- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/20/24 at 6:39 am to I20goon
quote:
However, before going there and reforming that prosecutors and law enforcement should see some accountability.
Prosecutors and public defenders should also have to share the same pool of money. The government should not have all the resources to build a case against a citizen while the accused citizen gets table scraps to defend himself against the government.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:22 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Prosecutors and public defenders should also have to share the same pool of money. The government should not have all the resources to build a case against a citizen while the accused citizen gets table scraps to defend himself against the government.
I can see two sides to this.
I think overall I am inclined to agree with you on it, but it's a new idea to me and I might change my mind given more time to consider it.
One thing I have long been an advocate for, however, is professional juries.
The system would stop being as much about about who has the best lawyer if we had jurors trained in legal concepts who had experience in dozens/hundreds of trials. It would stop being so much about who could put on the best smoke and mirrors show by the lawyers because the jurors would see through that nonsense.
Also you could review the records of the jurors to examine them for patterns possibly indicating bias.
I think it would help tremendously in getting to the actual truth of cases.
Plus, I think that the "right" to a jury trial is the one thing the FF got wrong. I don't recognize anything as a "right" that depends upon the state compelling citizens who otherwise have no interest or involvement to participate.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 7:24 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:30 am to 4cubbies
quote:What do you call someone who is awaiting trial but has been convicted several times for other crimes?
“Criminal” implies guilt. Most of the people incarcerated in Louisiana haven’t been convicted.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:33 am to 4cubbies
quote:
I’m not sure why you’re so upset that you feel the need to post emotional insults
Again, someone calling you stupid isn't them being emotional. I don't understand how you are unable to grasp this concept.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 7:34 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:42 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
I can see two sides to this.
There are.
However, its a miniscule problem and fits the "chasing ghosts" theme.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:44 am to Diamondawg
quote:
What do you call someone who is awaiting trial but has been convicted several times for other crimes?
If the person served his time for previous convictions, why would they matter? Obviously the charges weren’t too egregious otherwise the person wouldn’t have the opportunity to be convicted of multiple charges at separate times.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:54 am to 4cubbies
most of the inmates in jails are being held for trial. They are not convicts.
I'm not a fan of this. The Sheriffs use the video conferencing and phone contracts to gouge the families and gouge they do.
I'm not a fan of this. The Sheriffs use the video conferencing and phone contracts to gouge the families and gouge they do.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 7:57 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
There are.
However, its a miniscule problem and fits the "chasing ghosts" theme.
Interesting.
I was all set to disagree with you until I started looking at the conviction rates and sentencing times for public vs private defenders.
It does depend on who you ask, but there doesn't seem to be much difference in the rates of conviction or sentence times. There is some difference, but it's not a lot.
Thanks for pointing me in that direction.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:03 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Obviously the charges weren’t too egregious otherwise the person wouldn’t have the opportunity to be convicted of multiple charges at separate times.
Now you are the one being naive. Wasn't there a thread up here not too long ago about a guy who killed someone and he had been arrested and released dozens of times before?
If you are here illegally and released on bail, what do you think the chances are that you will show up for trial, regardless of how serious the charges are? They can't find you if you don't show up...you have no trackable information.
And yes, I realize that you said "convicted." But the average time served for assault is less than two years. Even aggravated assault can carry an original sentence as light as 5 years, out in 2-3.
So the math does work even if we're talking about convictions.
quote:
If the person served his time for previous convictions, why would they matter?
Because they make it more likely that the person is guilty. Someone who has been arrested eight times for assault is probably guilty of number nine.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 8:06 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:03 am to wackatimesthree
She's notorious for posting social justice stuff that has little bearing on the real world.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:06 am to 4cubbies
quote:Doesn't matter if they did their time, they are still criminals. Shouldn't you be more concerned about the "catch and release" programs practiced by the Soros backed DAs? Doesn't the victim deserve some justice? How many catch and release perps run home and hug their parents/kids?
