True, I forgot to say that Trayvon was in the wrong once he fought.
But think about, couldn't Trayvon have been fighting in self-defense as well? Maybe he did see his gun and tried to pin-down Zimmerman before he could take his gun out? I guess we'll never know.
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
True, I forgot to say that Trayvon was in the wrong once he fought.
But think about, couldn't Trayvon have been fighting in self-defense as well? Maybe he did see his gun and tried to pin-down Zimmerman before he could take his gun out? I guess we'll never know.
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
Nah. Had it been reversed, we would have had a guilty verdict and death sentence within days of the trial starting. When has america looked at a black youth as anything other than a threat?
True, I forgot to say that Trayvon was in the wrong once he fought.
But think about, couldn't Trayvon have been fighting in self-defense as well? Maybe he did see his gun and tried to pin-down Zimmerman before he could take his gun out? I guess we'll never know.
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
So basically the whole Stand Your Ground law is pure shit it seems.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
I speak for myself, not others. I think its hypocritical and poppycock to portray yourself as somehow speaking for others.
I'm not sure where I implied that I was speaking for others. If it was because I said the pro-gun crowd and social justice crowd are using this case as a proxy war for their own political agendas, I stand by that statement. Turn on a TV...it's happening right now.
My right is my right. I can support who I want. I can serve or not serve. No one has the right to judge me. A justice system that throws the wm3, mumia and peltier in prison is not one I want to be a part of. The justice system is beyond repair and I refuse to pat it on its back.
Who's patting the system on it's back? I've only argued that currently, it's the system we have. Zimmerman was acquitted by a jury of his peers. What should have happened? Should he have been convicted? Fine, but aren't you then looking for justice and resolution in a system you claim to want no part of? And if he shouldn't have been convicted, what should have been done with him? If not our current justice system, how would you propose we deal with individuals like George Zimmerman?
the system doesnt magically work. MUmia, peltier and wm3 werent abnormalities and exceptions to an otherwise pretty good or decent justice system. Its all rotten. from the top down, from the front to the back.
You're absolutely right. It takes thoughtful, patient and considerate people to make it work. It takes judges who are willing to listen to arguments and make decisions impartially. It takes prosecutors who want to see justice (not convictions). It takes defense attorneys who care about their clients and give good counsel. It takes jurors who take their job seriously and are willing to acquit or convict, if the evidence warrants it. For every Mumia, Peltier, WM3 or Juan Ramos, there are literally countless instances where people were rightfully acquitted or convicted.
Trust me, as a leftist and prosecutor, no one takes more seriously the idea that there are serious issues within the criminal justice system that need resolving. But those instances on the whole do not prove the claim that the entire system is flawed or "rotten." To say so shows how little experience one has with it.
I find it disturbing otherwise socially aware individuals would turn a blind eye to a system that is broken. Acting like it works some of the time allows people like peltier and mumia to rot in prison.
...so does refusing to sit on a jury. Remember: it takes one "not guilty" vote on a jury to acquit someone. By refusing to sit on one, you're potentially allowing another innocent man to be convicted.
Being part of a jury is condoning such actions. It reaffirms and tacitly accepts the justice system as is, as something that can be just and fair. Serving on a jury or applauding any judicial action reaffirms the idea that the justice system works and is a slap in the face not only to the black boy that was murdered but to the millions of people in prison, millions of people who will never be known to the public. Its a slap in the face to the thousands of black men lynched, the 401 treaties the U.S. failed to comply with-with the native americans.
Being on a jury isn't condoning anything, unless you do so with a clear bias in mind or ignore the evidence before you. Again, your one vote, withheld from lack of service, could be the vote that acquits an innocent man or convicts a guilty one. If you've done work with wrongfully convicted people (again, I have. Have you?), ask them about their impressions of jurors. Virtually every one of them has questions about why one of them didn't speak up.
Refusing jury service is a slap in the face to wrongfully convicted people everywhere.
IAmerican justice is a joke. Anyone who thinks otherwise has the wool pulled over there eyes. Yes, even you, my dear.
Lastly, spare me your condescending champy little nickname. I'm willing to debate you respectfully, but I'm not your "dear."
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
the innocence project is a noble cause. But it comes at it from the perspective that the justice system usually gets it right and that if only we work within the system and get the few people out of prison who were wrongly convicted, we will have a fine justice system again.
Take a spin around their website. Talk to one of the lawyers that donate their time doing the cases pro bono. Read one of the many books published by their attorneys and founders.
You couldn't be more wrong when you say that they start with the assumption that the justice system "usually gets it right."
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
I've always thought there should be professional jurors. And I'm not saying this because of the Zimmerman verdict because I guess they technically got it right. Nothing against any jurors past, present, or future. But overall, people's lives are on the line in these things. Someone that doesn't understand a judge's direction or someone that lets emotions cloud their minds, can totally screw up a verdict. And I'm not saying to have professional jurors for all trials. And not in this Zimmerman one either. But for capital crimes like murder 1, I think it should be decided by people that know the legal system inside and out, not some farmer that was only selected because he doesn't watch TV and hasn't heard of the defendant.
refusing jury duty is championing and a fist upraised to the wrongly imprisoned that numbers in the millions.
Im sorry but by being a prosecutor you outdo all the good work you do by supporting the innocence project.
Any allowance at all, and by being a prosecutor, and supporting a reformist organization, you essentially suggest the system works, but has a few kinks and bumps in the road. Thats psychotic.
A justice system that refused to acknowledge a SINGLE ONE of the 401 treaties with the Native americans is one im just not comfortable working with or within. Thats just my opinion. By definition the american justice system is fantasy. Its stolen land, treaties were not followed, so any judgement at all, any legal action at all, from traffic infractions to murder cases, are all outside the jurisdiction of the US gov't and the justice system and thereby all legal judgements are outright farces.
By refusing to participate in a jury, its my right. And im being honest. Id flat out refuse to render any judgement. I believe cops are brutal by nature, and I believe the entire justice system is corrupt. Forget and throw away whether you personally agree with my sentiments, my beliefs as stated mean Im incapable of being "fair" in a courtroom or jury situation. Why would anyone want me on a jury. If Im going to flat out say "cops are evil and the justice system is a joke", the person who selects the jury would have to be high to believe id be a good choice to serve on a jury.
Refusing to sit on a jury doesnt make an impact in terms of possibly allowing a person to be sent to jail or not. Ive done my homework enough to know Mumia and Peltier are not exceptions. Black men routinely are thrown into jail for nonviolent drug crimes. In fact, most blacks in jail are in for this reason. over 1 million. I consider them to be innocent. Any system that views such people as criminals, and worthy of imprisonment is insane and not worthy of being served.
Im questioning the entire system. The legitimacy and point of prisons. The corrupt police. All of it.
Your solution to Mumia, Peltier, and Wm3 and millions of black men is to be a prosecutor and support a reformist organization thats unwilling to look too deep into the situation. The root causes of why all this happens. And what can be done about it. Im a radical. I look at the root causes of things. Anyone working inside the justice system views it as inherently good and just.
Reformist and electoral politics are jokes. We need a complete dismantling of the system, abolition of prisons, and the dismantling of civilization as a whole.
True, I forgot to say that Trayvon was in the wrong once he fought.
But think about, couldn't Trayvon have been fighting in self-defense as well? Maybe he did see his gun and tried to pin-down Zimmerman before he could take his gun out? I guess we'll never know.
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
Nah. Had it been reversed, we would have had a guilty verdict and death sentence within days of the trial starting. When has america looked at a black youth as anything other than a threat?
If the gun was Trayvon's; I'd say their be a greater 'race' hurdle to jump over. But with witnesses hearing/seeing being fought by a man twice his size and age. I'd say he'd was in a life threatening situation.
the game is rigged. its always been this way. Its rigged in 2013 just as it was rigged in 1888 or 1792. It was rigged in 92 with King. IN 1999 with Diallo. The guy was shot 41 times and the pigs still got off. Louima was raped by 2 of NYPD's finest and the cops were found not guilty. those pigs in LAPD were filmed beating and brutalizing King ON TAPE and still went free.
This isnt about fairness. Never has been. Justice has never existed for those who are of a different class and race and skin color or those who are "others.
True, I forgot to say that Trayvon was in the wrong once he fought.
But think about, couldn't Trayvon have been fighting in self-defense as well? Maybe he did see his gun and tried to pin-down Zimmerman before he could take his gun out? I guess we'll never know.
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
So basically the whole Stand Your Ground law is pure shit it seems.
Exactly, there's too much grey area as to what a 'life-threatening' situation is. And are you suppose to 'stand your ground' to prevent a life threatening situation from occurring? Or only when the life threatening situation has occurred?
If guns are suitable weapons for the stand your ground law, these grey areas shouldn't exist. It works great during a home invasion when you can assume the worst with a home intruder. But it's a horrible law for public conflicts.
doesnt really matter who has more experience working with wrongly convicted people. If you look at my posts and dont see a blatant and explicit "i view prisoners as human beings and worthy of respect, rights etc..." and "i believe the justice system treats human beings like crap", then you are in need of glasses.
Ive given money to peltier, mumia and wm3. Ive bought shirts and merch from peltier and mumia. Ive bought items from the wm3. Ive talked endlessly to friends and family and everyone else about the cases. Ive seen documentaries on all 3 of those cases. Ive visited their websites.
You dont have to be working as a prosecutor to work for justice.
For every Mumia, Peltier, WM3 or Juan Ramos, there are literally countless instances where people were rightfully acquitted or convicted."
