There is an interesting case out of Kansas that first aired late July. Kansas Judge David Byrn (left) was the presiding judge in the case of Robert Nelson, 49, who was sentenced to 70 years for a rape that he insisted that he did not commit. Byrn refused repeated requests from Nelson to prove his innocence through DNA testing. Nelson would have stayed in jail for the 70 year sentence if it was not for the fact that Sharon Snyder, 70, directed a family member to an earlier motion where such testing was ordered. Using that information, Nelson won the right to the testing and proved his innocence. When Bryn found out it was the clerk who informed him of the earlier successful motion in another case, he fired her just months before her retirement (though she later found that she could still receive her pension). She had been a clerk for 34 years.
Byrn turned down a motion in 2009 for DNA testing, which was not available 25 years earlier in 1983. By using the cited case, a third motion was successful and a lawyer from the Innocence Project was appointed to represent Nelson.
After Nelson was proven to be innocent all along, the judge went after the clerk. He wrote her that “The document you chose was, in effect, your recommendation for a Motion for DNA testing that would likely be successful in this Division . . . But it was clearly improper and a violation of Canon Seven … which warns against the risk of offering an opinion or suggested course of action.”
Notably, the earlier motion was public information. However Bryn said that the clerk was recorded in calls discussing non-public information with Nelson’s sister. Synder’s actions certainly could be viewed as suggesting a course of action and the discussion of any sealed information would be a serious breach. However, I am surprised with the level discipline against her. Notably, there has been no effort to review the actions of the police or prosecution in the wrongful conviction. There is no effort to review Bryn own repeated refusal to allow such simple testing of the evidence. It is the clerk who is fired.
I am also surprised that Judge Bryn would take this action himself since he was directly involved in the prior case and the testing has proven an embarrassment to him. I would have though that a recusal might have been ordered for another judge to look at the matter.
Bryn’s bio states:
David M. Byrn was appointed by Governor Matt Blunt in September 2008 as Judge of Division 3 of the Jackson County Circuit Court. Prior to his appointment to the bench, Judge Byrn practiced law for 27 years with the law firm of Jeter Rains & Byrn, LC. . .
Judge Byrn received his Juris Doctor Degree from the University of Missouri – Kansas City in 1981. He received a Bachelor of Arts Degree, Summa Cum Laude, from Graceland University in Lamoni, Iowa in 1978 . . .Judge Byrn has long been an active member of his community, donating time to serve on multiple city boards and commissions. He has also served his local school district in many ways including serving on financial advisory committees, judging debate tournaments, and speaking at career days. Judge Byrn has been a long time supporter of many different charities including Habitat for Humanity, Truman Neurological Center, Optimist Club, and the Boy Scouts. Judge Byrn is an ordained minister in the Community of Christ and has served in multiple administrative positions and on many different boards and commissions of his church.
Snyder was fired just five days after Nelson was released.
Compare the firing of a clerk to the mild reprimands given to federal prosecutors for far more serious infractions.
Once again, a two tier legal system.
It is time to fire the judge. If they elect judges in KC, I hope he gets a good opponent since he needs to be gone and off the bench.
Why would an inmate request a DNA test if it would prove he did the crime? Innocent people want DNA tests. Why would you have to make a DNA request through the Judge who presided at your trial? It’s already a conflict of interest since the Judge would have to admit a mistake was made. DNA requests by inmates, who never had the opportunity to get DNA evidence tested at their original trial, should go through an Appeals Board. And maybe the DNA will help find the real rapist!
Judge Byrn is a bully and doesn’t belong on any bench. The Court Clerk is a hero for helping to free an innocent man.
“It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”
The judge should be disbarred and removed from the bench for imitating an human…..
Reblogged this on Reality Check and commented:
Remove this judge from his office. Disbar him immediately!
If someone does a crime, they should do their time. If they didn’t do the crime they shouldn’t have been railroaded into jail in the first place.
This is a Missouri judge. Jackson County is in Missouri. They should make him move to Kansas as punishment.
randyjet, Most counties in Missouri elect their judges. Jackson County and St. Louis County still do not, along w/ maybe a couple others.
