What’s your complaint? on the Wednesday OPEN thread
Shot by Dan at Chocolate Paper on Market Street
“With patient and firm determination, I am going to press on for jobs. I’m going to press on for equality. I’m going to press on for the sake of our children. I’m going to press on for the sake of all those families who are struggling right now. I don’t have time to feel sorry for myself. I don’t have time to complain. I am going to press on.”
Barack Obama
March 20, 2013 - 10:00 AM
Fellow bloggers,
Several days ago I shared with Dan, via email, some exciting news regarding a trip I will be making this coming June. As I think most of you know, I serve as President of a small Catholic two year college in Indiana. My institution is a member of the national organization of Catholic colleges and universities in the United States. That group has, for the last several years, sent a delegation of 20 leaders from its member institutions to Rome for a week of meetings with the leaders of the Catholic Church in the Vatican. The exciting news I received was that I had been selected to be one of those 20 delegates this year. So my wife and I will travel to Rome this summer to participate in the meetings. Among the meetings we will have during our 5 days in the Vatican is an audience with Pope Francis.
I am deeply honored to have been chosen to participate in this mission. My college is one of just a very few remaining Catholic two year colleges left in the U.S. and it serves a very small population. Nonetheless, the population we serve, I think, is close to the heart of the new Pope. Obviously, I am excited. As time and electronic capability permit, I will keep the blog posted during my time in Rome.
Congratulations, Ron.
Surprise, surprise, surprise. Michele Bachmann’s speech to CPAC was filled with Pinocchio moments. And when confronted by a reporter about those lies and distortions, she runs away.
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/20/michele_bachmann_runs_away_from_reporter/
Congrats, Ron!
I reckon this means a regular on this blog is getting an audience with the pope before you-know-who, the hallmark of Catholic piety.
Oh, the outrage!
#4 I’m sure you-know-who will make sure the pope knows of all of Ron’s “non-Catholic” views as well as the fact that his college’s website didn’t look or read Catholic enough.
Congrats, Ron!
That’s very exciting news, Ron. I hope, in between meetings, you and your wife get a chance to explore the Eternal City and see some of its famous sights.
From what I understand, it is the trip of a lifetime Ron. Enjoy.
A man has been imprisoned for 22 years for a crime he didn’t commit. At his trial, the judge was “troubled” by the lead detective’s behavior but still let the trial proceed and accepted the mans conviction. This is shameful.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/nyregion/brooklyn-prosecutor-to-seek-freedom-of-man-convicted-in-1990-killing-of-rabbi.html?ref=todayspaper
OK Debbie. What’s your point?
Wow Debbie, that is such a scary tale. I think we would all be surprised how many times this has happened. “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+18%3A23-32&version=NIV
I cannot imagine the despair.
“OK Debbie. What’s your point?”
–Chuck
Why did you ask this question, Chuck?
Ron May
Congratulations. You must be thrilled.
Chuck, Debbie’s point, I think, is that the justice system in reality is nothing like what is portrayed on TV. It’s all about winning in the real world. If that means convicting the wrong person, so be it. I am not sure the police and prosecutors care all that much. Conversely, defense attorneys are supposed to keep their clients out of prison, guilty or not.
It’s an open thread Chuck.
Just curious as to what point is served by posting this story. Generally people have some message they are trying to send or a conversation they are trying to start by pointing out such issues. I’m curious about that.
Speaking of corporate welfare. Wonder why right wingers and privatizers aren’t screaming about this:
“The accounting of the financial cost of the nearly decade-long Iraq War will go on for years, but a recent analysis has shed light on the companies that made money off the war by providing support services as the privatization of what were former U.S. military operations rose to unprecedented levels.
Private or publicly listed firms received at least $138 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for government contracts for services that included providing private security, building infrastructure and feeding the troops.”
Of course, Halliburton (KBR) was #1
…
“According to the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the level of corruption by defense contractors may be as high as $60 billion. Disciplined soldiers that would traditionally do many of the tasks are commissioned by private and publicly listed companies.
Even without the graft, the costs of paying for these services are higher than paying government employees or soldiers to do them because of the profit motive involved. … ”
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/308-12/16561-focus-cheneys-halliburton-made-395-billion-on-iraq-war
I found it to be a very interesting story, Chuck. Did you read it? I wonder how mnay other people may have been wrongly convicted because of testimony from the detective involved in this case.
Talk about a pokey news day. Why, pray tell, did this make it to the front page of roanoke.com?
http://www.roanoke.com/living/1788518-12/their-best-investment-a-long-friendship.html
51 months to get to Isarael. Obama’s on the ball!!!!!!!@!@%$%^
Pirengle….the mere fact that anyone still eats at Coach and Four is news. Celebration Station!!!!!