This is what im talking about. Its tacit approval of a system thats racist and classist and corrupt. A system that throws Mumia in prison for no reason isnt going to be fair. It doesnt work like that. You cant have blind racism and then act in a rational manner.
Prison and the prison industrial complex is there to make money. Its big buisness. Throwing more black men in jail isnt about making us safe or justice. its about racism, greed, and money.
Cops have quotas, they take money, they plant evidence. they get kickbacks. And drugs. They work in collusion with dark elements.
Any prison, any legal judgement that involves prison is legitimizing the system and a slap in the face to mumia and peltier and wm3. They are just famous figureheads for a larger struggle. Im sure Peltier wouldnt say "once I get free the struggle for justice worldwide is over". Peltier is a placeholder for millions of unknown to us native americans, blacks, latinos etc... who have been wronged and continued to be wronged.
The prosecutors in the wm3, peltier, louima, tim thomas, king, diallo, etc.. weren;t about justice or fairness. Maybe you are different. I hope so.
Its a slap in the face to anyone wrongly convicted to say we need only reform and then everything will be ok.
mumia and peltier and wm3 lost decades of their life. It looks likely mumia and especially peltier as he's older, will die in prison.
I find it hard to justify sitting on a jury or just merely propping up the justice system with mere words, when stuff like that is a reality.
A family friend active in the peltier case told me she spoke with FBI agents who told her they knew Peltier was innocent and that they were going after him regaurdless.
Im not into being a part of, or really interacting with any system that acts in that manner. Its beyond disturbing.
refusing jury duty is championing and a fist upraised to the wrongly imprisoned that numbers in the millions.
Im sorry but by being a prosecutor you outdo all the good work you do by supporting the innocence project.
Any allowance at all, and by being a prosecutor, and supporting a reformist organization, you essentially suggest the system works, but has a few kinks and bumps in the road. Thats psychotic.
A justice system that refused to acknowledge a SINGLE ONE of the 401 treaties with the Native americans is one im just not comfortable working with or within. Thats just my opinion. By definition the american justice system is fantasy. Its stolen land, treaties were not followed, so any judgement at all, any legal action at all, from traffic infractions to murder cases, are all outside the jurisdiction of the US gov't and the justice system and thereby all legal judgements are outright farces.
By refusing to participate in a jury, its my right. And im being honest. Id flat out refuse to render any judgement. I believe cops are brutal by nature, and I believe the entire justice system is corrupt. Forget and throw away whether you personally agree with my sentiments, my beliefs as stated mean Im incapable of being "fair" in a courtroom or jury situation. Why would anyone want me on a jury. If Im going to flat out say "cops are evil and the justice system is a joke", the person who selects the jury would have to be high to believe id be a good choice to serve on a jury.
Refusing to sit on a jury doesnt make an impact in terms of possibly allowing a person to be sent to jail or not. Ive done my homework enough to know Mumia and Peltier are not exceptions. Black men routinely are thrown into jail for nonviolent drug crimes. In fact, most blacks in jail are in for this reason. over 1 million. I consider them to be innocent. Any system that views such people as criminals, and worthy of imprisonment is insane and not worthy of being served.
Im questioning the entire system. The legitimacy and point of prisons. The corrupt police. All of it.
Your solution to Mumia, Peltier, and Wm3 and millions of black men is to be a prosecutor and support a reformist organization thats unwilling to look too deep into the situation. The root causes of why all this happens. And what can be done about it. Im a radical. I look at the root causes of things. Anyone working inside the justice system views it as inherently good and just.
Reformist and electoral politics are jokes. We need a complete dismantling of the system, abolition of prisons, and the dismantling of civilization as a whole.
Bold statements with no support for it.
When I have overwhelming evidence of someone's guilt, say, a young black defendant involved in gang violence, but instead convicting him at trial, he and I (or his attorney) work out a resolution that helps him avoid incarceration and conviction, is that perpetuating a system of oppression, violence and racism? Or is it good coming out of the system? When that kid beats drugs, beats violence and finds a job (yes, this shit does happen), was he worse off for having come in contact with the courts?
When I convict someone - through trial or guilty plea - for their third or fourth instance of serious domestic violence, white or black, is that simply promoting a system that subjugates and oppresses people based on race or socio-economic status?
When, instead of pursuing a conviction, I refer a case to a veteran's or other trauma-based court for processing, and it results on that person receiving chemical or mental health treatment instead of incarceration, is that an inherent evil that needs to be rooted out?
You make a lot of bold statements, and if I'm guessing, you've spend no time inside a court and know very few attorneys who practice criminal law, otherwise you wouldn't paint criminal law practitioners with such a broad brush. There are obvious problems in the criminal justice system, but for every problem that exists, there are hundreds of attorneys who use good sense, perspective, patience and impartiality to work out good solutions for individual defendants. Many of us strive to punish the bad guys and ensure that the good guys - the people in the wrong place at the wrong time, the innocent, the young kid who made a mistake - aren't ruined for life by conviction or incarceration.
I do in fact suggest that the system works, or is working, in some capacity, but I don't believe that it's inherently good or just. Read my previous post: it takes thoughtful, considerate, compassion and patient people to make it work. I work with defense attorneys, judges, jurors and court staff every day that make it work. There are, of course, severe problems at play, for instance, underfunding of public defender programs or disparate sentencing, but not one of those problems proves that the system is broken or can't be remedied. You say you've done your homework, so let's see it. Show your work. Title your essay: "The System Is Broken, Here's Proof, and No Good Comes From it."
You've advocated for tossing the whole system out, which means the burden is on you to suggest a system in it's place. What shall we do without a jury system? If the system we have currently results in wrongful convictions at given rate, how will a non-jury system remedy that? If we don't have a prison system, what shall we do with legitimate serial killers or sexual predators? If the system is broken because a guy like George Zimmerman was acquitted and you don't believe in the jury system, then what should be done with him?
So then, what is the alternative? If there's not one good thing that comes out of the current system we have, and if guys like me don't do a lick of good because the system is so flawed and irreversibly broken, then what's next? What comes tomorrow?
Refusing to sit on a jury doesnt make an impact in terms of possibly allowing a person to be sent to jail or not.
You can keep telling yourself that, but keep in mind, in cases of wrongful convictions (i.e. Mumia, Peltier, WM3), ONE VOTE, perhaps yours would have acquitted them.
We need...the dismantling of civilization as a whole.
Good luck with that. Impractical politics are worse than no politics. Read Saul Alinsky. Choose your arguments wisely and appropriate your energy effectively. In this thread, you've gone from being upset about Zimmerman's acquittal, to expressing that the system is broken anyway (begging the question: would you have suddenly loved the system had their been a conviction? :roll: ), to saying that jury service can't help acquit innocent people, to now calling for the dismantling of civilization. Bold statements, and I appreciate your passion for big changes. But you might spend years of spinning your wheels. Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Use yourself wisely.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
For every Mumia, Peltier, WM3 or Juan Ramos, there are literally countless instances where people were rightfully acquitted or convicted."
This is what im talking about. Its tacit approval of a system thats racist and classist and corrupt. A system that throws Mumia in prison for no reason isnt going to be fair. It doesnt work like that. You cant have blind racism and then act in a rational manner.
Prison and the prison industrial complex is there to make money. Its big buisness. Throwing more black men in jail isnt about making us safe or justice. its about racism, greed, and money.
Cops have quotas, they take money, they plant evidence. they get kickbacks. And drugs. They work in collusion with dark elements.
Any prison, any legal judgement that involves prison is legitimizing the system and a slap in the face to mumia and peltier and wm3. They are just famous figureheads for a larger struggle. Im sure Peltier wouldnt say "once I get free the struggle for justice worldwide is over". Peltier is a placeholder for millions of unknown to us native americans, blacks, latinos etc... who have been wronged and continued to be wronged.
The prosecutors in the wm3, peltier, louima, tim thomas, king, diallo, etc.. weren;t about justice or fairness. Maybe you are different. I hope so.
Its a slap in the face to anyone wrongly convicted to say we need only reform and then everything will be ok.
You're talking about two different things.
A system that rightfully convicts a sexual predator in Chicago and incarcerates him for life works.
A system that wrongfully convicts a Latino person in LA and incarcerates him for life doesn't.
You don't toss out the whole thing then, because then the good guys and the bad guys go free. Wouldn't it be wiser to try to emulate the aspects of the justice system that do work and ferret out the aspects that aren't working?
Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Arguing that there are corrupt cops is an issue of police hiring and government transparency. Arguing that prisons are being built by private companies with government contracts, thereby incentivizing the incarceration of people (mostly black or Latino men) is a legislative and executive issue.
But none of that goes toward a sound conclusion that the justice system doesn't or can't work or isn't working in many cases. The fact that it doesn't always work, and sometimes, in very scary failures, doesn't mean you toss the entire thing out, especially when there's no ready-made alternative at hand. That's an invitation for chaos and injustice, likely worse than whatever we've got now.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
When I have overwhelming evidence of someone's guilt, say, a young black defendant involved in gang violence, but instead convicting him at trial, he and I (or his attorney) work out a resolution that helps him avoid incarceration and conviction, is that perpetuating a system of oppression, violence and racism? Or is it good coming out of the system? When that kid beats drugs, beats violence and finds a job (yes, this shit does happen), was he worse off for having come in contact with the courts?