There was a death penalty case in Montgomery County Texas where a school janitor was convicted of killing and raping a HS school girl. The cops did the normal thing and arrested the black man for the crime, despite the fact he had been a long time employee of the school. During the “trial” he was found guilty and sentenced to death. Years later as he was about to be murdered, the court clerk confessed to the lawyers that the judge and the prosecutor in the case met every morning of the trial to work out strategy to get the guy convicted. She was fired for having told the truth. They judge was not discimplined at all, nor was the prosecutor. At the very least they both should have been disbarred.
In the subsequent trial that was moved to Galveston, Brantley was found not guilty, and the defense attorneys turned up a person who probably DID commit the crime. It was a young guy who had worked at the school as a janitor, had quit, and not turned in his keys. His ex wife testified he showed up at her place in Conroe, drunk, and demanding sex on that same day as the murder. The DA did not follow up on this at all.
Speaking the truth is now a very dangerous thing in this country. The Judge should be thrown off the bench. Kudos to the clerk. I am glad that she did get her pension.
Gives new meaning to being Byrned.
Would one of the lawyers on this blog Please explain how this is possible. Why is this sort of thing allowed to stand, or even happen at all?
I know the country is going to hell and etc. We’ve established all that in prior stories. But that cant be the answer for this case. This is simple basic injustice that has been going on for “ever”.
Is our judicial system truly that capricious?
I understand that human error things happen. This seems bigger than that. Meaning, when the judicial system is confronted with its error it should correct it. It doesn’t seem to.
In the article it is said the judge should have recused himself. Why is it up to him?
Why is it not standard procedure for a case involving any sort of potential conflict of interest – or (what is the right phrase for the case when it is a conflict with ones prior decisions…??)
Why is a judge allowed to keep the case before him over this amount of time? It seems a built in procedure that will naturally result in these sorts of injustices. It certainly is not blind injustice!! As this case is reported it seems pretty obvious that this judge was making decisions not based on the case, and certainly not in the interests of justice, but out of his own ego protection.
Why are the procedures not organized to take care of this obvious conflict?
It seems the basic constitutional principle of our nation is to distribute power so as to minimize these sorts of errors and problems.
How is it that that principle is not baked into our judicial system at its basic operational level?
— It is apparent that this sort of issue is one of immense frustration for me as a layman. I am a student of law at some level, but am not a lawyer. As a citizen I simply cannot understand, and worse , I cannot get a straight, or rather meaningful answer from the legal profession how it is that this level of injustice is systemically allowed to happen.
What seems even worse is that when something like this happens there seems to be no recourse in the system to correct itself as a system. If it corrects at all it seems to be episodic.
— I believe that the unraveling of any society starts with the injustice of its legal system. I think this proposition can be profoundly exampled in history as well as examples like this in our country.
Are we seriously that corrupt as a nation that we have to simply shrug our public shoulders and say “Shit happens”… ?
It seems to me that various issues are being considered as a group which really constitute separate ones. First, wrongful convictions occur even when everyone behaves properly and ethically. Therefore, the fact of a wrongful conviction alone does not establish misconduct, though it does remind us that the system is inherently flawed in that it relies on the evidence and information available to the parties at the time of trial. Second, I don’t know Kansas law regarding post-conviction DNA testing but many states have specific requirements which must be met before such a petition is granted. Again, the fact tha a subsequent petition, is successful does not establish that the court erred in denying an earlier one.
I find the lack of specific information concerning the firing to be a great hindrance in evaluating the judge’s action. I don’t believe providing a copy of a successful motion constitutes recommending a particular course of action. However, I do believe that a court clerk publicly disclosing confidential matter could be a firing offense–depending on what was disclosed. I haven’t found any news stories that provide any information on that point.
[ I hope this is not a duplicate? Sometimes this system seems to drop a post, only to have it show up again later??]
Would one of the lawyers on this blog Please explain how this is possible. Why is this sort of thing allowed to stand, or even happen at all?
