Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial

That's pretty funny.

Police and prosecutors are notorious for refusing to believe that a convicted person could be innocent, no matter how clear the evidence is. I'm sure there are some sore people on the side of the city and state in this situation.

In 2004, Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial after ruling that Boston police hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence.

They don't care WHO gets convicted, they don't care IF that person is guilty or not. All they care about is that SOMEBODY gets convicted. It really doesn't matter if they're REALLY guilty, they probably did something. No amount of money can compensate a person for 30 years of their life. The cops involved should be locked up.

Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

Moron.

DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

Nancy boy. How do you type with such limp wrists?

If I spent 30 years in prison for a crime I didn't commit, that check better be pretty hefty or various people would be looking over their shoulders until the end of time.

Mugato: Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial

That's pretty funny.

Nice catch.

DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

Soo, should the DC shooter have been commuted?

Since when did the T have "porter's"?

DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

If it's legal, it's not murder - as murder refers to the crime. Perhaps you're thinking of "kill"?

stevegarbowski: DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

Moron.

His opinion may be ill-stated, but you really have to question the State when they are willing to throw away and ruin a man's life for the "pursuit of justice." Then you have the instance in Texas where they willingly executed an innocent man.

Prosecutors, police, and DAs should be held accountable. It doesn't even have to be extreme just fire them, fine them, and remove all pensions plus benefits.

GaryPDX: If I spent 30 years in prison for a crime I didn't commit, that check better be pretty hefty or various people would be looking over their shoulders until the end of time.

If it happened to be, the people that would need to be the most fearful are the ones who violated my civil rights.

stevegarbowski: DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

Moron.

Hmmm, must be a Rhodes Scholar. Good argument, asshat, your point is, well, pointless.

Solon Isonomia
Police and prosecutors are notorious for refusing to believe that a convicted person could be innocent, no matter how clear the evidence is. I'm sure there are some sore people on the side of the city and state in this situation.

I believe that force is called "Justice" or possibly "Freedom".

lajimi: In 2004, Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial after ruling that Boston police hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence.

They don't care WHO gets convicted, they don't care IF that person is guilty or not. All they care about is that SOMEBODY gets convicted. It really doesn't matter if they're REALLY guilty, they probably did something. No amount of money can compensate a person for 30 years of their life. The cops involved should be locked up.

The book "Homicide" addresses that issue of convictions. Everyone would pretty much expect the cops and the DAs to play the percentages for their conviction rates and stats, but it is still interesting to read how the process works. The other interesting chapter was how cops handle the reading of Miranda rights.

Ironic that an article like this should come up so soon after the one about prisoners not being fed properly according to their state law.

Incoming hypocritical comments from ignorant "IF UR IN JAIL U DONT GET TO EAT" type-of-people.

RanDomino: I believe that force is called "Justice" or possibly "Freedom".

"Target fixation" comes to mind too.

Considering all the inmates on death row who were acquitted due to DNA evidence, I don't agree with the death penalty either.

The police and the prosecution withhold evidence that would make someone they're prosecuting look innocent? That's unpossible.

Find a copy of "Our Enemies in Blue". GREAT book.

When you care enough to send the very best.

Mugato: Considering all the inmates on death row who were acquitted due to DNA evidence, I don't agree with the death penalty either.

A good number of those inmates were on death row for decades, before DNA testing became available or widely accepted. Will be interesting to see if the number of more recently sentenced inmates freed due to DNA evidence curtails sharply in the near future.

Any person who deliberately falsifies facts or withholds relevant evidence to obtain a conviction against a innocent person should be sentence to the same punishment. If it is a death sentence the offending party should die. One can play legalese word games if they must, but the offending party's act would be plotting to commit murder disguised as a official act.

beoswulf: Mugato: Considering all the inmates on death row who were acquitted due to DNA evidence, I don't agree with the death penalty either.

A good number of those inmates were on death row for decades, before DNA testing became available or widely accepted. Will be interesting to see if the number of more recently sentenced inmates freed due to DNA evidence curtails sharply in the near future.

