4 ms·

I agree and disagree. We should improve the system to make it resilient to individual failures, and we should place more pressure on individuals in positions of

I agree and disagree. We should improve the system to make it resilient to individual failures, and we should place more pressure on individuals in positions of power to not make mistakes. I think a judge making a mistake this egregious should not be allowed to continue being a judge.

lo_zamoyski 3y ago
> We should improve the system to make it resilient to individual failures This isn't a solution. It is a wish. Obviously, we all would like it to be the case that innocent people are never punished. But first, is the rate of false convictions of the innocent actually egregiously high? This article gives an example of one case, but it does not follow that we are facing high rates of false convictions, especially for serious crimes that carry serious penalties. Second, is there a way to reduce false convictions, especially in a way that doesn't comprise the system in some serious way? > I think a judge making a mistake this egregious should not be allowed to continue being a judge. Perhaps, perhaps not. You risk incentivizing behavior among judges that subverts the justice system.
- TheCleric 3y ago
  I think the best data we have of this in the US is the exoneration rate of death penalty convictions, which is startlingly high. A study from 2014 found it to be around 4% (https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1306417111 https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1306417111). 4% may sound low to some, but when people's live are on the line that's terribly high. If a plane had a 4% failure rate it would be considered a colossal failure.
- wholinator2 3y ago
  I know i have seen more stories lately about innocent people being freed after newly analyzed DNA evidence. I think a good question is, how would we know if someone were wrongly convicted? What tells are there that the person the judge and lawyers said was guilty, that's now in prison, what could tell us they are innocent. Presumably there are tons of guilty people proclaim innocence every day to try to get out of their consequences. What separates them? There could be catastrophically high rates of innocent convictions and I'm not confident we would be aware of that
tzs 3y ago
Wood's lawyer told the court that Woods did not have the mental capacity to stand trial. What do you think would have been the correct response from the judge?

lo_zamoyski 3y ago

> We should improve the system to make it resilient to individual failures This isn't a solution. It is a wish. Obviously, we all would like it to be the case that innocent people are never punished. But first, is the rate of false convictions of the innocent actually egregiously high? This article gives an example of one case, but it does not follow that we are facing high rates of false convictions, especially for serious crimes that carry serious penalties. Second, is there a way to reduce false convictions, especially in a way that doesn't comprise the system in some serious way? > I think a judge making a mistake this egregious should not be allowed to continue being a judge. Perhaps, perhaps not. You risk incentivizing behavior among judges that subverts the justice system.

TheCleric 3y ago
I think the best data we have of this in the US is the exoneration rate of death penalty convictions, which is startlingly high. A study from 2014 found it to be around 4% (https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1306417111 https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1306417111). 4% may sound low to some, but when people's live are on the line that's terribly high. If a plane had a 4% failure rate it would be considered a colossal failure.
wholinator2 3y ago
I know i have seen more stories lately about innocent people being freed after newly analyzed DNA evidence. I think a good question is, how would we know if someone were wrongly convicted? What tells are there that the person the judge and lawyers said was guilty, that's now in prison, what could tell us they are innocent. Presumably there are tons of guilty people proclaim innocence every day to try to get out of their consequences. What separates them? There could be catastrophically high rates of innocent convictions and I'm not confident we would be aware of that

tzs 3y ago

Wood's lawyer told the court that Woods did not have the mental capacity to stand trial. What do you think would have been the correct response from the judge?