Innocent until proven guilty

CTL, with your description of CT’s system, you indict the other states (i.e NY) with all the problems inherent in those states system that effectively corrupt justice.

There’s a small part of it that isn’t corrupt?

Perhaps.

It isn’t just the Judicial system that is corrupt, the laws themselves are corrupt. Poorly written, unevenly enforced, unfair and unjust.

Laws frequently, hastily, written reactively in response to pubic and media outrage to some newsworthy event. Draconian sentences for light crimes while other more serious crimes carry much lighter sentences. Sentences are imposed on the whims of a judge. The same crime can result in vastly different punishments (or no punishment) depending which judge you get (even in the same courthouse) or which jurisdiction you’re in. Judges who are frequently highly unqualified and/or biased to judge.

And all this is even before discussing the perversion of Justice based on who one’s legal counsel is. Is it real justice that in order to obtain true justice one needs the ability to afford very costly legal representation? How can you call it a justice system when an accused guilty rich man with a top lawyer can get away with a crime whereas an innocent poor man who cannot afford counsel can get convicted due to lack of decent legal representation?

AviK….
In 5 years, my new hires should be off on their own as solo practitioners or partners in a small firm of similar aged attorneys. They know when being hired there is ZERO chance of becoming a member of the firm. Long term family owned firms generally do not make non-family members partners and are not interested in large expansion.
Lack of a Grand Jury Indictment means that a prosecutor has to justify bringing prosecution to his/her superiors without being able to shift blame on the Grand Jury. I feel it benefits all involved, not just defendants. I have seen witnesses terrified of appearing before a Grand Jury because they are without the benefit of counsel while in the room.

Atty. Spinella is a Criminal Defense Attorney, he is NOT part of the Hartford Courant newspaper. Apparently he wrote an opinion piece or was interviewed by them. He practices in The Hartford area, I do not. I’ve not read his piece and can not pass judgment on his opinion. He certainly is not the be all to end all in Criminal Justice matters in CT.

The beauty of America is that different people can have and express different opinions.

@Joseph
You may not like the laws as they are written, enforced, etc. BIT that does not mean they are corrupt. You need to look at the dictionary definition of corrupt:
“adjective
having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain.
“unscrupulous logging companies assisted by corrupt officials”
Laws may be applied by corrupt individuals but in and of themselves they are not corrupt.

Joseph, I can’t tell from your comment whether you have ever sat on a jury. YitzchokM said he has been in jury pools, not that he’s been on a jury. I sat on a jury in the Bronx in a criminal trial over 30 years ago, and most of my fellow jurors were decent people who wanted to do the right thing. My wife recently sat on a jury in Queens, also in a criminal trial, and her experience was similar. Presumably, neither the prosecution nor the defense is interested in jurors who are “the lowest of the low.” It’s also not clear to me how one can tell in a jury pool who’s “the lowest of the low.” It’s not likely that you engaged in conversation with such people.

Joseph, great post at 2:12. Every word of it is true.

Prosecutors generally see themselves as the cops’ lawyers, with the mission of prosecuting everybody who’s arrested and getting them the longest sentence possible. They’re idealistic but in an unnecessarily partisan and punitive way. (This along with overly punitive laws and unfair policing practices resulted in our country having the world’s highest incarceration rate, which basically everyone, even Republicans like Gingrich and Norquist, thinks needs to be reduced dramatically.) Judges are often former prosecutors and have the same mentality. Other judges have quit after having to hand down so many unreasonable mandatory minimum sentences the defendants don’t come close to deserving.

Prosecutors have the constitutional duty to turn over exculpatory and witness impeachment evidence to the defense but violations of this duty are extremely widespread (they are known as Brady violations, and they (and other forms of prosecutorial misconduct) are so common that they are a significant driver of false convictions.) However, they usually never get caught and when they do they are virtually never punished even in the slightest way. This is all very well documented, in research carried out in reaction to the Supreme Court’s Connick v. Thompson decision, which made it much harder to sue prosecutors even when they engage in misconduct that leads to innocent people being sent to prison for years.

The Bill of Rights looks good on paper (and indeed, it resembles Torah criminal procedure in some respects, such as the Fifth Amendment) and sometimes these rights are enforced. But the system as a whole produces massively unjust and unreasonable results.

CTl,
1. That means that they will be making much more than there peers who remained in public service.
2. How is having to justify an indictment to supervisors better than having to justify it to a grand jury?

Iacisrmma, you are correct but the pension (assuming one worked five years, which is the minimum for vesting) is based on years of service and final salary . That means that the pensions they will receive thirty years down the line will be very small and even smaller if inflation reawakens.

Yehudayona,
1. I second you. I personally was never on a jury although I almost was (after I was selected the judge decided the split the trials of the two defendants and dismissed us) but my father a”h was on both a state jury and a Federal grand jury. From what he told me it was very fair. In fact, the state jury was going to acquit except that the defendant said to the complainant at the stationhouse “I didn’t rob your store” without being told that he was specifically accused of that.
2. So? Kim lei b’d’rabba minei. Learn the third perek of Makkot and you will see that in Halacha we also pile on every possible aveira (the record is six for eating a wasp – Makkot 16b).

Yytz, no system administered by human beings can be perfect. I consider it unfair that prosecutors have to turn over exculpatory info but defense attorneys may not reveal the reverse. What are “overly punitive laws and unfair policing practices” is also in the eye of the beholder. At least at one time Manhattan prosecutors considered themselves lucky to get convictions because juries identified with the defendants. In fact, the reason why the British did not introduce it in EY was that they thought that Jewish jurors would automatically acquit Jews and Arab jurors would automatically acquit Arabs. They had three-judge panels with one Jew, one Arab and one Britisher. The majority decided. As for highest percentage of citizens incarcerated, the US is No. 41 in overall crime rate and No. 14 in violent crime rate.

CTl, as I recalled when you first mentioned your new associates you said that they will also have the option of corporate legal departments. I presume that they pay much more than government agencies.

Avi K, I should have mentioned that Sessions was talking about drug offenses. Throwing the book at low-level drug offenders has been shown to be ineffective. It’s hard to argue that the War on Drugs has been a success. Perhaps the Trump administration is pushing this to create jobs in prison construction and for prison guards.

Avi, while his boss may think he’s reigning (rather than serving), you presumably think Sessions should rein in asset forfeiture.