Can we trust a criminal conviction?

[roarup]

I just read about a crime lab in Houston, whch was skewing results to match police theories. The result: the innocent were being convicted and the guilty were not being investigated.

This is terrible, I think.

[dgun]

Can we trust a criminal conviction?

No. Unless there is clear evidence. we should be skeptical.

I just read about a crime lab in Houston, whch was skewing results to match police theories. The result: the innocent were being convicted and the guilty were not being investigated.

Do you have a link?

This does not in the least surprise me. Although the framers of our constitution felt like the odds should be somewhat in favor of the defendant, the courts, DA's, and law enforcement do anything they can to go in the other direction.

Judges should at least be objective. However, they work with law enforcement and DA's so closely and so often, that all of them get a distorted view of their function.

DA's and law enforcement especially get tunnel vision and get caught up in the objective of obtaining convictions and they forget about the true objective of justice.

Throw in politics and DA's and judges thinking of future election campaigns, and then the appearance of being "tough on crime" kicks in.

In short, we should not put any intrinsic trust in the courts. We should always question everything.

In 2000 they found huge problems in Illinois of coerced confessions and fabricated evidence and Illinois suspended the death penalty.

[Buck Laser]

Dgun, there are plenty of links to the story about the Houston crime lab. A quick google will bring them up. I don't have time to do it, but it's been a big story in TX for quite a while. I'm not sure, but I think the prosecutors in Houston are trying to quash the story because it'll inevitably make them look bad.

[preservanation]

I don't trust most cops, nor their affiliates.
Period.

[roarup]

Here's a link about a good story.

http://surftofind.com/why

[suedanim]

I just read about a crime lab in Houston, whch was skewing results to match police theories. The result: the innocent were being convicted and the guilty were not being investigated.

This is terrible, I think.


It doesn't just happen in Texas, though I'm not surprised it happens there. I don't understand how a person can be convicted on fiber evidence alone either, without any other corroborating evidence. Yet, that does happen.

If the Nifong (Duke Lacrosse) or Jena Six tragedies in recent news have taught us anything its that SOMETIMES (too often) cops, prosecutors and judges make decisions based on expediency, bias, political agenda and simply because they have the power to do so.

Crime labs appear in many instances to be not impartial at all. Some are under pressure from prosecutors to get specific results they have decided fits with an easier conviction. And thats really what justice in this country is all about .. easy convictions.