I know the country is going to hell and etc. We’ve established all that in prior stories. But that cant be the answer for this case. This is simple basic injustice that has been going on for “ever”.
Is our judicial system truly that capricious?
I understand that human error things happen. This seems bigger than that. Meaning, when the judicial system is confronted with its error it should correct it. It doesn’t seem to.
In the article it is said the judge should have recused himself. Why is it up to him?
Why is it not standard procedure for a case involving any sort of potential conflict of interest – or (what is the right phrase for the case when it is a conflict with ones prior decisions…??)
Why is a judge allowed to keep the case before him over this amount of time? It seems a built in procedure that will naturally result in these sorts of injustices. It certainly is not blind injustice!! As this case is reported it seems pretty obvious that this judge was making decisions not based on the case, and certainly not in the interests of justice, but out of his own ego protection.
Why are the procedures not organized to take care of this obvious conflict?
It seems the basic constitutional principle of our nation is to distribute power so as to minimize these sorts of errors and problems.
How is it that that principle is not baked into our judicial system at its basic operational level?
— It is apparent that this sort of issue is one of immense frustration for me as a layman. I am a student of law at some level, but am not a lawyer. As a citizen I simply cannot understand, and worse , I cannot get a straight, or rather meaningful answer from the legal profession how it is that this level of injustice is systemically allowed to happen.
What seems even worse is that when something like this happens there seems to be no recourse in the system to correct itself as a system. If it corrects at all it seems to be episodic.
— I believe that the unraveling of any society starts with the injustice of its legal system. I think this proposition can be profoundly exampled in history as well as examples like this in our country.
Are we seriously that corrupt as a nation that we have to simply shrug our public shoulders and say “Shit happens”… ?
Perhaps I am naive, but the logic of barring a DNA test that might prove someone innocent of a crime perplexes me. What is the legal or philosophical justification? While the criminal justice system is not specifically set up to assure fairness and exactitude, who benefits by convicting innocent people of crimes
The takeaway from this story for me is the need for indigent legal services. This wrongfully convicted man should have had access to a criminal lawyer. Instead, he had to get his free legal advice from a court clerk to figure out the magic words to say before the judge granted his request for DNA testing.
It would be nice to have further context in this case, especially how other clerks had been treated for similar actions. There sure seems to be the appearance that this judge, who presided over the original trial and denied two prior motions for DNA testing, didn’t like being made to look bad and was reacting out of spite. Firing the clerk certainly seems like a harsh penalty when she was certainly only trying to do good.
If the DNA lab was objective and certified what does it matter if it is tested? Either the evidence confirms or it denies. Let it happen.
A case hanging on a single piece of evidence is a not very solid to begin with.
I hope this clerk files a wrongful termination action with her civil service process. But, like is often the case, the judge and other employees might likely start the retroactive smear campaign against her claiming she did everything short of kidnapping the Lindberg baby and that her action with the DNA request was “the final straw” in a newly announced long list of violations.
The county would rather spend a million dollars fighting her in court and dragging it on for years then settle for $50,000 and let her move on. It will be all about punishment for her, blaming her for this man’s exoneration, and covering their own backsides, and using this as a way to threaten other employees as to what will happen if anyone speaks against those in power in the future.
And guess what. Nothing will happen to this judge.
Mike Spindell:
my thoughts as well. Call me crazy but shouldnt you give an individual all avenues to prove he is innocent? Even if he is convicted and a test 20 years later could exonerate him, isnt it the duty of the state to do the test?
I can understand a person being unjustly convicted if it was done based on the best evidence at the time but shouldnt testing be allowed if new technologies come to market? Especially those which might set a person free.
This man, the judge, is sick. If I was a judge my ego would not be worth 70 years of a man’s life. Not even 1 year.
If he did this to protect his ego, maybe he should finish the man’s sentence?
Mike Spindell: “While the criminal justice system is not specifically set up to assure fairness and exactitude, who benefits by convicting innocent people of crimes…”
****
Prosecutors looking to make a name for themselves, cops that want a high clearance rate, Judges that don’t want to be perceived as soft on crime. Convictions benefit the players as much as the victims and society. LOL, you need another cup of coffee: you know that.