“Just as a quick reminder, if our national goal is to create jobs, investing in clean energy is several times more effective than investing in fossil fuel or nuclear jobs.”
It bothers me that the entrenched way is often deemed the only way to create jobs when in reality it is neither the only way nor the most efficient:
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/03/20/over-3-times-more-green-jobs-per-million-than-fossil-fuel-or-nuclear-jobs/
Pirengle, that is so true about Coach and Four. The ties they are a changin’, but not so for the Coach and Four and the folks who eat there. That was a picture of those 2 couples taken in the 70′s, right?
Congratulations, Ron.
Re: Chuck at 12:54 pm
-
—————
-
I see that Debbie has give a more than adequate — even if I see no need for her to do so.
However, when I see such stories I am conflicted — very conflicted.
On one hand, in criminal law, I strongly believe Blackstone’s formulation. “All presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously; for the law holds it better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent party suffer.” — Commentaries on the Laws of England, William Blackstone.
Or for that matter see Genesis 18:23.
OTOH, I am deeply offended by the violent criminals who later commit yet another violent crime after being released.
However, in that many authoritarian personalities seem to take ( seem to historically have taken) the opposite view as to which ratio is better, opt for Blackstone, et al.
My (small “l”) libertarian soul sides with Blackstone; Benjamin Franklin [ "... it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer"]; and John Adams [ “It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, . . . ."].
As always, YMMV.
—–
BTW, for a very good read by one of my favorite thinkers see:
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm
**
n Guilty Men
SNIP
I. The n Controversy
“Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer,” 2 says English jurist William Blackstone. The ratio 10:1 has become known as the “Blackstone ratio.” 3 Lawyers “are indoctrinated” with it “early in law school.” 4 “Schoolboys are taught” it. 5 In the fantasies of legal academics, jurors think about Blackstone routinely. 6
But why ten? Other eminent legal authorities through the ages have put their weight behind other numbers. “One” has appeared on Geraldo. 7 “It’s better for four guilty men to go free than one innocent man to be imprisoned,” says basketball coach George Raveling. 8 But “it’s better to turn five guilty men loose than it is to convict one innocent man,” according to ex-Mississippi executioner and roadside fruit stand operator Thomas Berry Bruce, who ought to know. 9 “It is better to let nine guilty men free than to convict one innocent man,” counters lawyer Bruce Rosen from Madison, Wisconsin. 10 Justice Benjamin Cardozo certainly believed in five for execution, 11 and allegedly favored ten for imprisonment, 12 which is a bit counterintuitive. Benjamin Franklin thought “that it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer.” 13 Mario Puzo’s Don Clericuzio heard about letting a hundred guilty men go free and, “struck almost dumb by the beauty of the concept . . . became an ardent patriot.” 14 Denver radio talk show host Mike Rosen claims to have heard it argued “in the abstract” that it’s better that 1000 guilty men go free than one innocent man be imprisoned, and comments, “Well, we get our wish.” 15
Or, perhaps, it may be merely “a few,” 16 “some,” 17 “several,” 18 “many” (and particularly more than eight), 19 “a considerable amount,” 20 or even “a goodly number.” 21 Not all commentators weigh acquitting the guilty against the conviction of one innocent man. A Missouri district court said in 1877 that it was “better that some guilty ones should escape than that many innocent persons should be subjected to the expense and disgrace attendant upon being arrested upon a criminal charge.” 22 And in Judge Henry J. Friendly’s opinion, “Most Americans would allow a considerable number of guilty persons to go free than to convict any appreciable number of innocent men.” 23 It is unclear whether “considerable” is greater or less than “appreciable.” 24
n guilty men, then. The travels and metamorphoses of n through all lands and eras are the stuff that epic miniseries are made of. n is the father of criminal law. This is its story.
SNIP
**
Re: my last.
The somewhat strangely distracting numbers in the snip from n Guilty Men refer to footnotes.
Congratulations, Ron May!
Debbie, I realize my first comment sounded terse and I apologize. I did not intend it that way. I was on my lunch break and trying to post quickly. I did read the story and it was interesting. I think in that particular case there was a confluence of events to form the proverbial perfect storm that led to the person in question to be wrongfully imprisoned. There was far more than a dirty cop at play there. There was the politics of having Mayor Dinkins take a personal interest and without a doubt, exerting pressure on the police to make an arrest. There was a prosecutor who seemed more than happy to turn a blind eye to rather obvious problems in a high profile case. And of course, there was a corrupt cop or a whole task force of corrupt cops.
