A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 26th 07, 02:20 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Larry[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

In article >,
Kent Wills > wrote:

> As I understand it, on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:47:29 GMT, GK
> > wrote:
>
> >Kent Wills wrote:
> >> As I understand it, on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:20:58 GMT, GK
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
> >>> relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.
> >>>
> >>> People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
> >>> the flimsiest circumstantial evidence.
> >>
> >> If it is enough to convince a jury of 12 men and women that
> >> the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, circumstantial is
> >> enough.
> >> And if the defendant was convicted on nothing more than the
> >> flimsiest circumstantial evidence, the defense attorney didn't do
> >> his/her job properly.

> >
> >Remember the idea was innocence is to be presumed. The accused should
> >not have to go hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to prove they
> >are innocent.

>
> No one said they should. Further, it's the prosecution who has
> to prove guilt, not the defense that needs to prove innocence.
> However, just because one is presumed innocent until proven
> guilty doesn't mean the defense team can expect to just sit there and
> do nothing.
>
> >>
> >>> Circumstantial evidence can often
> >>> be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
> >>> Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
> >>> innocent because they do not care about the truth.
> >>
> >> Can you offer a cite for this? While I can accept it's
> >> possible, given human nature, I know of no direct examples.
> >>

> >Not just human nature, but common practice. Exculpatory evidence that
> >would prove the accused is innocent is not only disregarded but fought
> >by the prosecution. Happens every day, all over.

>
> Can you offer a cite where this has happened?


I'm going to assume he means something other than what he wrote.

"Exculpatory evidence" is fought by the prosecution quite often. It's
called cross-examining defense witnesses. It's not only _not_
unethical, as the poster implied, it is a key part of the adversarial
system.

I assume he meant to imply prosecutors who know about exculpatory
evidence hide it from the defense. I can say that I know hundreds of
prosecutors, and I've never seen that happen. More than once, I've
dismissed a case when I learned of exculpatory information, sometimes
even _before_ I share it with defense counsel.
Ads
  #12  
Old April 26th 07, 04:11 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

As I understand it, on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:20:29 GMT, Larry >
wrote:

>In article >,
> Kent Wills > wrote:
>
>> As I understand it, on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:47:29 GMT, GK
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Kent Wills wrote:
>> >> As I understand it, on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:20:58 GMT, GK
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
>> >>> relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.
>> >>>
>> >>> People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
>> >>> the flimsiest circumstantial evidence.
>> >>
>> >> If it is enough to convince a jury of 12 men and women that
>> >> the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, circumstantial is
>> >> enough.
>> >> And if the defendant was convicted on nothing more than the
>> >> flimsiest circumstantial evidence, the defense attorney didn't do
>> >> his/her job properly.
>> >
>> >Remember the idea was innocence is to be presumed. The accused should
>> >not have to go hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to prove they
>> >are innocent.

>>
>> No one said they should. Further, it's the prosecution who has
>> to prove guilt, not the defense that needs to prove innocence.
>> However, just because one is presumed innocent until proven
>> guilty doesn't mean the defense team can expect to just sit there and
>> do nothing.
>>
>> >>
>> >>> Circumstantial evidence can often
>> >>> be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
>> >>> Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
>> >>> innocent because they do not care about the truth.
>> >>
>> >> Can you offer a cite for this? While I can accept it's
>> >> possible, given human nature, I know of no direct examples.
>> >>
>> >Not just human nature, but common practice. Exculpatory evidence that
>> >would prove the accused is innocent is not only disregarded but fought
>> >by the prosecution. Happens every day, all over.

>>
>> Can you offer a cite where this has happened?

>
>I'm going to assume he means something other than what he wrote.
>
>"Exculpatory evidence" is fought by the prosecution quite often. It's
>called cross-examining defense witnesses. It's not only _not_
>unethical, as the poster implied, it is a key part of the adversarial
>system.


It's also quite different from "Prosecutors routinely
disregard evidence that would show someone is innocent because they do
not care about the truth."
Challenging evidence is expected from both sides.

>
>I assume he meant to imply prosecutors who know about exculpatory
>evidence hide it from the defense.


I'd love to read a cite from the OP where this has happened.
I can accept that it probably has, since not everyone who
becomes a lawyer is going to be ethical. The same is true of any
demographic group one wishes to name.

>I can say that I know hundreds of
>prosecutors, and I've never seen that happen. More than once, I've
>dismissed a case when I learned of exculpatory information, sometimes
>even _before_ I share it with defense counsel.


As it should be.
Most prosecutors are honestly interested in justice. When
it's clear that the evidence shows the defendant is innocent, the
prosecutor will drop the charges since justice will not be served by
convicting an innocent person. I'm sure it happens every day in the
United States.

--
Kent
Bless me, Father, for I have committed an original sin.
I poked a badger with a spoon.
  #13  
Old April 26th 07, 05:24 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Brent P[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,639
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

In article >, Kent Wills wrote:

> Most prosecutors are honestly interested in justice.


Not in traffic court.

> When
> it's clear that the evidence shows the defendant is innocent, the
> prosecutor will drop the charges since justice will not be served by
> convicting an innocent person.


In traffic court he just lies.

> I'm sure it happens every day in the
> United States.


