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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (3947)	3/22/2002 8:31:49 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

The courts are not supposed to consider the prior record in a felony case. The UK has the same law. Here's where I am really relativist... I can see the value of the law. Each case must be considered on its own merits. BUT... What if someone finds a way of crime that works - for them? it's called serial offending, and does happen. There's a recent UK case where - after a majority guilty verdict - a man accused as a paedophile had 27 similar cases revealed to the jury... Similarly, a man recently had his record revealed when he tried using a very similar defence against a rape accusation - for about the 9th time... So, especially since most crimes (esp. felonies, in the UK - it's about 80%) are committed by repeat offenders, I feel it may well be genuinely germane if an accused has been accused (especially if convicted) of a similar offence before. If you want the benefit of the doubt, then don't commit a crime the first time :)