Quantcast

Forums | MacLife

You are not logged in.

#1 2009-11-04 9:43 am

Tallgeese
Sternly Advising
From: Pool Party
Registered: 2000-10-17
Posts: 34114

I am the law so I won

Government says: No Constitutional right to not be framed

Do prosecutors have total immunity from lawsuits for anything they do, including framing someone for murder? That is the question the justices of the Supreme Court face Wednesday.

On one side of the case being argued are Iowa prosecutors who contend "there is no freestanding right not to be framed." They are backed by the Obama administration, 28 states and every major prosecutors organization in the country.

On the other side are two black men — Terry Harrington and Curtis McGhee — men who served 25 years in prison before evidence long hidden in police files resulted in them being freed.

...

Harrington struck up a friendship with the prison barber, who petitioned for the police records in his case. According to defense lawyers, those records not only disclosed how police and prosecutors had coached Hughes until his story matched the facts, and how other witnesses were coerced into lying, but that the records also showed that police and prosecutors had withheld evidence that pointed to another suspect.

They had identified a white man named Charles Gates, who had been seen with a shotgun near the scene of the crime. Gates, the brother-in-law of a Council Bluffs Fire Department captain, was interviewed and failed a polygraph. But prosecutors and police abandoned their interest in him in favor of Harrington, who was not even offered a polygraph.

"So the bottom line," says Clement, "is essentially that police and prosecutors together at some point in this case stopped looking for the real killer, the real suspect and decided it would be far easier to get an eyewitness account that said to a moral certainty that the two African-American youths from across the state line have committed this crime. "
...
But even after 25 years in prison, Harrington never gave up. In 2003, armed with the newly disclosed police records, he petitioned the Iowa Supreme Court, which overturned his conviction as well as McGhee's, and concluded that the star witness was a "liar and perjurer." Since then, all the witnesses have recanted.
...
The Council Bluffs prosecution team, while still maintaining that Harrington and McGhee are guilty, contends that even if the men were in fact framed, prosecutors, under established Supreme Court precedent, have total immunity from being sued.

The Supreme Court has indeed said that prosecutors are immune from suit for anything they do at trial. But in this case, Harrington and McGhee maintain that before anyone being charged, prosecutors gathered evidence alongside police, interviewed witnesses and knew the testimony they were assembling was false.

The prosecutors counter that there is "no freestanding constitutional right not to be framed."
...
Even if a prosecutor files charges against a person knowing that there is no evidence of his guilt, says Sanders, "that's an absolutely immunized activity."

What can I even say about this? Prosecutors openly stating that they have immunity against lawsuits concerning manufacturing evidence and prosecuting people who they don't think are guilty, and may even know aren't guilty.  Even worse, they may legally be right about this. Justice in America is sick and prosecutors treat it as a game where more convictions = hiscore - guilt or innocence or justice or protecting or serving isn't relevant. Numbers numbers numbers.


I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.

Offline

 

#2 2009-11-04 11:31 am

JakeTheTall
Cargo Cultist
From: In Permanent Opposition
Registered: 2003-03-13
Posts: 9623

Re: I am the law so I won

The act of filing charges and pursuing the case at trail is an immunized activity, but can the suppression of evidence and conspiracy to get people to commit perjury be pursued separately ?

Interestingly, the Sixth Amendment actually doesn't guarantee a right to a "fair trial," just a speedy and public one.


Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim.  Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet."  They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew.

Offline

 

#3 2009-11-04 11:33 am

JakeTheTall
Cargo Cultist
From: In Permanent Opposition
Registered: 2003-03-13
Posts: 9623

Re: I am the law so I won

More precisely, lots of wiggle room for unscrupulous prosecutors.

The Sixth Amendment wrote:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim.  Then he told them, "Now draw some out and take it to the master of the banquet."  They did so, and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine. He did not realize where it had come from, though the servants who had drawn the water knew.

Offline

 

#4 2009-11-04 11:36 am

wellfleation
High on Life
From: Metheun, Mass.
Registered: 2001-11-13
Posts: 8684

Re: I am the law so I won

JakeTheTall wrote:

The act of filing charges and pursuing the case at trail is an immunized activity, but can the suppression of evidence and conspiracy to get people to commit perjury be pursued separately ?

Interestingly, the Sixth Amendment actually doesn't guarantee a right to a "fair trial," just a speedy and public one.

I think so or this is the biggest loophole ever.


FIGHThttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v317/wellfleation/stern-h1_01.jpgPOWER

Offline

 

#5 2009-11-04 12:14 pm

Alien
Forum Czar
Administrator
From: Republic of Amsterdam
Registered: 1999-07-05
Posts: 16948
Website

Re: I am the law so I won

Damn you, Geesie. I've had that song stuck in my head for the last four hours, thanks to you.

