Another Wrongful Conviction Reversed...

[bigbadbob]

After serving 9 and a 1/2 years for a murder he did not commit,Timothy Masters was recently freed by authorities after DNA showed someone else was at the scene.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/01/22/masters.case/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Again, another DNA exoneration of someone that did not commit a crime, but was convicted based on prosecutorial misconduct and the general idea that, if he was arrested, he probably did it.

If we (The U.S.) have hundreds of cases were DNA evidence has exonerated people already convicted for a crime, it stands to reason that there is an similar percentage of others convicted for crimes they did not commit, but which they will never be exonerated because there is no physical evidence for DNA to be a help. Or for which they didn't serve much time because it was wasn't as serious as murder.

When are we going to wake up and make major reforms to our criminal justice system that levels the playing field for those accused of a crime? The foundation of a criminal justice system such as ours is that the State's case MUST be vigorously challenged. This examination is supposed to identify the flaws in the State's case and give a jury the opportunity to make a reasoned decision. However, we (by electing politicians who are "tough on crime") have allowed our system to be corrupted to the point where jury verdicts are suspect. Rules of evidence have been so relaxed as to allow much that had was previosly unavailable. Judges are elected in "non-partisan" races and attacked for not being tough enough on those that are brought before the Court. We have a Court of Criminal Appeals that only uses the worst cases in which to make new law, and who tries to read a juries mind by declaring blatant errors "harmless" The 4th amendment has become a joke.

This is unacceptable. I am not saying that those who commit crimes shoudl not be punished. I am saying that it is much worse for an innocent person to spend even a second without his freedom than it is to let guilty people skate on a "technicality"

This has got to stop.

[osupsycho]

Understand the problem but what do you think is a solution? No system will be perfect so I am not sure that even hundreds of cases is enough to say that the system is broken. How many total criminal cases are we talking about that these are a part of? Thousands, millions....? If we are talking about a tiny percentage then I don't see a reason to scrap it all and start over. I just don't see how there could ever be a system where wrongful convictions would not happen some of the time...

[CowboyJD]

Understand the problem but what do you think is a solution? No system will be perfect so I am not sure that even hundreds of cases is enough to say that the system is broken. How many total criminal cases are we talking about that these are a part of? Thousands, millions....? If we are talking about a tiny percentage then I don't see a reason to scrap it all and start over. I just don't see how there could ever be a system where wrongful convictions would not happen some of the time...

THAT'S CRAZY TALK!!!

THERE MUST BE CHANGE, AND IT MUST BE NOW!!!

BOB NEEDS MORE $$$ AND NEEDS TO GET MORE OF HIS CLIENTS FREED!!! :eek::p:cool:

[Lewis the Pike]

I would also like there to be a contingency that while a person who is accused of comitting violent offenses (rape, murder, etc.) The accused must sleep on his defending attorney's couch.

[bigbadbob]

I would also like there to be a contingency that while a person who is accused of comitting violent offenses (rape, murder, etc.) The accused must sleep on his defending attorney's couch.

Ha!

[bleedorange]

It's an imperfect world Dick, screws fall out.

You keep me in stitches bob. And for that, I thank you.;)

[Lewis the Pike]

in all fairness, my quote was from one of Dennis Miller's rants on his HBO show

[bigbadbob]

Understand the problem but what do you think is a solution? No system will be perfect so I am not sure that even hundreds of cases is enough to say that the system is broken. How many total criminal cases are we talking about that these are a part of? Thousands, millions....? If we are talking about a tiny percentage then I don't see a reason to scrap it all and start over. I just don't see how there could ever be a system where wrongful convictions would not happen some of the time...

There are several things that we could do to help the system while still protecting society as a whole

1) Appointment rather than election of State Court Judges: This takes politics out of the system and creates a more independant judiciary. I believe Justice O'Connor has said something like an elected judiciary is a bane of judicial independance.

2) Requiring the Court of Criminal Appeals to have full opinions in all appealed cases, instead of just death cases (bad facts make bad law).

3) Try to reverse the perception that just because you are arrested, you are guilty.

4) Give lots more money to the Pubic Defender' offices and OIDS as they are critically underfunded to the point that many Defendant's don't get experts in their cases, even when necessary.

