Picture of everything wrong with the US justice system

[DeadlyYellow]

Pfft. As others have pointed out, large sums of cash carry significant weight with it. It's the reason why celebrities will do maybe a month for a crime a mid-class joe would land 8 years for.

Secondly, do you really expect an American government body to pass on the opportunity to get a vagrant off the street for numerous years? They tend to be regarded as a bit of a nuisance and security risk.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Also, from some stuff I watched recently, a doc and an episode of QI, prisons are big business in the US.

The sheer amount of stuff being made by prisoners in the US is a form of slave trade almost, it's no wonder jail is such an easy option for judges when it's going to make the country money to lock em up. In a way of course, it's a good thing that they've found a way to make the system pay for itself, but I still can't help but feel it's not quite right.

I still can't believe, that for most non violent offenders, community service wouldn't be a better option, cleaning, repairing, DIY, litter picking etc. Repaying the community you've wronged seems a far more sensible option than being locked up, so long as you're not a threat.

I'm not at all surprised about the cases mentioned however, theft of money is usually seen as far worse than violence or sexual attacks, unless you're already rich and can afford to buy your way out of trouble with an army of lawyers.

 

[GraveeKing]

Ooh fine job there buddy, being a true American there, only putting you in so you can be there just enough time to make further contacts, and to teach you for being caught in the first place! Better luck next time stealing billions from an economy in debt ^^.

That is just.... terrible. He confessed,turned himself in,didn't hurt anybody.
Clearly such innocence should not be tolerated in our master race! Innocence and lack of criminal violence?! I sentence you to 15 years in prison!

Seriously though, this is why I never plan to go to the US, I'd get mugged and then sued for yelling at the guy as he ran away and it was considered 'harassment'.

 

[Dags90]

theft of money

Is that a Futurama reference? Because if so, it's pretty much perfectly in tone.

 

[kokoska]

the rich can afford better lawyers. capitalism and courts mix in a strange way, but to suggest nationalizing all law firms in the interest of fairness would be SOCIALISM. SOCIALISM. it is merica's sovereign duty to fend off the unwashed socialist hordes of Satan.

 

[Exile714]

First, I would just like to say I do not believe what I am about to say... but someone needs to argue the other side.

Rich people are more valuable to society than the poor. Rich people have money, and it is their use of that money which provides economic activity, investment, business and employment. The homeless man provides nothing to society, and will consume the same resources he did on the street as he will in the prison, and will create nothing just as he did before being jailed.

Also, white collar crimes are non-violent, while the man committed violent, armed theft (the requirements of robbery, dumbed down, of course). There is a greater cost to society in robbery, even of a small amount, than large amounts of money stolen in a non-violent way. Robbery can lead to much worse crimes, including murder, while white collar crime is not similarly likely to do so.

Finally, there are greater safeguards against white collar crime already in place than safeguards against robbery. White collar criminals are already deterred by economic regulations, investor protections and increased transparency in the economic system. The victims of white collar crime are often guilty of allowing the criminals to get away with their theft because the victims either believe the dishonesty will make them rich, or because they are careless with their money. There are no similar safeguards against robbery, especially with police enforcement dwindling due to budget cuts.

Future robbers are not easily deterred from committing their crimes. For this reason, harsh penalties must be common. White collar criminals have much more to lose just by virtue of having been convicted, thus they are more easily deterred by smaller sentences. Since the deterrence will not increase much due to the already high cost of short incarcerations, the cost to society of imprisoning the white collar criminal is unjustifiable.

OK, time to go wash myself off... but at the same time, you know that some of the above is correct, at least in the eyes of the US judiciary.

 

[bl4ckh4wk64]

Damn, I was kinda hoping someone would point out problems with our judiciary system rather than say, "oh there's a difference between rich and poor person punishment." Really, the homeless guy now has a promised three square meals a day and a place to keep out of the weather. It's a whole lot better than what he's used to. Besides, most of the prisons aren't as bad as people portray them through comedy or on tv. We aren't allowed to do anything we wouldn't be able to do to a lawful citizen and we pay good taxpayer money to keep them in there just thinking about their next crime. I thought there would be a mention of that, or a mention of how we cannot use a serial killers diary of all his kills because we would have taken it without a warrant or without his consent. Then again, I'm normally in the minority with my support of harsher punishment for criminals. Hell, they're not even called prisons anymore, they're now called "correctional facilities." Correction my ass, many long term convicts become used to having everything handed to them and they can't reintegrate into society so what do they do? They commit another crime and get landed back in jail only to use even more of our money! Yay!

 

[Akytalusia]

that isn't a picture of everything wrong with the system. it's only a picture of a sliver of what's wrong with it. the whole system needs a revamp.

 

[Eri]

First, I would just like to say I do not believe what I am about to say... but someone needs to argue the other side.

Rich people are more valuable to society than the poor. Rich people have money, and it is their use of that money which provides economic activity, investment, business and employment. The homeless man provides nothing to society, and will consume the same resources he did on the street as he will in the prison, and will create nothing just as he did before being jailed.

Also, white collar crimes are non-violent, while the man committed violent, armed theft (the requirements of robbery, dumbed down, of course). There is a greater cost to society in robbery, even of a small amount, than large amounts of money stolen in a non-violent way. Robbery can lead to much worse crimes, including murder, while white collar crime is not similarly likely to do so.