When I convict someone - through trial or guilty plea - for their third or fourth instance of serious domestic violence, white or black, is that simply promoting a system that subjugates and oppresses people based on race or socio-economic status?
When, instead of pursuing a conviction, I refer a case to a veteran's or other trauma-based court for processing, and it results on that person receiving chemical or mental health treatment instead of incarceration, is that an inherent evil that needs to be rooted out?
You make a lot of bold statements, and if I'm guessing, you've spend no time inside a court and know very few attorneys who practice criminal law, otherwise you wouldn't paint criminal law practitioners with such a broad brush. There are obvious problems in the criminal justice system, but for every problem that exists, there are hundreds of attorneys who use good sense, perspective, patience and impartiality to work out good solutions for individual defendants. Many of us strive to punish the bad guys and ensure that the good guys - the people in the wrong place at the wrong time, the innocent, the young kid who made a mistake - aren't ruined for life by conviction or incarceration.
I do in fact suggest that the system works, or is working, in some capacity, but I don't believe that it's inherently good or just. Read my previous post: it takes thoughtful, considerate, compassion and patient people to make it work. I work with defense attorneys, judges, jurors and court staff every day that make it work. There are, of course, severe problems at play, for instance, underfunding of public defender programs or disparate sentencing, but not one of those problems proves that the system is broken or can't be remedied. You say you've done your homework, so let's see it. Show your work. Title your essay: "The System Is Broken, Here's Proof, and No Good Comes From it."
You've advocated for tossing the whole system out, which means the burden is on you to suggest a system in it's place. What shall we do without a jury system? If the system we have currently results in wrongful convictions at given rate, how will a non-jury system remedy that? If we don't have a prison system, what shall we do with legitimate serial killers or sexual predators? If the system is broken because a guy like George Zimmerman was acquitted and you don't believe in the jury system, then what should be done with him?
So then, what is the alternative? If there's not one good thing that comes out of the current system we have, and if guys like me don't do a lick of good because the system is so flawed and irreversibly broken, then what's next? What comes tomorrow?
Refusing to sit on a jury doesnt make an impact in terms of possibly allowing a person to be sent to jail or not.
You can keep telling yourself that, but keep in mind, in cases of wrongful convictions (i.e. Mumia, Peltier, WM3), ONE VOTE, perhaps yours would have acquitted them.
We need...the dismantling of civilization as a whole.
Good luck with that. Impractical politics are worse than no politics. Read Saul Alinsky. Choose your arguments wisely and appropriate your energy effectively. In this thread, you've gone from being upset about Zimmerman's acquittal, to expressing that the system is broken anyway (begging the question: would you have suddenly loved the system had their been a conviction? :roll: ), to saying that jury service can't help acquit innocent people, to now calling for the dismantling of civilization. Bold statements, and I appreciate your passion for big changes. But you might spend years of spinning your wheels. Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Use yourself wisely.[/quote]
interesting stuff to be sure. Ive personally never talked to a prosecutor before so this has been interesting. I think you and I have similar references points. I think we both read the same books, watched the same movies, attended the same lectures, but came to wildly different conclusions.
I think you have a faith in the system i dont share. Ive seen and read too much. Ive seen too many cases where the system treats blacks and others as subhuman. The politics aside, my view of the ineptness of the justice system I think is widely shared by the american population. And as I said, I think you and I have read the same books, have similar heroes, and all that stuff. Can you really blame people for having a cynical view of the justice system? Having read Angela Davis. Take a black family for example, could you really blame them, given America's disturbing history, that they might feel that the justice system views them as worthless?
Whether or not you think my politics are level headed or not, i dont know how hiding my political beliefs would do me any good. I believe every single thing Ive posted in this thread. Someone with my beliefs doesnt fit in on a jury. Nor would it make sense. Those in charge would have to be insane to take me for the job in that respect "yeah, that musicismylife78, he hates cops, supported death row inmates, calls for the dismantling of civilization, believes prison abolition is good, and thinks the system is beyond repair....why don't we give him a call and say he's been picked to be serving on the jury". My politics preclude me from that. Im an open marxist anarchist. Have been for years.
I dont know what the alternative to a prison or justice system would be. Its clear to me though the current one isnt working. The system is set up in terms of punishment not working to help the prisoner change. Even with people legitimately convicted and tried, real criminals, I dont believe 23 hours in a small cell, common experiences in solitary, routine beatings and abuse, and being manacled and shackled is humane,nor is it fair or justified. Of course there are dispicable and wrong actions and crimes. But even if we were talking about a murderer I wouldnt feel prison is fair.
It would be different if the justice system was clearly about protecting the public. Its clearly not, You know better than all of us. The cops, lawyers, and other people you interact with, few if any do it for the genuine love. They do it for the power, the money, the kickbacks. You watched The Wire? My view of the justice system is basically that show. Its all corrupt. The Wire didnt suggest we do a little tweaking here, and some changes there, and then its okay. David Simon clearly was suggesting we throw the entire system out. Im with him.
There are dark forces. The cops and guards patrolling the prisons are allowing drugs into the prison and are getting a cut of the money. Cops on the street getting money from drug dealers and all that. It all works together. Cop quotas and racial profiling. It all melds together.
I think thats great what you do, the example you gave of a black youth and you working out a resolution so he avoids incarceration. I think thats great.
A system that rightfully convicts a sexual predator in Chicago and incarcerates him for life works.
A system that wrongfully convicts a Latino person in LA and incarcerates him for life doesn't.
.[/quote]
Prison and justice isnt about protecting the public. You seem to be an exception. And Im glad. But cops and prosecutors and attorneys dont really care about protecting the public. The bottom line is always the bottom line. To be elected you need to be tough on crime. AFter a big murder, the public demands someone pay. Thats what happened with the WM3. Instead of actually doing investigative work, the WMPD knew the public wanted someones blood, so they found 3 innocent teens and branded them satanists.
Indeed a sexual predator in chicago that indeed did commit a crime should be punished. But im not sure life imprisonment is the right punishment. Prisons are inhumane by definition. As I said, putting someone in a cell 23 hours a day, in manacles and shackles, routine beatings and racism and sexism and rape and all that. That aint justice. For anyone. And I dont support it.
American justice seems to be, you commit a crime-you languish in an inhumane cess pool for the rest of your life. No attempt is made to change the behavior. No attempt is made to discuss why they did what they did.
Read Echols book. He paints a disturbing portrait of the prison system. No one should deal with that. Wrongly or rightly convicted criminals. None.
Im for restorative justice. That might be an alternative. I dont believe throwing people in prison for a crime does anything to deal with the issue. TO me, dialogue, discussion, and forming some sort of restitution and whatnot, that would be my hope.
Prisons are counterproductive. And they make no sense at all. Things either are or they arent. You can't have an entire prison industrial complex built on deceit, lies, greed and racism, and then turn the other way and say, oh yeah, they do serve a purpose for the "real criminals". You cant weed it out.
The system is too messed up. The innocence project is only the tip of the iceberg. We know the famous cases. But thats why peltier and Mumia are so famous. Tomorrow in NY when some racist pig arrests some black teen for marijuana possession and the kid gets thrown in prison for life for the three strikes law, that kid wont be famous. We wont know his name. The system aint working for him.
1 million black men in prison , most for non violent drug offenses. Id consider every single one of them innocent.
thats not a winning percentage. if it was a sports team you'd label them a loser. A bad team.
If anything the innocence project wildly underestimates the amount of unfair and unjust convictions
But it comes at it from the perspective that the justice system usually gets it right
well, in this case, the justice system did get it right. there was no way to convict this guy beyond a reasonable doubt. there was a whole heap of reasonable doubt. did he murder Trayvon? Probably.
but the justice system can't convict on "probably".
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
remember, "not guilty" does not mean innocent. he shot and killed a kid, and as a result he will never ever lead a "normal" life. is it justice enough? to me, no. but knowing the guy is gonna sleep with one eye open the rest of his natural life is ok with me.
zimmerman will get his due. either in a civil court, or a federal one.
the defense did their job. they got a killer off the hook. that is why they make the big bucks.
props to the jury for not being swayed by the emotion of it all. they did their job.
martin's family handled it beautifully. i am heartbroken for them.
zimmerman's brother is an asshole.
the people like ann coulter who are gloating about this are nothing more than assholes. they are gloating at a kid being dead and the killer walking free. if trayvon had been white and zimmerman been black, they would not be saying things with so much glee.
and where are these riots in sanford that many people were predicting? they didn't happen. hope those people feel good for profiling the entire african american population of sanford.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
But cops and prosecutors and attorneys dont really care about protecting the public.
You discredit yourself every time you say something like this. You even concede that you've never talked to a prosecutor before me, but you can make this claim?
Indeed a sexual predator in chicago that indeed did commit a crime should be punished. But im not sure life imprisonment is the right punishment. Prisons are inhumane by definition. As I said, putting someone in a cell 23 hours a day, in manacles and shackles, routine beatings and racism and sexism and rape and all that. That aint justice. For anyone. And I dont support it.
This is different than saying "abolish prisons." If you've got an aspirational argument about what the goals of punishment should be (i.e. restorative justice vs. a punitive approach), that's one thing, but just because some prisons are inhumane and corrections should actually work on "correcting" behavior, it does not logically follow then that prisons should be abolished, and certainly not without a contingency plan for all the untreated sex offenders who would get new found freedom.
American justice seems to be, you commit a crime-you languish in an inhumane cess pool for the rest of your life. No attempt is made to change the behavior. No attempt is made to discuss why they did what they did.
