The American Nightmare: The Tyranny Of The Criminal Justice System

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

How can the life of such a man
Be in the palm of some fool’s hand?
To see him obviously framed
Couldn’t help but make me feel ashamed to live in a land
Where justice is a game.—Bob Dylan, “Hurricane

Justice in America is not all it’s cracked up to be.

Just ask Jeffrey Deskovic, who spent 16 years in prison for a rape and murder he did not commit. Despite the fact that Deskovic’s DNA did not match what was found at the murder scene, he was singled out by police as a suspect because he wept at the victim’s funeral (he was 16 years old at the time), then badgered over the course of two months into confessing his guilt. He was eventually paid $6.5 million in reparation.

James Bain spent 35 years in prison for the kidnapping and rape of a 9-year-old boy, but he too was innocent of the crime. Despite the fact that the prosecutor’s case was flimsy—it hinged on the similarity of Bain’s first name to the rapist’s, Bain’s ownership of a red motorcycle, and a misidentification of Bain in a lineup by a hysterical 9-year-old boy—Bain was sentenced to life in prison. He was finally freed after DNA testing proved his innocence, and was paid $1.7 million.

Mark Weiner got off relatively easy when you compare his experience to the thousands of individuals who are spending lifetimes behind bars for crimes they did not commit.

Weiner was wrongfully arrested, convicted, and jailed for more than two years for a crime he too did not commit. In his case, a young woman claimed Weiner had abducted her, knocked her out and then sent taunting text messages to her boyfriend about his plans to rape her. Despite the fact that cell phone signals, eyewitness accounts and expert testimony indicated the young woman had fabricated the entire incident, the prosecutor and judge repeatedly rejected any evidence contradicting the woman’s far-fetched account, sentencing Weiner to eight more years in jail. Weiner was only released after his accuser was caught selling cocaine to undercover cops.

In the meantime, Weiner lost his job, his home, and his savings, and time with his wife and young son. As Slate reporter journalist Dahlia Lithwick warned, “If anyone suggests that the fact that Mark Weiner was released this week means ‘the system works,’ I fear that I will have to punch him in the neck. Because at every single turn, the system that should have worked to consider proof of Weiner’s innocence failed him.”

The system that should have worked didn’t, because the system is broken, almost beyond repair.

In courtroom thrillers like 12 Angry Men and To Kill a Mockingbird, justice is served in the end because someone—whether it’s Juror #8 or Atticus Finch—chooses to stand on principle and challenge wrongdoing, and truth wins.

Unfortunately, in the real world, justice is harder to come by, fairness is almost unheard of, and truth rarely wins.

On paper, you may be innocent until proven guilty, but in actuality, you’ve already been tried, found guilty and convicted by police officers, prosecutors and judges long before you ever appear in a courtroom.

Chronic injustice has turned the American dream into a nightmare.

At every step along the way, whether it’s encounters with the police, dealings with prosecutors, hearings in court before judges and juries, or jail terms in one of the nation’s many prisons, the system is riddled with corruption, abuse and an appalling disregard for the rights of the citizenry.

Due process rights afforded to a person accused of a crime—the right to remain silent, the right to be informed of the charges against you, the right to representation by counsel, the right to a fair trial, the right to a speedy trial, the right to prove your innocence with witnesses and evidence, the right to a reasonable bail, the right to not languish in jail before being tried, the right to confront your accusers, etc.—mean nothing when the government is allowed to sidestep those safeguards against abuse whenever convenient.

It’s telling that while President Obama said all the right things about the broken state of our criminal justice system—that we jail too many Americans for nonviolent crimes (we make up 5 percent of the world’s population, but our prison population constitutes nearly 25% of the world’s prisoners), that we spend more money on incarceration than any other nation ($80 billion a year), that we sentence people for longer jail terms than their crimes merit, that our criminal justice system is far from color-blind, that the nation’s school-to-prison pipeline is contributing to overcrowded jails, and that we need to focus on rehabilitation of criminals rather than retribution—he failed to own up to the government’s major role in contributing to this injustice in America.

