How Can This Happen In The USA Today?

[Charlie]

I must admit I thought Hierophants comment rather unjust. If the USA isn't advanced (depending upon what we term advanced of course) then who is? Not sure that he came across as he meant to...dunno.

Can someone explain how US law works? I know that could take forever but some kind of brief, simplistic overview would help. Your country is so massive and it seems you have so many differing policies/laws from state to state even though you are a United country. I can't quite grasp that.

My own country (Great Britain as a whole...ugh, I said it) is minute in comparison. Although we have slight differences in terminology, like sherrifs in Scotland, the LAW I think and it's punishments are pretty much the same.

Forgetting the racial undertones regarding this case. How can it be that not one single LAW PERSON saw fit to see the law done? Is their no governing body?
Here we have the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) that has to look at EVERY case and decides whether it merits court time once the prosecutors..... ie the police.... have submitted their evidence. There is no way in one million, billion years this case would have made the courts, infact I'd swear blind Tom Coleman would have been nicked and screwed.

I'm sure that being so vast complicates things, but surely if you're the United States you must unite into a single law.

I'm not after a law debate now [img]smile.gif[/img] But with your being so big and advanced it seems that there are some places left to interpret the law for themselves. Lucky (or maybe not if you're the one in prison) there wasn't a length of rope and a big old tree outside the courthouse.

I'm not knocking the USA. But, humbly and politely put, it does seem that some areas of law, or probably more, the lawful enforcement of the law, are a little backward for such an advanced country in the year 2003.

EDIT...Typo's/grammar.

[ 03-04-2003, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Charlie ]

[Charlie]

Originally posted by pritchke: In the 1800's no one would be suing McDonalds, or the local pub for selling them unhealthy food, or suing the neighbour because his kids ball smashed a window. Then it would be "Don't worry about it neighbour, bring your wife over and we will make you a fine meal." In some things we have probably gotten worse, less neighbourly, more childish, less respectful of each other, less willing to be responsible for our actions. I don't know, I do think many things have changed for the better but some things make it seem like the world is going to the dogs.

Amen.

People were actually tried and sued for selling unhealthy food back then, but the essence of your post is most correct. Mate, our door was ever open in the 1960's, day and night.......not so now.

[Timber Loftis]

As for US criminal law, it is written mostly by the states. There are federal crimes but those are specifically targeted at egregious and interstate acts.

But, most states base their laws on the American Law Institute (a think tank) Model Penal Code ( giggle ). Thus, most state criminal laws are similar - but with different nuances. In a nutshell.

But, all things considered, this could happen anywhere. This was a "undercover" cop working to bust drugs in Texas. Sorta like the movie "Rush." It was frame-up after frame-up. Even with your typical bureauons reviewing cases, it's hard to avoid the injustice that will occur when the primary fact-finder lies.

The cops don't prosecute cases. They build a fact file and then the prosecutor (a lawyer) takes the case to trial. Watch the US TV show Law & Order for a conservative's wet dream of how the system works at its best.

So, obviously the cop didn't completely act as judge jury & executioner in these matters. But, he handed over false facts to the lawyers who then ran with those facts.

Now, if the prosecutors (or one boss prosecutor) are equally corrupt, it only worsens the situation. And, if you've got a corrupt criminal court judge in town too, well, you get the picture.

It's not a USA problem - could happen in any system.

And, I agree with MagiK we should punish cops harder when this stuff happens. Especially since the "fraternity" nature of officers makes them so hard to catch.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: It's not a USA problem - could happen in any system. And, I agree with MagiK we should punish cops harder when this stuff happens. Especially since the "fraternity" nature of officers makes them so hard to catch.

Nope, couldn't disagree more. There is no way on Gods good Earth that 40 odd people could be convicted on the word of a single man, policeman or not, with not a single shred of corroboratory evidence in my country. Dunno if it's a USA phenomenon or not but I guarantee you it wouldn't happen here. Travesties happen, accepted, but not on this scale and most certainly not on the word of a single man.