Police departments around the country would do well to process the DNA samples they already have, most rape kits aren’t processed and years-long backlogs exist.
“Rape evidence in U.S. languishes untested in police storage”
http://www.trust.org/item/20130423081731-1ifja/
An upstanding degenerate, spiteful, and morally bankrupt.
I agree concerning the problem of not routinely providing the opportunity to have relevant evidence tested for DNA when such testing was not available. However, the costs involved are prohibitive, and create the potential for significant additional costs and a lack of finality as the value of the test result is litigated. Certainly DNA which does not match inside a rape victim who has not otherwise engaged in sexual activity should probably result in a conviction being tossed–but what if DNA on her outer clothes doesn’t match? How much weight would that have? In addition, the assumption that a prisoner who was guilty would not request testing is incorrect. One study estimates that the testing results provide further support for the conviction in 50-60 percent of cases where post-conviction testing has been done.
Most states have statutory schemes reflecting how the legislative body has determined the various interests involved should be balanced, and a judge hearing a petition is required to follow those statutes. This situation does point up one of the major problems in our legal system in that it can be extremely difficult to navigate without competent legal assistance, and many individuals have very limited access to such assistance.
blhlls: “One study estimates that the testing results provide further support for the conviction in 50-60 percent of cases where post-conviction testing has been done”
How many of those tests were requested by the convicted person? This is not clear from your comment.
The clerk was exercising her right to petition her government for redress of grievances which is protected under the First Amendment. The judge is a state actor and can be sued for violation of the fired employees rights because the judge has no immunity for this non judicial function and state acts in violation of the civil rights of the employee. 42 U.S,C, Section 1983. Be there are be square lawyers.
This igPay Judge is in Jackson County, Missouri, which is Kansas City, but not the State of Kansas. Get the facts straight Toto. Dorothy is in Kansas.
To correct my earlier reference to a study. The material I saw concerned an estimate by Barry Scheck that 50 to 60 percent of the results of post-conviction DNA testing incriminated the petitioner who sought the testing. Given his knowledge and experience, I would expect that estimate to be in the ballpark, but it would not represent a conclusion based on a systematic review.
It looks like the clerk also did the state a favor. What does it cost the state to keep someone locked up per year, $25,000-$40,000??? While, as a general rule, clerks shouldn’t be dispensing legal advice, the judge should have used some discretion here.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
jmquinnn, some prisoners will try anything to try to shorten their time behind bars, including asking for DNA tests. As it also costs the govt money and time, it penalizes the system, which could give a prisoner a warm feeling of revenge. Quite rare I’m sure, but Barry Scheck has worked wonders with DNA and contaminated samples of it.
What a vindictive Prick
Judge David Byrn is.
For David Byrn, DNA means Do Not Argue
This man has truly lost the forest for the trees. Or…he’s just another arrogant p*ick with a black robe.
Another amoral human and proof that all humans are criminals/”criminals”.
What Mike S. said. DNA testing should be a right, not a procedure that you have to ask for. Especially in capital cases. I thought the goal was the truth, not get a conviction.
You guys want to hear another side of this multifaceted issue?
I was at the regional state prison, doing some work on the protective custody unit. One of the staff nurses came in, wanting to talk to the inmate I was interviewing. She had a swab sample kit and asked the inmate if she could take a swab from inside his cheek for a DNA sample. She told him it was voluntary, and the testing was free.
He refused. She explained that under the rules, he could not get credit for any good days off until there was a DNA sample on file. He still refused. He did not want his DNA on file. The nurse and I both tried to explain to him that he was adding at least a year or two onto his sentence by refusing. He still refused to provide a sample. He said he would just flat time his sentence rather than give a DNA sample.
I think his reason is obvious.