Indeed, while Obama placed the responsibility for reform squarely in the hands of prosecutors, judges and police, he failed to acknowledge that they bear the burden of our failed justice system, along with the legislatures and corporations who have worked with them to create an environment that is hostile to the rights of the accused.

In such a climate, we are all the accused, the guilty and the suspect.

As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’re operating in a new paradigm where the citizenry are presumed guilty and treated as suspects, our movements tracked, our communications monitored, our property seized and searched, our bodily integrity disregarded, and our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” rendered insignificant when measured against the government’s priorities.

Every American is now in jeopardy of being targeted and punished for a crime he did not commit thanks to an overabundance of arcane laws. Making matters worse, by allowing government agents to operate above the law, immune from wrongdoing, we have created a situation in which the law is one-sided and top-down, used as a hammer to oppress the populace, while useless in protecting us against government abuse.

Add to the mix a profit-driven system of incarceration in which state and federal governments agree to keep the jails full in exchange for having private corporations run the prisons, and you will find the only word to describe such a state of abject corruption is “evil.” 

How else do you explain a system that allows police officers to shoot first and ask questions later, without any real consequences for their misdeeds? Despite the initial outcry over the shootings of unarmed individuals in Ferguson and Baltimore, the pace of police shootings has yet to slow. In fact, close to 400 people were shot and killed by police nationwide in the first half of 2015, almost two shootings a day. Those are just the shootings that were tracked. Of those killed, almost 1 in 6 were either unarmed or carried a toy gun.

For those who survive an encounter with the police only to end up on the inside of a jail cell, waiting for a “fair and speedy trial,” it’s often a long wait. Consider that 60 percent of the people in the nation’s jails have yet to be convicted of a crime. There are 2.3 million people in jails or prisons in America. Those who can’t afford bail, “some of them innocent, most of them nonviolent and a vast majority of them impoverished,” will spend about four months in jail before they even get a trial.

Not even that promised “day in court” is a guarantee that justice will be served.

As Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals points out, there are an endless number of factors that can render an innocent man or woman a criminal and caged for life: unreliable eyewitnesses, fallible forensic evidence, flawed memories, coerced confessions, harsh interrogation tactics, uninformed jurors, prosecutorial misconduct, falsified evidence, and overly harsh sentences, to name just a few.

In early 2015, the Justice Department and FBI “formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period…. The admissions mark a watershed in one of the country’s largest forensic scandals, highlighting the failure of the nation’s courts for decades to keep bogus scientific information from juries, legal analysts said.”

“How do rogue forensic scientists and other bad cops thrive in our criminal justice system?” asks Judge Kozinski. “The simple answer is that some prosecutors turn a blind eye to such misconduct because they’re more interested in gaining a conviction than achieving a just result.”

The power of prosecutors is not to be underestimated.

Increasingly, when we talk about innocent people being jailed for crimes they did not commit, the prosecutor plays a critical role in bringing about that injustice. As The Washington Post reports, “Prosecutors win 95 percent of their cases, 90 percent of them without ever having to go to trial…. Are American prosecutors that much better? No… it is because of the plea bargain, a system of bullying and intimidation by government lawyers for which they ‘would be disbarred in most other serious countries….’”

This phenomenon of innocent people pleading guilty makes a mockery of everything the criminal justice system is supposed to stand for: fairness, equality and justice. As Judge Jed S. Rakoff concludes, “our criminal justice system is almost exclusively a system of plea bargaining, negotiated behind closed doors and with no judicial oversight. The outcome is very largely determined by the prosecutor alone.”

It’s estimated that between 2 and 8 percent of convicted felons who have agreed to a prosecutor’s plea bargain (remember, there are 2.3 million prisoners in America) are in prison for crimes they did not commit.

Clearly, the Coalition for Public Safety was right when it concluded, “You don’t need to be a criminal to have your life destroyed by the U.S. criminal justice system.”

