[HN Gopher] Let's Put an End to Prosecutorial Immunity (2018)
___________________________________________________________________
Let's Put an End to Prosecutorial Immunity (2018)
Author : dredmorbius
Score : 68 points
Date : 2021-10-24 21:10 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.themarshallproject.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.themarshallproject.org)
| spaetzleesser wrote:
| In my view if a prosecutor, judge or cop breaks intentionally or
| knowingly break the rules, it should be treated as a very serious
| crime and they should be punished harshly. These people are
| trusted by society with enormous power over people's lives and
| their behavior should have the highest integrity. Once people
| have doubts about the legal system, a civilized society can't
| really work properly.
|
| A vast majority of the workers in the legal system are doing
| their job with honesty. It should also be in their interest to
| get rid of corrupt people.
| jawns wrote:
| While we're at it, let's have the Supreme Court clarify that
| aside from identifying yourself, you have the right to remain
| silent during a Terry stop.
|
| It seems pretty obvious that if you have the right to not answer
| officer's questions in consensual encounters (where you're not
| suspected of a crime) and arrests (where you're charged with a
| crime), you should also have the right to remain silent during an
| investigative detention.
|
| But just because it's obvious doesn't mean it's legally
| protected.
|
| It turns out that the Supreme Court has declined opportunities to
| clearly establish the right to remain silent during a Terry stop.
|
| Which means that in some cases, a person can be charged with
| obstruction if they refuse to answer an officer's questions
| during a Terry stop. Worse yet, if a court later finds that the
| officer has violated a person's constitutional rights by
| arresting them for refusing to answer questions, qualified
| immunity prevents the victim from being compensated for the
| injustice, because the right to remain silent during a Terry stop
| is not considered "clearly established."
|
| Here's a link to a piece titled "Obvious But Not Clear: The Right
| to Refuse to Cooperate with the Police During a Terry Stop." It
| was published in the American University Law Review in 2020.
| Written by a University of Denver law professor and an attorney
| who graduated from that university, it reviews all of the
| relevant case law and urges the Supreme Court, other courts, and
| state legislatures to "clearly define" the right, which would
| remove qualified-immunity protections for officers who violate
| that right.
|
| https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?...
| lakecresva wrote:
| The Supreme Court should just not be allowed to select the
| cases they review. If lower courts and legal experts think
| there's a genuine circuit split or pressing legal issue that
| needs to be resolved, they should be able to force the Supreme
| Court to issue an opinion.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| When I was younger (Actually I was pulled over about a year ago
| for no reason.). I was pulled over for basically an old car,
| and hair below my ears. I didn't want to say anything, but knew
| if didn't kiss their badge, I might get pricy ticket.
|
| The one time I didn't answer their rediculious questions, like,
| "Where you are going. What are you buying at Safeway. It seems
| strange you are buying dinner at 10 pm". These were the actual
| questions.
|
| She walked around my car looking for something to ticket, and
| then said I was speeding. A $350 ticket.
|
| Yea, I tried to fight it, but she actually showed up in court,
| and the judge sided with the Police Officer.
|
| (In California their was a bill that would essentially legalize
| jaywalking. It was drafted because cops were using jaywalking
| violations to harass, and intimidate citizens. Basically, I
| have nothing on you, but I could site you for jaywalking.
|
| Governor Neusome vetoed the bill. I get where he was comming
| from, but still disappointed.
|
| I don't know the solution other than every cop, including
| undercover cops, should have a camera on every minute of their
| shift. Only using a bathroom could the cop flip the cover on
| the camera.
|
| Those tapes should be allowed to be retrieved in an easy
| fashion by anyone. If cops resist, their are many people in
| line for that job.)
| largbae wrote:
| It's an interesting proposal, but we have to find some way of
| fitting intent into the picture, or good prosecutors will be
| paralyzed. Since this is clearly US-focused, how do other
| countries do it?
| Stevvo wrote:
| In other countries it's simple; Prosecutors are treated exactly
| the same as any other citizen. Breaking the law is illegal for
| them and their institutions.
|
| If 'good prosecutors' will be paralyzed by no longer being
| permitted to plant evidence, fake testimonies and commit other
| deplorable acts, them maybe they are not good prosecutors?
