6 ms·

Innocent meaning they didn’t do the specific crime, or innocent as in someone with a clean record that was railroaded? If you’re looking for the criminal that

by graphe 3y ago

Innocent meaning they didn’t do the specific crime, or innocent as in someone with a clean record that was railroaded? If you’re looking for the criminal that killed a bunch of people but not that specific case it’s not that uncommon. If you’re looking for a squeaky clean guy that was there at the wrong place at the wrong time it’s very rare. Most criminals are repeat offenders.

Zigurd 3y ago
Most businesses create and cultivate repeat customers from specific target markets. The US prison industrial complex is adept at this.
- graphe 3y ago
  What is the conclusion you’re making?
  - mistrial9 3y ago
    it is a revolving door in real ways
    - Zigurd 3y ago
      It starts with selective enforcement and repeated police contact with young people. That's how the business of imprisonment fills the funnel in the US.
klyrs 3y ago
This is magical thinking. We know the guy was bad so we locked him up for a crime. We don't know if we pinned the right crime on him or not, but he's locked away safely now so he must be bad. If this is your genuine belief, it begs the question: why are Americans, on average, such terrible people when compared to other first world citizens?
- graphe 3y ago
  You don’t just decide to lock someone up for a crime. Police gather evidence, give it to a prosecutor, the prosecutor makes a case (or not) and they will either go to trial or plea, then it’s in the hands of a jury or judge. Claiming guilt to plea down to avoid a case is a problem, but that isn’t the case you’re making. There’s nothing magical about criminal prosecution.
  - klyrs 3y ago
    > If you’re looking for the criminal that killed a bunch of people but not that specific case it’s not that uncommon. Here you're saying that mass-murderers are common, but despite their extensive trails of corpses, we can't pin the actual crime on an actual criminal. No, there's nothing magical about criminal prosecution here, it's no more than bullshit as you've described it. Back to my question, why do you think mass-murderers are so incredibly overrepresented in the American population?
    - graphe 3y ago
      Blame laws like fruit of the poisoned tree. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree If you want to act in bad faith and call it magic and bullshit feel free to grandstand.
      - qingcharles 3y ago
        What is wrong with the poisonous tree doctrine in your opinion? I find it isn't used widely enough against police and prosecutor misconduct. There are too many ways out of it for them.
        graphe 3y ago
        It’s in response to: >Here you're saying that mass-murderers are common, but despite their extensive trails of corpses, we can't pin the actual crime on an actual criminal. No, there's nothing magical about criminal prosecution here, it's no more than bullshit as you've described it. Everyone does illegal stuff in the US. Sometimes it’s a technicality that a guilty party goes free.
s1artibartfast 3y ago
I believe, and I think the data supports, that the US prison population is due to the number of laws we have, and the harshness of our penalties. A false conviction rate of a few percent does not explain an order of magnitude level differences in incarceration between countries. I think an interesting question is what portion of the US population would be incarcerated if the totality of our laws were applied to everyone
- graphe 3y ago
  US law is applied unequally. It’s very harsh, sometimes random and I’ve heard all Americans break the law daily. We would all be in jail and sometimes prison. US crime is like driving across the only road that is covered in black ice with toll trolls on the way, you have to cross it, you know it’s there, and you can do it carefully but you never know what will happen or where you’ll slip up.
- qingcharles 3y ago
  Opinion of a criminal: I don't think there are too many criminal laws at the State level. That is definitely not the reason for high incarceration rates. The guys who are in prison didn't randomly trip over a law they didn't know existed. 99% of the laws are the same as they've been since pre-history: don't hurt someone, don't steal etc. Sentencing to prison is probably the key problem. Criminals need help. Outright punishment just hardens them. From my experience the bulk of crime has its origin in mental illnesses which are not being treated. The medical system in the USA almost certainly is the cause of this.
  - pdonis 3y ago
    What about non-violent drug possession? AFAIK that all by itself accounts for a significant number of incarcerated people. Laws criminalizing that are a product of the war on drugs, not embodying something in statute that's been a common law crime throughout human history.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
moate 3y ago
[flagged]
- graphe 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - moate 3y ago
    [flagged]
andrewla 3y ago
This is frequently cited by law enforcement and criminal justice officials, but this is an impossible bar to set, because they have not been convicted of those other unspecified crimes. The excuse "he maybe didn't rob this store, but he did rob those other stores, so let's nudge the case a bit", even if done in good faith by law enforcement, is still fishy, because ... why not convict them instead for the other crimes being purported, since we're more confident about them? In many cases I think this is likely to be a post facto rationalization for the fact that the case against the suspect is weaker than initially thought but represents a great deal of manpower that feels wasted if the suspect is not convicted.
- graphe 3y ago
  That definitely happens but lots of evidence is thrown out and they are looking at throwing the law at him. A famous case is Al Capone. I’m not calling it right or wrong, it’s just what happens with the system in place. It’s also shown to the public to convict them. The jury has the ability to ‘throw’ the case as they did in the case of OJ.
  - pc86 3y ago
    Except Al Capone actually did what he went to prison for. Yeah he did a lot of other stuff nobody could prove to the standard of a courtroom, but what you're talking about is someone "knows" Al Capone is bad, so they fabricate crimes and evidence and frame him for those in order to send him to prison. That would still be wrong. This is a feature, not a bug.
    - lesuorac 3y ago
      A feature to the prosector maybe but a bug to the public at large. 1) People do convince themselves of falsehoods; the person may not actually have done that initial crime. 2) Being able to trump up lessor charges can be (ab)used even if the person didn't commit an initial crime but instead is just a ~journalist~ nuisance.
    - denton-scratch 3y ago

by graphe 3y ago

Zigurd 3y ago

Most businesses create and cultivate repeat customers from specific target markets. The US prison industrial complex is adept at this.