It wasn’t always this way. As Judge Rakoff recounts, the Founding Fathers envisioned a criminal justice system in which the critical element “was the jury trial, which served not only as a truth-seeking mechanism and a means of achieving fairness, but also as a shield against tyranny.”

That shield against tyranny has long since been shattered, leaving Americans vulnerable to the cruelties, vanities, errors, ambitions and greed of the government and its partners in crime.

There is not enough money in the world to make reparation to those whose lives have been disrupted by wrongful convictions.

Over the past quarter century, more than 1500 Americans have been released from prison after being cleared of crimes they did not commit. These are the fortunate ones. For every exonerated convict who is able to prove his innocence after 10, 20 or 30 years behind bars, Judge Kozinski estimates there may be dozens who are innocent but cannot prove it, lacking access to lawyers, evidence, money and avenues of appeal.

For those who have yet to fully experience the injustice of the American system of justice, it’s only a matter of time.

America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause, and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government’s interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution.

Without courts willing to uphold the Constitution’s provisions when government officials disregard them, and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, the Constitution provides little protection against the police state.

In other words, in this age of hollow justice, courts of order, and government-sanctioned tyranny, the Constitution is no safeguard against government wrongdoing such as SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions, asset forfeitures, prosecutorial misconduct and the like.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
El Vaquero's picture

How about this:  We have far too many laws, making everybody, including you, a criminal.  Yes, you are a criminal.  There are over 10,000 federal crimes, plus countless state and local crimes, and I guarantee that you have violated many of them without even realizing it.  The "GOTTA GET TOUGH ON CRIME!  HERP HERP DERP!" attitude leads to a police state.  Get rid of a lot of the laws and strengthen self defense rights, and things will take care of themselves.  A society can be made to work without tons of law enforcement.  This worked for 400+ years:

 

1. If the plaintiff summons the defendant to court the defendant shall go. If the defendant does not go the plaintiff shall call a witness thereto. Only then the plaintiff shall seize the defendant.

2. If the defendant attempts evasion or takes flight the plaintiff shall lay hand on him.

3. If sickness or age is an impediment he who summons the defendant to court shall grant him a vehicle. If he a does not wish he shall not spread a carriage with cushions.

That included somebody summoning another for violating the equivalent of criminal law.  Citizens were responsible for policing their community.  

lost money's picture

Nothing you said changes a thing I said. We dont have community policing, we have a prison system because people wanted to do away with community policing, i.e. getting a posse togehter, catching and hanging a horse thief. today we arrst him and put him in jail. 100 years ago, no jail, today jail. and a prison population. people ued to be put in stocks for two or three days, shamed before friends and family and released. that was deemed offensive and done away with, so we had to build a prison to hold the guy. hence a large prsion population. 

and most people are not in jail based the crime of waking up in the morning.

bluez's picture

It's really no fun being kept in a tiny cell. I experienced that once when I was high on acid. Watching the cops melting was no fun.

You been watching too many cop shows.

Raging Debate's picture

Lost Money - Perhaps if you want to know why societies build police states (it is really about taxation) you should read Fredrick Bastiat's 'The Law'.

The law today is about expediant taxation. If your going to go Pro Se there are books about it. But it comes down to striking a deal with the prosecutor, that is pretty much what an attorney will do based on the crime.

In NH where I lived for a time the state (female legislature) used family law, driving offences and gender bias/sexual harrassment lawsuits for taxation. I won multiple cases, all except one and that was an activist female judge who forced me into default by nefarious means (I was kicking the shit out of the plaintiff). Nowdays, I would just hire a lawyer. Time is precious and while my experiences taught me a lot it just isnt worth it to fight the expediancy/tax system.

As for driving offences I didnt have a ticket in 23 years. I always asked for a break and got one. I put my hands on the wheel, turn the car off and have the papers ready. I did get a break for speeding when I first moved to Florida but my insurance had expired. My bad for not getting on it sooner.