OS:
I would refuse too. Fuk that. Maybe he had an iheritable disease and didnt want his children punished by not being able to get insurance.
his reason is not obvious.
rafflaw, as an isolated question I agree with you. However, it takes resources both to do the testing and have a system for determining the value of the results. I also believe that current defendants in such cases should have demonstrably competent and talented legal representation and the funds for whatever experts, investigation, or testing the attorney believes might be useful and that the threshhold for establishing reversible error should be much lower. However, the system has a limited pool of funds available so how those should best be divided up will always be a matter for dispute. In connection with most post-conviction DNA testing statutes there is a preliminary analysis as to whether the requested testing, assuming results favorable to the petitioner, would be sufficient to cause the conviction to be set aside. In many cases DNA results might be useful in helping establish guilt, but of little value in establishing innocence. It will always be a judgment call as to whether testing of a particular item is warranted under the applicable law and circumstances of the case.
Bron,
That guy had left a trail of “samples” at a number crime scenes. Crimes he had not ever been connected to.
I think Dexter needs to be called in on this guy.
He has a code. He’ll check the DNA surreptitiously, and if they match, he will dispatch.
Kansas Judge David Byrn is a fraction of a human being.
Proves the old point that any thing looks good on a resume but the truth is in ones actions. An ordianed minister to boot. What a joke. Too much power in this country without any checks and balances.
OS:
what did he do? Rape?
Child.
The judge should be the one fired (preferably, out of a cannon), and his personal wealth taken and given to Nelson in compensation.
Bryn’s misconduct is worse than the rape of the original victim, both for the damage he caused to Nelson AND the failure to properly prosecute the real rapist.
Those who abuse their positions (be they pi…I mean cops, mis-judges like Bryn, public persecutors or forsensic fictioners) should be deemed automatically guilty and imprisoned to save the public the cost of another trial.
randyjet – “There was a death penalty case in Montgomery County Texas where a school janitor was convicted of killing and raping a HS school girl.”
I saw a documentary on that case once, but the firing of the clerk was not mentioned.
Clarence Brandley, the man who was railroaded into the conviction, said that one of the “cops” said to him (and I quote verbatim), “You’re the n*****, you’re elected.” There wasn’t just laziness and corruption in the case, there was outright and naked bigotry.
Bron – “Even if he is convicted and a test 20 years later could exonerate him, isnt it the duty of the state to do the test?”
People seem to think it’s important to go back and retest 15 year old urine samples in pro sports for drugs or steroids, but nobody wants to retest old DNA samples to prove innocence or guilt for murder or rape. Priorities, people.
That judge is a Mizzoura judge, not a Kansas judge. Jackson County, Missouri.
PSmith: Can you point me to the information showing the judge committed some kind of misconduct either in connection with the original trial or his determination on the original petitions for DNA testing? I haven’t seen any, and am curious as to what you are referring to.
@lottakatz
Every single step you mention is irrelevant to any notion of justice.
So my original question stands…
a) Is our system of “justice” so perverted that it is a cynical joke to think that justice is its actual purpose?
b) I wish JT or one of the lawyers on this blog would address this point in some depth.
It seems insufficient to say “its too hard”. I agree w the post above that suggests that the state has a burden to prove innocence as much as guilt.
I fear the justice system for these capricious reasons that it seems to function out of. What I want to know is this fear justified or is it paranoid?
Judge serves as another energy source fueling *PrisonWorld* aka America
How far do you stretch to consider coverup?
They seem to forget that a trial is supposed to be a search for the truth.
OS:
fuk him.
Bron, that was why he was on the protective custody unit.
We disagree on a number of things, but you get no disagreement from me on that.
Michael B: “Every single step you mention is irrelevant to any notion of justice”
*
On that we agree.
[…] Posted on August 18, 2013 by admin Kansas Prisoner Released After DNA Evidence Clears Him Of Rape . . . Judge Then Fires Clerk Who Told… […]
Judge David Byrn is a Black Robed Despot!
Imagine my surprise when I click on the link to the original article and see a black guy’s face.
@blhlls The cost of an admissable DNA test is $230, according to “DNA Testing Center of America”. Even assuming the tests need are 10x more expensive than that that’s less than 2 1/2 grand or less the cost of 8 weeks incarceration. To claim that limited resources is what’s stopping DNA testing is ludicrous. The reason it’s “Too expensive” is that anything is too expensive if you don’t want to do it.
