5 ms·

I don't think individual cases like these prove anything about the American justice system at large. In any system run by humans that is large enough, there wil

by tines 5y ago

I don't think individual cases like these prove anything about the American justice system at large. In any system run by humans that is large enough, there will be mistakes or abuses committed by individuals or small groups, but this doesn't make any strong implications about the design of the system overall. (Of course, it may really be broken like you're saying, it's just that I don't think a few cases like these prove it.)

pempem 5y ago
(Unless you're the one robbed of your 43 years or 2 years of life while continuously claiming - correctly - your innocence). Its beyond Kafkaesque.
- tines 5y ago
  So a system has to be perfect or else it is Kafkaesque? Isn't there a gradient between them?
  - SerLava 5y ago
    You're the only one inventing a false binary. The US legal system locks up more people than any country on earth, and the majority of its prisoners did not do anything morally wrong. Most of them didn't even go to trial, and a huge number have not even been charged. It is so blatantly corrupt and psychotic a system, it's quite honestly ignorant to even compare it to any notion of "perfect". "Kafkaesque" is going easy on it. It's objectively the extension of chattel slavery in this country. It's a crime against humanity.
    - tines 5y ago
      Again, I'm not arguing that the system isn't broken or defending it in any way, I'm only saying that the original post didn't offer evidence in that direction. The things you're talking about may indeed be evidence, but they're not what I was talking about.
      - macintux 5y ago
        The evidence is not exactly in short supply, but I was not writing an essay intending to prove my case beyond a reasonable doubt.
    - vajrabum 5y ago
      What do you mean that the US legal systems has locked up a huge number that have not even been charged? That doesn't pass the sniff test. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.
      - Clubber 5y ago
        Most cases are pled out of court. So the dilemma is you are innocent, the prosecutor is asking 20 years for the crime you didn't commit. If you plea guilty to the crime you didn't commit, you get 5 years. Your public defender probably has 40 other ongoing cases, so he is an expert at plea deals but who knows about his trial skills. He recommends you take the plea deal. Do you trust the jury to find you rightfully innocent?
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      > the majority of its prisoners did not do anything morally wrong Are you suggesting that the prisoners who did nothing morally wrong are the ones convicted of drug-related offenses? Honestly, while the fraction is large, it hardly looks like a majority (1 in 5 apparently): https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html And it is not broken down to users vs dealers. The former may have a claim to having done nothing morally wrong, but the latter certainly do not. > Most of them didn't even go to trial This is arguably a problem, but not unique to the US. Other places also do a majority of convictions via plea bargain: https://www.economist.com/international/2017/11/09/the-troubling-spread-of-plea-bargaining-from-america-to-the-world https://www.economist.com/international/2017/11/09/the-troub...
      - skinnymuch 5y ago
        Dealing weed or hallucinogens or even ecstasy certainly aren’t that morally wrong. I’d say not at all, but they are a far cry from actually harmful serious drugs and the addictions they can cause.
yardie 5y ago
If it was an isolated incident, mistake, or abuse surely the powers that be would want it corrected immediately when brought to light? Well, look here [0], it isn't a priority. The people in charge of the system have no interest in fixing anything. [0] https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-aud-nw-missouri-governor-pardons-20210610-427r6pau7neu5haq2uknglksbu-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-aud-nw-missouri-go...
- tines 5y ago
  I agree, that is pretty terrible. But the system is designed so that this guy can be voted out. Again, I'd say it's the people, not the design of the system, that is the problem.
  - netizen-936824 5y ago
    The design of the system allows people to be lax and make mistakes, the system could be designed with more accountability. However, people designed the system and people make mistakes
- mustacheemperor 5y ago
  And another flaw in the system highlighted by this case, >If Strickland is released, he will not be eligible for compensation from the state. Missouri compensates only inmates who are exonerated through DNA evidence It's also worth noting that despite this issue not being a priority for the governor of missouri, he did find the time to pardon two individuals fined after pleading guilty over pointing firearms at protestors from their property.[0] [0]https://www.khou.com/article/news/politics/gov-parson-pardons-mark-patricia-mccloskey-pointing-guns-protesters/63-895be996-3566-47b6-8c3d-3b473d8e2319 https://www.khou.com/article/news/politics/gov-parson-pardon...
  - fencepost 5y ago
    It really does seem that there should be mandatory minimums for compensation, at least in cases involving prosecutorial misconduct. The math for a bare minimum amount should be easy: How much would a person with that skill level have made hired into a position at the prosecutor's office in the year of imprisonment? Now run that out for the duration of imprisonment, including generous allowances for overtime, raises, promotions, etc. using percentages taken directly from the salary histories of the office involved. This doesn't mean the money has to come out of the budget of the prosecutor's office, this is just a way to address arguments over "How much is fair? That's too generous! That's too cheap!" If the situation is such that the minimum amount seems unacceptably low, judges or juries can depart upward. If everyone agrees that the minimum is too high, that's easy to address as well - go claw back some of the overly-generous salaries paid to people in the prosecutor's office, then adjust the calculation using the new numbers.
elliekelly 5y ago
Our “justice” system was arguably designed to allow some guilty people go free in order to prevent innocent people from wrongfully being robbed of their liberty.
- tines 5y ago
  Sure, but this doesn't impact my point, which is that relatively few mistakes don't impugn the design system. Other things might impugn it, but a few mistakes don't, that's all I'm saying.
  - SerLava 5y ago
    You're right that a few mistakes wouldn't impugn the design of the system, but in this case there is no ambiguity- the US justice system is intentionally evil.
    - tines 5y ago
      I wasn't arguing that there is ambiguity. Not sure how many times I have to say that in this thread.
- ursugardaddy 5y ago
  that's what they teach, in reality it's a bit different
SavantIdiot 5y ago
The radically disproportionate ratio of blacks in prison vs whites in prison compared to their population percentage would like to have a word with you. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/30/shrinking-gap-between-number-of-blacks-and-whites-in-prison/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/30/shrinking-g...
- tines 5y ago
  I'd say that the laws are mostly fair, but the enforcement isn't. The fact you cite is an indictment of the people in charge, not of the system (which allows those people to be replaced by voting).
  - SavantIdiot 5y ago
    > I'd say that the laws are mostly fair, but the enforcement isn't. Yes, exactly.
- gunapologist99 5y ago
  Correlation is not causation. This unfortunately demonstrates a common misunderstanding of how to interpret data; if there are more left-handed people compared to the general population in prison, does it mean that the justice system is biased against people who are left-handed? That may still be true, but you simply cannot draw a correct conclusion without additional data along a different axis.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - SavantIdiot 5y ago
    > does it mean that the justice system is biased against people who are left-handed? Yes. That is literally the definition of a statistical bias. From wikipedia: Statistical bias is a feature of a statistical technique or of its results whereby the expected value of the results differs from the true underlying quantitative parameter being estimated.
kook_throwaway 5y ago
The US has more people in in prison than anywhere in the world. It is broken.

