Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   SCOTUS rules that just because you had an incompetent defense attorney who failed to present evidence of your innocence doesn't mean you should get a new trial when you're found guilty, because that might make people mistrust the system   (cnn.com) divider line
    More: Murica, Supreme Court of the United States, United States Constitution, federal courts, inmates' constitutional rights, state's criminal case, lawyers' failure, majority opinion, new evidence of innocence  
•       •       •

2373 clicks; posted to Politics » and Main » on 23 May 2022 at 1:38 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



159 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-05-23 12:04:03 PM  
because that ruling will surely quell any mistrust of the system.
 
2022-05-23 12:11:53 PM  
Due process is very inconvenient for when you want to keep innocent people in prison.
 
2022-05-23 12:14:56 PM  
IF YOU'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.

Offer not available in all areas.
 
2022-05-23 12:24:41 PM  
And here they are, violating originalism. That reactionary authoritarians have successfully rebranded their ideology as originalism is evil genius.
 
2022-05-23 12:33:29 PM  
It comes down to states rights. If your shiathole state wants to kill you after providing ineffective counsel you are right farked.
 
2022-05-23 12:46:04 PM  
I fully expect even the most obvious black and white constitutional rights to be farked with.

"Actually, so long as we require the people's tax dollars to build barracks to house soldiers, is it really any different to require citizens to open their homes to soldiers occasionally to provide room and board? It's probably cheaper anyway."
 
2022-05-23 1:00:32 PM  
FEBRUARY 2021 SPECIAL REPORT
"The Innocence Epidemic"
A special Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) report revealed 11 new exonerations, bringing the total number of people who were innocent on death row to 187.

The report revealed that 69% of these cases included "official misconduct by police, prosecutors, or other government officials." These wrongful convictions were not mere accidents, but rather symptoms of a system fraught with abuse. DPIC found disturbing patterns of misconduct, perjury, and racial bias in death-row exonerations.

WTI Executive Director and death row exoneree, Kirk Bloodsworth, said of the report,"with such a large number of mistakes uncovered, there's no need to wonder anymore, we can also be sure that innocent people have been executed."
 
2022-05-23 1:07:22 PM  
By the time they're done, only the 2A will remain. What's cute is conservatives don't think they'll go after Rusty one.

When you want to be an "Originalist," you gotta get rid of all those changes that mar the original document's perfection.
 
2022-05-23 1:08:21 PM  
Unnecessary delays? Hey, Clarence, if there are any doubts about a death sentence, all the delays are necessary.
 
2022-05-23 1:14:27 PM  
Justice Sotomayor, in dissent, calls the decision "perverse" and "illogical," correctly noting that it effectively overturns two recent precedents and extinguishes the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in many habeas cases. https://t.co/zHX8P4iJS6 pic.twitter.com/ZUqOyszGpw

- Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 23, 2022


Fark user imageView Full Size


 
2022-05-23 1:22:36 PM  
"The Court's decision will leave many people who were convicted in violation of the Sixth Amendment to face incarceration or even execution without any meaningful chance to vindicate their right to counsel."

That's the point, Madame Justice.  That's the entire f*cking point.
 
2022-05-23 1:27:43 PM  
This is one of those Supreme Court opinions that sounds like a stupid joke to anyone without a terminal case of lawyer brain. "If you get sentenced to death because your lawyer sucked, actually it's your fault, also it's illegal to present evidence that your lawyer sucked." https://t.co/ze1iQfQ2jl

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022


Here is Clarence Thomas, writing for 6 of 9 Supreme Court justices, explaining that the prospect of a federal court hearing evidence that a person on death row might be actually innocent is an "affront to the State" and its sacred right to kill people pic.twitter.com/LjpX0mvAx7

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022


If you're not a lawyer and you read a Supreme Court opinion like this and think, "wait, this is the dumbest thing I've ever read, I guess I'm not really getting it," I want to emphasize that no, you do, in fact, get it, and it is the legal system that is dumb, not you pic.twitter.com/O9Iqo9AVhM

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022

 
2022-05-23 1:27:44 PM  

SoupGuru: I fully expect even the most obvious black and white constitutional rights to be farked with.

"Actually, so long as we require the people's tax dollars to build barracks to house soldiers, is it really any different to require citizens to open their homes to soldiers occasionally to provide room and board? It's probably cheaper anyway."


No kidding.

"It is up to the discretion of local law enforcement to determine whether a search is "reasonable"."
 
2022-05-23 1:33:38 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-23 1:35:52 PM  

Gubbo: Due process is very inconvenient for when you want to keep innocent people in prison.


Unfortunately, this guy isn't going to get to live out his years in prison. This is a death penalty case. So you can die without an opportunity to present what seems to be pretty convincing evidence that you didn't commit the crime if your lawyer fails to present it on your behalf.
 
2022-05-23 1:40:32 PM  
So what I'm hearing is that guilt or innocence is irrelevant to our legal system and we should just grab whatever justice we can for ourselves whenever possible.
 
