Author [EN] [PL] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [ID] Topic: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.  (Read 4013 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lelygax

  • The Wanderer
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4552
  • Its useless, its all useless.
  • Awards 2017-07-Sprite Contest First Place Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
  • Likes:
Source: Reddit

Well, this is pretty old (3 years ago) but since this strory have a strong value I wanted to share it.

Quote
IAMA jury member who caused a hung jury. Two months later, evidence showed the guy was indeed not guilty. AMAA.

In 1994 I was called to be a jury in a rape case. A black man had supposedly attacked a young woman in a park, and raped her. He was apprehended by the police only hours later and faced up to 30 years in jail (including aggravated assault). I received the letter one morning and immediately was angry at it as it would waste much of my time in the coming months. However, I have a strong sense of honor, and felt it was my duty.

The interview was kind of weird. After the first questions by the judge, both parties went to ask questions about me and my opinions. First, the defendant had a public defendant who asked me almost no questions (for those not familiar with the law, with a jury trial, both parties select jury members according to strict rules). The prosecutor was very direct and, in my mind, completely unethical. He asked me some VERY direct questions. It went something like this:

PROSECUTION: Hello sir Glad to see you here. In your mind, do you think the defendant is guilty or not? ME: Uhhhh... I don't know, I didn't hear all the case details... PROSECUTION: Yes, but considering he was arrested by the police and they have a whole file on him... ME: I will wait to see the whole file on him.

At this point, I understood something. If I acted like I was racist, surely would they dismiss me from being part of the jury!! I thought about it for a second, thought about the month of underpaid work I'd saved, and decided it was worth a shot.

PROSECUTION: Consider the defendant. Do you think his 'situation' make him more likely to commit this crime? ME: Huhh... I don't know... PROSECUTION: A poor woman was viciously attacked, beat and raped. I think we can both agree it was a horrible crime? ME: Yes, absolutely. PROSECUTION: She described the man exactly as he is standing there. He was arrested and interrogated by the police. Do you agree this man might have committed this crime? ME: Yes, I do. PROSECUTION: What is your view on black people? ME(lies): Not particularly dislike them, but not particularly like them. PROSECUTION: Explain? ME(lies): They are human and they have a right to live, but I don't see them exactly like us.

The prosecution party seemed satisfied of the answers. Keep in mind this was in front of the judge and at this point I was 100% sure I would be dismissed, with a "RACIST" tag over my head forever.

Not at all.

I was informed a bit later, to my great surprise, that I would be part of the jury. If I could describe the case in one word, it would be: "long". It was terribly long. Hours and hours passed, hours became days and days became weeks. Then, each parties had its final hearing. To my surprise, the public defendant was doing a very decent job in front of the prosecution party.

Then, we went inside, all 12 of us, to discuss.

I had made my mind close to the end of the trial. He was not guilty. There was definitely not enough evidence to convict him. The woman had given (a really tearful) testimony but admitted she couldn't identify him. The police, after a few questions, had to admit they had no prior file of this man. An expert psychiatrist, hired by the defense, said the man was "happily married with childrens and unlikely to commit that kind of crime. But what really helped me make my mind was when the police admitted they had no DNA evidence at all (which was kind of new at the time). However, the police had a signed confession (which I supposed coerced) and the women had identified a mark the defendant had on the bottom of the neck. Also, he had no alibis and was, to his admission, "walking around at the time". Finally, a witness supposedly saw a man running away with the same clothes as the defendant.

The jury hearing looked like it would last less than an hour. By the 45-minutes mark, most jury member had made their minds: he was guilty. By the 1h15 mark, all jury members decided he was guilty.

Except for me.

I still wasn't convinced. I told them I would say he was not guilty. Everyone sighed. "For christ-sake this is the 5th time we vote, I think it's time we decide already". We kept talking, and one jury member even got mad: "ARE YOU SAYING THE 11 OF US ARE WRONG? Look at us, there are women and men alike here. This guy IS guilty." One even told me I was a "nigger-defendant" which made me doubt of the composition of the jury.

