4 ms·

It's not about individual cases, it's about the aggregate effect of the rules governing the process. Making it easier to convict people (by lowering or shifting

It's not about individual cases, it's about the aggregate effect of the rules governing the process. Making it easier to convict people (by lowering or shifting the burden of proof, weakening procedural protections for the accused etc) will result in more guilty people being convicted, but it will also result in more innocent people being convicted. And making it more difficult to convict has the opposite effect. It's not like the only two possible outcomes of a criminal investigation are that a guilty person gets convicted or an innocent person gets convicted. You can also convict both (eg, if there is evidence that multiple people were involved), or neither.

giantg2 3y ago
I'm mot sure why you're replying this to me. Did you mean to respond to someone else? It seems to be formed argumentatively but follows what I was already saying.
- Kwantuum 3y ago
  Pretty sure they're just replying specifically to > you still have guilty parties going free anyways since the wrong person is convicted which is a non sequitur.
  - giantg2 3y ago
    How exactly is that a non sequitur? It should be evident that if you jail the innocent party, the guilty party would still be at large, case closed, authorities would no longer be looking for them. The whole premise of this one or the other thing is flawed. You can increase conviction of the guilty while also protecting the innocent depending on the procedures taken. The "how" matters at lot. So when you ask people stuff like how many guilty men should go free, it's a complete farce that is easily manipulated based on how you pose the question, methods, and outcomes in the fictional scenario. It takes away focus from the actual policies/solutions. Edit: why disagree?
kevinmchugh 3y ago
What's the aggregate, social effect of living in a state where 9% of prisoners are innocent?
michaelmrose 3y ago
Those same effects can almost always for practical purposes be increasing resources and accountability. If evidentiary rules force you to exclude evidence you obtained illegally learn to break the law less and beat the pavement more. Loosening rules is in fact likely to result in MORE guilty parties running around not less because it makes it easier to stick SOMEONE with the crime whereas accountability makes it more likely that you stick the right guy with the crime.

giantg2 3y ago

I'm mot sure why you're replying this to me. Did you mean to respond to someone else? It seems to be formed argumentatively but follows what I was already saying.

Kwantuum 3y ago
Pretty sure they're just replying specifically to > you still have guilty parties going free anyways since the wrong person is convicted which is a non sequitur.
- giantg2 3y ago
  How exactly is that a non sequitur? It should be evident that if you jail the innocent party, the guilty party would still be at large, case closed, authorities would no longer be looking for them. The whole premise of this one or the other thing is flawed. You can increase conviction of the guilty while also protecting the innocent depending on the procedures taken. The "how" matters at lot. So when you ask people stuff like how many guilty men should go free, it's a complete farce that is easily manipulated based on how you pose the question, methods, and outcomes in the fictional scenario. It takes away focus from the actual policies/solutions. Edit: why disagree?

kevinmchugh 3y ago

What's the aggregate, social effect of living in a state where 9% of prisoners are innocent?

michaelmrose 3y ago

Those same effects can almost always for practical purposes be increasing resources and accountability. If evidentiary rules force you to exclude evidence you obtained illegally learn to break the law less and beat the pavement more. Loosening rules is in fact likely to result in MORE guilty parties running around not less because it makes it easier to stick SOMEONE with the crime whereas accountability makes it more likely that you stick the right guy with the crime.