So you're saying that we, as a society, have sentenced people (men!) to death based on either circumstantial or manufactured evidence or upon the lies of witnesses.

You think that will stop merely because DNA evidence is available? You do realize that the cops and courts are doing all they can to resist DNA evidence unless they know it will lead to a conviction, don't you?

bandy: You think that will stop merely because DNA evidence is available? You do realize that the cops and courts are doing all they can to resist DNA evidence unless they know it will lead to a conviction, don't you?

First: don't use the term "courts." That term applies to the judiciary which is neutral in the process. Stick with "prosecutors."

Second: prosecutors love DNA evidence. To be extremely crude, you trot that crap out in front of the juries the whole box goes "ooooo" and you've got yourself a conviction (affirmative defenses notwithstanding). The problem isn't the use of DNA evidence at trial, the problem is the "gotta get the bad guys" and "if you got the police's attention then you must have done something wrong and you deserve to get punished" mentality in law enforcement and prosecutor's offices.

It may have been a Mulligan, but in reality, no one that goes away to prison forever, deserved it.

What else did he do?

AR55: His opinion may be ill-stated, but you really have to question the State when they are willing to throw away and ruin a man's life for the "pursuit of justice." Then you have the instance in Texas where they willingly executed an innocent man.

Prosecutors, police, and DAs should be held accountable. It doesn't even have to be extreme just fire them, fine them, and remove all pensions plus benefits.

Well, that's the thing- the police who "hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence" will face what? A minor punishment, if that. How's that a deterrent to lying?

If he had been put to death, then the police could now be facing murder charges. (After all, they deliberately took actions that lead to an innocent man's death. Sounds like murder to me.) This means the dirty cops would now be facing execution. I think that'd be an amazing deterrent to lying.

Solon Isonomia: First: don't use the term "courts." That term applies to the judiciary which is neutral in the process.

If judges are neutral in practice, then I'm a bee.

fredklein: AR55: His opinion may be ill-stated, but you really have to question the State when they are willing to throw away and ruin a man's life for the "pursuit of justice." Then you have the instance in Texas where they willingly executed an innocent man.

Prosecutors, police, and DAs should be held accountable. It doesn't even have to be extreme just fire them, fine them, and remove all pensions plus benefits.

Well, that's the thing- the police who "hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence" will face what? A minor punishment, if that. How's that a deterrent to lying?

If he had been put to death, then the police could now be facing murder charges. (After all, they deliberately took actions that lead to an innocent man's death. Sounds like murder to me.) This means the dirty cops would now be facing execution. I think that'd be an amazing deterrent to lying.

Honestly... Are you a retard?

Do you think the police chose to screw with someone?

Go back and enjoy your little corner of paranoia.

Generally, people that have issues, should get help. In your case, I suggest moving to Texas.

If you have enough of an issue, they will take care of it there.

bandy: If judges are neutral in practice, then I'm a bee.

Compared to the prosecutors and defenses attorneys? You bet your ass.

Solon Isonomia: bandy: If judges are neutral in practice, then I'm a bee.

Compared to the prosecutors and defenses attorneys? You bet your ass.

Umm.. You mentioned both sides of the story.

Have issues?

Be a good citizen.

That way you are not having to deal with either court peoples.

CasperImproved: Do you think the police chose to screw with someone?

The evidence says yes. You need to pay more attention when videos pop up on the 'net.

Or are you from the "Everyone is guilty of something." school of thought, Officer?

Solon Isonomia: bandy: If judges are neutral in practice, then I'm a bee.

Compared to the prosecutors and defenses attorneys? You bet your ass.

That's not what I personally have witnesses.

Warning: Typing sideways leads to typos.

CasperImproved: Honestly... Are you a retard?

Do you think the police chose to screw with someone?

Go back and enjoy your little corner of paranoia.

I'm just quoting from the last paragraph of TFA:

"In 2004, Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial after ruling that Boston police hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence. Adams was later freed."

