3 ms·
10 years in prison is a lot for a non-violent crime. He might have withheld evidence but in the end it's the jury who found him guilty.
by shin_lao 13y ago
10 years in prison is a lot for a non-violent crime. He might have withheld evidence but in the end it's the jury who found him guilty.
- girvo 13y agoThe prosecutor got 10 days? Unless I'm reading your comment incorrectly. The jury system cannot handle them being liable for imprisoning the wrong people, unfortunately. That's why we have all these rules in place in our legal system. The prosecutor was the one who made the decision to willingly withhold important evidence and lie to the jury to get the conviction, so I personally think he is culpable. Oh, and by doing so, the actual killer went free, and murdered someone else. :(
- scrumper 13y ago10 days.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y agoA non-violent crime? Are you kidding? If you were kidnapped and imprisoned by an entity other than the State, would that be a violent crime? False imprisonment is a violent crime. >He might have withheld evidence but in the end it's the jury who found him guilty. You need to seriously rethink that statement. How could a jury be expected reach a correct solution when exculpatory evidence was hidden from them?