5) Realize that the State version of the 4th amendment is different from the Federal version and can be construed to be more protective

6) Bring back true preliminary hearings where the Defendant can call witnesses

7) Stop with the "exceptions" to the evidence rules that are not traditional exceptions, i.e. allowing hearsay statements in sex abuse cases

8) Require all confession rooms to be outfitted with recording devices

9) More money to cops-but require more from them

10) Outside agency to investigate officer corruption.

And this is just a start.

[bigbadbob]

THAT'S CRAZY TALK!!!

THERE MUST BE CHANGE, AND IT MUST BE NOW!!!

BOB NEEDS MORE $$$ AND NEEDS TO GET MORE OF HIS CLIENTS FREED!!! :eek::p:cool:

Actually, I don't need more $$$. I've got plenty of clients, whether they be divorce, criminal or otherwise. And making changes to the system doesn't make me more money anyway.

I also don't need more of my clients freed. The vast majority of my clients don't go to jail.

And as for it being a small number of wrongful convictions-you are only talking about the cases that there is DNA evidence in the first place - which is a small percentage, AND cases in which the crime is heinous enough to put someone behind bars for a lengthy amount of time- which makes the pecentage of cases even smaller. That leads me to believe that there is an exponentially greater number of wrongful convictions out there that will never be turned over or found because there is either no DNA or the case isn't big enough.

[CowboyJD]

Actually, I don't need more $$$. I've got plenty of clients, whether they be divorce, criminal or otherwise. And making changes to the system doesn't make me more money anyway.

I also don't need more of my clients freed. The vast majority of my clients don't go to jail.

And as for it being a small number of wrongful convictions-you are only talking about the cases that there is DNA evidence in the first place - which is a small percentage, AND cases in which the crime is heinous enough to put someone behind bars for a lengthy amount of time- which makes the pecentage of cases even smaller. That leads me to believe that there is an exponentially greater number of wrongful convictions out there that will never be turned over or found because there is either no DNA or the case isn't big enough.

Lighten up francis....really.

You tend to believe what you like in the absence of any evidence.

[CowboyJD]

There are several things that we could do to help the system while still protecting society as a whole

1) Appointment rather than election of State Court Judges: This takes politics out of the system and creates a more independant judiciary. I believe Justice O'Connor has said something like an elected judiciary is a bane of judicial independance.

2) Requiring the Court of Criminal Appeals to have full opinions in all appealed cases, instead of just death cases (bad facts make bad law).

3) Try to reverse the perception that just because you are arrested, you are guilty.

4) Give lots more money to the Pubic Defender' offices and OIDS as they are critically underfunded to the point that many Defendant's don't get experts in their cases, even when necessary.

5) Realize that the State version of the 4th amendment is different from the Federal version and can be construed to be more protective

6) Bring back true preliminary hearings where the Defendant can call witnesses

7) Stop with the "exceptions" to the evidence rules that are not traditional exceptions, i.e. allowing hearsay statements in sex abuse cases

8) Require all confession rooms to be outfitted with recording devices

9) More money to cops-but require more from them

10) Outside agency to investigate officer corruption.

And this is just a start.

1. Because we know appointment of Judges at the federal level has eliminated the politics, right?

2. Log jam city. Good luck with that one. Lots of cases just really don't need full opinions. You know that. I know that.

3. How do you propose to do that?

4. Agreed

5. In other words, you don't like the opinions of the appellate courts on this issue. That's not a flaw IMHO, it's just a preference that you'd have.

6. The purpose of a preliminary hearing is not to gain free discovery or to try the case in advance. The purpose of a preliminary hearing is to determine whether the state can present enough evidence to establish the lower level of proof called probable cause....a standard less than establishing that they could possibly get beyond a demurrer motion at trial. Again...not a flaw in my opinion, but more of a "that would make your life easier" preference. I'm also not sure what you mean by "go back", but the present procedure for prelims has been in place for longer than I have been in practice....and that's nearly 18 years. I'd been interested in learning how long ago it was that defense counsel was entitled to call witnesses once the prosecution had established probable cause under the applicable standard at that phase of the trial.

7. See #5.

8. No problem with that.

9. Not sure what you mean by "require more of them", but greater accountability and greater pay is always good.

10. We handle many public corruption cases in Oklahoma including many involving police departments and sheriff's offices. I believe the charges and convictions generated via those investigations indicate we're impartial, fair, and accurate in those investigations and without favortism to law enforcement. Civilian oversight boards are something that I'm not opposed to, but I'm not sure who you think should be doing criminal investigations other than law enforcement investigators of some type.