their ranks.
nopassrecover 16y ago
Not to distract from the point but if crack users are 100 times more likely to commit other crimes (theft/assault) as a result of their crack use then this is a "fair" sentence.

by yoseph 16y ago

d0mine 16y ago

Prosecutors win over 99% (99.2% in 2007 [1]) cases in Russia. [1]: http://www.forbesrussia.ru/forbes/issue/2008-11/7199-nevinovnyh-net http://www.forbesrussia.ru/forbes/issue/2008-11/7199-nevinov...

mustpax 16y ago
It's not much of an argument in favor of the status quo to say it could have been worse. The North Korean regime has a worse censorship record than China, but that doesn't make the situation in China any less troubling.
- jerf 16y ago
  What's your target? In a perfect world, a prosecutor only brings a case if they have enough evidence to have a reasonable expectation of winning. I honestly don't know if 90% is a problem, but the natural knee-jerk "fair" outcome of 50% would actually mean that half the time, a prosecutor is bringing a case that they shouldn't have. That sounds like an awfully high rate of false charges to me. 90% doesn't sound so wrong to me, and I don't think that's where the problem lies. The problem is the breadth and variety of ways in which the prosecutor can bring a successful case against you. (This is important because if we're going to push for reform, we want to push for the right things, not just kneejerk that everything is wrong every time we see a statistic.)
  - mustpax 16y ago
    Agreed, the statistic bears further exploration and analysis. A figure like 99% percent does raise some eyebrows, and I would argue, so does 90%. But we shouldn't leave it there.
pg 16y ago
Interesting. I bet this rate would be a useful element in a corruptness index for countries.
- ZachPruckowski 16y ago
  I'd model a criminal conviction as indicative of one of four possibilities: 1) Defendant is guilty and the police did their job right, bringing strong evidence to the prosecutor. 2) Defendant is innocent, but there's a weight of misinterpreted evidence that his defense fails to overcome. 3) Defense is exceptionally shoddy in the face of an average-to-weak prosecutorial case. 4) Corruption. To disentangle the effects of gains in (1) & (4) on increases in the conviction rate, you need a metric of police efficiency that's unaffected by corruption. For instance, a country with DNA or fingerprint forensics will have a higher conviction rate than one without DNA/fingerprints, but as a result of solid police work, not as a result of corruption.
- patio11 16y ago
  Over seven nines of charged cases in Japan most years. 100 pct of all jury trials ever. Do we win? (I do not think it is a very useful metric. Japan has a problem, but it is forcing confessions as the sole investigatory tactic, not corruption. The conviction rates for any Western democracy should be ninety plus, or prosecutors are bringing cases they should know are insufficient, to the detriment of the public and innocent alike.)
  - nandemo 16y ago
    I agree that it's not a very useful metric. On the confessions: Japanese police can detain suspects and question them days on end without allowing them to talk to a lawyer.

Mark_Book 16y ago

"I'm honestly surprised (& pleased) he would say that outright. I'm not particularly familiar with the workings of the U.S. justice system but a disparity of 100 to one sounds fairly unjust." You sound prejudiced against American justice if you can be pleased that he takes a certain position on something that you are unfamiliar with. Part of the reason why there's a 90% success rate (if that is the case) might be that prosecutors in many jurisdictions are instructed to only pursue cases they believ are winnable

mynameishere 16y ago

It's all banalities. Standard lefty talking points. And of course, it's a lie. "100 to 1"? http://politics.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01/crack-vs-powder-cocaine-a-gulf-in-penalties.html http://politics.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2007/10/01... In 2006, crack cocaine sentences were 43.5 percent longer than powder cocaine sentences; the average length of imprisonment for powder cocaine offenders was 84.7 months, while crack cocaine-related imprisonments averaged 121.5 months.

neilk 16y ago
Conrad Black would be amused at your description of him as a lefty. This guy founded a newspaper specifically to combat what he called "soft, left pap" in the Canadian journalism scene. He and his wife are so retrograde they are open admirers of the monarchy and nostalgic for the British class system. There is a disease in American politics of attacking the position for potentially being consonant with a particular ideology. Call it the ad ideologicem fallacy. Like, if this statement could be said by a left-winger, it must not be true, even if it's made by someone with actual experience or data. Maybe his 100 to 1 statement is factually wrong, or perhaps that was just hyperbole. The main issue is that there's any disparity at all between drug sentences.
MaysonL 16y ago
The 100 to 1 sentencing disparity is in the amount of drug which triggers the five year mandatory minimum sentence: 5 grams in the case of crack, 500 grams in the case of powder. See http://www.drugpolicy.org/drugwar/mandatorymin/crackpowder.cfm http://www.drugpolicy.org/drugwar/mandatorymin/crackpowder.c... for more.
electromagnetic 16y ago
If Conrad Black is a 'standard lefty' in the US, you poor bastards must have the most nihilistic hegemonic fascist right-wing government to ever exist. Frankly, if Black is a lefty, it must have taken all of the gods recorded in human history working to their max to suppress the rightist powers in the American system from going supra-Nazi-fascist-zombie-monster and destroying all non-Aryans. Seriously, Black is a super-right wing nut job. Please, check your own facts before making outright ludicrous claims as calling him a lefty. Seriously, I hope Canada doesn't take him back because we've already got enough right-wing fraudsters running our country, we don't need another one to come back and help bolster their ranks.

nopassrecover 16y ago

Not to distract from the point but if crack users are 100 times more likely to commit other crimes (theft/assault) as a result of their crack use then this is a "fair" sentence.