by tines 5y ago

pempem 5y ago

(Unless you're the one robbed of your 43 years or 2 years of life while continuously claiming - correctly - your innocence). Its beyond Kafkaesque.

tines 5y ago
So a system has to be perfect or else it is Kafkaesque? Isn't there a gradient between them?
- SerLava 5y ago
  You're the only one inventing a false binary. The US legal system locks up more people than any country on earth, and the majority of its prisoners did not do anything morally wrong. Most of them didn't even go to trial, and a huge number have not even been charged. It is so blatantly corrupt and psychotic a system, it's quite honestly ignorant to even compare it to any notion of "perfect". "Kafkaesque" is going easy on it. It's objectively the extension of chattel slavery in this country. It's a crime against humanity.
  - tines 5y ago
    Again, I'm not arguing that the system isn't broken or defending it in any way, I'm only saying that the original post didn't offer evidence in that direction. The things you're talking about may indeed be evidence, but they're not what I was talking about.
    - macintux 5y ago
      The evidence is not exactly in short supply, but I was not writing an essay intending to prove my case beyond a reasonable doubt.
  - vajrabum 5y ago
    What do you mean that the US legal systems has locked up a huge number that have not even been charged? That doesn't pass the sniff test. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.
    - Clubber 5y ago
      Most cases are pled out of court. So the dilemma is you are innocent, the prosecutor is asking 20 years for the crime you didn't commit. If you plea guilty to the crime you didn't commit, you get 5 years. Your public defender probably has 40 other ongoing cases, so he is an expert at plea deals but who knows about his trial skills. He recommends you take the plea deal. Do you trust the jury to find you rightfully innocent?
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    > the majority of its prisoners did not do anything morally wrong Are you suggesting that the prisoners who did nothing morally wrong are the ones convicted of drug-related offenses? Honestly, while the fraction is large, it hardly looks like a majority (1 in 5 apparently): https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html And it is not broken down to users vs dealers. The former may have a claim to having done nothing morally wrong, but the latter certainly do not. > Most of them didn't even go to trial This is arguably a problem, but not unique to the US. Other places also do a majority of convictions via plea bargain: https://www.economist.com/international/2017/11/09/the-troubling-spread-of-plea-bargaining-from-america-to-the-world https://www.economist.com/international/2017/11/09/the-troub...
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      Dealing weed or hallucinogens or even ecstasy certainly aren’t that morally wrong. I’d say not at all, but they are a far cry from actually harmful serious drugs and the addictions they can cause.

