Welcome to Open Carnage

A resource for Halo 1 modding and tech, with unique means of rewarding individual content creation and support. Have a wander to see why we're worth the time! EST. 2012

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
xvii

Wrongly convicted man released after 39 years

55 posts in this topic

I wouldn't think that he could be tried as a juvenile now but a leniency would surely be served for the 'emotional stress' or guilt he has endured over the years.  I bet he has aged a lot faster carrying the burden of his lie/s for all these years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Members of Open Carnage never see off-site ads.

@Weps about the settlement: Yes the taxpayers would bear the burden, as they do with everything, but the man simply deserves compensation. If there were a better system in place where he could be compensated by those responsible for his imprisonment, of course that would be better, but regardless of that he still deserves compensation.

 

Ricky is lucky in that aspect, most states offer no compensation for false imprisonment. Ge get's $43,000 for each year imprisoned.  

 

Sounds like a debate topic should be born for this to continue.

My questions are:

What are they doing now to catch the culprit responsible for the crime? and

Is the now, 53 year old witness suffering any consequences of his false evidence? Maybe he should serve the remainder of the innocents jail term.

 

He'll get his, he committed Perjury. 

 

In context of this article of an innocent man being released and potentially acquited for a murder he did not commit (as opposed to one that is guilty of murder):

I think it's hard to prove your innocence or get a fair trial, re-trial or acquital for a crime you didn't do when you're dead =\ because the "justice" system failed you at a certain point of time. Being alive and doing time is a chance for redemption, especially for those who slip through the cracks (yes at the tax payers expense.... if you were doing time and were wrongfully imprisioned, wouldn't you want the chance for redemeption and to clear your name for yourself and your familys'?). Is there even a price for redemption? This man deserves redemption, who are we to say he doesn't?

 

 

 

If we all had an eye for an eye mentality (bar the obvious immediate self defence), what makes us any better than those we detest for crimes done to us and our loved ones? What makes sharia law any more extreme or morally detestable if we intentionally and ignorantly punish a potentially innocent man by death? I find this distasteful. Death is final, the reality is that it won't change anything that has been done or will be done, it may bring a temporary satistifaction or relief but will always be a very counter-productive sense of justice.

 

So what's needed, however "idealistic", is to strive to improve the justice system so people aren't doing time based on circumstanial evidence and bias, if you're thinking about reducing costs and prison over crowding, rethink punishment methologies for petty crime (remember they once also locked up people for stealing a loaf of bread) and keep* the ones who truly need to be locked up, incarcerated. With improving forensic technology, there is a higher chance for cases where circumstantial eye witness accounts and cold cases can be solved/re-investigated, as evidence can now be properly analysed and prove a person innocent or guilty.

 

Keywords I see in this article: 1975, black man, money, murder.

 

And yes, giving false evidence/fradulent information should be punishable as based on intent and the severity of the extent of their actions (and so should racial profiling of potential suspects based on circumstantial evidence in the court of law). If this innocent man faced the death penalty and the evidence surfaced as it did of this once little boy who lied, would you wish death upon the man he is today because he caused this extreme injustice? Can you understand the absurdity.... Seeing the world through unwarranted cynisim is just as bad as looking though absent minded rose-coloured glasses.

 

Directly unrelated but still somewhat comparable, if anyone hasn't seen the Green Mile, it's a good movie to watch and the tv series Cold Case.

 

A convicted person has multiple chances of repeal, during that time they can not be executed. 

 

The justice system didn't failed at some point, it's corrupted. Had the court upheld the Rule-of-Law and the Constitution, Ricky would never have been convicted.

 

 That's why the "Due Process Clause" exists in the Constitution, as does the Eighth Amendment. It ensures the right to a fair trial. 

Improved? It needs to be cleaned out. The System is fine, it's the people running it that cause men like Ricky to be convicted and sentenced. 

 

The majority of laws are comparable to the crime, it's laws that perpetuate incarceration for victimless crimes that need to be removed. This also isn't 1700's England, people aren't stealing food and having a hand removed because of it. We have social programs to care for those that are homeless, jobless, and hungry. The majority of theft is for personal gain, not because of hunger. 

It is a crime, it's Perjury. Perjury isn't punishable with the death penalty, in most states is a Felony that's a year or more in prison. (I have no idea where you're pulling the racial profiling bit, but it's ridiculous)

You guys need to stop trying to be philosophers and actually read the US Constitution and US Code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weps is fantastic with sources and stat, and asks all the right questions when it comes to this stuff. The pain train has no brakes!