The day ended and we all went home.

I spent the night without sleeping. In the morning, I was even more sure: he was not guilty.
And then came the second day, long as hell. A fat man became seriously mad and asked to get out (which he couldn't). I could feel, at the end of the day, that they were all mad at me.

Then came the third day and the 1235235th vote. Again, we failed to reach consensus. They all guessed who voted not guilty. Then, one man flipped out.

MAN: Look out son. I don't know what your freaking problem is... We have his confession. The woman identified him. A FREAKING WITNESS SAW HIM! What the fuck do you need? ME: I am not convinced by any of the evidence.

Then, things became weirder. The prosecution attorney came to talk to me. To my surprise, he was very kind to me.

PROSECUTION: Hey sir,I heard you thought the defendant was not guilty? ME: WHAT??? Sir, this is supposed to be confidential! PROSECUTION: And it will. Behind us. Sir, I just want to tell this: twenty police officers worked on it. Twenty. I wouldn't take a man to trial without the absolute proof he is guilty. ME: Thanks... I will consider it...

But I already made up my mind. Fourth day passed and at this point no one was talking. At the end of the fifth day, the judge made us all appear in front of us. Every jury member was looking at me.

JUDGE: Has the jury reached a verdict? CHIEF JURY: No, your honor. JUDGE (really surprised): Do you need more time to reach a verdict? CHIEF JURY: No, your honor. JUDGE: You... You don't think you can reach a verdict? CHIEFT JURY: No, your honor.

Everyone in the audience sighed. Not one second I put my head down. After a couple of days, a hung jury verdict was given. And everything was to be started again. My life took a turn to the worst, I was bullied, intimidated in my life. My car was frequently arrested by patrolling police officers for no reason. I started to think about moving out.

Two months later, before the new trial began, a man confessed to the crime at a police station. He was also black, although looked nothing like the first man, even in terms of weight/height. He gave a crying confession to which he admitted everything. Then, he gave details that were kept private (not shared with any outsider) and that he could in no way know unless he was the perpretator of the crime. He said he followed the long trial, and was tortured thinking about everything that happened. When the woman saw him, she immediately said it was him, and I had the feeling police told her it was the first black man who did it.

Later on he was convicted, served a prison time, and was released after many years. Sorry to make this so long. AMA.

TLDR: I was part of a jury for a rape case by a black man. Every jury member said he was guilty and I said he was not guilty. I caused a hung jury. The real criminal eventually surrendered to the police, gave precise case details no one else could know, and was convicted. AMA

EDIT: fixed gramatical mistakes

Justice 1 x Von Karma 0

« Last Edit: September 08, 2013, 02:25:39 PM by Lelygax »
(click to show/hide)
Hau auu~     

Offline Ratty

  • A Little Pile of Secrets
  • Global Moderator
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1850
  • Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. The Great Defender will always defend the object of his or her fandom.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Other (?)
  • Likes:
0
What some laughingly call the American Criminal Justice System very rarely has anything to do with "justice", and everything to do with money and expediency. Some countries are worse in terms of beating confessions out of victims, as I understand in Japan it's not unheard of for defense lawyers to never win a case in their careers because of this. But I suspect few could match the USA for how much of an industry, an industry with "100% assured growth" as someone once put it at a prison trade show, it is here.

It's a source of cheap labor and a way to disenfranchise undesirables. (Like, say, African Americans. Who are much more likely to be convicted and given harsher penalties than whites facing the same evidence.) Indeed, some states spend more on building and maintaining prisons than they do on their school systems. Very few cases here actually make it to trial, the overwhelming majority are settled with plea bargains for lesser sentences. Which lawyers, judges jailors and police all love because 1. It keeps them all employed. 2. High conviction rates look good. 3. It's fast and relatively easy. 4. It closes the case forever.  Never mind if the accused actually did it or not, or if the confession was coerced.