If the person served his time for previous convictions, why would they matter? Obviously the charges weren’t too egregious otherwise the person wouldn’t have the opportunity to be convicted of multiple charges at separate times.
BETA Page
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:10 am to 4cubbies
quote:
The government should not have all the resources to build a case against a citizen while the accused citizen gets table scraps to defend himself against the government.
I share some sentiment here. The legal profession should be the first socialized when you progressives take over.
I'd rather see LEO and DAs punished for pushing marginal cases personally. As long as I can shoot people committing crimes against me, I'm fine with y'alls bleeding heart approaches.
This post was edited on 5/20/24 at 8:11 am
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:25 am to GeauxtigersMs36
quote:
No reason someone should make money on more people getting sent to jail.
Thats how the State works with education, prison and welfare programs.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:35 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
professional juries.
I haven't thought about this extensively, but my initial reaction is that this would be a violation of the Sixth amendment, which has been interpreted to ensure a jury of one's peers. A professional jury would also present more opportunities for corruption. And that would have to be someone's full-time job, correct? They pay would have to be great otherwise qualified people wouldn't want to do it. Or would qualified people be limited only to lawyers?
quote:You're describing judges. So you're basically advocating for removing juries all together and allowing judges to decide every case.
f we had jurors trained in legal concepts who had experience in dozens/hundreds of trials.
quote:
Plus, I think that the "right" to a jury trial is the one thing the FF got wrong. I don't recognize anything as a "right" that depends upon the state compelling citizens who otherwise have no interest or involvement to participate.
Ehhh. There are countless instances of judges being extremely corrupt all across the country.
Also, lawyers choose juries. They aren't going to choose someone who they can tell has no interest in being there and will just be a pain in the butt to have on the jury.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 8:44 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Now you are the one being naive. Wasn't there a thread up here not too long ago about a guy who killed someone and he had been arrested and released dozens of times before?
Probably, although I can't recall the exact thread you're referencing it. It definitely happens, but people aren't convicted of murder, released and re-convicted of other murders multiple times. If this has happened, it doesn't happen regularly.
quote:
If you are here illegally and released on bail, what do you think the chances are that you will show up for trial, regardless of how serious the charges are?
There's a lot to unpack here. If the person committed a serious offense, chances are they wouldn't be able to afford the bond anyway. I'm by no means an expert in immigration law, but I don't believe all immigrants are even eligible for bail upon arrest. Again, I'm not sure about the specific laws or circumstances that dictate this.
Regardless, most people that are arrested in Louisiana are citizens of Louisiana.
quote:That depends on if its a felony or misdemeanor. Louisiana has a habitual offender law that allows for harsher penalties for subsequent convictions, as well.
And yes, I realize that you said "convicted." But the average time served for assault is less than two years. Even aggravated assault can carry an original sentence as light as 5 years, out in 2-3.
quote:
Because they make it more likely that the person is guilty. Someone who has been arrested eight times for assault is probably guilty of number nine.
I disagree. It all depends on the facts of the case.
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:22 am to Diamondawg
quote:
Doesn't matter if they did their time, they are still criminals.
And? We all screw up. Some people never get caught.
quote:
Shouldn't you be more concerned about the "catch and release" programs practiced by the Soros backed DAs?
Are you asking me why I started a thread about corruption related to charging people to visit incarcerated loved ones instead of starting a thread about people not getting harsh enough prison sentences?
Posted on 5/20/24 at 9:55 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Interesting.
I was all set to disagree with you until I started looking at the conviction rates and sentencing times for public vs private defenders.
It does depend on who you ask, but there doesn't seem to be much difference in the rates of conviction or sentence times. There is some difference, but it's not a lot.
Thanks for pointing me in that direction.
Yes. Unless you are OJ hiring the legal dream team and getting a predominantly black jury right after the LA riots, the difference is small.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News