| [deleted]
| bradleyjg wrote:
| This is a very American system solution and it won't work. People
| go on and on about getting rid qualified immunity but it's only a
| partial immunity and cases are still fairly frequently lost. Look
| at what happens in those cases---the city pays a lot of money.
| The cops suffer no consequences at all. They pay nothing. They
| even often get overtime for participating in the trial.
|
| Lawsuits are a failed means of regulation when it comes to state
| actors (they are a failure in regulating other things as well but
| that's a different conversation). It's time we admit that instead
| of insisting we just need this one more tweak.
|
| Let's put in place real political accountability and then empower
| politicians to make genuine reforms---even over the objections of
| civil service unions.
| rayiner wrote:
| I'm a pretty pro-criminal justice reform guy, but most folks in
| that camp really don't understand how very guilty most people in
| prison are. From first hand experience, the system is already
| inundated with meritless litigation, appeals, etc. People in
| person don't exactly have a lot of better things to do. Innocence
| Project and similar organizations have to screen hundreds of
| cases to find the one or two meritorious ones. Ending
| prosecutorial immunity would mean 99 completely frivolous
| lawsuits for every one worth considering.
| rainworld wrote:
| _have to screen hundreds of cases to find the one or two
| meritorious ones_
|
| And even then, _legal_ merit, long after conviction, brought
| forward by a team of highly motivated activists, against an
| indifferent (or often enough even sympathetic) legal system
| does not equate innocence. Peculiarities of the American legal
| system and political pressures exacerbate this.
| aaomidi wrote:
| People who are pro criminal justice reform understand people
| are guilty. But they're trying to solve the actual systemic
| issues that lead to crime, not just say crime doesn't happen.
|
| Excessive policing, not spending money on social services, etc
| etc are all making it worse. https://ips-dc.org/three-felonies-
| day/
|
| So yeah, we've over criminalized shit and we're spending money
| on mercs instead of investing in society.
| m0zg wrote:
| A modest proposal: if you're going to do it, and have the
| political wherewithal to push it through, do it in _your own_
| county/city, then wait for 5 years or so to see the effects. I.e.
| if Hollywood wants to "defund the police", defund Beverly Hills
| PD first, see how well that works.
|
| Sick and tired of people proposing harebrained policies that
| affect everyone else but them.
| WalterBright wrote:
| Not to split hares, but this is the first time I've ever seen
| harebrained spelled correctly in the wild.
| upbeat_general wrote:
| 1. Hollywood != Beverly Hills 2. IANAL but I believe this would
| have to be done on a state or federal level not a local level.
| 3. Why do you think the change is "harebrained"?
| 1cvmask wrote:
| Kamala Harris withheld exculpatory evidence from an innocent
| person. The judge reprimanded her.
|
| Now she's promoted and voted into the second highest office in
| the country. Government is around so that we can fail upwards.
|
| Thank god she gets to live the American dream. In other countries
| such prosecutorial abuse would land you in jail.
|
| https://nypost.com/2020/09/03/kamala-harris-rampant-prosecut...
|
| https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-aler...
|
| There is a whole list of abusive prosecutors who got political
| success ranging from Eliot Spitzer, Rudolph Giuliani and now
| Kamala Harris.
| [deleted]
| civilized wrote:
| Terrifying human being. Why do such awful people rise to the
| top?
| 1cvmask wrote:
| The voters voted for her. We should ask the majority of the
| voters I suppose. These were known about her even when she
| got voted in as California senator. Clearly majority of
| Californians agree with innocents (mainly Blacks) being
| jailed.
|
| Or NYers with Eliot Spitzer or Rudolph Giuliani.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| I wonder if it's because moral people avoid dealing with such
| evil, which helps nothing in the grand scheme.
| 1cvmask wrote:
| The media is part of that evil racket. Just see how they
| lionized Colin Powell, a man deeply involved in genocides
| and massacres and war crimes. His career got its push from
| him helping cover up the My Lai massacre and then
| advocating every Vietnamese boy being shot as they could
| turn into a Viet Cong soldier.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-24 23:01 UTC)