Offline Lelygax

  • The Wanderer
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4552
  • Its useless, its all useless.
  • Awards 2017-07-Sprite Contest First Place Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
  • Likes:
0
But you dont agree that in this specific case justice have won? A guy that was innocent have been saved by one sole person that doesnt believed he was the culprit, while the true culprit felt guilty and have been sent to the prison.

I know that in the majority of cases criminal system sucks, but what I tried to do sharing this is show hope. :)
(click to show/hide)
Hau auu~     

Offline Abnormal Freak

  • luvz Elizabeth B.
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 7496
  • Gender: Male
  • Swanktastic
  • Awards ICVD Denizen: Those that dwell in the corrupted, mirror image of The Dungeon. The Pervert: Sneaks in any and all innuendo into threads that he/she can. The Music Fanatic: Listens to a large collection of music, posts lyrics, etc. SuperOld Dungeonite: Members who have been around since the oldOLD days.
    • Swankster's Backloggery
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania (NES/etc)
  • Likes:
0
Having a bit of firsthand experience in a trial last year, I saw just how much people rely on personal thoughts or feelings on a case rather than THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED. A prosecutor has the burden of proof; they have to show without a shadow of a doubt that the defendant is guilty. I just wasn't seeing any actual logical proof in the case presented to us, and I had to keep asking my fellow jurors, "Did the plaintiff's attorneys prove to you anything?" to which they usually kinda wriggled around a bit and said, "No, not really." Justice has to be blind and jurors cannot bring their personal feelings into a verdict.

We spent almost a whole day deliberating. I can't imagine doing several days, lol. One was torture enough, which was on top of a nearly 2 1/2 week trial where we got a measly ten dollars a day and I still had to work and barely slept. Though when it was all over, my own personal feelings on the matter rejoiced, because the hot-shot lawyers from California, who wanted ten million dollars out of the defendants (two doctors), did not get their money and had to return home with their tails between their legs, probably hating Minnesotans—or at least my county and the jurors—for the rest of their lives.
Oh yeah, and also:
meat

Soda as well.

Offline TheouAegis

  • Amateur Auteur of GMvania
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
  • Gender: Male
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. The Great Defender will always defend the object of his or her fandom. Hack Master makes creations out of CV parts. (S)he makes Dr. Frankenstein proud.
    • GMvania Developer's Blog
    • Awards
  • Likes:
0
Remember, defendants are stupid. Plaintiffs are stupid. Anyone that is not a a lawyer/attorney serving on the case is stupid, and even then there's no guarantee those serving on the case aren't stupid either. That's the no.1 rule of American law. You are guilty until proven innocent, so if you ever open your mouth, you're as good as convicted or as good as discredited (and possibly counter-sued). The black guy opened his mouth. His saving grace was so did the lady and the officers and he called for a trial by jury. He was a lucky guy.
Your mom has had more floppies put in her than a Commodore 64!


Follow my lack of progress on my game at my blog:
http://gmvania.blogspot.com

Offline Mooning Freddy

  • The scent of my butt will set your soul wandering for eternity!
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1644
  • Gender: Male
  • I simply love children.
  • Awards The Pervert: Sneaks in any and all innuendo into threads that he/she can. Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply. Master Debater: Gracefully argues 'til the cows come home about topics.
    • Awards
  • Likes:
0
Quote
Few cases here actually make it to trial, the overwhelming majority are settled with plea bargains for lesser sentences. Which lawyers, judges jailors and police all love because 1. It keeps them all employed. 2. High conviction rates look good. 3. It's fast and relatively easy. 4. It closes the case forever.  Never mind if the accused actually did it or not, or if the confession was coerced.

Same in my country. It's quite a distortion of justice because it allows criminals to get a way with a smaller punishment than they deserve, and innocent people are pressured into signing the bargain to escape long and tiresome trials. Yet with the impossibly large number of trials it saves the courts valuable time.