That's simply untrue. Whether the current program is effective or not, or whether there are disparities in sentencing is up for debate, but to claim that the corrections system does not attempt to rehabilitate probationers or that opportunities are not made for rehabilitation is flat out untrue.
Im for restorative justice. That might be an alternative. I dont believe throwing people in prison for a crime does anything to deal with the issue. TO me, dialogue, discussion, and forming some sort of restitution and whatnot, that would be my hope.
That's fine. Many lawyers also favor restorative justice, but as one component of criminal justice. Even the most ardent proponents of it understand that there are certain cases where it simply will not work (i.e. crimes with child victims, crimes with vulnerable victims, sex crimes etc).
Prisons are counterproductive. And they make no sense at all. Things either are or they arent. You can't have an entire prison industrial complex built on deceit, lies, greed and racism, and then turn the other way and say, oh yeah, they do serve a purpose for the "real criminals". You cant weed it out.
I have no clue what you're talking about. The prison-industrial complex as a term refers to prisons as an industry, being built and maintained by private companies who obtain government contracts and therefore have a significant financial interest in keeping said prisons full. The other part of the equation is legislators and lobbyists colluding to draft harsher sentences and criminalizing more behavior to help keep prisons full.
How does that set of circumstances preclude someone from saying "imprisonment is appropriate in some cases?" I'm quite confident in saying that imprisonment is appropriate, independent of whether said imprisonment is profitable, in many cases. Like for unrepetent serial killers or high-risk sexual predators.
The system is too messed up. The innocence project is only the tip of the iceberg. We know the famous cases. But thats why peltier and Mumia are so famous. Tomorrow in NY when some racist pig arrests some black teen for marijuana possession and the kid gets thrown in prison for life for the three strikes law, that kid wont be famous. We wont know his name. The system aint working for him.
Sure, that's all fine and great but you're raising issues that are independent of whether a criminal justice system should exist or not. Stupid overly rigid laws like a three-strikes sentencing law is a legislative issue and does nothing to further your claim that we should abolish prisons or "dismantle civilization."
If anything the innocence project wildly underestimates the amount of unfair and unjust convictions
Again, take a spin around their website. Talk to one of them. See if you still think that. I can assure you, they don't.
I'm not going to waste much more time on this thread. It's sad and depressing and this discussion is going no where.
You've said you've never spoken to a prosecutor before me and yet somehow feel comfortable making the claim that lawyers don't care about justice or doing good and only care about power and "kickbacks" (whatever the hell that means).
You've cited The Wire as an example for why you believe we should do away with the criminal justice system. You know that show is fiction, right? You deplore Zimmerman's acquittal but can provide no alternative to what should be done with him.
For every flag-waving American who doesn't pay attention to anything and is willfully blind to government abuses that could use a healthy dose of skepticism, there's a hand-wringing liberal who's perfectly willing to lob unsupported claims about a system he admittedly has little experience with that could use the same.
Until you've met every lawyer or cop, you've got no basis to say we're all corrupt. Until you've got an appropriate alternative plan to deal with all the prisoners beyond rehabilitation (trust me, they exist), you've got no basis to say "abolish prisons." A TV show and a lack of experience don't afford you much credibility, at least with the types of claims you're making.
There is good and bad in the criminal justice system, and I see both every day. I speak from experience. It's reckless and irresponsible to propose doing away with a system unless you've got a viable alternative ready. It kills your credibility, socially and politically, every time you generalize about a system or group of practitioners you have little experience with.
I wish you luck, but I think you need to do some more homework before you continue to say a lot of what you've said here.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
But cops and prosecutors and attorneys dont really care about protecting the public.
You discredit yourself every time you say something like this. You even concede that you've never talked to a prosecutor before me, but you can make this claim?
Indeed a sexual predator in chicago that indeed did commit a crime should be punished. But im not sure life imprisonment is the right punishment. Prisons are inhumane by definition. As I said, putting someone in a cell 23 hours a day, in manacles and shackles, routine beatings and racism and sexism and rape and all that. That aint justice. For anyone. And I dont support it.
This is different than saying "abolish prisons." If you've got an aspirational argument about what the goals of punishment should be (i.e. restorative justice vs. a punitive approach), that's one thing, but just because some prisons are inhumane and corrections should actually work on "correcting" behavior, it does not logically follow then that prisons should be abolished, and certainly not without a contingency plan for all the untreated sex offenders who would get new found freedom.
American justice seems to be, you commit a crime-you languish in an inhumane cess pool for the rest of your life. No attempt is made to change the behavior. No attempt is made to discuss why they did what they did.
That's simply untrue. Whether the current program is effective or not, or whether there are disparities in sentencing is up for debate, but to claim that the corrections system does not attempt to rehabilitate probationers or that opportunities are not made for rehabilitation is flat out untrue.
Im for restorative justice. That might be an alternative. I dont believe throwing people in prison for a crime does anything to deal with the issue. TO me, dialogue, discussion, and forming some sort of restitution and whatnot, that would be my hope.
That's fine. Many lawyers also favor restorative justice, but as one component of criminal justice. Even the most ardent proponents of it understand that there are certain cases where it simply will not work (i.e. crimes with child victims, crimes with vulnerable victims, sex crimes etc).
Prisons are counterproductive. And they make no sense at all. Things either are or they arent. You can't have an entire prison industrial complex built on deceit, lies, greed and racism, and then turn the other way and say, oh yeah, they do serve a purpose for the "real criminals". You cant weed it out.
I have no clue what you're talking about. The prison-industrial complex as a term refers to prisons as an industry, being built and maintained by private companies who obtain government contracts and therefore have a significant financial interest in keeping said prisons full. The other part of the equation is legislators and lobbyists colluding to draft harsher sentences and criminalizing more behavior to help keep prisons full.
How does that set of circumstances preclude someone from saying "imprisonment is appropriate in some cases?" I'm quite confident in saying that imprisonment is appropriate, independent of whether said imprisonment is profitable, in many cases. Like for unrepetent serial killers or high-risk sexual predators.
The system is too messed up. The innocence project is only the tip of the iceberg. We know the famous cases. But thats why peltier and Mumia are so famous. Tomorrow in NY when some racist pig arrests some black teen for marijuana possession and the kid gets thrown in prison for life for the three strikes law, that kid wont be famous. We wont know his name. The system aint working for him.
Sure, that's all fine and great but you're raising issues that are independent of whether a criminal justice system should exist or not. Stupid overly rigid laws like a three-strikes sentencing law is a legislative issue and does nothing to further your claim that we should abolish prisons or "dismantle civilization."
If anything the innocence project wildly underestimates the amount of unfair and unjust convictions
Again, take a spin around their website. Talk to one of them. See if you still think that. I can assure you, they don't.
I'm not going to waste much more time on this thread. It's sad and depressing and this discussion is going no where.
You've said you've never spoken to a prosecutor before me and yet somehow feel comfortable making the claim that lawyers don't care about justice or doing good and only care about power and "kickbacks" (whatever the hell that means).
You've cited The Wire as an example for why you believe we should do away with the criminal justice system. You know that show is fiction, right? You deplore Zimmerman's acquittal but can provide no alternative to what should be done with him.
For every flag-waving American who doesn't pay attention to anything and is willfully blind to government abuses that could use a healthy dose of skepticism, there's a hand-wringing liberal who's perfectly willing to lob unsupported claims about a system he admittedly has little experience with that could use the same.
Until you've met every lawyer or cop, you've got no basis to say we're all corrupt. Until you've got an appropriate alternative plan to deal with all the prisoners beyond rehabilitation (trust me, they exist), you've got no basis to say "abolish prisons." A TV show and a lack of experience don't afford you much credibility, at least with the types of claims you're making.
There is good and bad in the criminal justice system, and I see both every day. I speak from experience. It's reckless and irresponsible to propose doing away with a system unless you've got a viable alternative ready. It kills your credibility, socially and politically, every time you generalize about a system or group of practitioners you have little experience with.
I wish you luck, but I think you need to do some more homework before you continue to say a lot of what you've said here.
Being a prosecutor doesnt make you an expert on it, nor does it make me any less of an expert if Im not a prosecutor. Since post 1 ive sensed a snootiness with you. You are a prosecutor therefore you know more, youve gone through more schooling, youve read more books, is what I keep getting from you. Ive stated I thought we've both read and been influenced by the same stuff, its just we took different paths. You became a prosecutor, im a radical.
You know nothing about me. You dont know where I went to school. What I majored in. You dont know me or my experiences. How dare you act like you do. Step off the high horse and talk like a normal person.
Id steer clear of making judgements, even if thats your job, because it usually bites you in the face.
I know more than enough about the justice system, how it works, and its supposed triumphs. You dont need to be in the system to see the "results". As I said 2 plus million in prison, over 1 million are black men, the majority on non violent drug offenses. In places like DC, the numbers of blacks in prison is 95-97 percent black.
The Wire wasnt fiction and just a tv show. You clearly dont know much about it. This was as meticulously researched and purposeful as any show could be. David Simon the creator had clear intensions. Entertaining the audience and letting you "take the edge off after work and let your hair down" was not his goal. His stated goal was to force the viewer to deal with their own biases and to show how the entire system has failed these black and poor children.
Like a Kubrick film, I can guarantee you no image or scene in The Wire, in 5 seasons, was just made up. Or just to entertain. It all had a point. A clear one. This wasnt some meaningless project.
