Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rafael Madrigal was a father, homeowner, and soccer coach in Mira Loma, CA. A victim of a drive by shooting ID'ed him from a photo lineup put together by LAPD. He was at work the day of the shooting, but the time-punch machine at his job was broken, so he couldn't prove it. He was convicted, and sentenced to 53 years to life. His wife sold the house to avoid foreclosure, and his kids grew up without him. But he continued fighting his legal case, and 9 years later walked out of prison a free man. His life before being wrongfully convicted had disappeared, however. He wound up working in a warehouse
Quote:
The number of people exonerated each year in the United States has nearly tripled over the last two decades, according to the National Registry of Exonerations, an academic database that tracks those declared innocent, pardoned, acquitted at retrial, or released by a judge based on new evidence.
Some on the left seem to reflexively trust the 'justice' system. Maybe they work in the 'justice' system, it's their gravy train, and they don't mind a few being devoured by a meat-grinder if they benefit. Some on the right also have reflexive trust in police, prosecutors, and courts. Don't do the time if you can't do the crime, they intone. Both are blind idiots, who with luck will wind up hoist on their own petard. Probably not, but I can dream, can't I?
yep it was a jury and we accept the judgment even when other evidence not allowed shows person guilty and they get off. Nothing is perfect. Its really the witness that was wrong as he claims; not the system that allows witnesses to testify. No perfect system exist.The story isn't even well written because the witness had to identify him in court .The photo lineup ID just allowed arrest by probable cause; nothing more. The jury also got to hear the supervisor as witness if defense called him. Nothing in that article says is was indeed innocent really. That is why we have courts and not judgement by articles.its quite common for convicts to sue or to file appeals to conviction with the system allows. The thread title is terrible;the injustice is claims it makes not support even in article.
Mr Madrigal needs to be compensated every year he was in prison based on his income history.
Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arctichomesteader
The jurors should go to prison along with the prosecution when they wrongfully convict.
This is overkill, although I understand and also feel a similar emotional reaction. The jurors screwed up, but weren't malicious. I could see an investigation into the witness who ID'ed him and the prosecutor to see if anything funny went down but knee-jerk going after the jurors isn't a good thing. They didn't ask to serve and they didn't intentionally give the wrong verdict.
yep it was a jury and we accept the judgment even when other evidence not allowed shows person guilty and they get off. Nothing is perfect. Its really the witness that was wrong as he claims; not the system that allows witnesses to testify. No perfect system exist.The story isn't even well written because the witness had to identify him in court .The photo lineup ID just allowed arrest by probable cause; nothing more. The jury also got to hear the supervisor as witness if defense called him. Nothing in that article says is was indeed innocent really. That is why we have courts and not judgement by articles.its quite common for convicts to sue or to file appeals to conviction with the system allows. The thread title is terrible;the injustice is claims it makes not support even in article.
It's pretty clear from the evidence that he didn't do it. That's why he is free today. Yet you still think it is A-OK that he was put behind bars for 9 years? Would you say that he should still be behind bars?
This is overkill, although I understand and also feel a similar emotional reaction. The jurors screwed up, but weren't malicious. I could see an investigation into the witness who ID'ed him and the prosecutor to see if anything funny went down but knee-jerk going after the jurors isn't a good thing. They didn't ask to serve and they didn't intentionally give the wrong verdict.
Having consequences would discourage both unwarranted prosecutions and the tendency of many jurors to have too much faith in what cops and prosecutors say at trial.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