My country's judicial system doesn't have citizen juries, though. Cases are decided by the verdict of a judge or a group of judges only. I don't know whether it's better or worse. At least it saves people from such an unrewarding duty.   
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 11:21:37 AM by Mooning Freddy »
"Yes, I am on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. It's not available, because if you try it you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your exploded body."
~Charlie Sheen

Offline Ratty

  • A Little Pile of Secrets
  • Global Moderator
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1850
  • Tea. Earl Grey. Hot.
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. The Great Defender will always defend the object of his or her fandom.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Other (?)
  • Likes:
0
But you dont agree that in this specific case justice have won? A guy that was innocent have been saved by one sole person that doesnt believed he was the culprit, while the true culprit felt guilty and have been sent to the prison.

I know that in the majority of cases criminal system sucks, but what I tried to do sharing this is show hope. :)

Yeah sometimes you luck out and justice happens, he's lucky the real rapist had a conscience. I'm just a very cynical person lol.

Same in my country. It's quite a distortion of justice because it allows criminals to get a way with a smaller punishment than they deserve, and innocent people are pressured into signing the bargain to escape long and tiresome trials. Yet with the impossibly large number of trials it saves the courts valuable time.

My country's judicial system doesn't have citizen juries, though. Cases are decided by the verdict of a judge or a group of judges only. I don't know whether it's better or worse. At least it saves people from such an unrewarding duty.   

Sounds better and worse, on the one hand the judges could hardly be called peers of the accused. On the other hand the biggest problem with our juries, as the story and Theou have both pointed out, is that they can be cheery picked and usually take a "guilty until proven innocent" mindset, regardless of what the law says.

It's not hard to see why, for one thing just look at any American police procedural show made over the last 70 or 80 years (if you go back into radio plays with Dragnet and the like) the detective in the American mind is a godlike, benevolent and grizzled savior who is never wrong or motivated by the pressures of real life bureaucracy.

These same shows also inevitably show every case going to a Jury trial, which is absurd. Sometimes the defense lawyers are outright vilified like in Law & Order. For many, perhaps most, Americans this and media circus trials like Micheal Jackson and OJ Simpson is where the entirety of their "knowledge" about the CJS comes from.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 12:21:26 PM by Ratty »

Offline Mooning Freddy

  • The scent of my butt will set your soul wandering for eternity!
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1644
  • Gender: Male
  • I simply love children.
  • Awards The Pervert: Sneaks in any and all innuendo into threads that he/she can. Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply. Master Debater: Gracefully argues 'til the cows come home about topics.
    • Awards
  • Likes:
0
I am so sorry, this is stronger than me.  ;D

Uncle Ruckus That Nigga Is Guilty
"Yes, I am on a drug. It's called Charlie Sheen. It's not available, because if you try it you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your exploded body."
~Charlie Sheen

Offline Lelygax

  • The Wanderer
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4552
  • Its useless, its all useless.
  • Awards 2017-07-Sprite Contest First Place Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
  • Likes:
0
What is the name of this cartoon?
(click to show/hide)
Hau auu~     

Offline TheouAegis

  • Amateur Auteur of GMvania
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1860
  • Gender: Male
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. The Great Defender will always defend the object of his or her fandom. Hack Master makes creations out of CV parts. (S)he makes Dr. Frankenstein proud.
    • GMvania Developer's Blog
    • Awards
  • Likes:
0
Boondocks.

Racist and hilarious as fuck. Was a comic strip in the newspapers. Also racist and hilarious as fuck. I always shout, "Wafuu Nigga!" for no reason in the voice of ... um... one of the crazy black dudes in that show. I forgot his name. ... I guess it's not really racist though if the show actually stars black voice actors too. Oh well. Being white and enjoying it is a guilty pleasure for a lot of people.





« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 06:31:09 PM by TheouAegis »
Your mom has had more floppies put in her than a Commodore 64!