I think the root of the problem might be better addressed by ousting corrupt (in the sense of money and bias) judicially involved people and refining the justice system to incarcerate less people somehow. How we'll do that is a big question. Additionally we have to factor in that this man was black, and therefore his chances of being incarcerated (in general and even if he didn't do it) are huge, which is something else to fix.

xvii and Weps like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the root of the problem might be better addressed by ousting corrupt (in the sense of money and bias) judicially involved people and refining the justice system to incarcerate less people somehow. How we'll do that is a big question. Additionally we have to factor in that this man was black, and therefore his chances of being incarcerated (in general and even if he didn't do it) are huge, which is something else to fix.

 

It must drive everyone nuts that I constantly say it, but the Constitution is the benchmark. The foundation exists, but that foundation was built on the premise of good men tenuring the helm. The Constitution actually allots Congress the power to form and abolish any court outside the Supreme Court and various State Courts. 

If you look at the incarceration rates, it was almost non-existent in the early 20th century through most of the 20th, in the late 20th into the 21st it's soared like a seagull on crack. We see the creation of private prisons, outside the purview of State or Federal control, receiving funding and support. 

 

Quite a bit goes into why much of the prison population are minorities, but that's a different discussion, for a different time. Now, the part that plays into this is older layers and judges, with an ax to grind or simply to old and set in their ways as closet KKK members.

 

If we want to rid our system of these people, we need to be active and participate. 

 

 

Mars and I don't always agree, but I respect him. His points are based in vested interests, not because it's hip or for the sake of argument, but because they matter to him. That's why our system is so important, where two people can have a debate/discussion on a subject, without fear of reprisal from the government, and we can come to compromise or at least understand each-others points. 

 

I'm sure to many of you I seem like some monster who is uncaring about death and destruction, but nothing could be further from the truth.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A convicted person has multiple chances of repeal, during that time they can not be executed. 

 

The justice system didn't failed at some point, it's corrupted. Had the court upheld the Rule-of-Law and the Constitution, Ricky would never have been convicted.

 

 That's why the "Due Process Clause" exists in the Constitution, as does the Eighth Amendment. It ensures the right to a fair trial. 

Improved? It needs to be cleaned out. The System is fine, it's the people running it that cause men like Ricky to be convicted and sentenced. 

 

The majority of laws are comparable to the crime, it's laws that perpetuate incarceration for victimless crimes that need to be removed. This also isn't 1700's England, people aren't stealing food and having a hand removed because of it. We have social programs to care for those that are homeless, jobless, and hungry. The majority of theft is for personal gain, not because of hunger. 

It is a crime, it's Perjury. Perjury isn't punishable with the death penalty, in most states is a Felony that's a year or more in prison. (I have no idea where you're pulling the racial profiling bit, but it's ridiculous)

You guys need to stop trying to be philosophers and actually read the US Constitution and US Code.

 

Yes a convicted person has a chance of repeal but not when they're dead (capital punishment) and the period of time where evidence may resurface to prove their innocence is unknown (e.g. the man in this article). This unknown, is a chance for redemption which is the main point of the counter argument.

 

Yes we agree it was not done as to how it's set out in US Law but most importantly, it was not a just outcome. Question the system and improve it so that there is little chance for power and corruption to be easily swept under the carpet (see my previous paragraph as to an avenue to do this).

Sometimes a philosophical approach is required, considering that is primarily how modern law and justice has come about. Asking questions, finding another way instead of accepting what is and arguing about what is, quoting a textbook consitution will not always provide all the answers, hence why laws and policy are reformed accordingly using example of cases such as these. By suggesting there is no way to do this because everyone is corrupt and power hungry is an assumption that does not allow a chance for a justice system to work and is incorrect.

Most of your points align to what was said by my last post, so I agree that corruption and giving someone too much power is bad.

However, I disagree that the system is "fine" when there are people getting away with the above. This isn't about what's better but what's right.

 

Additionally, there might be room for adjustment in regards to prison overcrowding for petty crime in America:

http://www.alec.org/initiatives/prison-overcrowding/

http://newamericamedia.org/2014/09/new-study-prop-47-would-help-california-address-overcrowded-prisons.php *

 

I'm not trying to be ridiculous but given the ethnicity of the accused and the circumstantal evidence (a little white kid who thought he saw something) that was then used to place him in jail and potentially capitally punished, I find it highly probable for that period of American Law and History that this would be the circumstance (there's whole books about it and degrees specialising in it- See 'The Racial Hoax' Page 284):

http://www33.homepage.villanova.edu/kelly.welch/Documents/Racial%20Typification%20Article%202007.pdf

I think I'll leave it at that.

Edited by Pandora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.