I think the cop in question should be tried and imprisoned if the story is accurate. Given the number of people involved in this case, he shouldn’t be alone in that fate. I have no doubt that the imprisoned person will receive millions from the City of New York. That won’t return the time he lost, but it is the only realistic option our society has to compensate him.
The concern I have when these issues get widespread attention is that it fosters beliefs like the one expressed by old blue. It is true that the justice system is nothing like what you see on TV. It is also not really like what you see on the TV news as the news only covers the unusual cases. The idea that cops and prosecutors as criminal justice entities, just want to make an arrest and win at all costs, regardless of actual guilt or innocence, is just plain wrong.
As with all professions, there are bad cops and prosecutors. Some are corrupt, some are incompetent, some lazy, some dishonest and some are brutal. However, the vast majority are decent people trying to do a difficult job that society simultaneously demands they do, but also doesn’t want them to do. As for the bad apples, the same is true of any profession and it is no more fair to indict the entire profession than it is to say all teachers are pedophiles because one sleeps with a student, or to say all accountants are thieves because one embezzles money.
However, people are a little more ready to make that leap with the police and prosecutors because people by and large only have negative associations with the police. For the average person,they only encounter the police in one of two ways. They have either been the victim of a crime, an experience that in and of itself is negative. Add to it the frustration with the limits imposed by the law and the lengthy and at times inefficient legal process and that negative feeling is only magnified. The second instance the “average” person encounters the police is when they have been stopped for a traffic violation, again a negative experience if for no other reason than people usually don’t like being called on it when they make a mistake.
Old blue is right. It isn’t like TV. On TV the star of the show can find incontrovertible scientific proof of the bad guy’s guilt and get a confession and a conviction all in an hour. It is generally no where near that simple. There isn’t always physical evidence and bad guys actually often go to great lengths to conceal their activities and make sure they leave no evidence behind. Sometimes they refuse to confess too. Unfortunately TV has convinced the public that the “good cops” are infallible and everyone else is either incompetent or dirty. Then, when a case like this one comes along, they line up to shout “see, I told you so.”
When you meet the Poop, tell him to quit pretending to speak for God. And tell him his organization’s penchant for taking advantage of catamites, and continual lying about it, is a disgrace.
I would be hesitant to indict David Dinkins for wanting the murder solved, or for pressuring the police to solve it.
IF Dinkins exerted pressure on police to solve it (of which there is NO evidence despite Chuck’s assertion that it happened “without a doubt) he certainly didn’t mean he wanted some innocent patsy locked up for the crime. If Dinkins told the cops he wanted it solved, he meant by the actual perpetrator. IF he told them that, of course.
I happen to agree with Chuck that most cops and prosecutors are honest and on the level. Almost all of my own personal interactions with police have been positive ones.
On the other hand the stories of the ones who are bad are important. Police and prosecutors hold enormous power over average citizens. And when that’s abused, it needs to be shouted about from the highest mountaintop, to warn future innocent victims, and future police and prosecutors.
Thw 1998 series “Win at All Costs” from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette is an interesting window into those abuses, in federal courts all over the country. It recounts scores of things that can only be characterized as legal horror stories. Interestingly, the Justice Department would not comment to the paper when it was preparing the series; a highly critical, after-the-fact letter by then Dep. Attorney General Eric Holder was all they would say.
Things like that happen here in Roanoke, too. The federal prosecutions of Dr. Cecil Knox and Richard Burrow are two examples.
Dan Casey at 11:58 pm
LOL.
Dan, I would have taken a bet that you’d cite a drug case, where you to cite a local case.
-
I agree with Chuck, too. I believe most police officers and prosecutors are decent, honorable people. There was so much worng in that case, and I hold the prosecutor and judge far more culpable than Mayor Dinkins.
“Detective Scarcella and his partner, Stephen Chmil, according to investigators and legal documents, broke rule after rule. They kept few written records, coached a witness and took Mr. Ranta’s confession under what a judge described as highly dubious circumstances. They allowed two dangerous criminals, an investigator said, to leave jail, smoke crack cocaine and visit with prostitutes in exchange for incriminating Mr. Ranta.”
“At trial, prosecutors acknowledged the detectives had misbehaved but depicted them as likable scamps. Reached in retirement on Tuesday, Mr. Scarcella defended his work. “I never framed anyone in my life,” he said.”
The jewelry courier who saw the presumed killer face to face, swore in court that Ranta was not the man he saw. The judge knew that there was so much wrong in the case, yet he let it proceed. The prosecutor had to know it too at the time. He recently had the task force created to look into questionable convictions and this was one of them. It’s too bad it took him so long to do it.