Follow my lack of progress on my game at my blog:
http://gmvania.blogspot.com

Offline PFG9000

  • No, not the gun
  • Legendary Hunter
  • ****
  • Posts: 993
  • Gender: Male
  • Fan of all things Floyd
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. SuperOld Dungeonite: Members who have been around since the oldOLD days.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.
« Reply #10 on: September 22, 2013, 10:07:29 PM »
0
Wow, it's been awhile since I visited Off Topic.  I have quite a few comments on this.

Firstly, how do we know this story is true?  If it truly is three years old, the author should certainly be able to post details about the case.  But everything is incredibly vague.  It reads just like so many other Facebook dramas that eventually show up on Snopes as hoaxes.  (This one isn't on Snopes, one way or the other.)  It could be one of a million different cases; it's just that generic.  So for all we know, everyone posting here could be getting all bent out of shape over absolutely nothing.

Next, this statement is largely bullshit:
Very few cases here actually make it to trial, the overwhelming majority are settled with plea bargains for lesser sentences. Which lawyers, judges jailors and police all love because 1. It keeps them all employed. 2. High conviction rates look good. 3. It's fast and relatively easy. 4. It closes the case forever.  Never mind if the accused actually did it or not, or if the confession was coerced.
Not so much the first part, as it's true that a majority of cases are plea bargained as an alternative to trial, but instead regarding the second statement.  I won't speak for judges, since I really don't know how they feel about plea bargaining.  I know quite a few lawyers, and those who are prosecutors tend to dislike plea bargains, as they let the bad guys off easy.  They see the importance of plea bargains as the most effective means of reducing their case loads, and for that reason they go along with them.  But I wouldn't say they love them.

Jailers are pretty ambivalent when it comes to plea bargains.  I used to be one, and I know many; I should know.  Plea bargains don't really effect the job a jailer does.  They'll be dealing with the shitbags regardless of whether they cop a plea or push their case to a jury trial.

And I can absolutely speak for police officers.  I am one, and I'm married to one.  I know literally hundreds of them.  And yet, I can't think of a single one who like plea bargaining.  We put quite a bit of work into every case that reaches the court system.  We take pride in the work that we do.  We put together convincing cases that show why the person we threw in jail is guilty of whatever charges we're referring to the D.A., and we pore over those cases to make sure they're solid.  So why would we "love" the idea of letting that suspect off with less than what we can prove they're guilty of? 

Imagine if you're (back) in college, and you're tasked with writing a research paper.  You make several trips to the library (hey, this is my story, so this is back before the internets) to do your research.  You interview dozens of authorities, sketch out a few diagrams to support your research, and proofread your work several times to make sure it's professional.  Then you turn your paper in, and instead of evaluating your work by its own merit, your professor flips a coin to determine what grade you will receive.  That is how police feel about plea bargaining.  It's hardly fair, it's hardly just, and it makes your work seem insubstantial.  So please, don't tell me that police love plea bargaining, because you clearly have no clue what you're getting at if you feel that way.

It's not hard to see why, for one thing just look at any American police procedural show made over the last 70 or 80 years (if you go back into radio plays with Dragnet and the like) the detective in the American mind is a godlike, benevolent and grizzled savior who is never wrong or motivated by the pressures of real life bureaucracy.

These same shows also inevitably show every case going to a Jury trial, which is absurd. Sometimes the defense lawyers are outright vilified like in Law & Order. For many, perhaps most, Americans this and media circus trials like Micheal Jackson and OJ Simpson is where the entirety of their "knowledge" about the CJS comes from.
Are you really using TV shows to support your views on the American justice system?  Ironically, this ties in with the complaint of the writer of the original story, when he says that his mind was made up by the lack of DNA evidence.  Shows like CSI have convinced the TV-hooked public that every case needs DNA evidence before a conviction can be made.  Very few cases involve DNA evidence.  I collect DNA samples in maybe 5% of the cases I investigate.  It's just not present or not relevant most of the time.