2022-05-23 1:41:30 PM  
Can't mess with those prosecution success rates. That'd keep them from being slightly less likely to be future elected officials or judges because they weren't sufficiently tough on crime, and we can't have that.
 
2022-05-23 1:41:48 PM  
Refusing to expand the judiciary was worth it. All it cost was freedom and in some cases actual lives of innocent people. Because if we didn't condemn these people to incarceration or execution, then Republicans might retaliate when they get back into power.
 
2022-05-23 1:41:56 PM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: "The Court's decision will leave many people who were convicted in violation of the Sixth Amendment to face incarceration or even execution without any meaningful chance to vindicate their right to counsel."

That's the point, Madame Justice.  That's the entire f*cking point.


That's what we get for electing a black guy
 
2022-05-23 1:42:27 PM  
Simple solution: be rich. Then you won't have to worry about effective counsel. And, if you're rich enough, you won't even have to worry about consequences.
 
2022-05-23 1:43:11 PM  
They seem preoccupied with the integrity of their institutions of late. Very telling.
 
2022-05-23 1:43:23 PM  
People "trust the system"? Aww, bless their hearts.

The SCOTUS is useless at this point. Might as well get rid of it before the rapeublicans weaponize it when they take back control from the spineless Dems.

Nice country while it lasted, for the most part.
 
2022-05-23 1:43:38 PM  

BigMax: Gubbo: Due process is very inconvenient for when you want to keep innocent people in prison.

Unfortunately, this guy isn't going to get to live out his years in prison. This is a death penalty case. So you can die without an opportunity to present what seems to be pretty convincing evidence that you didn't commit the crime if your lawyer fails to present it on your behalf.


If I heard it correctly on the news this morning, you can't even get a new trial if it turns out that the prosecution failed to turn over exculpatory evidence.

We now have a system where the DA doesn't have any incentive to be fair. No matter what is discovered later the original verdict will hold.

USA! USA! USA!
 
2022-05-23 1:43:48 PM  
And another piece moves into place for the ascendancy of fascism - depriving opposition of competent counsel in felony cases. "The courts have no inherent duty to defend you" goes pretty well with "the police have no inherent duty to protect you." Got to protect that prison labor pipeline or we'll never bring slavery back within our lifetimes.
 
2022-05-23 1:44:20 PM  
Sorry folks, due to labor shortages and inflationary pressures you will just get one shot at a defense going forward.
 
2022-05-23 1:44:38 PM  

nmrsnr: Simple solution: be rich. Then you won't have to worry about effective counsel. And, if you're rich enough, you won't even have to worry about consequences.


Or just escalate everything to murder, because the end result of even jaywalking or littering is an effective death sentence these days.
Innocent. Guilty. Doesn't matter either way. It's all about checking off boxes on a form.
 
2022-05-23 1:46:55 PM  
Next up, the presumption of innocence, followed by due process.
 
2022-05-23 1:47:29 PM  
"Serial relitigation of final convictions undermines the finality that is essential to both the retributive and deterrent functions of criminal law,"

Better that 10 innocent people go to jail, than 1 guilty person go free...amirite, Clarence?
 
2022-05-23 1:47:39 PM  

Gin Buddy: If I heard it correctly on the news this morning, you can't even get a new trial if it turns out that the prosecution failed to turn over exculpatory evidence.

We now have a system where the DA doesn't have any incentive to be fair. No matter what is discovered later the original verdict will hold.

USA! USA! USA!


If there's no difference between double parking and double homicide, then why not just escalate everything to murder? You'll fry the same either way.
 
2022-05-23 1:48:36 PM  
Textbook authoritarianism.
 
2022-05-23 1:50:13 PM  

Weaver95: nmrsnr: Simple solution: be rich. Then you won't have to worry about effective counsel. And, if you're rich enough, you won't even have to worry about consequences.

Or just escalate everything to murder, because the end result of even jaywalking or littering is an effective death sentence these days.
Innocent. Guilty. Doesn't matter either way. It's all about checking off boxes on a form.


Step 1) Murder spree
Step 2) Plead guilty to greater charge of insurrection
Step 3) Receive slap on wrist.

/this is my cunning plan, copyright me
 
2022-05-23 1:50:56 PM  
SCOTUS Conservatives: "Abortion isn't in the Constitution"

also SCOTUS Conservatives: "So what if due process is in the Constitution"
 
2022-05-23 1:51:29 PM  

SoupGuru: I fully expect even the most obvious black and white constitutional rights to be farked with.

"Actually, so long as we require the people's tax dollars to build barracks to house soldiers, is it really any different to require citizens to open their homes to soldiers occasionally to provide room and board? It's probably cheaper anyway."


Stop giving them ideas.
 
2022-05-23 1:51:30 PM  
The 6-3 opinion was penned by Justice Clarence Thomas.

I hope they have a macro for that phrase because they'll be using it a lot over the next several years.
 
2022-05-23 1:51:53 PM  
"Serial relitigation of final convictions undermines the finality that is essential to both the retributive and deterrent functions of criminal law"

How different from restorative justice, and how telling.
 
