3 ms·

I heard the reason for the high conviction rate is because they only pursue cases that they think they have a 100% of winning. <rant> Which I think is a reall

I heard the reason for the high conviction rate is because they only pursue cases that they think they have a 100% of winning. <rant> Which I think is a really messed up thing. The police exist to serve the public, not to “win” cases. The fact that the public thinks “losing” a case is a bad thing is crazy. While you could argue that “losing” cases means they need to be replaced with someone who’ll get better evidence, this always leads to putting someone who’ll be “tough on crime” as the DA. And those DAs end up putting a lot of innocent people in prison. </rant>

catalogia 6y ago
Almost as bad as prosecutors winning cases against innocent people is prosecutors losing cases against innocent people. Losing cases against innocent people is a bad thing insofar as the process itself is punishment. If prosecutors avoid cases they think they might lose, they're doubtlessly avoiding the scenario where they lose cases against innocent people, not just the scenario where they lose cases against guilty people. The question of which should be prioritized doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Surely there's a balance to strike, but where?
pnw_hazor 6y ago
Not sure about Japan, but the tendency of US prosecutors to dismiss/drop cases they think they might lose is a critical part of the US justice system. The US prosecutor has a dual role that includes protecting people from unwarranted prosecution as well as prosecuting people charged by police . Though [too] often, they confuse their important duty to protect people from unwarranted prosecution with their personal interest in promoting their career. edit: toned it down a bit - added [too]
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  Oh, I agree that it’s essential to a functioning justice system. I’m just upset about corrupt prosecutors. For example, sometimes, even with all the evidence pointing to Person A, the police will still railroad (an unrelated) Person B because they, for some reason, can’t admit they’re wrong.
  - pnw_hazor 6y ago
    Corrupt prosecutors are evil and way too common. Prosecutors are supposed to be the gatekeeper -- they should be a bulwark against injustice. I wish there was some plea offer reform to stop prosecutors from making coercive plea offers. I think that is one of the worse offenses against justice. E.g., offering plea deals with a choice of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor with no jail or you get multiple felonies thrown at you and the potential for years of prison. The Feds are even worse with their false statements or mail/wire fraud charges. No wonder they get their convictions. Plea guilty to one count of making a false statement or you get 100 counts of mail fraud -- take your pick.
    - colejohnson66 6y ago
      Plea bargains are evil. It’s my belief that if your case is not rock solid enough that you need to resort to a plea bargain, you shouldn’t be prosecuting that person. Also, how are plea bargains not perjury? You’re saying, “I did it” even if you didn’t.
      - pnw_hazor 6y ago
        I feel the policy behind plea bargains is sound. Some of the problems the Japan criminal justice has is because plea bargains are not generally allowed except for recent limited reforms that in some ways make things worse. Many US-style plea bargains are reasonable and do not require defendants to lie because they are pleading guilty to lesser included crimes rather than lying about what they did. The problem is when plea bargaining is used as a weapon that encourages false confessions or false guilty pleas. Or, more generally, when the choice to plead guilty or go to trial is unbalanced such that defendants will not even try to force the government to prove their case. This is bad for justice. The Feds are big into this. They wield/abuse 18 U.S. Code § 1001 (making false statements a felony) with abandon. A defendant can be faced with $100,000s in legal fees with the potential of decades in federal prison or they can plead guilty to one count of 18 USC 1001, it happens everyday (probably several times a day).

catalogia 6y ago

Almost as bad as prosecutors winning cases against innocent people is prosecutors losing cases against innocent people. Losing cases against innocent people is a bad thing insofar as the process itself is punishment. If prosecutors avoid cases they think they might lose, they're doubtlessly avoiding the scenario where they lose cases against innocent people, not just the scenario where they lose cases against guilty people. The question of which should be prioritized doesn't seem so clear cut to me. Surely there's a balance to strike, but where?

pnw_hazor 6y ago

Not sure about Japan, but the tendency of US prosecutors to dismiss/drop cases they think they might lose is a critical part of the US justice system. The US prosecutor has a dual role that includes protecting people from unwarranted prosecution as well as prosecuting people charged by police . Though [too] often, they confuse their important duty to protect people from unwarranted prosecution with their personal interest in promoting their career. edit: toned it down a bit - added [too]

colejohnson66 6y ago
Oh, I agree that it’s essential to a functioning justice system. I’m just upset about corrupt prosecutors. For example, sometimes, even with all the evidence pointing to Person A, the police will still railroad (an unrelated) Person B because they, for some reason, can’t admit they’re wrong.
- pnw_hazor 6y ago
  Corrupt prosecutors are evil and way too common. Prosecutors are supposed to be the gatekeeper -- they should be a bulwark against injustice. I wish there was some plea offer reform to stop prosecutors from making coercive plea offers. I think that is one of the worse offenses against justice. E.g., offering plea deals with a choice of pleading guilty to a misdemeanor with no jail or you get multiple felonies thrown at you and the potential for years of prison. The Feds are even worse with their false statements or mail/wire fraud charges. No wonder they get their convictions. Plea guilty to one count of making a false statement or you get 100 counts of mail fraud -- take your pick.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    Plea bargains are evil. It’s my belief that if your case is not rock solid enough that you need to resort to a plea bargain, you shouldn’t be prosecuting that person. Also, how are plea bargains not perjury? You’re saying, “I did it” even if you didn’t.
    - pnw_hazor 6y ago
      I feel the policy behind plea bargains is sound. Some of the problems the Japan criminal justice has is because plea bargains are not generally allowed except for recent limited reforms that in some ways make things worse. Many US-style plea bargains are reasonable and do not require defendants to lie because they are pleading guilty to lesser included crimes rather than lying about what they did. The problem is when plea bargaining is used as a weapon that encourages false confessions or false guilty pleas. Or, more generally, when the choice to plead guilty or go to trial is unbalanced such that defendants will not even try to force the government to prove their case. This is bad for justice. The Feds are big into this. They wield/abuse 18 U.S. Code § 1001 (making false statements a felony) with abandon. A defendant can be faced with $100,000s in legal fees with the potential of decades in federal prison or they can plead guilty to one count of 18 USC 1001, it happens everyday (probably several times a day).