5 ms·

Just because any system could or do have biases, that’s no good defence of a system we know has terrible pernicious biases that are visibly compromising it’s in

by simonh 5y ago

Just because any system could or do have biases, that’s no good defence of a system we know has terrible pernicious biases that are visibly compromising it’s integrity. I’m a Brit, and I’d have good expectations of being treated fairly if I faced prosecution as an innocent person here in the UK, in France, Germany, or plenty of other countries. I have no such confidence about the USA. Especially so if the crime I was accused of was politicised. I actually know someone in the US who’s life was destroyed by that system, he spent a year in prison and it took years more to clear his name. Politicisation is endemic to the US justice and policing system, it’s an absolute disgrace. I agree no system is perfect, we have miscarriages of justice here in the UK too, but perfection is not the enemy of the good and your system is below mediocre. You can do, and deserve, a lot better.

Ekaros 5y ago
Specially when the public side is underfunded and defending yourself is insanely expensive. Not that law is cheap anywhere, but from recent cases like Kyle Rittenhouse and officer Potter it seems just stupid and broken.
- ziml77 5y ago
  After both looking into the details myself and watching LegalEagle's analysis of the case, I'm not convinced that there was anything wrong with the Rittenhouse trial. Rittenhouse was stupid for driving into the city in the first place, but each of the times he fired his gun seemed perfectly reasonable. And I had initially thought that he was looking for an excuse to shoot black people, but then found out that all 3 people he shot were white.
- JaimeThompson 5y ago
  What was wrong with the Potter case?
  - Ekaros 5y ago
    That that sort of case would take weeks in court room and even longer outside and cost tens or hundreds of thousands to pay for defence.
- ttybird2 5y ago
  Did you disagree with the result of the Potter case? I am unfamiliar with it but it seems like they charged a police officer who "mistakenly used a handgun instead of a Taser"? Am I missing something here?
luckylion 5y ago
Germany just had Pimmelgate (Pimmel is a synonym for penis). Hamburg's Senator of the Interior did something and some random guy wrote "you're such a dick" ("du bist so 1 pimmel"). The Senator apparently was very annoyed and asked the state attorney to go after the guy. They summoned him to the precinct, he went, said that he wrote that tweet and declined to say anything else without a lawyer present. They then got a judge to sign a search warrant against his ex-girlfriend (and mother of his children who live with her), and executed it, which was unnecessary (they knew who did it and he had already confessed) and meant to punish extra-judicially since the case would likely be thrown out in court. The state attorneys and police are part of the executive branch and subject to directives of the politician in charge. Theoretically, electing the state attorneys directly would motivate them to not just do whatever the administration wants, be that legally reasonable or not. In practice it probably does not matter.
- simonh 5y ago
  Like I said, no system is perfect. It’s a matter of the overall results. You’ll always find individual lapses unfortunately, and we always need to hold authorities to account. Anyway it’s good that there was an uproar about that case.

by simonh 5y ago

Ekaros 5y ago

Specially when the public side is underfunded and defending yourself is insanely expensive. Not that law is cheap anywhere, but from recent cases like Kyle Rittenhouse and officer Potter it seems just stupid and broken.

ziml77 5y ago
After both looking into the details myself and watching LegalEagle's analysis of the case, I'm not convinced that there was anything wrong with the Rittenhouse trial. Rittenhouse was stupid for driving into the city in the first place, but each of the times he fired his gun seemed perfectly reasonable. And I had initially thought that he was looking for an excuse to shoot black people, but then found out that all 3 people he shot were white.
JaimeThompson 5y ago
What was wrong with the Potter case?
- Ekaros 5y ago
  That that sort of case would take weeks in court room and even longer outside and cost tens or hundreds of thousands to pay for defence.
ttybird2 5y ago
Did you disagree with the result of the Potter case? I am unfamiliar with it but it seems like they charged a police officer who "mistakenly used a handgun instead of a Taser"? Am I missing something here?

luckylion 5y ago

Germany just had Pimmelgate (Pimmel is a synonym for penis). Hamburg's Senator of the Interior did something and some random guy wrote "you're such a dick" ("du bist so 1 pimmel"). The Senator apparently was very annoyed and asked the state attorney to go after the guy. They summoned him to the precinct, he went, said that he wrote that tweet and declined to say anything else without a lawyer present. They then got a judge to sign a search warrant against his ex-girlfriend (and mother of his children who live with her), and executed it, which was unnecessary (they knew who did it and he had already confessed) and meant to punish extra-judicially since the case would likely be thrown out in court. The state attorneys and police are part of the executive branch and subject to directives of the politician in charge. Theoretically, electing the state attorneys directly would motivate them to not just do whatever the administration wants, be that legally reasonable or not. In practice it probably does not matter.

simonh 5y ago
Like I said, no system is perfect. It’s a matter of the overall results. You’ll always find individual lapses unfortunately, and we always need to hold authorities to account. Anyway it’s good that there was an uproar about that case.