That's what the judge said. Go call him "retarded" and "paranoid". Even though I'll bet he has a lot mot experience dealing with the cops than you have, you, of course know better than him. ::rolleyes::

bandy: The police and the prosecution withhold evidence that would make someone they're prosecuting look innocent? That's unpossible.

Find a copy of "Our Enemies in Blue". GREAT book.

In most countries that's "Perverting the Course of Justice" - a criminal offense and taken seriously. Sadly it seems to be part of the job description for the police and DAs in the US.

CasperImproved: Umm.. You mentioned both sides of the story.

Have issues?

Be a good citizen.

That way you are not having to deal with either court peoples.

Check the profile: I'm an attorney and used to work in the judicial branch. I am one of those court peoples.

bandy: That's not what I personally have witnesses.

Example?

Solon Isonomia: Police and prosecutors are notorious for refusing to believe that a convicted accused person could be innocent, no matter how clear the evidence is. I'm sure there are some sore people on the side of the city and state in this situation.

FTFY

Solon Isonomia
First: don't use the term "courts." That term applies to the judiciary which is neutral in the process.

+1, would laugh again

that was sarcasm, right?

Solon Isonomia: CasperImproved: Umm.. You mentioned both sides of the story.

Have issues?

Be a good citizen.

That way you are not having to deal with either court peoples.

Check the profile: I'm an attorney and used to work in the judicial branch. I am one of those court peoples.

I need to point out to you that the process is serving the vast majority?

Bad peeps go to prison. Good peeps are exonerated. Occasionally, the wrong party goes to jail.

We are humans. Mistakes happen, but we do the best we can.

What is your excuse?

lajimi: In 2004, Superior Court Judge Robert Mulligan ordered a new trial after ruling that Boston police hid reports that could have helped Adams prove his innocence.

They don't care WHO gets convicted, they don't care IF that person is guilty or not. All they care about is that SOMEBODY gets convicted. It really doesn't matter if they're REALLY guilty, ...

^THIS^

DarkVader: Had this been Texas, this man would have already been murdered by the state.

It's time to end the barbarism once and for all. The US is the last western democracy where the government can legally murder the citizens.

This.

Solon Isonomia: CasperImproved: Umm.. You mentioned both sides of the story.

Have issues?

Be a good citizen.

That way you are not having to deal with either court peoples.

Check the profile: I'm an attorney and used to work in the judicial branch. I am one of those court peoples.

And you have earned what? Our scorn?

GaryPDX: If I spent 30 years in prison for a crime I didn't commit, that check better be pretty hefty or various people would be looking over their shoulders until the end of time.

Why?

You are a pussy, nothing to fear there.

Solon Isonomia: bandy: That's not what I personally have witnesses.

Example?

Google about for her conduct. Check the other family court judges in Santa Clara county. Why does this one particular judge stand out?

CasperImproved: We are humans. Mistakes happen, but we do the best we can.

What is your excuse?

Ah, I see, you're not interested in a productive conversation here' enjoy the thread.

AR55: Prosecutors, police, and DAs should be held accountable. It doesn't even have to be extreme just fire them, fine them, and remove all pensions plus benefits.

Wrong. They should spend one day in prison for every day the freed man spent in prison. If they die in custody they can wait to be buried until the sentence has run its course. The only bonus they get for good behavior is not to be put in general population.

Mugato: Considering all the inmates on death row who were acquitted due to DNA evidence, I don't agree with the death penalty either.

Or how about just making the death penalty only apply in situations where the scumbag has been found guilty of multiple separate (and serious) incidences?

It's pretty darn unlikely that the same completely innocent person will be in the wrong place at the wrong time several different times. Unless the police and court systems are completely corrupt (rather than just mostly corrupt), it would be very difficult to frame, withhold evidence, etc. again and again.

Consider the situations of serial rapists, spree killers, and life-long gang bangers. Frankly, even if they turn out to be innocent of half the stuff they're accused of, they're still guilty of the other half.

Solon Isonomia: CasperImproved: We are humans. Mistakes happen, but we do the best we can.

What is your excuse?

Ah, I see, you're not interested in a productive conversation here' enjoy the thread.

And what was your "productive" comment?