Its not surprising you would dislike the show or call it just a tv show. It doesnt portray anyone involved in the system as being helpful to dealing with the crux issues-racism and classism. The show portrays cops as no better than the murderous drug dealers they pursue.
Im sorry but people, including myself, have real legitimate beefs and problems with the justice system and the prison industrial complex. The fact you are a prosecutor alone makes it impossible for you to deal with this fairly or in a coherent manner. Its hard for someone who's job it is to lock people up and lord power over people to see things from the normal peoples perspective.
I would hope you dont talk to your clients like this. "You dont have experience and like a tv show therefore I know more than you". Come on my friend. You are being childish.
Being a prosecutor doesnt make you an expert on it, nor does it make me any less of an expert if Im not a prosecutor. Since post 1 ive sensed a snootiness with you. You are a prosecutor therefore you know more, youve gone through more schooling, youve read more books, is what I keep getting from you. Ive stated I thought we've both read and been influenced by the same stuff, its just we took different paths. You became a prosecutor, im a radical.
You know nothing about me. You dont know where I went to school. What I majored in. You dont know me or my experiences. How dare you act like you do. Step off the high horse and talk like a normal person.
Id steer clear of making judgements, even if thats your job, because it usually bites you in the face.
I know more than enough about the justice system, how it works, and its supposed triumphs. You dont need to be in the system to see the "results". As I said 2 plus million in prison, over 1 million are black men, the majority on non violent drug offenses. In places like DC, the numbers of blacks in prison is 95-97 percent black.
The Wire wasnt fiction and just a tv show. You clearly dont know much about it. This was as meticulously researched and purposeful as any show could be. David Simon the creator had clear intensions. Entertaining the audience and letting you "take the edge off after work and let your hair down" was not his goal. His stated goal was to force the viewer to deal with their own biases and to show how the entire system has failed these black and poor children.
Like a Kubrick film, I can guarantee you no image or scene in The Wire, in 5 seasons, was just made up. Or just to entertain. It all had a point. A clear one. This wasnt some meaningless project.
Its not surprising you would dislike the show or call it just a tv show. It doesnt portray anyone involved in the system as being helpful to dealing with the crux issues-racism and classism. The show portrays cops as no better than the murderous drug dealers they pursue.
Im sorry but people, including myself, have real legitimate beefs and problems with the justice system and the prison industrial complex. The fact you are a prosecutor alone makes it impossible for you to deal with this fairly or in a coherent manner. Its hard for someone who's job it is to lock people up and lord power over people to see things from the normal peoples perspective.
I would hope you dont talk to your clients like this. "You dont have experience and like a tv show therefore I know more than you". Come on my friend. You are being childish.
OK.
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1 2024-08-31 Wrigley 2 2024-09-15 Fenway 1 2024-09-27 Ohana 1 2024-09-29 Ohana 2
This is different than saying "abolish prisons." If you've got an aspirational argument about what the goals of punishment should be (i.e. restorative justice vs. a punitive approach), that's one thing, but just because some prisons are inhumane and corrections should actually work on "correcting" behavior, it does not logically follow then that prisons should be abolished, and certainly not without a contingency plan for all the untreated sex offenders who would get new found freedom.
Oh I beg your pardon. I wasnt aware there prisons that didnt involve rape, sexism, racism, routine brutalization, harassment etc...
Lets face it, most prisons are the kind of prisons I describe. Next time you hear any judge talk about that a punishment they hand down 25 years for armed robbery for instance, that the punishment is about correcting the behavior and working on it, give me a ring on my oreo phone here at the batcave at a quarter to never.
How can you be that blind to the reality. Im not interested in working for the system. If that means being blind to the realities of the world...no thanks.
Being a prosecutor doesnt make you an expert on it, nor does it make me any less of an expert if Im not a prosecutor. Since post 1 ive sensed a snootiness with you. You are a prosecutor therefore you know more, youve gone through more schooling, youve read more books, is what I keep getting from you. Ive stated I thought we've both read and been influenced by the same stuff, its just we took different paths. You became a prosecutor, im a radical.
You know nothing about me. You dont know where I went to school. What I majored in. You dont know me or my experiences. How dare you act like you do. Step off the high horse and talk like a normal person.
Id steer clear of making judgements, even if thats your job, because it usually bites you in the face.
I know more than enough about the justice system, how it works, and its supposed triumphs. You dont need to be in the system to see the "results". As I said 2 plus million in prison, over 1 million are black men, the majority on non violent drug offenses. In places like DC, the numbers of blacks in prison is 95-97 percent black.
The Wire wasnt fiction and just a tv show. You clearly dont know much about it. This was as meticulously researched and purposeful as any show could be. David Simon the creator had clear intensions. Entertaining the audience and letting you "take the edge off after work and let your hair down" was not his goal. His stated goal was to force the viewer to deal with their own biases and to show how the entire system has failed these black and poor children.
Like a Kubrick film, I can guarantee you no image or scene in The Wire, in 5 seasons, was just made up. Or just to entertain. It all had a point. A clear one. This wasnt some meaningless project.
Its not surprising you would dislike the show or call it just a tv show. It doesnt portray anyone involved in the system as being helpful to dealing with the crux issues-racism and classism. The show portrays cops as no better than the murderous drug dealers they pursue.
Im sorry but people, including myself, have real legitimate beefs and problems with the justice system and the prison industrial complex. The fact you are a prosecutor alone makes it impossible for you to deal with this fairly or in a coherent manner. Its hard for someone who's job it is to lock people up and lord power over people to see things from the normal peoples perspective.
I would hope you dont talk to your clients like this. "You dont have experience and like a tv show therefore I know more than you". Come on my friend. You are being childish.
OK.
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.
Oh, so you told me I was ignorant for getting my facts from a tv show but failed to admit you had never seen it before? Smart move. Intelligent too. How can you critique my views on it and its conclusions and call it "just a tv show" if youve never seen it?
Id generally make it a practice when you post on here to refrain from the "im a prosecutor and thus I know more than you, you uneducated peon you" nonsense. Its not becoming. And it completely made my point for me. My main point was the justice system doesnt care about people and cant be bothered with facts. You've said you are left wing, you support peltier, mumia and wm3, and you've said you have gone a different route with people you encounter and tried to steer them away from prison. Yet your behavior on here towards me was the complete portrayal of what I was saying. You dont know me. You dont know my history. Or why I believe what I believe. For all you know my whole family could have been messed up by the justice system. The whole point is you took it on yourself to play the holier than thou person.
A person doesnt have to pass the bar to know and make rational statements on the justice system and politics
Being a prosecutor doesnt make you an expert on it, nor does it make me any less of an expert if Im not a prosecutor. Since post 1 ive sensed a snootiness with you. You are a prosecutor therefore you know more, youve gone through more schooling, youve read more books, is what I keep getting from you. Ive stated I thought we've both read and been influenced by the same stuff, its just we took different paths. You became a prosecutor, im a radical.
You know nothing about me. You dont know where I went to school. What I majored in. You dont know me or my experiences. How dare you act like you do. Step off the high horse and talk like a normal person.
Id steer clear of making judgements, even if thats your job, because it usually bites you in the face.
I know more than enough about the justice system, how it works, and its supposed triumphs. You dont need to be in the system to see the "results". As I said 2 plus million in prison, over 1 million are black men, the majority on non violent drug offenses. In places like DC, the numbers of blacks in prison is 95-97 percent black.
The Wire wasnt fiction and just a tv show. You clearly dont know much about it. This was as meticulously researched and purposeful as any show could be. David Simon the creator had clear intensions. Entertaining the audience and letting you "take the edge off after work and let your hair down" was not his goal. His stated goal was to force the viewer to deal with their own biases and to show how the entire system has failed these black and poor children.
Like a Kubrick film, I can guarantee you no image or scene in The Wire, in 5 seasons, was just made up. Or just to entertain. It all had a point. A clear one. This wasnt some meaningless project.
Its not surprising you would dislike the show or call it just a tv show. It doesnt portray anyone involved in the system as being helpful to dealing with the crux issues-racism and classism. The show portrays cops as no better than the murderous drug dealers they pursue.
Im sorry but people, including myself, have real legitimate beefs and problems with the justice system and the prison industrial complex. The fact you are a prosecutor alone makes it impossible for you to deal with this fairly or in a coherent manner. Its hard for someone who's job it is to lock people up and lord power over people to see things from the normal peoples perspective.
I would hope you dont talk to your clients like this. "You dont have experience and like a tv show therefore I know more than you". Come on my friend. You are being childish.
OK.
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.
If you have the time I would highly recommend watching The Wire, it is amazing.
:corn: well.....anybody up for a riot ? you all can bring your race cards and join in on the festivitys.
to be quite honest with you guys I wouldn't care if he walked or did not,sometimes when a kid lives his life in the "gansta" world he or she may find more than they wanted too, it's truly a shame he died but it could have been zimmerman just as easy and at that poit we wouldn't be posting on this at all...he'd just be another dead "white mexican" and some of you would probably be asking for a get out of jail free card because he was just a teenager who made a bad choice in life and needed another chance....right ?
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.[/quote]
It may not be the case, but it does appear that way from the outside. A prosecutors job is to get a conviction. And obviously punishment of some kind, usually prison time. The whole way its framed is even suggestive of this.
"the states case" when talking about it. "the state of arkansas against/vs Joe Blow".