Anyways, if your caught with no insurance here they revoke your license, it is about $250 to have it reinstated. The worst is you need an SR-22 for insurance like your a drunk. My insurance went from $80 a month to two hundred and you have to pay six months in advance. While I can afford that many people around here make $10. It turns that person into nearly unemployable not being able to drive. This an example of the FIRE industries lobbying influence which is now completely out of control.

i_call_you_my_base's picture

Yes, let's not just imprison innocent people, let's murder them.

bluez's picture

 

Actually, we have the mafia running the entire show. The whole entire so-called "Legal system" is a pure Godfather scenario.

Why pretend it's different?

Abaco's picture

You are an idiot.  We have a large prison population because we have defined exercising  liberty as criminal behavior. We have a large prison population because teh inmates and their familes are farmed for wealth by the crony contractors and because it provides jobs for the bailiffs, judges, correctional officers, and attorney's who support the crooked system.

lost money's picture

I understand if you are one of the innocent... now look at the millions convicted and THE FEW done so wrongly. Sounds like they get it right 99.99 percent of the time. so how is that a failed system?

El Vaquero's picture

I can tell you are unfamiliar with how our legal system works.  In many jurisdictions, DAs will pile felony charges on a person even when there is no probable cause, then come on like they're the meanest motherfucker on the planet and brow beat them into a plea deal for lesser charges.  How are you going to react when your choice is to risk 25 years in the poke vs 2 years probation?  I guarantee that a lot more than 0.01% of the prison population is innocent.  Another issue is that people are put in jail for shit that shouldn't even be a crime to begin with.

MachoMan's picture

This is simply the result of an adversarial legal system...  think of it like a negotiation...  you don't start out where you want to end.  Further, in the event that you fail to mount a viable defense, then you go to jail for the excessive charges...  so long as there are two able-bodied fighters on each side, the system works great...  many of the injustices in the legal system are simply because one side lays down.

El Vaquero's picture

I agree on the advesarial part.  The problem is that the DAs are much more able to make the average suspect think that they are holding all of the cards than vise versa.  DAs are starting with an advantage here. 

 

I won't lay down. 

MachoMan's picture

Well, if you didn't commit a crime, then I'm not sure why you would be worried about any supposed cards...

Vullsain's picture

Where did you get the 99.9% stat that you are parrot like its fact. 

El Vaquero's picture

i have no clue where he got that, but I can say that ~25% of the people that the innocence project have had their convictions overturned via DNA evidence confessed to crimes that they did not commit. 

 

http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction/false-confess...

 

Look up the Reid Technique.  Fucking mind games.  If you are being interrogated, don't let them be buddy buddy with you.  At all.  Set the tone.  A female interrogator?  Stare at her face.  Make it obvious.  If she asks about it, say that she needs to wash her face.  If she asks why, tell her that it's because she's got "BITCH" written all over it.  Prepare for the beating and the civil rights lawsuit.  If she goes and washes her face before asking, LOL during the ass kicking that you'll receive. 

Abaco's picture

Pulled it out of his ass through his mouth.

Renfield's picture

<<In courtroom thrillers like 12 Angry Men and To Kill a Mockingbird, justice is served in the end because someone—whether it’s Juror #8 or Atticus Finch—chooses to stand on principle and challenge wrongdoing, and truth wins.>>

In 12 Angry Men -- if it had been non-fiction -- they would have most likely acquitted a guilty youth. Henry Fonda's character dismantles a very strong circumstantial case, one circumstance at a time. But TAKEN TOGETHER, that case is in fact very strong. It would mean impeaching BOTH witness, AND the kid didn't mean it when he threatened to kill his father (personally, I've never threatened to kill anyone let alone my family members, not as common as the film treats it), AND the kid lost his knife the very same day his father was found with that kind of knife (sure, a knife you could buy elsewhere), AND the kid had VERY BAD amnesia about the main feature he watched (the juror who couldn't remember someone acting in a second film means nothing), AND that NOBODY ELSE with means amd motive for that very same random time and place could be found. The film showed the jury misjudging a very strong circumstantial case.  This kid was either the world's unluckiest guy -- or he did it, and got off. It's a good film to show the power of persuasion but I think it should also show the injustice of throwing out a strong CUMULATIVE circumstantial case. Anatomy of a Murder is a much better example of a courtroom drama, and far less simplistic.

