4 ms·
If the government can afford a crime lab, expert witnesses and a team of prosecutors then why not the equal amount for public defense? Then they can do a cost-b
by the8472 6y ago
If the government can afford a crime lab, expert witnesses and a team of prosecutors then why not the equal amount for public defense? Then they can do a cost-benefit analysis whether it's really worth to indict someone even though they have to pay for their defense. It's essentially the problem of only optimizing to keep false negatives low but ignoring false positives.
- eagsalazar2 6y agoThis should be mandated for all litigation - both sides must split any funds used in the case equally, otherwise by definition it isn't a fair trial. This is one of many many ways the American justice system is completely corrupt (not singling out US, this is just where I live and what I know)
- mindfulhack 6y agoHow on earth could you easily enforce that though? Easy to quietly pay some private investigator or specialist to do some expensive or hard work in evidence gathering or analysis, and then pretend it was easier and cheaper to do than it really was. I agree that on principle it should be a rule though, so yes, absolutely agree.
- cutemonster 6y agoAt least that'd be some extra steps they'd need to take and a little bit risky for them
- eagsalazar2 6y agoYeah people could and would cheat but there are already similar laws about hiding evidence. It would be better, not perfect. Way better.
- afiori 6y agoHonestly this feels like painting a tomb, sure there is a new shiny look but it did nothing for the rotten inside.