Cop's should get DOUBLE the sentence imho for fitting a man up. If the man was looking at a 10 year stretch for Bills lies....Bill should get a score + years for lying if he's proven to have done so. Make em think a wee bit more before being so quick to tear a man and his families lives to shreds to enhance their own personal ambitions.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Charlie: There is no way on Gods good Earth that 40 odd people could be convicted on the word of a single man, policeman or not, with not a single shred of corroboratory evidence in my country. Dunno if it's a USA phenomenon or not but I guarantee you it wouldn't happen here.

But what if the Bobbie had planted the evidence? And the prosecutor was in on it too?

Oh, and it did happen there, during the Victorian era when the farce England called "justice" included 200 death penalty crimes and prisoners were tried 12 at a time before the (now cartoonish) justice sitting on a bench one full story above. I've been to those house of horrors tours in London, y'know.

But, past is past, I realize. The one good thing that the UK has is a consolidated prosecution/defense system where the barristers switch sides. That is a GREAT idea. It keeps them from becoming too personally convinced one way or the other.

Ultimately, though, I don't have time to find travesties of British justice at the moment to prove you wrong. But, bet your ass you will someday regret saying NEVER so emphatically on this issue.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis:

But what if the Bobbie had planted the evidence? And the prosecutor was in on it too?

Fine, guaranteed the prosecutor could be guaranteed to prosecute. Impossible here. The complete show of evidence to suggest grounds for prosecution must be submitted to a comittee (not an individual) called the CPS. If grounds are not met the case will never get to court....they don't even appoint the prosecutor so the police and prosecution are not hand in glove.

Oh, and it did happen there, during the Victorian era when the farce England called "justice" included 200 death penalty crimes and prisoners were tried 12 at a time before the (now cartoonish) justice sitting on a bench one full story above. I've been to those house of horrors tours in London, y'know.

Err...

But, past is past, I realize. The one good thing that the UK has is a consolidated prosecution/defense system where the barristers switch sides. That is a GREAT idea. It keeps them from becoming too personally convinced one way or the other.

Ultimately, though, I don't have time to find travesties of British justice at the moment to prove you wrong. But, bet your ass you will someday regret saying NEVER so emphatically on this issue. [/QUOTE]

I bet I NEVER say NEVER regarding a British travesty concerning 40 people and a single bent copper with no evidence....not in the last 5 years leastwise....NEVER. [img]smile.gif[/img]

P.S Timber. I know you wouldn't have to look too hard for travesties my friend. I can tell you some and you could find many more...we all have them.

[ 03-04-2003, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: Charlie ]

[Charlie]

Man...I'm so shit at making that quote thing do what I want it to do.

[Bardan the Slayer]

Charlie's right. We have had travesties of justice - of course we have. We've had 2 or 3 instances of a small group of people being locked up (and by small, i mean 3 - 6) as the result of a widespread police effort to frame them, but we never ever have had anything in the modern british justice system to even compare to Mr Coleman's story. 1 cop, 40 accused, no evidence. It just doesn't happen here.

[Wulfere]

Originally posted by MagiK: Quote: Originally posted by Wulfere: Bush sr used them somewhere around 50,000 times and Clinton even more. The laws have been expanded to more than 250 different crimes and are being expanded to cover more and more crimes

I think it is completely unfair and inaccurate to use this phrasing. Neither Bush Sr. nor Clinton or Bush Jr. for that matter use these enforcement tools. If you must blame someone blame the Justice Dept. and I would bet the DEA was the agency behind most of the uses. So blame Justice and the Judicial branch of government more than the presidents. [/QUOTE]As I had said Magik...most of the info I've gotten was from the interview I listened too. I of course could have said the Justice Department you are 100% correct. But, this phrasing does give it a time reference. I wasn't playing the blame game, just reporting what I had heard and hoping for clearification. Which Timber Loftis kindly supplied.

No prob. Wolfie [img]smile.gif[/img] Just wnated it to be pointed at the proper agency/ies I do think that the property seizures are a dangerous power for law enforcement....it is easily abused.