<<Indeed, while Obama placed the responsibility for reform squarely in the hands of prosecutors, judges and police, he failed to acknowledge that they bear the burden of our failed justice system, along with the legislatures and corporations who have worked with them to create an environment that is hostile to the rights of the accused.>>

Let alone that the accused whether guilty or not bears all the consequences of the trial (time, besmirched reputation, stress, often costs). While the state usually bears NO consequences for any amount of frivolous prosecution. It costs the state nothing but easily-printed money to accuse whomever they want whenever they want. It may cost the accused most of what they have just to try to get their life back.

<<As I document in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’re operating in a new paradigm where the citizenry are presumed guilty and treated as suspects, our movements tracked, our communications monitored, our property seized and searched, our bodily integrity disregarded, and our inalienable rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” rendered insignificant when measured against the government’s priorities. Every American is now in jeopardy of being targeted and punished for a crime he did not commit thanks to an overabundance of arcane laws. Making matters worse, by allowing government agents to operate above the law, immune from wrongdoing, we have created a situation in which the law is one-sided and top-down, used as a hammer to oppress the populace, while useless in protecting us against government abuse.>>

Zero Hedge featured an article last month by John Whitehead, which points out that Americans now live in a prison without walls, essentially run the same as a minimum-security prison.

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commen...

<<Add to the mix a profit-driven system of incarceration in which state and federal governments agree to keep the jails full in exchange for having private corporations run the prisons, and you will find the only word to describe such a state of abject corruption is “evil.”>>

The main problem, right there. How can the state possibly be considered arm's length when it has a clear conflict of interest, in sponsoring a profit motive for one side? With this motive, the state loses even the pretence of impartiality.

<<How else do you explain a system that allows police officers to shoot first and ask questions later, without any real consequences for their misdeeds?>>

I see no other option than to discard prosecutorial immunity.

<<America no longer operates under a system of justice characterized by due process, an assumption of innocence, probable cause, and clear prohibitions on government overreach and police abuse. Instead, our courts of justice have been transformed into courts of order, advocating for the government’s interests, rather than championing the rights of the citizenry, as enshrined in the Constitution.>>

Very well stated, "courts of order". See legalman's excellent articles examining the corruption of the legal system, starting with these:

http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/they-intentionally-build-a-form-of-ty...

http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/allowing-a-5-to-4-s-ct-decision-to-im...

http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/the-supreme-court-is-there-to-make-st...

http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/ignorance-of-the-law-should-be-an-exc...

http://www.thetruthaboutthelaw.com/i-know-my-rights-i-demand-a-jury-trial

Legalman asks, Why do lower courts need 100% jury agreement, but the Supreme Court gets to disagree and settle law for 360 million people by a vote of 5-4? Which indicates that reasonable people, including trained judges, may disagree about the law -- then how is a regular person supposed to know and follow it so well? I agree.

<<Without courts willing to uphold the Constitution’s provisions when government officials disregard them, and a citizenry knowledgeable enough to be outraged when those provisions are undermined, the Constitution provides little protection against the police state.>>

How many people know that the Constitution does not apply in a contract situation, since contracts overrule (waive) rights? How many further know that you are nearly always in a CONTRACT situation, when you 1) open and use a bank account; 2) buy a car or a house with financing; 3) use or rely on the police or the court system; 4) use the fiat money system; 5) apply for and use a social security or social insurance or tax file number; 6) file your taxes?

Contract law, and a system of invisible contracts, governs nearly everything we do in the 'west'. This is by design, so that our rights do not apply and the law governing us is contract, not tort, law.

bluez's picture

Oh fuck the stupid "law" already.

We get no "protection" whatsoever. Stop the bullshit. Stop the lying.

not a yahoo's picture

Wow, those are like 3 or 4 bombastic points in one post.