And any case we've discussed so far has been about the prosecution putting people in prison no matter what, evidence or not. This leads to the prosecution having an all out mentality, no matter what we will get this guy. It leads to tunnel vision. If your job is to get a conviction, you arent going to be interested in hearing information and evidence that suggests the guy is innocent. Im talking about the cases of peltier, mumia, wm3 and so on
Comments
Trayvon absolutely could have been/was fighting in self-defense, he didn't commit any crimes and wasn't being detained by an officer, that's why neighborhood watchmen are only supposed to report to police. If he had gotten a hold of the gun and shot Zimmerman out of fear for his life, he would have been equally protected by the "stand your ground" law.
Nah. Had it been reversed, we would have had a guilty verdict and death sentence within days of the trial starting. When has america looked at a black youth as anything other than a threat?
So basically the whole Stand Your Ground law is pure shit it seems.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
I'm not sure where I implied that I was speaking for others. If it was because I said the pro-gun crowd and social justice crowd are using this case as a proxy war for their own political agendas, I stand by that statement. Turn on a TV...it's happening right now.
Who's patting the system on it's back? I've only argued that currently, it's the system we have. Zimmerman was acquitted by a jury of his peers. What should have happened? Should he have been convicted? Fine, but aren't you then looking for justice and resolution in a system you claim to want no part of? And if he shouldn't have been convicted, what should have been done with him? If not our current justice system, how would you propose we deal with individuals like George Zimmerman?
You're absolutely right. It takes thoughtful, patient and considerate people to make it work. It takes judges who are willing to listen to arguments and make decisions impartially. It takes prosecutors who want to see justice (not convictions). It takes defense attorneys who care about their clients and give good counsel. It takes jurors who take their job seriously and are willing to acquit or convict, if the evidence warrants it. For every Mumia, Peltier, WM3 or Juan Ramos, there are literally countless instances where people were rightfully acquitted or convicted.
Trust me, as a leftist and prosecutor, no one takes more seriously the idea that there are serious issues within the criminal justice system that need resolving. But those instances on the whole do not prove the claim that the entire system is flawed or "rotten." To say so shows how little experience one has with it.
...so does refusing to sit on a jury. Remember: it takes one "not guilty" vote on a jury to acquit someone. By refusing to sit on one, you're potentially allowing another innocent man to be convicted.
Being on a jury isn't condoning anything, unless you do so with a clear bias in mind or ignore the evidence before you. Again, your one vote, withheld from lack of service, could be the vote that acquits an innocent man or convicts a guilty one. If you've done work with wrongfully convicted people (again, I have. Have you?), ask them about their impressions of jurors. Virtually every one of them has questions about why one of them didn't speak up.
Refusing jury service is a slap in the face to wrongfully convicted people everywhere.
No one's debating you on the evils of the prison-industrial complex. I've read Angela Davis too.
Lastly, spare me your condescending champy little nickname. I'm willing to debate you respectfully, but I'm not your "dear."
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
Take a spin around their website. Talk to one of the lawyers that donate their time doing the cases pro bono. Read one of the many books published by their attorneys and founders.
You couldn't be more wrong when you say that they start with the assumption that the justice system "usually gets it right."
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Im sorry but by being a prosecutor you outdo all the good work you do by supporting the innocence project.
Any allowance at all, and by being a prosecutor, and supporting a reformist organization, you essentially suggest the system works, but has a few kinks and bumps in the road. Thats psychotic.
A justice system that refused to acknowledge a SINGLE ONE of the 401 treaties with the Native americans is one im just not comfortable working with or within. Thats just my opinion. By definition the american justice system is fantasy. Its stolen land, treaties were not followed, so any judgement at all, any legal action at all, from traffic infractions to murder cases, are all outside the jurisdiction of the US gov't and the justice system and thereby all legal judgements are outright farces.
By refusing to participate in a jury, its my right. And im being honest. Id flat out refuse to render any judgement. I believe cops are brutal by nature, and I believe the entire justice system is corrupt. Forget and throw away whether you personally agree with my sentiments, my beliefs as stated mean Im incapable of being "fair" in a courtroom or jury situation. Why would anyone want me on a jury. If Im going to flat out say "cops are evil and the justice system is a joke", the person who selects the jury would have to be high to believe id be a good choice to serve on a jury.
Refusing to sit on a jury doesnt make an impact in terms of possibly allowing a person to be sent to jail or not. Ive done my homework enough to know Mumia and Peltier are not exceptions. Black men routinely are thrown into jail for nonviolent drug crimes. In fact, most blacks in jail are in for this reason. over 1 million. I consider them to be innocent. Any system that views such people as criminals, and worthy of imprisonment is insane and not worthy of being served.
Im questioning the entire system. The legitimacy and point of prisons. The corrupt police. All of it.
Your solution to Mumia, Peltier, and Wm3 and millions of black men is to be a prosecutor and support a reformist organization thats unwilling to look too deep into the situation. The root causes of why all this happens. And what can be done about it. Im a radical. I look at the root causes of things. Anyone working inside the justice system views it as inherently good and just.
Reformist and electoral politics are jokes. We need a complete dismantling of the system, abolition of prisons, and the dismantling of civilization as a whole.
If the gun was Trayvon's; I'd say their be a greater 'race' hurdle to jump over. But with witnesses hearing/seeing being fought by a man twice his size and age. I'd say he'd was in a life threatening situation.
This isnt about fairness. Never has been. Justice has never existed for those who are of a different class and race and skin color or those who are "others.
Exactly, there's too much grey area as to what a 'life-threatening' situation is. And are you suppose to 'stand your ground' to prevent a life threatening situation from occurring? Or only when the life threatening situation has occurred?
If guns are suitable weapons for the stand your ground law, these grey areas shouldn't exist. It works great during a home invasion when you can assume the worst with a home intruder. But it's a horrible law for public conflicts.
Ive given money to peltier, mumia and wm3. Ive bought shirts and merch from peltier and mumia. Ive bought items from the wm3. Ive talked endlessly to friends and family and everyone else about the cases. Ive seen documentaries on all 3 of those cases. Ive visited their websites.
You dont have to be working as a prosecutor to work for justice.
This is what im talking about. Its tacit approval of a system thats racist and classist and corrupt. A system that throws Mumia in prison for no reason isnt going to be fair. It doesnt work like that. You cant have blind racism and then act in a rational manner.
Prison and the prison industrial complex is there to make money. Its big buisness. Throwing more black men in jail isnt about making us safe or justice. its about racism, greed, and money.
Cops have quotas, they take money, they plant evidence. they get kickbacks. And drugs. They work in collusion with dark elements.
Any prison, any legal judgement that involves prison is legitimizing the system and a slap in the face to mumia and peltier and wm3. They are just famous figureheads for a larger struggle. Im sure Peltier wouldnt say "once I get free the struggle for justice worldwide is over". Peltier is a placeholder for millions of unknown to us native americans, blacks, latinos etc... who have been wronged and continued to be wronged.
The prosecutors in the wm3, peltier, louima, tim thomas, king, diallo, etc.. weren;t about justice or fairness. Maybe you are different. I hope so.
Its a slap in the face to anyone wrongly convicted to say we need only reform and then everything will be ok.
I find it hard to justify sitting on a jury or just merely propping up the justice system with mere words, when stuff like that is a reality.
A family friend active in the peltier case told me she spoke with FBI agents who told her they knew Peltier was innocent and that they were going after him regaurdless.
Im not into being a part of, or really interacting with any system that acts in that manner. Its beyond disturbing.
Bold statements with no support for it.
When I have overwhelming evidence of someone's guilt, say, a young black defendant involved in gang violence, but instead convicting him at trial, he and I (or his attorney) work out a resolution that helps him avoid incarceration and conviction, is that perpetuating a system of oppression, violence and racism? Or is it good coming out of the system? When that kid beats drugs, beats violence and finds a job (yes, this shit does happen), was he worse off for having come in contact with the courts?
When I convict someone - through trial or guilty plea - for their third or fourth instance of serious domestic violence, white or black, is that simply promoting a system that subjugates and oppresses people based on race or socio-economic status?
When, instead of pursuing a conviction, I refer a case to a veteran's or other trauma-based court for processing, and it results on that person receiving chemical or mental health treatment instead of incarceration, is that an inherent evil that needs to be rooted out?
You make a lot of bold statements, and if I'm guessing, you've spend no time inside a court and know very few attorneys who practice criminal law, otherwise you wouldn't paint criminal law practitioners with such a broad brush. There are obvious problems in the criminal justice system, but for every problem that exists, there are hundreds of attorneys who use good sense, perspective, patience and impartiality to work out good solutions for individual defendants. Many of us strive to punish the bad guys and ensure that the good guys - the people in the wrong place at the wrong time, the innocent, the young kid who made a mistake - aren't ruined for life by conviction or incarceration.
I do in fact suggest that the system works, or is working, in some capacity, but I don't believe that it's inherently good or just. Read my previous post: it takes thoughtful, considerate, compassion and patient people to make it work. I work with defense attorneys, judges, jurors and court staff every day that make it work. There are, of course, severe problems at play, for instance, underfunding of public defender programs or disparate sentencing, but not one of those problems proves that the system is broken or can't be remedied. You say you've done your homework, so let's see it. Show your work. Title your essay: "The System Is Broken, Here's Proof, and No Good Comes From it."
You've advocated for tossing the whole system out, which means the burden is on you to suggest a system in it's place. What shall we do without a jury system? If the system we have currently results in wrongful convictions at given rate, how will a non-jury system remedy that? If we don't have a prison system, what shall we do with legitimate serial killers or sexual predators? If the system is broken because a guy like George Zimmerman was acquitted and you don't believe in the jury system, then what should be done with him?