graphe 3y ago
What is the conclusion you’re making?
- mistrial9 3y ago
  it is a revolving door in real ways
  - Zigurd 3y ago
    It starts with selective enforcement and repeated police contact with young people. That's how the business of imprisonment fills the funnel in the US.

klyrs 3y ago

This is magical thinking. We know the guy was bad so we locked him up for a crime. We don't know if we pinned the right crime on him or not, but he's locked away safely now so he must be bad. If this is your genuine belief, it begs the question: why are Americans, on average, such terrible people when compared to other first world citizens?

graphe 3y ago
You don’t just decide to lock someone up for a crime. Police gather evidence, give it to a prosecutor, the prosecutor makes a case (or not) and they will either go to trial or plea, then it’s in the hands of a jury or judge. Claiming guilt to plea down to avoid a case is a problem, but that isn’t the case you’re making. There’s nothing magical about criminal prosecution.
- klyrs 3y ago
  > If you’re looking for the criminal that killed a bunch of people but not that specific case it’s not that uncommon. Here you're saying that mass-murderers are common, but despite their extensive trails of corpses, we can't pin the actual crime on an actual criminal. No, there's nothing magical about criminal prosecution here, it's no more than bullshit as you've described it. Back to my question, why do you think mass-murderers are so incredibly overrepresented in the American population?
  - graphe 3y ago
    Blame laws like fruit of the poisoned tree. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree If you want to act in bad faith and call it magic and bullshit feel free to grandstand.
    - qingcharles 3y ago
      What is wrong with the poisonous tree doctrine in your opinion? I find it isn't used widely enough against police and prosecutor misconduct. There are too many ways out of it for them.
      - graphe 3y ago
        It’s in response to: >Here you're saying that mass-murderers are common, but despite their extensive trails of corpses, we can't pin the actual crime on an actual criminal. No, there's nothing magical about criminal prosecution here, it's no more than bullshit as you've described it. Everyone does illegal stuff in the US. Sometimes it’s a technicality that a guilty party goes free.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

I believe, and I think the data supports, that the US prison population is due to the number of laws we have, and the harshness of our penalties. A false conviction rate of a few percent does not explain an order of magnitude level differences in incarceration between countries. I think an interesting question is what portion of the US population would be incarcerated if the totality of our laws were applied to everyone

graphe 3y ago
US law is applied unequally. It’s very harsh, sometimes random and I’ve heard all Americans break the law daily. We would all be in jail and sometimes prison. US crime is like driving across the only road that is covered in black ice with toll trolls on the way, you have to cross it, you know it’s there, and you can do it carefully but you never know what will happen or where you’ll slip up.
qingcharles 3y ago
Opinion of a criminal: I don't think there are too many criminal laws at the State level. That is definitely not the reason for high incarceration rates. The guys who are in prison didn't randomly trip over a law they didn't know existed. 99% of the laws are the same as they've been since pre-history: don't hurt someone, don't steal etc. Sentencing to prison is probably the key problem. Criminals need help. Outright punishment just hardens them. From my experience the bulk of crime has its origin in mental illnesses which are not being treated. The medical system in the USA almost certainly is the cause of this.
- pdonis 3y ago
  What about non-violent drug possession? AFAIK that all by itself accounts for a significant number of incarcerated people. Laws criminalizing that are a product of the war on drugs, not embodying something in statute that's been a common law crime throughout human history.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago

moate 3y ago

[flagged]

graphe 3y ago
[flagged]
- moate 3y ago
  [flagged]

andrewla 3y ago

This is frequently cited by law enforcement and criminal justice officials, but this is an impossible bar to set, because they have not been convicted of those other unspecified crimes. The excuse "he maybe didn't rob this store, but he did rob those other stores, so let's nudge the case a bit", even if done in good faith by law enforcement, is still fishy, because ... why not convict them instead for the other crimes being purported, since we're more confident about them? In many cases I think this is likely to be a post facto rationalization for the fact that the case against the suspect is weaker than initially thought but represents a great deal of manpower that feels wasted if the suspect is not convicted.

graphe 3y ago
That definitely happens but lots of evidence is thrown out and they are looking at throwing the law at him. A famous case is Al Capone. I’m not calling it right or wrong, it’s just what happens with the system in place. It’s also shown to the public to convict them. The jury has the ability to ‘throw’ the case as they did in the case of OJ.
- pc86 3y ago
  Except Al Capone actually did what he went to prison for. Yeah he did a lot of other stuff nobody could prove to the standard of a courtroom, but what you're talking about is someone "knows" Al Capone is bad, so they fabricate crimes and evidence and frame him for those in order to send him to prison. That would still be wrong. This is a feature, not a bug.
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    A feature to the prosector maybe but a bug to the public at large. 1) People do convince themselves of falsehoods; the person may not actually have done that initial crime. 2) Being able to trump up lessor charges can be (ab)used even if the person didn't commit an initial crime but instead is just a ~journalist~ nuisance.
  - denton-scratch 3y ago