M. Price: First, keep in mind I agree with you that post-conviction DNA testing should be more available than it is, and that more prosecutors should be more willing to concede the exonerating effect of such tests in appropriate cases. However, your analysis of the resources involved fails to take into account many things. First, the evidence which may have DNA which can be tested must be identified and a determination must be made as to whether results favorable to the defendance would be likely to exonerate the convicted person. At this early stage, a review of the case by law enforcement and prosecuting attorney, as well as scientific consultation concerning potentially hundreds of items of evidence is likely to be required and then the preliminary issues briefed and hearings held. Then the testing. Then comes the litigation over the actual effect of the test results which is likely to consume substantial resources as you end up at what is essentially a trial balancing the new test results in with all the other evidence. Ultimately, there has to be a statutory scheme to determine how this should all be worked out, and judges are required to follow that scheme.
Like anything else, the funds for these processes have to come from somewhere. Our system already has problems providing a complete defense to those initially charged due to a lack of resources. It is easy to say there’s enough money if we really want to do it, but every $230 to one place has to come from someone else. Many members of the public seem to be unwilling to to direct that resources should be appropriated for this particular purpose.
I have had my run in with feckless and lazy “detectives” and a corrupt DA. I was accused of child molestation as a result of meddling in a relative’s drug use. What ensued has taught me that everyone can forget about justice and expect to be prosecuted without regard to the truth.
My odyssey started shortly after I started trying to intervene in niece’s coke-snorting booze-swilling life. I was naturally worried that the children (one of them my 10-year old great nephew) were at risk of harm. My niece had married a baseball player and she went from broke white trash to rich white trash. In the ensuing years, her husband cheated on her and that led her in the direction of being more and more unstable over time.
My meddling got me accused of molesting my then 10-year old nephew. I don’t know if he was put up to it or not but I suspect he was because the bizarre of the nature of the lurid accusations; they directly reflected the coke-and-booze induced convoluted thinking of a cocaine induced paranoia.
Understand now, there is, in Georgia, a curious abuse of one’s rights in the interest of catching and jailing child molesters. It is called “the outcry” and it is the ONLY piece of evidence needed to get a conviction for child molestation in Georgia. There need be no physical evidence or eye witnesses because, as the theory goes, children don’t lie and certainly not about that. Of course, anyone with children knows that children lie all of the time.
The law has been the bane of many fathers caught up in acrimonious divorce cases and there is no way to tell how many innocent men have ended up in prison unjustly. There is practically no way to defend against a single allegation of child molestation; good thing that there were many accusations made against me. I needed only to prove my nephew to be lying in a couple of case to call his claims into question. At least I thought so.
That is the crux of my point here. In one instance, my nephew made a claim that I was able to refute because there was another child with us. My brilliant lawyer asked to get a deposition from the child that ultimately proved beyond any doubt that I was telling the truth, at least in that instance.
Now, it isn’t really curious that the prosecutor raised strenuous objections to the deposition but luckily the judge thought it perfectly reasonable to allow it. The prosecutor was opposed for one reason, she had a weak case filled with such lurid allegations that I would need to be a green-eyed purple monster for anyone to believe them. Or, at least, completely insane with such uncontrollable sexual lust for a little boy that I’d do anything to get at his privates.
That brings me to the real failure of justice. The police are supposed to be just as interested in proving a person innocent as guilty. Meaning, they should investigate to get at the truth and not just a sufficiency of evidence to convict. And, the prosecutor’s job is to get to the truth. Well, it should be but prosecutors could care less if they think they have a “good case” meaning a winnable case.
However, you must remember the “outcry”. The simplicity of the legal requirement means that the cops are not tasked with doing anything extraordinary to do their “job” and nor are prosecutors. In my case, my nephew was “professionally” interviewed and those interviewers came to the conclusion that indeed he was telling the truth.