So then, what is the alternative? If there's not one good thing that comes out of the current system we have, and if guys like me don't do a lick of good because the system is so flawed and irreversibly broken, then what's next? What comes tomorrow?
You can keep telling yourself that, but keep in mind, in cases of wrongful convictions (i.e. Mumia, Peltier, WM3), ONE VOTE, perhaps yours would have acquitted them.
Good luck with that. Impractical politics are worse than no politics. Read Saul Alinsky. Choose your arguments wisely and appropriate your energy effectively. In this thread, you've gone from being upset about Zimmerman's acquittal, to expressing that the system is broken anyway (begging the question: would you have suddenly loved the system had their been a conviction? :roll: ), to saying that jury service can't help acquit innocent people, to now calling for the dismantling of civilization. Bold statements, and I appreciate your passion for big changes. But you might spend years of spinning your wheels. Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Use yourself wisely.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
You're talking about two different things.
A system that rightfully convicts a sexual predator in Chicago and incarcerates him for life works.
A system that wrongfully convicts a Latino person in LA and incarcerates him for life doesn't.
You don't toss out the whole thing then, because then the good guys and the bad guys go free. Wouldn't it be wiser to try to emulate the aspects of the justice system that do work and ferret out the aspects that aren't working?
Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Arguing that there are corrupt cops is an issue of police hiring and government transparency. Arguing that prisons are being built by private companies with government contracts, thereby incentivizing the incarceration of people (mostly black or Latino men) is a legislative and executive issue.
But none of that goes toward a sound conclusion that the justice system doesn't or can't work or isn't working in many cases. The fact that it doesn't always work, and sometimes, in very scary failures, doesn't mean you toss the entire thing out, especially when there's no ready-made alternative at hand. That's an invitation for chaos and injustice, likely worse than whatever we've got now.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
When I have overwhelming evidence of someone's guilt, say, a young black defendant involved in gang violence, but instead convicting him at trial, he and I (or his attorney) work out a resolution that helps him avoid incarceration and conviction, is that perpetuating a system of oppression, violence and racism? Or is it good coming out of the system? When that kid beats drugs, beats violence and finds a job (yes, this shit does happen), was he worse off for having come in contact with the courts?
When I convict someone - through trial or guilty plea - for their third or fourth instance of serious domestic violence, white or black, is that simply promoting a system that subjugates and oppresses people based on race or socio-economic status?
When, instead of pursuing a conviction, I refer a case to a veteran's or other trauma-based court for processing, and it results on that person receiving chemical or mental health treatment instead of incarceration, is that an inherent evil that needs to be rooted out?
You make a lot of bold statements, and if I'm guessing, you've spend no time inside a court and know very few attorneys who practice criminal law, otherwise you wouldn't paint criminal law practitioners with such a broad brush. There are obvious problems in the criminal justice system, but for every problem that exists, there are hundreds of attorneys who use good sense, perspective, patience and impartiality to work out good solutions for individual defendants. Many of us strive to punish the bad guys and ensure that the good guys - the people in the wrong place at the wrong time, the innocent, the young kid who made a mistake - aren't ruined for life by conviction or incarceration.
I do in fact suggest that the system works, or is working, in some capacity, but I don't believe that it's inherently good or just. Read my previous post: it takes thoughtful, considerate, compassion and patient people to make it work. I work with defense attorneys, judges, jurors and court staff every day that make it work. There are, of course, severe problems at play, for instance, underfunding of public defender programs or disparate sentencing, but not one of those problems proves that the system is broken or can't be remedied. You say you've done your homework, so let's see it. Show your work. Title your essay: "The System Is Broken, Here's Proof, and No Good Comes From it."
You've advocated for tossing the whole system out, which means the burden is on you to suggest a system in it's place. What shall we do without a jury system? If the system we have currently results in wrongful convictions at given rate, how will a non-jury system remedy that? If we don't have a prison system, what shall we do with legitimate serial killers or sexual predators? If the system is broken because a guy like George Zimmerman was acquitted and you don't believe in the jury system, then what should be done with him?
So then, what is the alternative? If there's not one good thing that comes out of the current system we have, and if guys like me don't do a lick of good because the system is so flawed and irreversibly broken, then what's next? What comes tomorrow?
You can keep telling yourself that, but keep in mind, in cases of wrongful convictions (i.e. Mumia, Peltier, WM3), ONE VOTE, perhaps yours would have acquitted them.
Good luck with that. Impractical politics are worse than no politics. Read Saul Alinsky. Choose your arguments wisely and appropriate your energy effectively. In this thread, you've gone from being upset about Zimmerman's acquittal, to expressing that the system is broken anyway (begging the question: would you have suddenly loved the system had their been a conviction? :roll: ), to saying that jury service can't help acquit innocent people, to now calling for the dismantling of civilization. Bold statements, and I appreciate your passion for big changes. But you might spend years of spinning your wheels. Impractical politics are worse than no politics.
Use yourself wisely.[/quote]
interesting stuff to be sure. Ive personally never talked to a prosecutor before so this has been interesting. I think you and I have similar references points. I think we both read the same books, watched the same movies, attended the same lectures, but came to wildly different conclusions.
I think you have a faith in the system i dont share. Ive seen and read too much. Ive seen too many cases where the system treats blacks and others as subhuman. The politics aside, my view of the ineptness of the justice system I think is widely shared by the american population. And as I said, I think you and I have read the same books, have similar heroes, and all that stuff. Can you really blame people for having a cynical view of the justice system? Having read Angela Davis. Take a black family for example, could you really blame them, given America's disturbing history, that they might feel that the justice system views them as worthless?
Whether or not you think my politics are level headed or not, i dont know how hiding my political beliefs would do me any good. I believe every single thing Ive posted in this thread. Someone with my beliefs doesnt fit in on a jury. Nor would it make sense. Those in charge would have to be insane to take me for the job in that respect "yeah, that musicismylife78, he hates cops, supported death row inmates, calls for the dismantling of civilization, believes prison abolition is good, and thinks the system is beyond repair....why don't we give him a call and say he's been picked to be serving on the jury". My politics preclude me from that. Im an open marxist anarchist. Have been for years.
I dont know what the alternative to a prison or justice system would be. Its clear to me though the current one isnt working. The system is set up in terms of punishment not working to help the prisoner change. Even with people legitimately convicted and tried, real criminals, I dont believe 23 hours in a small cell, common experiences in solitary, routine beatings and abuse, and being manacled and shackled is humane,nor is it fair or justified. Of course there are dispicable and wrong actions and crimes. But even if we were talking about a murderer I wouldnt feel prison is fair.
It would be different if the justice system was clearly about protecting the public. Its clearly not, You know better than all of us. The cops, lawyers, and other people you interact with, few if any do it for the genuine love. They do it for the power, the money, the kickbacks. You watched The Wire? My view of the justice system is basically that show. Its all corrupt. The Wire didnt suggest we do a little tweaking here, and some changes there, and then its okay. David Simon clearly was suggesting we throw the entire system out. Im with him.
There are dark forces. The cops and guards patrolling the prisons are allowing drugs into the prison and are getting a cut of the money. Cops on the street getting money from drug dealers and all that. It all works together. Cop quotas and racial profiling. It all melds together.
I think thats great what you do, the example you gave of a black youth and you working out a resolution so he avoids incarceration. I think thats great.
A system that rightfully convicts a sexual predator in Chicago and incarcerates him for life works.
A system that wrongfully convicts a Latino person in LA and incarcerates him for life doesn't.
.[/quote]
Prison and justice isnt about protecting the public. You seem to be an exception. And Im glad. But cops and prosecutors and attorneys dont really care about protecting the public. The bottom line is always the bottom line. To be elected you need to be tough on crime. AFter a big murder, the public demands someone pay. Thats what happened with the WM3. Instead of actually doing investigative work, the WMPD knew the public wanted someones blood, so they found 3 innocent teens and branded them satanists.
Indeed a sexual predator in chicago that indeed did commit a crime should be punished. But im not sure life imprisonment is the right punishment. Prisons are inhumane by definition. As I said, putting someone in a cell 23 hours a day, in manacles and shackles, routine beatings and racism and sexism and rape and all that. That aint justice. For anyone. And I dont support it.
American justice seems to be, you commit a crime-you languish in an inhumane cess pool for the rest of your life. No attempt is made to change the behavior. No attempt is made to discuss why they did what they did.
Read Echols book. He paints a disturbing portrait of the prison system. No one should deal with that. Wrongly or rightly convicted criminals. None.
Im for restorative justice. That might be an alternative. I dont believe throwing people in prison for a crime does anything to deal with the issue. TO me, dialogue, discussion, and forming some sort of restitution and whatnot, that would be my hope.
Prisons are counterproductive. And they make no sense at all. Things either are or they arent. You can't have an entire prison industrial complex built on deceit, lies, greed and racism, and then turn the other way and say, oh yeah, they do serve a purpose for the "real criminals". You cant weed it out.
The system is too messed up. The innocence project is only the tip of the iceberg. We know the famous cases. But thats why peltier and Mumia are so famous. Tomorrow in NY when some racist pig arrests some black teen for marijuana possession and the kid gets thrown in prison for life for the three strikes law, that kid wont be famous. We wont know his name. The system aint working for him.
1 million black men in prison , most for non violent drug offenses. Id consider every single one of them innocent.
thats not a winning percentage. if it was a sports team you'd label them a loser. A bad team.
