[269] in libertarians
Re: Death Penalty
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul D. Eccles)
Tue Sep 27 11:58:14 1994
From: "Paul D. Eccles" <pde@sd.inri.com>
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 8:54:42 PDT
> I believe the system *is* about finding the truth. However, it is
> administered by people who don't always have an interest in the truth.
The system can't be about finding the truth unless all parties are trying
to find it. The prosecuter, judge, and jury are supposed to find the truth
but the the defense lawyer is only interested in the truth if the defendent is
actually inocent. Ohterwise if the defendent did actually commit the crime
he/she is accused, the defense lawyer does not want the truth to come out.
I had a conversation about the system with a criminal lawyer. He told me that
he does not take a case unless the accused tells him exactly the situation.
The lawyer knows whether the accused did the crime or not. This is the only
way the lawyer can give his best effort. I asked him what was his experience
of the percentage of accused persons who go to trial actually commited the
crime they are accused. He told me it was greater than 99.9%. He said that
this is because the District Attorney's office only goes to trial when
it has a a lot of evidence and a very good chance of winning. Otherwise
a plea bargain is sought.
I admit that prosecutors do sometimes go to trial even knowing the accused
did not commit the crime. High publicity cases where the public wants
swift justice or the DA is up for re-election causes this to happen more.
This makes me think where the OJ Simpson case falls. Did he actually do it
and the defense will do anything to prevent the truth to come out? Is it
high publicity enough the DA won't even consider that he might not have
done it? Or, OJ did not do it and the DA is just making a mistake.
Paul