Finally, there are greater safeguards against white collar crime already in place than safeguards against robbery. White collar criminals are already deterred by economic regulations, investor protections and increased transparency in the economic system. The victims of white collar crime are often guilty of allowing the criminals to get away with their theft because the victims either believe the dishonesty will make them rich, or because they are careless with their money. There are no similar safeguards against robbery, especially with police enforcement dwindling due to budget cuts.

Future robbers are not easily deterred from committing their crimes. For this reason, harsh penalties must be common. White collar criminals have much more to lose just by virtue of having been convicted, thus they are more easily deterred by smaller sentences. Since the deterrence will not increase much due to the already high cost of short incarcerations, the cost to society of imprisoning the white collar criminal is unjustifiable.

OK, time to go wash myself off... but at the same time, you know that some of the above is correct, at least in the eyes of the US judiciary.

3 billion dollars. THREE BILLION. Just because no one was harmed doesn't make it a better crime. I guess I shouldn't put a price on life but 3 billion is an absurd number.

Also how do you define poor? As an example, I might make 65k a year, but I'm poor to any millionaire. I might be rich compared to someone who makes 22k a year.

 

[Raregolddragon]

So what it just gos to prove done be homeless or poor. If you want a better quality of life stay in school and become important.

 

[pubbing]

There is a very simple answer to this question and that is mandatory minimum sentences. The mandatory minimum sentence for a bank robbery no matter how much is 15 years in prison.

The mandatory minimum sentence for embezzlement and fraud is much less. The amount of money involved doesn't matter when it comes to mandatory minimum sentencing.

This is why the concept of mandatory sentencing guidelines is a complete joke because it takes away the ability for a judge to use "judgement" when sentencing and must follow the guidelines.

Kind of silly huh?

 

[Hero in a half shell]

15 years for such a tame robbery is a shambles, I always look at these sentences in terms of fractions of a life: This man will only get about 5 of those (probably less) and he has to spend one in jail for an action that, if he pulled it on me, I would probably have freely given him more money.

There is a very simple answer to this question and that is mandatory minimum sentences. The mandatory minimum sentence for a bank robbery no matter how much is 15 years in prison.

Ah. These case outcomes make sense now, although I don't think anyone could agree that this is justice.

The justice system also relies too heavily on the abilities of your lawyer. The fraudster probably had a crack team of the best lawyers in America to defend him, whereas the homeless guy would have had to rely on the free lawyer provided by the state, who is generally rubbish.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Rich people are more valuable to society than the poor.

I stopped reading. This has NEVER been the case, and any where that accepts it is a country that is in its death throes.

Money may be valuable, rich people have equal value to poor people. Always.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

It's really easy. The socio/econo-polictial sphere the USA has is currently the same as the middle age era prior French Revolution. The rich(nobility) believe they can do what they want, whenever they want without consequence. And if they did do something wrong/illegal? Light sentences more akin to 'You got caught? For shame'. All the while the poor and middle classes are suffering under the decadence of rich.

Also have to keep in mind the mandates that have been set up for crimes. As we are a 'civilized' country, therefore we have rules and limits to what is done.

 

[Dags90]

Ah. These case outcomes make sense now, although I don't think anyone could agree that this is justice.

Mandatory minimum sentences - especially in connection to drug offenses - have had a lot to do with the explosion of the U.S. prison population.

 

[TheAceTheOne]

Rich people are more valuable to society than the poor.

I stopped reading. This has NEVER been the case, and any where that accepts it is a country that is in its death throes.

Money may be valuable, rich people have equal value to poor people. Always.

I take a stance that people are people, every life is worth the same.

Captcha: Younnat's day,

Glad to see he finally got his own day~

 

[Dyme]

Robbery =/= fraud.


Still not quite what I would call "justice" though.

Americans still sentence people to death. Just to contribute something that is severely fucked up in the US justice system.

 

[TheAceTheOne]

Robbery =/= fraud.


Still not quite what I would call "justice" though.

Americans still sentence people to death. Just to contribute something that is severely fucked up in the US justice system.

You gonna tell me you'd rather have dangerous mass-murderers and people like that running around? Remember, in prison, there's a chance they'll escape, however slim.

(Edit: Don't mean disrespect with that, or to turn this into a political discussion)

 

[Dyme]

You gonna tell me you'd rather have dangerous mass-murderers and people like that running around? Remember, in prison, there's a chance they'll escape, however slim.

And with death sentence there is the (slim) chance to kill innocent people.

Death sentence is only for retribution. And while I partially can understand that, it is not worth it, because I don't want to live in a state where killing is the law. The state and law should be an example to its people.

 

[TheAceTheOne]

You gonna tell me you'd rather have dangerous mass-murderers and people like that running around? Remember, in prison, there's a chance they'll escape, however slim.

And with death sentence there is the (slim) chance to kill innocent people.

Death sentence is only for retribution. And while I partially can understand that, it is not worth it, because I don't want to live in a state where killing is the law. The state and law should be an example to its people.

But killing isn't the law. It's a way to uphold a law, sure, but it's not like back in the old West.


They won't kill you for cheating at poker. They might try to, though.

That's just my two cents, though.

One more quick thing: What about the prison overcrowding? It'd be worse if we didn't have the death penalty.