If anything the innocence project wildly underestimates the amount of unfair and unjust convictions
well, in this case, the justice system did get it right. there was no way to convict this guy beyond a reasonable doubt. there was a whole heap of reasonable doubt. did he murder Trayvon? Probably.
but the justice system can't convict on "probably".
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
remember, "not guilty" does not mean innocent. he shot and killed a kid, and as a result he will never ever lead a "normal" life. is it justice enough? to me, no. but knowing the guy is gonna sleep with one eye open the rest of his natural life is ok with me.
zimmerman will get his due. either in a civil court, or a federal one.
the defense did their job. they got a killer off the hook. that is why they make the big bucks.
props to the jury for not being swayed by the emotion of it all. they did their job.
martin's family handled it beautifully. i am heartbroken for them.
zimmerman's brother is an asshole.
the people like ann coulter who are gloating about this are nothing more than assholes. they are gloating at a kid being dead and the killer walking free. if trayvon had been white and zimmerman been black, they would not be saying things with so much glee.
and where are these riots in sanford that many people were predicting? they didn't happen. hope those people feel good for profiling the entire african american population of sanford.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
hmmmmmmmmmm......
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
You discredit yourself every time you say something like this. You even concede that you've never talked to a prosecutor before me, but you can make this claim?
This is different than saying "abolish prisons." If you've got an aspirational argument about what the goals of punishment should be (i.e. restorative justice vs. a punitive approach), that's one thing, but just because some prisons are inhumane and corrections should actually work on "correcting" behavior, it does not logically follow then that prisons should be abolished, and certainly not without a contingency plan for all the untreated sex offenders who would get new found freedom.
That's simply untrue. Whether the current program is effective or not, or whether there are disparities in sentencing is up for debate, but to claim that the corrections system does not attempt to rehabilitate probationers or that opportunities are not made for rehabilitation is flat out untrue.
Read it. I expect prison for an innocent man is an awful, awful experience.
That's fine. Many lawyers also favor restorative justice, but as one component of criminal justice. Even the most ardent proponents of it understand that there are certain cases where it simply will not work (i.e. crimes with child victims, crimes with vulnerable victims, sex crimes etc).
I have no clue what you're talking about. The prison-industrial complex as a term refers to prisons as an industry, being built and maintained by private companies who obtain government contracts and therefore have a significant financial interest in keeping said prisons full. The other part of the equation is legislators and lobbyists colluding to draft harsher sentences and criminalizing more behavior to help keep prisons full.
How does that set of circumstances preclude someone from saying "imprisonment is appropriate in some cases?" I'm quite confident in saying that imprisonment is appropriate, independent of whether said imprisonment is profitable, in many cases. Like for unrepetent serial killers or high-risk sexual predators.
Sure, that's all fine and great but you're raising issues that are independent of whether a criminal justice system should exist or not. Stupid overly rigid laws like a three-strikes sentencing law is a legislative issue and does nothing to further your claim that we should abolish prisons or "dismantle civilization."
Again, take a spin around their website. Talk to one of them. See if you still think that. I can assure you, they don't.
I'm not going to waste much more time on this thread. It's sad and depressing and this discussion is going no where.
You've said you've never spoken to a prosecutor before me and yet somehow feel comfortable making the claim that lawyers don't care about justice or doing good and only care about power and "kickbacks" (whatever the hell that means).
You've cited The Wire as an example for why you believe we should do away with the criminal justice system. You know that show is fiction, right? You deplore Zimmerman's acquittal but can provide no alternative to what should be done with him.
For every flag-waving American who doesn't pay attention to anything and is willfully blind to government abuses that could use a healthy dose of skepticism, there's a hand-wringing liberal who's perfectly willing to lob unsupported claims about a system he admittedly has little experience with that could use the same.
Until you've met every lawyer or cop, you've got no basis to say we're all corrupt. Until you've got an appropriate alternative plan to deal with all the prisoners beyond rehabilitation (trust me, they exist), you've got no basis to say "abolish prisons." A TV show and a lack of experience don't afford you much credibility, at least with the types of claims you're making.
There is good and bad in the criminal justice system, and I see both every day. I speak from experience. It's reckless and irresponsible to propose doing away with a system unless you've got a viable alternative ready. It kills your credibility, socially and politically, every time you generalize about a system or group of practitioners you have little experience with.
I wish you luck, but I think you need to do some more homework before you continue to say a lot of what you've said here.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
Being a prosecutor doesnt make you an expert on it, nor does it make me any less of an expert if Im not a prosecutor. Since post 1 ive sensed a snootiness with you. You are a prosecutor therefore you know more, youve gone through more schooling, youve read more books, is what I keep getting from you. Ive stated I thought we've both read and been influenced by the same stuff, its just we took different paths. You became a prosecutor, im a radical.
You know nothing about me. You dont know where I went to school. What I majored in. You dont know me or my experiences. How dare you act like you do. Step off the high horse and talk like a normal person.
Id steer clear of making judgements, even if thats your job, because it usually bites you in the face.
I know more than enough about the justice system, how it works, and its supposed triumphs. You dont need to be in the system to see the "results". As I said 2 plus million in prison, over 1 million are black men, the majority on non violent drug offenses. In places like DC, the numbers of blacks in prison is 95-97 percent black.
The Wire wasnt fiction and just a tv show. You clearly dont know much about it. This was as meticulously researched and purposeful as any show could be. David Simon the creator had clear intensions. Entertaining the audience and letting you "take the edge off after work and let your hair down" was not his goal. His stated goal was to force the viewer to deal with their own biases and to show how the entire system has failed these black and poor children.
Like a Kubrick film, I can guarantee you no image or scene in The Wire, in 5 seasons, was just made up. Or just to entertain. It all had a point. A clear one. This wasnt some meaningless project.
Its not surprising you would dislike the show or call it just a tv show. It doesnt portray anyone involved in the system as being helpful to dealing with the crux issues-racism and classism. The show portrays cops as no better than the murderous drug dealers they pursue.
Im sorry but people, including myself, have real legitimate beefs and problems with the justice system and the prison industrial complex. The fact you are a prosecutor alone makes it impossible for you to deal with this fairly or in a coherent manner. Its hard for someone who's job it is to lock people up and lord power over people to see things from the normal peoples perspective.
I would hope you dont talk to your clients like this. "You dont have experience and like a tv show therefore I know more than you". Come on my friend. You are being childish.
OK.
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
2024-08-31 Wrigley 2
2024-09-15 Fenway 1
2024-09-27 Ohana 1
2024-09-29 Ohana 2
Oh I beg your pardon. I wasnt aware there prisons that didnt involve rape, sexism, racism, routine brutalization, harassment etc...
Lets face it, most prisons are the kind of prisons I describe. Next time you hear any judge talk about that a punishment they hand down 25 years for armed robbery for instance, that the punishment is about correcting the behavior and working on it, give me a ring on my oreo phone here at the batcave at a quarter to never.
How can you be that blind to the reality. Im not interested in working for the system. If that means being blind to the realities of the world...no thanks.
Oh, so you told me I was ignorant for getting my facts from a tv show but failed to admit you had never seen it before? Smart move. Intelligent too. How can you critique my views on it and its conclusions and call it "just a tv show" if youve never seen it?
Id generally make it a practice when you post on here to refrain from the "im a prosecutor and thus I know more than you, you uneducated peon you" nonsense. Its not becoming. And it completely made my point for me. My main point was the justice system doesnt care about people and cant be bothered with facts. You've said you are left wing, you support peltier, mumia and wm3, and you've said you have gone a different route with people you encounter and tried to steer them away from prison. Yet your behavior on here towards me was the complete portrayal of what I was saying. You dont know me. You dont know my history. Or why I believe what I believe. For all you know my whole family could have been messed up by the justice system. The whole point is you took it on yourself to play the holier than thou person.
A person doesnt have to pass the bar to know and make rational statements on the justice system and politics
If you have the time I would highly recommend watching The Wire, it is amazing.
:corn: well.....anybody up for a riot ? you all can bring your race cards and join in on the festivitys.
to be quite honest with you guys I wouldn't care if he walked or did not,sometimes when a kid lives his life in the "gansta" world he or she may find more than they wanted too, it's truly a shame he died but it could have been zimmerman just as easy and at that poit we wouldn't be posting on this at all...he'd just be another dead "white mexican" and some of you would probably be asking for a get out of jail free card because he was just a teenager who made a bad choice in life and needed another chance....right ?
Godfather.
It's not my job to lock people up. It's not any prosecutor's job to lock people up. It was not my intention to be snooty and if I came across that way, I apologize. I don't take kindly to broad generalizations about me or my profession, especially when I can think of any number of examples to counter what you say. I have never seen The Wire and if you feel comfortable basing a radical critique on our current justice system on a TV show, good for you. I don't.
Again, this discussion is going no where. Good luck.[/quote]
It may not be the case, but it does appear that way from the outside. A prosecutors job is to get a conviction. And obviously punishment of some kind, usually prison time. The whole way its framed is even suggestive of this.
"the states case" when talking about it. "the state of arkansas against/vs Joe Blow".
And any case we've discussed so far has been about the prosecution putting people in prison no matter what, evidence or not. This leads to the prosecution having an all out mentality, no matter what we will get this guy. It leads to tunnel vision. If your job is to get a conviction, you arent going to be interested in hearing information and evidence that suggests the guy is innocent. Im talking about the cases of peltier, mumia, wm3 and so on