I was thinking of rather more chickenshit charges, but sure, there are a lot of people involved, some judges are watchful and fair. But on the whole I don't know that most judges spend a whole lot of time worrying if the accused really broke into the car or really had the crack when the prosecution and defense present some deal they've worked out.
>I can't speak from personal experience to the first two
>(though the saying about grand juries is that they'll indicta ham sandwich),
>but I know my own district judge took the plea process very seriously,
>and she would not accept a plea if she did not think the guy was guilty.
Which kind of shows that it's a problem, actually. But who outside the system would know that it's a problem? The stereotype is rather the opposite.
jks:
>The hard fact is -- sorry Bill, this will convince you even more than you
>already believe I am total sell-out -- most criminal defendants are guilty,
>and most of them are obviously guilty. Ask any defense lawyer, which is
>what I am, never mind the prosecutors. We do our best, but mainly the best
>we can do is to plead to a lesser charge.The wonder is that the cops bother
>to lie and cheat at all. They don't have to. They mainly win when they
>play straight. I think its mainly laziness when they lie and cheat,
occasionally,
>in a high profile case, political pressure.
I guess you're in Chicago so you'd know this better, but as I recall Illinois governor George Ryan stopped signing execution orders because about half of the prisoners on death row there (13 out of 25 I think) were exonerated. That's not a particularly good percentage. I understand that the prosecutors are under more political pressure in these cases, but I would think that, on average, there would also be better defense in capital cases.
>If everyone demanded a trial the U.S. criminal justice system would be
>completely overwhelmed. Wanna stop the war on drugs? Everyone facing time
>on a drug charge refuse to plead guilty and demand a jury trial.
>[Screeeeeech.]
>
>jks. Yes, but it would be a bad choice for most clients, who'd lose and
>then be convicted of the full range of charges. Plus in fed ct if you plead
>you get credit for cooperation, which is worth time.
Sure, just as individually going on strike is generally a bad move, though people do it all the time, i.e. walk off the job to protest injustice.
Still, I do think people plead out more often and earlier than they should because of bullying by their lawyers. Here I'm not talking about murders but the run of the mill economic/drug crimes for which the vast majority of people enter the system. You really have no-one on your side if your lawyer is telling you to take a deal. It's terrifying to not understand the process and have your advocate telling you you're fucked unless you plead guilty--plus, the defense and prosecution have the advantage of offering you a known quantity over an unknown one. After a few court dates or months waiting, you just want to know what's going to happen, even if it's bad, so you and your family can start dealing with it. It's a terrible system, and it's allowed to continue partly because people outside it have no clue what's really going on.
Of course it'd be much worse if it weren't for the NLG--so while we're enjoying our arguments with Justin and Nathan, we should all be writing the Guild a check.
Jenny Brown