.tsooJ


http://macstack.net/forums/images/smilies/lol.gif

Offline

 

#6 2009-11-04 1:35 pm

Tallgeese
Sternly Advising
From: Pool Party
Registered: 2000-10-17
Posts: 34114

Re: I am the law so I won

JakeTheTall wrote:

The act of filing charges and pursuing the case at trail is an immunized activity, but can the suppression of evidence and conspiracy to get people to commit perjury be pursued separately ?

This would also imply that a prosecutor can, with full immunity, bring charges against someone out of revenge.

Well, I guess we'll find out when the Supreme Court makes a decision.

We're always told that our criminal justice system operates biased towards the defendant, on the principle that "it's better to let a guilty man go free than to imprison an innocent man". It seems that the truth is somewhat the reverse of that, "it's better to keep an innocent man in prison than to allow challenges to the confidence in and authority of the system".


I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.

Offline

 

#7 2009-11-04 2:08 pm

DukeofNuke
Free Radical
From: Hazard
Registered: 2003-05-02
Posts: 2563

Re: I am the law so I won

Would it have anything to do with kickbacks from the private prison industry?


"If you want to kick a tiger in the ass, you better have a plan for dealing with his teeth."
- Tom Clancy

Offline

 

#8 2009-11-04 2:16 pm

Tallgeese
Sternly Advising
From: Pool Party
Registered: 2000-10-17
Posts: 34114

Re: I am the law so I won

No, just the raging boner for authority that the Supreme Court has.


I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.

Offline

 

#9 2009-11-04 6:24 pm

Farmerkev
Official Dementor
Moderator
Registered: 2003-01-03
Posts: 18626

Re: I am the law so I won

Tallgeese wrote:

We're always told that our criminal justice system operates biased towards the defendant, on the principle that "it's better to let a guilty man go free than to imprison an innocent man". It seems that the truth is somewhat the reverse of that, "it's better to keep an innocent man in prison than to allow challenges to the confidence in and authority of the system".

I would say you nailed it.


Do your part to combat global warming.
Eat a cow.

Offline

 

#10 2009-11-04 6:54 pm

Pariah
James Carville Fan..
From: Belly Of The Beast, Oklahoma!
Registered: 2001-05-24
Posts: 18426

Re: I am the law so I won

Farmerkev wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

We're always told that our criminal justice system operates biased towards the defendant, on the principle that "it's better to let a guilty man go free than to imprison an innocent man". It seems that the truth is somewhat the reverse of that, "it's better to keep an innocent man in prison than to allow challenges to the confidence in and authority of the system".

I would say you nailed it.

And that's a shame..


"and it's not surprising that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Barack Obama

Offline

 

#11 2009-11-04 9:30 pm

sturner
Royal High Poobah
Moderator
From: Carrollton, TX USA
Registered: 2000-01-31
Posts: 13835

Re: I am the law so I won

They are, however, open to criminal charges far more onerous than a civil suit. They can be brought up for malfeasance in office, and a few other things.


I'm not dead yet.
There are 3 types of people, those who can count and those who can't.
"There are few things graven in stone, excepting your date of death."

Offline

 

#12 2009-11-04 9:34 pm

Tallgeese
Sternly Advising
From: Pool Party
Registered: 2000-10-17
Posts: 34114

Re: I am the law so I won

sturner wrote:

They are, however, open to criminal charges far more onerous than a civil suit. They can be brought up for malfeasance in office, and a few other things.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh, there was a happy time when I believed in liberals.

Offline

 

#13 2009-11-04 10:07 pm

matt
a very bad matt
Registered: 1999-09-16
Posts: 16688
Website

Re: I am the law so I won

God damn it.

When it is assumed that government should be allowed to do things that are not specifically listed and just because they are not specifically listed, and when it is assumed that people's rights should not be protected and just because they are not specifically listed then the Constitution has failed.


Being loud: The next best thing to being right.

Do not click here.

Offline

 

#14 2009-11-05 5:45 am

Ribtorus
Member
Registered: 2002-07-11
Posts: 13758

Re: I am the law so I won

Tradition holds with two sorts of "national constitutions", the Prussian model whereby that which isn't spelled out is forbidden, and the French, whereby that which isn't spelled out is permitted.

Last edited by Ribtorus (2009-11-05 5:46 am)


when surrounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
and the women come out to cut up what remains,
just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
and go to your god like a soldier...

Online

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB 1.2.6
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson