A Perversion of "Justice"

[Perknose]

http://www.theroot.com/black-man-found-not-guilty-of-crime-still-sentenced-to-1795475956

Read the story. It made me angry. I hope it makes you angry, too.

 

[fleshconsumed]

If you're going to post an article, why not post the original instead of a clickbait regurgitator?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ilty-probation-broke-terms-jail-a7744326.html

 

[jayzds]

Yes, that is sad and messed up. It fails the smell test and if was possible to investigate these, it should be done...and the judge should be removed/fired if guilty.

 

[JSt0rm]

so he serves 6 years for fucking up his probation doing a crime that he was later innocent of. lol. Poor people lawyers suck.

 

[fleshconsumed]

so he serves 6 years for fucking up his probation doing a crime that he was later innocent of. lol. Poor people lawyers suck.

Most certainly public lawyer fresh out of school and overworked with cases. Not surprising. Besides, I'm not sure if a good lawyer would have made a difference, seems like the judge had an axe to grind and since defendant is poor black dude no one will care.

 

[First]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

 

[fleshconsumed]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

He didn't, he tried to. And for the same reason as companies settle. If there is no hope of winning it's better to settle/take the plea for a lesser crime.

 

[justoh]

Those lawyers deserve more respect (-1). Points are also lost for believing the representation would have made a difference, or for entertaining such a notion (-1, -1). A judge making such a decision isn't going to be persuaded by a "good lawyer." It's not like his ruling wasn't malicious.

Also, OP's article is belligerent and the lame racial innuendo weakens the story. Flesh's article is a lot better (+1).

Fleshconsumed: 0
Perknose: -1
Jstorm: -2

 

[First]

He didn't, he tried to. And for the same reason as companies settle. If there is no hope of winning it's better to settle/take the plea for a lesser crime.

No I mean how can anyone believe the whole story when the guy wanted to plead guilty to assault? You don't plead guilty to assault unless you're guilty of something from what I can tell in this case. Doesn't look like we have the full story (which makes sense, since it's not legal to sentence someone to years in prison if found not guilty).

 

[thraashman]

No I mean how can anyone believe the whole story when the guy wanted to plead guilty to assault? You don't plead guilty to assault unless you're guilty of something from what I can tell in this case. Doesn't look like we have the full story (which makes sense, since it's not legal to sentence someone to years in prison if found not guilty).

I'm sorry but that's just ignorant. Our legal system is set up so that it is better for the underprivileged to plead guilty to something they didn't do to avoid a worse fate. The US justice system isn't interested in justice but in punishment.

 

[runzwithsizorz]

" Justice will never be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are "

 

[Xcobra]

Reminds of the Jamie Oliver bit on public defenders. Such a sad state of affairs.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=USkEzLuzmZ4

 

[pauldun170]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

A combination of police tactics, DA shenanigans and public defenders trying their best to make the best of a rigged system would result in you pleading guilty to anything they can can come up with. The alternative will be threats of nailing you with something far worse.
Doesn't matter if you are guilty or innocent.
Mind games will get you to say anything they want.

 

[Ken g6]

Even assuming he violated his probation, which it appears he didn't, how could he be sentenced to more time than the original probation for the original crime?

 

[agent00f]

" Justice will never be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are "

As a corollary, these stories exist because of people like this:

Those lawyers deserve more respect (-1). Points are also lost for believing the representation would have made a difference, or for entertaining such a notion (-1, -1). A judge making such a decision isn't going to be persuaded by a "good lawyer." It's not like his ruling wasn't malicious.

Also, OP's article is belligerent and the lame racial innuendo weakens the story. Flesh's article is a lot better (+1).

Fleshconsumed: 0
Perknose: -1
Jstorm: -2

 

[Victorian Gray]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

From the Independent article:

"It later emerged that ahead of the trial Chapman tried to enter an Alford plea on the charge of aggravated assault in exchange for the armed robbery charges being dropped.

An Alford plea means the defendant enters a guilty plea, but maintains his innocence. It is often used when a defendant feels like despite his innocence, he will lose at trial."

 

[xthetenth]

lame racial innuendo

I'm sorry, do you have even the most passing familiarity with the Southeast US? Race is always relevant here, triply so in the case of the legal system, and how it acts to funnel unfree labor into below minimum wage jobs.

 

[justoh]

I'm sorry, do you have even the most passing familiarity with the Southeast US? Race is always relevant here, triply so in the case of the legal system.

So, triply(?) always relevant, then?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

I find pretty much one version of the story and when that's the case I'm always hesitant to take things at face value. It's dreadfully wrong if the story is right, but I am reluctant to leap on one version and give it instant cred.

 

[interchange]

Even assuming he violated his probation, which it appears he didn't, how could he be sentenced to more time than the original probation for the original crime?

Sounds like he was re sentenced for the original conviction. While the judge may be overly racist, it seems like he felt the guy was guilty and used his prior conviction as a way to punish him. I am not going to assume he is innocent of the second crime as a judge who actually met the guy and heard evidence thought otherwise. But there is no way in hell I think his actions are appropriate nor productive even if he were guilty, and even absent overt racism our criminal justice system overall is a farcical anchor to the progress of erasing racial disparity in this country.

 

[Ken g6]

Sounds like he was re sentenced for the original conviction.

Yeah, that's my point, how is that legal? Re-sentencing to increase the sentence shouldn't happen at all, except maybe in cases of egregious misconduct by the previous judge.

 

[UNCjigga]

Wait, but why did he plead guilty to assault? That part makes no sense.

Yeah, a decent reporter should have quoted the defense attorney on why this plea deal was proposed, because to the lay public like myself...WTF? It seems Mr. Chapman was told he could lose at trial and be convicted, so it was best to avoid trial?? Rather than lead their readers to conjecture, where is the interview with Defense??

 

[werepossum]

Sounds like he was re sentenced for the original conviction. While the judge may be overly racist, it seems like he felt the guy was guilty and used his prior conviction as a way to punish him. I am not going to assume he is innocent of the second crime as a judge who actually met the guy and heard evidence thought otherwise. But there is no way in hell I think his actions are appropriate nor productive even if he were guilty, and even absent overt racism our criminal justice system overall is a farcical anchor to the progress of erasing racial disparity in this country.

Read fleshconsumed's article, which is much better. He was not re-sentenced, he was ordered to serve his original sentence because he broke the terms of his probation. I don't know if he SHOULD have been ordered to serve his original sentence or not, based on either story. However, a really good lawyer would have made all the difference. He might have still recommended that the guy try to cut a plea deal, depending on the circumstance. But I suspect that a really good lawyer would have been able to successfully argue than an Alford plea is not an admission of probation violation unless it is accepted. That's really a question for the lawyers though, and I suspect they would need information not available. I could not tell from the article whether an Alford plea for assault was actually entered and rejected by the judge, or merely floated. In either case, calling the judge racist from the information offered is a stretch.

 

[Jhhnn]

He was not re-sentenced, he was ordered to serve his original sentence because he broke the terms of his probation.

False. Per the article, a judge determined that the new charge constituted a probation violation even though he had yet to be convicted of it. When he was found not guilty, that order should have been vacated yet was not.

Catch-22, Southern style.

The Alford plea is immaterial because it was denied.

 

[Jhhnn]

.