Louie the Dog's picture

Here's some Florida style justice for you. Life without parole for burglary.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/joel-diagles-mandatory-minimum-life-sente...

lost money's picture

something else all you pot head ZHers need to understand is that not every person in prison for "drugs" is in prison for drugs. that was what the cops could get proof of, like capone when to jail for taxes not bootlegging. don't have enough for the murder charge, put a quick three drug felonies on the person and away they go. Murderer off the street. but all you see is the drug charge and not the reasoning behind it cause so many of you are pot heads

El Vaquero's picture

I've only tried pot once, and the statute of limitations has long since expired.  So that argument doesn't fly with me.  Legalize drugs.  The war on drugs creates a risk premium on drugs that dealers get to charge.  The amounts of currency are so large in those black markets that people are going to figurer that they're already violating one set of laws, why not another?  Somebody starts muscling in on your market?  Violence can solve that!  A lot of gang violence is centered around drugs.  Get rid of the war on drugs and the profit motive will go away.  It should also be pointed out that Al Capone was given the opportunity to become as rich and powerful as he became because of prohibition.

 

Making one behavior illegal to curb another behavior is another way to become a police state.  Remember, you're a criminal, as are we all. 

Monetas's picture
Monetas (not verified) Jul 21, 2015 11:58 PM

If the criminal justice system .... just had to deal with bad white people .... the system would be smaller and more effective .... however, the system has to deal with unimagined levels of crimminality .... and is overwhelmed .... so, don't forget to blame the crimminals !

PeaceLover's picture

So are you taking about bankers or road pirates?
I think your 99% right if the top .001% would put the money back in the system.
So real jobs that pay came back to U$A..
Who wants to steal when they have plenty to spend except a banker?

WTFUD's picture

It's CUNTS like you Monetas that allow this System to keep dishing out any shit it wants. In fact i'd rather hurt and hear fuckers like you squeal than any banker or politician whose got skin in the game.

falconflight's picture

I think you're tongue in cheek on this post, no?  No open reference to all the innocent unarmed black teens being snuffed out by the Man for eating skittles and the like? Sarc on in spades...

WTFUD's picture

Smashing. Barry and the MIC kill at will and are given Cash & Peace Prizes & Medals. Moral of the story should be if you get caught, kill at least one of the arresting officers.

neilhorn's picture

WTF, dude. Your understanding of the moral of the story is to kill someone? Woa, mister either you got the wrong story or you got the wrong understanding of the moral of the story.

falconflight's picture

I don't often agree with him, but I presume he's asserting that when a society corners its citizens who have an honest and justifiable desire to defend their rights, but have no recourse but the ultimate act of resistance, then so be it.  I agree that that time is long overdue.

WTFUD's picture

Yes falconflight you're not my cup of tea either but you're spot on there.

OldPhart's picture

You'll know we're there when the neighbors come out to back him up.

Rico's picture

Iraqis seemed to have found a solution: Use your time in prison to Organize Bitchez! 

ISIS leader says US prisons in Iraq led to creation of terrorist organization

https://www.rt.com/news/213843-isis-creation-prison-iraq/

 

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/-sp-isis-the-inside-story

PoasterToaster's picture
PoasterToaster (not verified) Jul 22, 2015 12:06 AM

Justice is a word used to describe the State's poor substitute for revenge. It removes agency from the individual and makes us helpless children of an abusive parent.  It takes away our humanity.

El Vaquero's picture

As a corollary, "deserve" should not be a part of a criminal justice system. 

highwaytoserfdom's picture

Not the real issue    economic jackboots instituted by corrupt politicians and there handlers..http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/scotus/

Government needs you to pay taxes's picture

You know the nation is fucked when you go to a courtroom for theater whilst going to a gun shop for justice.

neilhorn's picture

Are American prosecutors that much better? No… it is because of the plea bargain, a system of bullying and intimidation by government lawyers for which they ‘would be disbarred in most other serious countries….’”

I think this is wrong. American prosecutors are better because they usually have a pretty good case with forensic evidence. Police coercion does not produce the result that the justice system demands, so it is not part of our system. If any police think that bullying, intimidation and coercion will serve justice, then they need to experience justice.

