[Louis Foxwell]

The writer mentioned 2 important issues.
1 - traditional morality has been replaced by the personal authority of those in positions of power and prestige.
2 - lawyers consider the law to be their personal domain.

Access to the tools of the law is available exclusively to those who either have substantial resources or the necessary connections in the system. The enormous volume of cases coming into the system has resulted in a prosecutorial methodology that does nothing to assume innocence.

The average citizen is severely oppressed when the law is used against him. He typically does not have the resources needed to fight back to protect himself. Protecting oneself against the tyranny of the law is only possible if one is willing to spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Plea bargaining is the traditional tool of prosecutors for dealing with caseloads and keeping their conviction rate high. This allows the accused to plead guilty to a relatively minor charge rather than face the daunting task of proving his innocence against the unlimited resources of a prosecutorial office that is indifferent to innocence.

States Attorneys have no interest in determining the truth of a charge filed by state or local police. They pursue the case purely as a matter of adjudication. If the defendant does not have the resources to protect his rights he is found guilty.

Our jails are full of people who were considered guilty by government bureaucrats who have no interest in determining the legitimacy of a charge. Police file charges against an individual as a pro forma device for getting rid of a case. They basically kick the situation over to the prosecutors and the courts to determine guilt or innocence.

Prosecutors then do the same thing, assume guilt unless the accused is able to protect himself from the blind arrogance of power that is the government legal system. The fault lies with a system that rewards convictions without concern for guilt or innocence.

Prosecutors are supposed to investigate with a blind eye to determine adequacy of evidence to bring a case. Only in the rarest of cases does this actually occur.

[gas0linealley]

Your depiction of the American justice system is very disturbing, the stuff of nightmares. However, I believe it is an accurate depiction.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Outstanding post and correct. I also wanted to mention Wall Street. That is an entirely special case in regard to this entire argument. The amount of cheating, scamming, etc. that goes on in that arena to the detriment of the "little man" is unbelievable. Very little is done about the huge amount of dishonesty that is taking place. I could for an hour give examples. No time.

[jwparkerjr]

I have a grandson who is in jail right now being cajoled into accepting a plea agreement. He is a 21-year-old Marine who after his tour in Iraq had changed remarkably. He went AWOL and then got into trouble because of trying to keep away from the Marines. What he did was wrong, in every sense of the word, but the treatment he has gotten from the system is horrid. I am not making excuses for him, he has serious issues and he's right where he belongs at this point, but he needs help and that's the last thing they are interested in providing for him.

[MarkL]

States Attorneys have no interest in determining the truth of a charge filed by state or local police. They pursue the case purely as a matter of adjudication. If the defendant does not have the resources to protect his rights he is found guilty.

A lawyer I know was arguing a death penalty case in front of the MO Supreme Court. The case was to retry a man who was in jail when another inmate was murdered, and he was charged and convicted on the murder, based on an eyewitness' testimony (another convict). New evidence and a recanting witness showed that the convict could not have killed the inmate, but the state was arguing against a new trial. The state prosecutor actually said that the convict had gotten a fair trial the fist time around, and his innocence should have no bearing on whether he received a new trial or not.

Thankfully, the court held that he did deserve a new trial, and he was aquitted of the murder. At one point, he was within one hour of the execution.

Mark