What a bleak, cynical view of the world and the way it works. Not to mention the glaring factual inaccuracies like the so-called '99.9% accurate' claim.
A recent study by the Seton Hall law professor D. Michael Risinger puts the share of innocents in prison at 3 percent to 5 percent. But that study looked only at capital crimes and with capital crimes the defendant generally has better representation than in lesser cases. But even so, a 2 percent wrongful conviction rate would mean about 46,000 people who are incarcerated for crimes they didn’t commit.
I wonder what jacob would be writing if HE had been falsely accused of a crime, found to be 'guilty beyond a reasonable doubt' by a jury of his peers and incarcerated for 17 years for a crime he did not commit, costing him his job, his friends, his family, his reputation and placing him in a prison system that is, by almost any account, horrific.
As to the claim that the cost of assuring American citizens justice, in cases like this, is too expensive, I would respectfully point out that district attorneys and prosecutors could go a long way toward lowering the cost of such cases by allowing DNA testing where evidence is available.
Experience has repeatedly shown that prosecutors and D.A.'s routinely resist allowing DNA testing in pertinent cases and spend substantial sums of public money to do so, not because there is no credible reason to do so, but because they feel that the subsequent reversal of a case represents a failure of their offices.
This very resistance is a significant factor in the so-called 'paucity of successful appeals'. And the supreme financial irony is that it costs a lot less to do a DNA test and release the innocent than it does to keep a wrongfully-incarcerated individual in prison for 10 or 20 years .. or life .. or the death penalty.
Personally, I love the 'showmanship lawyers' claim. Apparently, frustrated by the the fact that he couldn't claim that these attorneys get rich defending the innocent (because, of course, wrongfully-convicted persons rarely have a lot of money), jacob has decided that they do it for the publicity. Think back; how many innocence attorneys of national stature can you think of? None? I wonder why?
Clearly jacob's personal philosophy and political ideology trump any thoughts of justice, empathy or compassion for others.
posted 2 years, 10 months ago
view in context