WTFUD's picture

Hi neil you don't sound like a bad lad but have any of your friends advised you to replace neil with green?

Maybe i was a little brutal with my considered opinion of ' if you're going down take as many down with you ' conviction. I mean if you're up for murder it should at least be a judge or higher POS.

It's just that in terms of the 'old bill' it irks me that i'm paying taxes for them to go about inflicting pain and suffering on ordinary people while turning a blind eye to their master's Crimes.

El Vaquero's picture

LOLOL!

 

Police intimidation is quite present.  Police are allowed to show you false evidence and claim that it is actual evidence against you to get you to talk.  If they don't think that anybody is looking, many will tune people up.  They'll keep them for 72 hours under stressful conditions to get them to talk.  In 72 hours, I could make a lot of people fess up to doing things that they didn't do, without using an amount of physical force that could be considered excessive.  DAs are notorious for piling felony charges on people for which the evidence does not exist and then use that as leverage force a plea deal.  I've watched that happen where I got to see the totality of the evidence, including some that was being ignored by both the police and the DA, and it amounted to a trial that would have been an embarrasment to the DA.  But, one of the witnesses lit the other witness on fire, so that ended that.  Some departments have policies that for domestic violence calls, somebody, almost always the male, is going to jail no matter what the facts and the situation are when they get there. I know somebody that wound up calling the cops on his wife, she admitted to the cops that she pushed him and he didn't touch her and they still arrested him and didn't drop the case until the day of trial.  If you think the cops generally do investigations like you see on CSI, you will be disappointed more often than not. 

Abaco's picture

What bullshit. Most prosecutors I have seen are stupid fucks notable only for their lack of both intelligence and ethics. Every prosecutor uses bullying and coercion to avoid having to prove their case. No victim?  Fine, we will go for the 40 year charge unless you admit to this shit that never happened and take a 3 year sentence.

 

As for forensic evidence you had the FBI lab tech coming into court and sweraring that a dog's hair was hiuman and belonged to the defendant. Wel, who wouldn't believe the FBI?  Guilty verdict!

MedicalQuack's picture

Read up on a term now being used quite a bit "evidence based sentencing"...this is happening and it's scary as it's another form of "scoring' if you will.  This is like grading on the curve if you will as sentencing uses other people's sentences to determine how much time one will serve.  

 

Atomizer's picture

Buts it's OK to fuel a rat bastard commercial to instill a free hamburger as long as you agree to accept this phone application to release your location, contact list, porn photos and online banking sign in passwords. Get a free hamburger 

TGIF 

How Far Will You Go For A Free Burger? (Sponsored by TGI Fridays ...

OldPhart's picture

This can be used TWICE a week...

 

 

Sure

Happy

It's

Thursday/Tuesday

 

jack stephan's picture

truth rarely wins, and youre right........but a swift few punches to the throat, and crushes the windpipe does win.  I cheat, plus i use cold steel knives, the little palm ones.  They are too cute.  Youre on your own, i could give examples, but im not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyvoEGSMqM

quasi_verbatim's picture

...In other words, in this age of hollow justice, courts of order, and government-sanctioned tyranny, the Constitution is no safeguard against government wrongdoing such as SWAT team raids, domestic surveillance, police shootings of unarmed citizens, indefinite detentions, asset forfeitures, prosecutorial misconduct and the like.

I doubt the Constitution was ever designed or intended to be a safeguard against any of this.

But use of the word 'tyranny' well describes the Great Judicial Terror.


shutterbug's picture

USa Government is the BIGGEST criminal organisation on this planet.

Justice?! It's trully blind.

gregga777's picture

There is no Rule of Law in the United States—it's the Rule of Politics from the barrel of a gun. All elections in the United States are rigged with predetermined outcomes—so forget about peaceful change. The rich and their wholly-owned Republican and Democratic parties are responsible for this states of affairs.

Bullets are the only means that the American People have to effect changes.