Main Article
This is an article I found earlier today relating to prosecutors overstepping their bounds in a number of California cases. It is always painful for me to hear about situations like these, where a miscarriage of justice once again ruins the lives of those it is meant to protect. The problem that I see as common among all of these types of cases is that the prosecutor typically works in some way that is both underhanded and typically illegal; presumably to get a conviction. While I can understand it is their job to get those convictions, I doubt an employee at Wal-Mart would be commended for stealing money from people's wallets or giving away things from the shelves. I mean, their two primary functions are to obtain people's money and move merchandise. Right?
I can not be certain (because of different state's and county's rules) but most often I think this situation stems from the DA's office being an elected position. The best way to get into a higher seat of power or retain your current one is to have many convictions, damn the consequences. This is especially true among the ADA's under the current DA who most likely want to curry favor with their boss, or work towards over-taking him/her. While I do not discount the guilt of those who act dishonestly in court, I do feel it has more to do with the system than the individuals. I do not profess to have an answer, nor a suggestion, on how to fix this. However, I do feel that if something is to change fundamentally in the system, it will most likely need to be spearheaded by innocence organizations such as the ones mentioned in the article.
This is an article I found earlier today relating to prosecutors overstepping their bounds in a number of California cases. It is always painful for me to hear about situations like these, where a miscarriage of justice once again ruins the lives of those it is meant to protect. The problem that I see as common among all of these types of cases is that the prosecutor typically works in some way that is both underhanded and typically illegal; presumably to get a conviction. While I can understand it is their job to get those convictions, I doubt an employee at Wal-Mart would be commended for stealing money from people's wallets or giving away things from the shelves. I mean, their two primary functions are to obtain people's money and move merchandise. Right?
I can not be certain (because of different state's and county's rules) but most often I think this situation stems from the DA's office being an elected position. The best way to get into a higher seat of power or retain your current one is to have many convictions, damn the consequences. This is especially true among the ADA's under the current DA who most likely want to curry favor with their boss, or work towards over-taking him/her. While I do not discount the guilt of those who act dishonestly in court, I do feel it has more to do with the system than the individuals. I do not profess to have an answer, nor a suggestion, on how to fix this. However, I do feel that if something is to change fundamentally in the system, it will most likely need to be spearheaded by innocence organizations such as the ones mentioned in the article.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment