question about justice and law
-
Hi all, I'm troubled by a few philosophical questions which I cannot seem to find direct answers from google.
1) What are the chances that the law or criminal investigations wrongly convict someone?
Many times, criminal investigations use techniques to deduce the sequence of events of a crime but my wonder is, that many things that occur may not be rationally deduced. I mean, for example if A's hair is found on a murdered body at a crime scene, while it suggests that A is the murderer, the truth however can be bizarre and unexpected. what if the reality is A's hair was carried by wind and landed precisely at the most suspicious spot? And if the crime scene does not yield any further evidences, while A coincidentally has no alibi, then A may be convicted for over 20 years for something he genuinely did not do. Yet if A genuinely is the murderer, we risk sending a dangerous person scot free, endagering society and the law would seem weak and powerless in the eyes of potential criminals.
Yet I understand that criminal investigations procedures like genetics and fingerprinting often have a very low margin of error, so while cases of wrongful conviction do occur, 99% and above cases are duely punished. But my worry is that from the wrongfully convicted's perspective, 20years of jail for something one did not do is really unfair.(think: what is that person is oneself?)
Of course the situation of A described above lends itself to many permutations which may be more sensible. Therefore can someone give me an overview of how the justice system deals with this sort of "gray-area"?
Thanks in advance!
-
Look, you are hauled to court.
Evidence is presented against you. (True or fabricated, it is what that is presented)
You present your defence. (True facts or played down or outright lies, it is heard)
The jugde evaluates the evidence and facts presented, and make judgment, base on the evidence presented.
Its a game. Sometimes a deadly game.
-
good question...and especially wrongful conviction leading to death penalty which is irreversible....i.e. drug trafficking offences...
risk factors are carried out and all means to prove the defendant innocent must be given without appeal until critical evidences are gathered to weigh against the contrary...
thus, criminal procedures must be detailed and this implies the controversies between a focus on criminal justice system/ procedures and crime prevention/ police investigations/ controls....
-
yes, the process is sophisticated..there have been cases where people were wrongly convicted
-
Philosophically, some very tiny particles smaller than hair and beyond naked eyes can be examined to its correctness. Chances are super super slim to be wrongly accused. If wrongfully convicted as mentioned above, his reward is from the joys of being acquitted and released :DD. However, the system in singapore and his age is difficult for employment, so, if i am justice pao, i will either compensate him a lump sum but in monthly payment and highly subsidised medical assistance for life :DD lol
-
Yeah I agree with mancha. One cornerstone of the law for criminal trials is "not guilty until proven otherwise", which I take to mean that the onus is on the prosecutor to come up with compelling evidences to convince the judge or jury the defendant is guilty. On the other hand, the defendant's lawyers would find ways to negate them and convince the jury otherwise, for example by cross examining the motive of the defendant. Therefore even if hair of the defendant is found on the crime scene, A could still be protected because maybe he is not even an aquitance of the murdered or that he has no past history of violence. Sometimes the prosecutors and defendants would argue with each other about the deductions from a single, crucial piece of evidence. Many times people (truly guilty or not) are released on the basis of insufficient evidence, and the police bring a case to court only when they are confident of their evidences. Hence I believe that the law is still very able to protect the innocent, but mistrials still occur once in a blue moon.
-
If A can reasonably explain himself even though he has no alibi, the judge could also look into other factors like 1. Fingerprints 2. Foot/shoe prints 3. Clothes fibre under A's nails..
-
There is the law and its parameters.
The judge would look into the actus reas and the mens reas, and see if the facts presented fits the criteria needed.
The problem is that when all the facts are correct and arguments logical, and judgment made accordingly, but accused standing there is not the person who actually committed the crime. He maybe someone at the wrong place, at the wrong time, picked up by the police, and the crime was made to fit him.
In the US there was a black man convicted of rape, and jailed, and years later discovered that he could not have been the rapist. But at the time of the trial, everything was down pat on him.
In the Singapore context, there are anecdotal reports of people pleading guilty for minor offences for the sake of convenience. This is also in a way a miscarriage of justice.
-
Talking about laws, now, who created laws? men!, correct
Now, men are born to make mistake, correct? correct
So, can laws be fair, and clean?
Can laws be balance?
-
so where is that hit ane run Romanian Diplomat ??
-
laws are created by men, but unfortunately it includes women for special priviledges and protection at their own expense out of sympathy...
men give themselves away for the sake of so called being a "gentle and reasonable man"
-
A man was convicted because he helped an old lady after she'd fell down. In returned, she sued the man. The judge takes her story and convict the man. Citing
"Only the guilty will help the injured"
WTF?
-
The Justice system cannot wrongly convict someone. Conversly, it also cannot rightly convict someone.
Just because you are not in agreement with the verdict, it is a wrong conviction. You are happy with the conviction, it is a right conviction.
Can it be so?Base on the facts, and explaination for the verdict, the judgment is made.
Did Anwar commit sodomny? All the facts presented point in that direction. Did he did it again a second time. All the facts presented point in that direction again.
So did Anwar commit sodomny? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. But for you, it depends on whether you are satisfied with whats going on. So did Anwar actually commit sodomny, God only knows, and He ain't telling. His conviction or acquittal would it be justice?
How do you feel?
-
What kind of justice is dispensed by this court?
http://sgforums.com/forums/3317/topics/442166?page=1
For four days the judges hear what, and then cast judgment?
So is Blair and Bush, guilty as charged, or not guilty as charged. Depends on how you feel, and to hell with justice.
-
Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:
A man was convicted because he helped an old lady after she'd fell down. In returned, she sued the man. The judge takes her story and convict the man. Citing
"Only the guilty will help the injured"
WTF?
Hmm, there has been a spate of such incidents in china where bystanders did not intervene to help someone in need. In this particular incident, I heard that in the opening of the man's trial, his defence is that the old woman bumped into him(她撞的我，�是我撞的她）. In the end the judges found him guilty. Such incidents, like this case and the guangzhou YueYue case, have caused quite a stir in chinese media recently.
also, I read about this "proof beyond reasonable doubt" thing. given all the evidences, based on a reasonable person's judgement, a verdict will be passed. Therefore in A's case, most likely having wind blowing hair onto the dead body is considered doubtful, the unknown truth still can be that A is just an innocent passerby but he will surely be found guilty. otherwise, if we only use dead solid evidences (do these even exist?) to convict someone, law and enforcement will be weak in punishing criminals and upholding justice. therefore some "gray-areas" and wrongful convictions may even be argued to be necessary for the functioning of the law.
-
not too sured,but i foumd some disturbing odds.
chances of getting away with murder: 1/2
so maybe the chances of being wrongly convicted...
Maybe 1/1000000000