yardie 5y ago

If it was an isolated incident, mistake, or abuse surely the powers that be would want it corrected immediately when brought to light? Well, look here [0], it isn't a priority. The people in charge of the system have no interest in fixing anything. [0] https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-aud-nw-missouri-governor-pardons-20210610-427r6pau7neu5haq2uknglksbu-story.html https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-aud-nw-missouri-go...

tines 5y ago
I agree, that is pretty terrible. But the system is designed so that this guy can be voted out. Again, I'd say it's the people, not the design of the system, that is the problem.
- netizen-936824 5y ago
  The design of the system allows people to be lax and make mistakes, the system could be designed with more accountability. However, people designed the system and people make mistakes
mustacheemperor 5y ago
And another flaw in the system highlighted by this case, >If Strickland is released, he will not be eligible for compensation from the state. Missouri compensates only inmates who are exonerated through DNA evidence It's also worth noting that despite this issue not being a priority for the governor of missouri, he did find the time to pardon two individuals fined after pleading guilty over pointing firearms at protestors from their property.[0] [0]https://www.khou.com/article/news/politics/gov-parson-pardons-mark-patricia-mccloskey-pointing-guns-protesters/63-895be996-3566-47b6-8c3d-3b473d8e2319 https://www.khou.com/article/news/politics/gov-parson-pardon...
- fencepost 5y ago
  It really does seem that there should be mandatory minimums for compensation, at least in cases involving prosecutorial misconduct. The math for a bare minimum amount should be easy: How much would a person with that skill level have made hired into a position at the prosecutor's office in the year of imprisonment? Now run that out for the duration of imprisonment, including generous allowances for overtime, raises, promotions, etc. using percentages taken directly from the salary histories of the office involved. This doesn't mean the money has to come out of the budget of the prosecutor's office, this is just a way to address arguments over "How much is fair? That's too generous! That's too cheap!" If the situation is such that the minimum amount seems unacceptably low, judges or juries can depart upward. If everyone agrees that the minimum is too high, that's easy to address as well - go claw back some of the overly-generous salaries paid to people in the prosecutor's office, then adjust the calculation using the new numbers.

elliekelly 5y ago

Our “justice” system was arguably designed to allow some guilty people go free in order to prevent innocent people from wrongfully being robbed of their liberty.

tines 5y ago
Sure, but this doesn't impact my point, which is that relatively few mistakes don't impugn the design system. Other things might impugn it, but a few mistakes don't, that's all I'm saying.
- SerLava 5y ago
  You're right that a few mistakes wouldn't impugn the design of the system, but in this case there is no ambiguity- the US justice system is intentionally evil.
  - tines 5y ago
    I wasn't arguing that there is ambiguity. Not sure how many times I have to say that in this thread.
ursugardaddy 5y ago
that's what they teach, in reality it's a bit different

SavantIdiot 5y ago

The radically disproportionate ratio of blacks in prison vs whites in prison compared to their population percentage would like to have a word with you. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/30/shrinking-gap-between-number-of-blacks-and-whites-in-prison/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/30/shrinking-g...

tines 5y ago
I'd say that the laws are mostly fair, but the enforcement isn't. The fact you cite is an indictment of the people in charge, not of the system (which allows those people to be replaced by voting).
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  > I'd say that the laws are mostly fair, but the enforcement isn't. Yes, exactly.
gunapologist99 5y ago
Correlation is not causation. This unfortunately demonstrates a common misunderstanding of how to interpret data; if there are more left-handed people compared to the general population in prison, does it mean that the justice system is biased against people who are left-handed? That may still be true, but you simply cannot draw a correct conclusion without additional data along a different axis.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  > does it mean that the justice system is biased against people who are left-handed? Yes. That is literally the definition of a statistical bias. From wikipedia: Statistical bias is a feature of a statistical technique or of its results whereby the expected value of the results differs from the true underlying quantitative parameter being estimated.

kook_throwaway 5y ago

The US has more people in in prison than anywhere in the world. It is broken.