In DNA discussions, I always think about a jury trial I lost a few years ago.  It was a sexual assault case with 3-yr old and 5-yr old female victims, and the suspect was an adult friend of the family.  The case was rock solid, but the jury rejected all the evidence showing that the suspect was guilty, because they wanted to see DNA evidence and there wasn't any (after every case, there is a "jury poll" that shows anonymously how the jurors voted and why they felt the way they did). 

In the end, I question stories like this one.  I'm obviously biased by my profession, and that's why I'll always be excused from a jury panel.  But please, don't be so quick to believe stories like this that have no way of being verified.

Offline Lelygax

  • The Wanderer
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4552
  • Its useless, its all useless.
  • Awards 2017-07-Sprite Contest First Place Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
  • Likes:
Re: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2013, 03:10:10 PM »
0
So you are saying that you dont believe reddit because they cant show DNA evidence to you? (Yes, its sarcasm)

We cant prove its the truth and at same time we cant prove its a lie. If its the truth, the guy wanted to share it for its lesson value, believing in people. Now if its a lie, this guy took his time to think and write a well thought story to give hope and good teachings for people.

So in both ways it gives benefits to who read this, reading what you posted (sorry, but that is how I've understood it, correct me if Im wrong) is like seeing a guy showing to a kid how magic doesnt exist, how the magician did it, everything. This doesnt add anything, only destroy. So while its good that you are explaining to us how we can be dumb, its unecessary IMHO.

To be honest, if this story was a lie they did a good job, because it would be the first time that I've been fooled by something like that. :p
(click to show/hide)
Hau auu~     

Offline PFG9000

  • No, not the gun
  • Legendary Hunter
  • ****
  • Posts: 993
  • Gender: Male
  • Fan of all things Floyd
  • Awards The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles. SuperOld Dungeonite: Members who have been around since the oldOLD days.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.
« Reply #12 on: September 24, 2013, 05:49:49 AM »
0
I'm not saying anybody is dumb.  I'm just warning you against being too quick to believe this story.  I wouldn't say it teaches a good lesson.  It's trying to "prove" how our justice system is racist and unfair.  The system is certainly not perfect, but I don't believe it's as corrupted as this story indicates, at least not in my neck of the woods.

Offline Lelygax

  • The Wanderer
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4552
  • Its useless, its all useless.
  • Awards 2017-07-Sprite Contest First Place Permanent Resident: Seems to always be around to post/reply.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance (GBA)
  • Likes:
Re: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.
« Reply #13 on: September 24, 2013, 04:53:11 PM »
0
Well, thanks for explaining. I dont have reached the conclusion that you have, maybe because Im not a person working for law or because I've never been in a real trial. But I've filtered his information before digesting it, I understood it as a standalone case where unfair things happened but this guy was saved, not as something showing that this happens all the time.

I know that a lot of unfair things like that happens around the world and most of the time the person isnt lucky enough and go to jail, not all the time but happens.
(click to show/hide)
Hau auu~     

Offline X

  • Xenocide
  • Master Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 9361
  • Gender: Male
  • Awards SuperOld Dungeonite: Members who have been around since the oldOLD days. The Unfazed: Never loses his/her calm, even in the most heated arguments. The Retro Gamer: Has a heated passion for the oldschool VG Titles.
    • Awards
  • Favorite Game: Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
  • Likes:
Re: Member who caused a hung jury. 2 months later, the guy was indeed not guilty.
« Reply #14 on: September 24, 2013, 08:21:28 PM »
0
I do think the justice system itself works, but the real problem is the people behind the system. We are naturally imperfect so we will bend the rules and such to get away with what we can. There are some honest people out there who do their damnedest to keep the system equal and open as possible, but every now and again you have a "rat" scurry its way through and "adjust" the system to benefit them and their needs. Unfortunately when it comes to money many of us are quick to fold and this is where the system fails us.
"Spirituality is God's gift to humanity...
Religion is Man's flawed interpretation of Spirituality given back to humanity..."

Tags:
 

anything