Understand, he didn’t claim that I touched him inappropriately in the privacy of a place where we were secreted away. Allegedly, in one instance, I tried to get him into a strip club here in Atlanta at 10:30 am: Atlanta has an ordinance that requires bars to be closed by 3 am and doesn’t have 24 hour strip clubs. According to my nephew, I argued at length with the bouncer at the door and then, upon failing, I took him to the parking lot and molested him in my mid sized sedan in broad daylight.
That, as it turns out, is a perfectly plausible story! Nevermind that molesters are more given to take their victims to places where they can have complete control over them with little chance of being found out – at least immediately anyway.
The cops NEVER interviewed him about the allegations. Had this been any other kind of crime where the police need to gather and validate evidence to get a conviction, the cops would likely have questioned him at length all the while looking for inconsistencies. Better they are found and cleared up before a prosecutor gets her ass handed to her at trial.
The prosecutor didn’t want to drop the case against me without getting something for the 8 months I was dragged through jail. At first, she wanted a confession to a reduced charge that still would have made me a sex offender and would have required me to go to “counselling” (don’t get me started on that phony crap). “Hell NO!”
Then she wanted no expression of wrongdoing but still the offender counselling. “What!? . . . HELL NO!”
Finally, I “confessed” to two counts of misdemeanor assault with time served. I grudgingly agreed. I needed to get out because my already poor health was really suffering and I needed to get back to my elderly mother who, as it turns out, needed bowel surgery almost immediately due to diverticular disease that almost killed her.
The act of copping that plea made me sick to my stomach. A small bite of a shit sandwich is still a bite and it made me physically sick. I am still emotionally sick from the whole thing now more than 5 years later. I immediately forgave my little nephew. Hell, he was used and manipulated but, even if that weren’t the case, he was only 10.
I have advice for anyone out there that reads this. If you are arrested, without regard to being innocent or guilty, DO NOT MAKE STATEMENTS TO THE POLICE WITHOUT A LAWYER! Further, don’t expect the prosecutor, police or even the judge to be interested in a fair trial based upon reasonable and believable allegations that are well supported by verifiable evidence.
“It is easy to say there’s enough money if we really want to do it, but every $230 to one place has to come from someone else. Many members of the public seem to be unwilling to to direct that resources should be appropriated for this particular purpose.”
blhlls,
You raise a valid point that I think illustrates a major problem with the criminal justice system in the US. One would think that it would be a primary concern of any society that holds itself up as “just”, that the guilty are punished and the innocent go free. This is not the case in America and I presume in the rest of the world. There are inadequate resources allocated for all parts of our criminal justice system save for the funds allotted for police equipment subsidized by the Federal Government.
Our trial system lacks enough Judges and ancillary personnel to ensure speedy and fair trials. Prosecutors and legal aid attorneys have large unwieldy caseloads. This lack of funding leads to shortcuts throughout the system and the odds of innocent people getting convicted, though probably low, are in fact unacceptably high if the rate were but 1%. This doesn’t even take into account the amount of people arrested and tried for victimless crimes and in the failed frenzy of the “War on Drugs.” To continue to underfund the system is a blanket admission that as a society we are less interested in justice than were are in expediency.
$230 is a bargain. Depending on the state and the specific facility, it can cost from about $100 per day up to over $600 per day to keep an inmate incarcerated. An inmate serving a life sentence costs the state department of corrections about $1.5 million dollars, on average.
If you go back and read the piece I wrote about the “greying” of our prison population, it is clear that aging prisoners have more heath problems than younger ones, including dementias such as Alzheimer’s disease. The cost of keeping an inmate in the DoC’s skilled nursing facility skyrockets the price of incarceration.
As I have been saying for a long time, scientific discoveries about the human genome (e.g. DNA) have brought DNA testing into focus in the sense of accuracy.
Scientists have discovered that forensic and medical assumptions about DNA are now troubling:
(The “It’s In Your Genes” Myth – 2). Criminal defense lawyers take note.
vitamin b2
I do not know whether it’s just me or if everyone else experiencing problems with your blog.
It appears as though some of the text within your content are running off the screen.
Can someone else please comment and let me know if this is happening
to them too? This could be a issue with my browser because I’ve had this
happen before. Kudos