Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

Net Nanny 5
The world's leading parental control software, controls access to websites and other online content such as Internet-based games, blocks file sharing of music, images and videos, and monitors a user's Internet activity. Know what your child is up to! Click here for more information.

Forum: Victims and Survivors Corner

Thread (Discussion): We need help

Switch to Flat View

In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user.

Message 122545 (In Reply to Message 122542)

Posted by steve on Dec 01, 2003 08:48 PM | Also by steve

Gender: Male, Age Bracket: 30 - 39, State: Virginia, Country: United States

marta wrote:
> This assumption of guilt phenomenon occurs because it is
> inconsistent with conventional wisdom that people walking the
> straight and narrow can suddenly be dragged into a pit of injustice
> by the horrible monster that is the American criminal justice system.

This reminds me of an experience I had while serving on the jury during a civil trial. I'll label my fellow juror as "Juror". This is paraphrased, but accurate and took place after jury selection, just before the trial was to begin.

Juror: Judge, I don't feel qualified to decide the outcome of this case. Can I be excused?

Judge: We all have concerns about deciding the fate of our peers. That is natural.

Juror: I don't think I should be a juror.

Judge: Is there something more you want to add? You were asked a series of questions before you were selected and both attorneys selected you.

Juror: Well, I think he [the defendant] must be guilty.

Judge: What do you mean?

Juror: I don't think anyone would go to the trouble of bringing someone to court unless the other person is guilty.

Judge: This juror is dismissed.

The juror wasn't just using this as an excuse. It was apparent that she really believed that no one would ever file civil charges unless the other party was at fault. I'm glad she spoke up. But as scary as her thought process was I have no doubt that a significant percentage of jurors feel the same way (whether it's a civil case or criminal case) and don't voice their concerns to have themselves excluded.

See an abbreviation or acronym, but don't know what it stands for? Consult the Glossary.

Switch to Flat View

Message 122542
I know

Posted by marta on Dec 01, 2003 07:55 PM | Also by marta

Gender: Female, Age Bracket: 30 - 39, State: N/A, Country: United States

But if Joe Blow owns an L.A. television station and insists that his employees continuously bombard the public with diatribes about how "bad" MJ is and proclaim MJ's "guilt", Joe Blow is interfering with MJ's ability to get a fair trial by an impartial jury. Joe Blow is entitled to his opnion, but he needs to stick to the KNOWN facts.
>>>
I thought I made it clear that the only reason Mr. Blow may "need" to stick to the known facts is because of his compelling sense of journalistic integrity, or his well-developed sense of justice.  He is not compelled by anything else.

I also thought I conveyed that while this sucks, no one comports themselves with the notions of due process 100% of the time, yourself included (along with me).  Some are more careful than average, but it's part of the human condition to be suspicious, petty, and to want to believe bad things about others who don't easily fit into the way we understand the world.

EXAMPLE:
>>>
we are given a sob story about how an obviously guilty person was somehow acquitted by a jury of his peers in the face of solid physical evidence, and we are asked to sympathize with this miscarriage of justice. 
>>>
You've made a fairly hefty accusation (that she's lying) with insufficient evidence.  Why bother?  It's not clear why you would assume a lie from the get go, without asking a lot more questions.  Except, perhaps because you have a bone to pick, because you think you're more likely than not right.  Just like all the people speculating about Michael Jackson.

>>>
I have to wonder what the comments would If the origianl poster had been a person claiming their spouse had been convicted by a jury on circumstantial and questionable evidence? 
>>>
If the original post was as ambiguous as this post, no one should respond with anything but questions.  In a perfect world.

>>>
Let me guess. 
>>>
Feel free to speculate away.  We're not in court here after all.

>>>
The responses would be "that's the way the suystem works", "too bad", or "obviously he was guilty, or the jury wouldn't have convicted".
It bothers me that posters seem to have two different sets of rules and opinions, one for "victims", and another for "offenders". 
>>>
I haven't seen this occurring.  I know that I myself tend to attack anyone who isn't rigorous about giving information but still expects sympathy.

This assumption of guilt phenomenon occurs because it is inconsistent with conventional wisdom that people walking the straight and narrow can suddenly be dragged into a pit of injustice by the horrible monster that is the American criminal justice system.  People who suspect wrong-doing without solid evidence of it do so not because they're immoral or unjust, but because everything about their world throughout their entire life makes it seem HIGHLY improbable that a person will get in trouble with the law if he/she didn't do anything wrong.

Your job is education, not castigating and crying foul.

Thread

122241, Chopdoc, Nov 24, 2003 07:48 PM [Please help]
      122242, orolan, Nov 24, 2003 08:45 PM
            122246, Silverthorne, Nov 24, 2003 09:45 PM
            122250, steve, Nov 24, 2003 09:51 PM [Not guilty, not innocent]
                  122253, orolan, Nov 24, 2003 11:53 PM
                        122256, steve, Nov 25, 2003 01:20 AM
                        122349, marta, Nov 26, 2003 12:47 AM [Constitutional rights]
                              122421, orolan, Nov 28, 2003 12:00 AM
                                    122542, marta, Dec 01, 2003 07:55 PM [I know]
                                          122545, steve, Dec 01, 2003 08:48 PM
                                          122633, orolan, Dec 03, 2003 02:52 PM
                                                122714, marta, Dec 05, 2003 05:57 AM [It's a wash]
            122415, PVulcan, Nov 27, 2003 10:35 PM
                  122417, Silverthorne, Nov 27, 2003 10:56 PM
      122252, dp1, Nov 24, 2003 11:35 PM [Hello]
      122257, poetsdreamscape, Nov 25, 2003 01:26 AM [Questions]
      122556, lisaearl, Dec 02, 2003 01:44 AM [sorry for your daughter]
            122582, mouseinawheel, Dec 02, 2003 05:46 AM
                  122632, orolan, Dec 03, 2003 02:36 PM [Bravo]

Forum Home | Top of Thread

Tell a Friend about this page.

Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion

Forum: Victims and Survivors CornerThread (Discussion): We need help

Message 122545 (In Reply to Message 122542)

Message 122542I know

Thread

Forum: Victims and Survivors Corner

Thread (Discussion): We need help

Message 122542
I know