2022-05-23 1:51:55 PM  
I say we halt any SCOTUS decisions made after 2016.  These are not laws, these are not interpretations, these are corrupted criminal acts committed by people placed fraudulently on the court.

By not even conducting senate business to hear Merrick Garland, everything is suspended.
 
2022-05-23 1:52:07 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Justice Sotomayor, in dissent, calls the decision "perverse" and "illogical," correctly noting that it effectively overturns two recent precedents and extinguishes the Sixth Amendment right to counsel in many habeas cases. https://t.co/zHX8P4iJS6 pic.twitter.com/ZUqOyszGpw

- Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) May 23, 2022


[Fark user image 650x349]


It's so cute that she thinks the conservative judges should care about the Constitution. The Constitution now just exists to provide an excuse for what ever decisions the judges have made ahead of time to further their goals.
 
2022-05-23 1:52:50 PM  
We have to take back the senate and add justices to make up for the stolen seats. Impeachment of beer bro and Thomas will never happen.
 
2022-05-23 1:52:52 PM  
So you can get railroaded and now there is legally f*ck all you can do. Awesome. I'm out
 
2022-05-23 1:53:00 PM  
Stupid poors. Why don't you just steal more money doing your crimes to afford better attorney like the rich folks do?

/This is f*cking disgusting and if the Democrats don't pack the court then they can f*ck themselves too.
//We've lost anything worth fighting for at this point.
 
2022-05-23 1:54:35 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: This is one of those Supreme Court opinions that sounds like a stupid joke to anyone without a terminal case of lawyer brain. "If you get sentenced to death because your lawyer sucked, actually it's your fault, also it's illegal to present evidence that your lawyer sucked." https://t.co/ze1iQfQ2jl

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022


Here is Clarence Thomas, writing for 6 of 9 Supreme Court justices, explaining that the prospect of a federal court hearing evidence that a person on death row might be actually innocent is an "affront to the State" and its sacred right to kill people pic.twitter.com/LjpX0mvAx7

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022


If you're not a lawyer and you read a Supreme Court opinion like this and think, "wait, this is the dumbest thing I've ever read, I guess I'm not really getting it," I want to emphasize that no, you do, in fact, get it, and it is the legal system that is dumb, not you pic.twitter.com/O9Iqo9AVhM

- Jay Willis (@jaywillis) May 23, 2022


"When the government does not represent the people, the people have the right to abolish that government, by force if necessary."

Something the conservative court should keep in mind.
 
2022-05-23 1:55:00 PM  
buckle up because we're going to get a lot of these kinds of decisions for a very long time. The conservative majority of the court has dropped any pretense about respecting precedent. Once you drop even the illusion of that, what you get is all political based decisions all the time.
 
2022-05-23 1:55:15 PM  

guestguy: "Serial relitigation of final convictions undermines the finality that is essential to both the retributive and deterrent functions of criminal law,"

Better that 10 innocent people go to jail, than 1 guilty person go free...amirite, Clarence?


See, now you are getting it.

Now just lay back and let it happen. If you don't resist, it won't be as bad. That is what they have been discretely telling us for years, now they have chucked the discrete method and are now yelling it from the top of the hill through a loud speaker.
 
2022-05-23 1:55:20 PM  
The justice system is not just in any way at all. This is beyond simple misinterpretation. This is a corrupt system that is rotten from the top down.
 
2022-05-23 1:56:00 PM  

ModernPrimitive01: buckle up because we're going to get a lot of these kinds of decisions for a very long time. The conservative majority of the court has dropped any pretense about respecting precedent. Once you drop even the illusion of that, what you get is all political based decisions all the time.


Destroying the court system is going to have some repercussions.
 
2022-05-23 1:56:51 PM  

Dedmon: The justice system is not just in any way at all. This is beyond simple misinterpretation. This is a corrupt system that is rotten from the top down.


Historically speaking this is a symptom of an empire in collapse.
 
2022-05-23 1:57:33 PM  

hobnail: IF YOU'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.

Offer not available in all areas.


Offer not valid for Those People, Feelthy Queers, Wanton Harlots, Union Thugs, Smelly Hippies and Lazy Mexicans Taking Our Jobs And Living Off Welfare.
 
2022-05-23 1:57:35 PM  
The entire point of federal appeals (in criminal cases) is to ensure that the state observed the accused's rights outlined in the Constitution.

"Nah, that sounds like work. We'll just take the state's word on it." - Clarence Thomas
 
2022-05-23 1:57:56 PM  

Clarence Brown: And here they are, violating originalism. That reactionary authoritarians have successfully rebranded their ideology as originalism is evil genius.


The original constitution enshrined literal chattel slavery; if there's a more authoritarian ideology than that I have yet to hear of it.
 
2022-05-23 1:58:10 PM  

TwoHead: It comes down to states rights. If your shiathole state wants to kill you after providing ineffective counsel you are right farked.


More a rich/poor thing.  Even Scalia was willing  to defend the rights of criminals, if and only if they could afford effective counsel.  I don't think anyone ever attacked rich men for stealing bread or sleeping under bridges harder than he did (see Gore vs. Bush).
 
Displayed 50 of 159 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.