Yep. Lying in court happens everyday.


  #16  
Old April 27th 07, 12:15 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Kent Wills
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 295
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

As I understand it, on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 04:31:57 GMT, Larry >
wrote:

>In article >,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>> In article >, Kent Wills wrote:
>>
>> > Most prosecutors are honestly interested in justice.

>>
>> Not in traffic court.

>
>Kent, are you going to bother asking him for a cite again, or do you
>think it will be a lost cause?
>


Probably a lost cause.
Now I'm wondering about traffic court. In Iowa there is no
prosecutor for traffic court. And I'm not aware of any other states
that have one.
Is there a prosecutor for traffic court in New York?

>
>> > When
>> > it's clear that the evidence shows the defendant is innocent, the
>> > prosecutor will drop the charges since justice will not be served by
>> > convicting an innocent person.

>>
>> In traffic court he just lies.

>
>The prosecutor really isn't in a position to lie or not. A prosecutor
>rarely gives testimony in a case, and it's the testimony and evidence
>that a verdict is based on.
>
>> > I'm sure it happens every day in the
>> > United States.

>>
>> Yep. Lying in court happens everyday.

>
>Considering the hundreds of thousands of cases pending at any one time,
>this might very well be true. Like Kent said, every demographic/career
>has some bad apples - its unavoidable. But its an extreme minority of
>cases, if that.


So long as there are courts in session, there is lying.
Witnesses can and do lie. Not all of them, of course, but it's safe
to say that lying does happen in court every day.

--
Kent
Vegetarian: Indian word for lousy hunter.
  #18  
Old April 27th 07, 01:24 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Larry[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

In article >,
Kent Wills > wrote:

> As I understand it, on Thu, 26 Apr 2007 04:31:57 GMT, Larry >
> wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> > (Brent P) wrote:
> >
> >> In article >, Kent Wills wrote:
> >>
> >> > Most prosecutors are honestly interested in justice.
> >>
> >> Not in traffic court.

> >
> >Kent, are you going to bother asking him for a cite again, or do you
> >think it will be a lost cause?
> >

>
> Probably a lost cause.
> Now I'm wondering about traffic court. In Iowa there is no
> prosecutor for traffic court. And I'm not aware of any other states
> that have one.
> Is there a prosecutor for traffic court in New York?


Nope, at least not in NYC. We have no jurisdiction there - I couldn't
"prosecute" a case in traffic court even if I wanted to.

> >> > When
> >> > it's clear that the evidence shows the defendant is innocent, the
> >> > prosecutor will drop the charges since justice will not be served by
> >> > convicting an innocent person.
> >>
> >> In traffic court he just lies.

> >
> >The prosecutor really isn't in a position to lie or not. A prosecutor
> >rarely gives testimony in a case, and it's the testimony and evidence
> >that a verdict is based on.
> >
> >> > I'm sure it happens every day in the
> >> > United States.
> >>
> >> Yep. Lying in court happens everyday.

> >
> >Considering the hundreds of thousands of cases pending at any one time,
> >this might very well be true. Like Kent said, every demographic/career
> >has some bad apples - its unavoidable. But its an extreme minority of
> >cases, if that.

>
> So long as there are courts in session, there is lying.
> Witnesses can and do lie. Not all of them, of course, but it's safe
> to say that lying does happen in court every day.

  #19  
Old April 27th 07, 01:25 AM posted to alt.law-enforcement,alt.true-crime,can.legal,misc.legal,rec.autos.driving
Larry[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 613
Default My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument

In article >,
(Brent P) wrote:

> In article >, Kent Wills wrote:
> > As I understand it, on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:24:51 -0500,
> >
(Brent P) wrote:
> >
> >>In article >, Kent Wills wrote:
> >>
> >>> Most prosecutors are honestly interested in justice.
> >>
> >>Not in traffic court.

>
> > I've never seen a prosecutor in traffic court. Just the
> > defendant, judge and the officer who issued the citation.

>
> I have.
>
> >>> When
> >>> it's clear that the evidence shows the defendant is innocent, the
> >>> prosecutor will drop the charges since justice will not be served by
> >>> convicting an innocent person.
> >>
> >>In traffic court he just lies.

>
> > What jurisdiction has a prosecutor for traffic court? I'm not
> > saying there are none, but I've never heard of it before.

>
> C(r)ook county IL.
>
>
> >>> I'm sure it happens every day in the
> >>> United States.

>
> >>Yep. Lying in court happens everyday.

>
> > Which has NOTHING to do with what I wrote.

>
> It shows a disinterest in justice.


It could also show one or more other things: trying to avoid
responsibility, helping out a friend or loved one, getting revenge, and
so one. Much more applicable to the defendant and defense witnesses
than prosecution witnesses, generally (which is why as a matter of law,
the defendant is an interested witness in many jurisdictions, unlike a
victim or other prosecution witness)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hey Rob your gas costs just dropped Peter C Auto Photos 4 January 6th 07 11:09 PM
Settle an argument-Is it better to leave good cat converter in? [email protected] Technology 1 September 11th 06 02:34 PM
AWA [OFFER] Brake Pads, Great Deal and Whole Lot, Great Prices! Move quickly! [email protected] General 0 February 24th 06 12:52 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.