Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (16298)	6/8/2001 10:37:38 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Do you think there is actually that level incompetence and malice in the system? In some areas, yes. Each state, and in some cases each county or court district, can determine how they assign public defenders and how much they get paid. The US Supreme Court sets what to me is a criminally low standard for what constitutes acceptable representation. There have been documented examples of new lawyers being assigned to death penalty cases, of lawyers sleeping through part of trials, of one lawyer assigned to represent an accused murderer who couldn't name, when asked, a single case relevant to homicide issues in his state, and on and on. As to malice, there are tens of thousands of prosecutors in the country, and for the most part district attorneys are elected. They read the papers, they have to run in two years, they know perfectly well what the public wants to happen to some black druggie who is accused of raping a 9 year old blonde, blue-eyed poster child white girl. I don't know that it's actual malice on the part of prosecutors, but they like their jobs and they're elected officials with a LOT of power. Don't get me wrong. There are a lot of honest and highly competent people out there. But not all are. And too often a high-publicity murder case with the death penalty involved brings out the worst in the system. it would seem that a fundamental overhaul of the entire justice system is in order Of the public defense system, yes. I actually like the English system where a barrister will one day appear for the defense and the next day for the Crown. It keeps they honest. I'm not in favor of a flat rate system -- rewards the lazy who do just enough (or less) to get by and penalizes the lawyer who really puts out for his client. Most people who know the system know it needs help. The problem is, most people just equate help with money, and what politician is going to vote to spend lots more public dollars defending McVeighs and rapists and murderers and all.