jb:
>Which kind of shows that it's a problem, actually
jks. Nah, it onl;y came up twice in three years while I was there, out of scores of guilty pleas.
>Jb:. But who outside the
system would know that it's a problem? The stereotype is rather the opposite.
jks. I don't understand this.
Jb: The general public impression is that the guilty get off or get lighter sentences than they should, not that the innocent plead guilty under pressure. And, as you say, there is a general feeling that those caught up in the criminal justice system deserve what they get, at least until you're one of those people.
Jb:
> 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.
jks. There 13 exonerations and 25 executions. We have several hundred on death row. It's still al lousy percentage.
Jb: Sorry. Should've looked that up, here's it is:
"The likelihood that the innocent are being executed was enough to compel Illinois Governor George Ryan, a onetime supporter of the death penalty to suspend executions two years ago. Simple arithmetic convinced him the system was broken: of 25 people put on death row in Illinois since 1987, 12 were executed, 13 were falsely accused and eventually freed, including Anthony Porter, a retarded man who came within a few days of execution for a murder he didn't commit. So Ryan halted a system he says was like flipping a coin. "It's a system that either works or it doesn't," says Ryan. "And if it doesn't, then we shouldn't have it."
http://www.insideout.org/documentaries/dna/thelaw.asp
I take it you're saying this is wrong, and it does seem wrong. The death penalty was reinstated in '77, no? Of course it's not every case where the possibility exists for exoneration based on DNA evidence, so even a 5% exoneration rate indicates a higher innocence rate, I would think.
Jenny Brown