Pressure from the mayor should not cause one to lose their conscience. As for the “likeable scamps” I hope that they are investigated and prosecuted too, but I’m not holding my breath.
” worng” that should be wrong.
Dave Gresham,
My trip to Rome doesn’t include a visit with the Poop. Believe me when I say I’ll do everything I can to avoid a meeting with the Poop.
Ron, congratulations. This will be quite a trip. We’re expecting pictures and updates!
Still Learning #20, hilarious! Thanks for the laugh.
Sadly, I think that story is more on point than anyone even cursorily involved with law enforcement will want to admit. Police do concentrate on making their case and they stick to it with a doggedness that is great when they are right and disgraceful when they are not. DAs, AGs and CAs all do like to win and many will not only go for a conviction, but multiple and felonious at the drop of a sneeze, even when they know it is not warranted. Prisons and the Sex Offender registry are full of bad guys and guys who just got a bad deal.
There is a certain personality drawn to police work from my experience and it can be both the boon and the bane.
I do not like criminals and low life people, but I agree that “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”.
#36 And let’s not forget that for decades Virginia had a law that essentially said that if a convicted person didn’t introduce new evidence in a case within (I think) 21 days, tough luck — even if that evidence exonerated you.
BTW Chuck, regarding your comment #27, it’s okay. No offense taken.
Coach and Four. I went there for the first and last time about 5 years ago with some people who probably last ate out at Archie’s Lobster House. I ordered a Greek salad with anchovies that were probably left over from Archie’s closing. What a dump.
chick chandler’s comment is the first negative stuff I’ve ever heard about Coach and Four.
#40 I’ve eaten at Coach and Four a few times and no complaints. Not a gourmet 5-star meal, but then neither is the price. And they seem to stay pretty darn full.
Well, it is no Montano’s but I have never disliked a meal at Coach and Four. I also go there very seldom, just because I usually head the other way.
The case of the innocent man in New York reminded me of an old, wry joke that I’ll try to share here in print, even though it’s humor absolutely depends on being heard out loud, spoken with a certain Texas drawl. So I’ll try to approximate the way it should sound, and hope the joke comes across.The joke is, why is a Texas trooper called a Texas Ranger? Answer: ” ‘Cause he always gits the one that done it, but if he cain’t, he jes’ teks a stranger.”
Bob @ 3:34, March 20, 2013,
“51 months to get to Isarael. Obama’s on the ball!!!!!!!@!@%$%^”
If you really cared about this as an issue, you probably would have spelled “Israel” correctly. Likewise, you might have boned up on your history a bit;
# times President Reagan visited Israel; 0
# times President Bush Sr visited Israel: 0
# times President Bush II visited Israel: 1, but it took him seven years.
Bob, do you totally suck at everything you comment on in blogs about or just history, spelling, punctuation, logic, reason and common sense?
You are relatively new here but already you’re getting off on the wrong foot. Slow down and think about the point you’re trying to convey so you don’t further embarrass yourself.
Slow witted conservatives are not a commodity here so find something else to specialize in; we can’t have you stepping all over franks toes, can we?
Bob, not to further embarrass you about Israel (or “Isarael” in your vernacular), not only did President Reagan never visit Israel, but President Clinton visited the country 4x more than Reagan met with Michael Jackson.
Steve C,
Reagan was a GREAT president because he never visited Israel. Carter was a bad president because he visited it too many times.
Obama beat GWB to the Holy Land by 2 years! Who’da thunk?
Pitifully desperate, he walked right into that one. Bob’s “on the ball!!!!!!!@!@%$%^”
Warren, I can hear that joke being told!
Funny, Warren!
Glad ya’ll could get the gist of the joke off the page. It’s funny, but also kind of sad, because it’s an old Texas joke from the days of segregation, when many ArkLaTex towns warned blacks not to let the sun set on them in that town. Those convicted of crimes wound up as virtual slave labor on the state prison farms, like Sugarland near Houston, where the “Midnight Special” train inspired the song (done by CCR and many others). “Let the Midnight Special, shine a light on me” could be taken to mean “let me escape”, with the singer away from the prison farm and out by the tracks where the night train’s light would pass. But then he’d soon be stranger again in some town, where the Texas rangers again might dog him around (often literally, with bloodhounds).
Nowadays, the joke might sadly still apply, given Texas’ execution record.
The poor Bobs on this blog.
chick chandler, I recommend trying Coach and Four’s ribeye before writing the place off.