Quote:
Originally Posted by pminus
How a so called "weak case" is defined matters most. The point I am making here is that today our biggest problem is that strong cases are flipped to appear as "weak cases" because of things like assuming evidence was tampered with because some CI trustee wasn't the only one who touched said evidence. That is just one example of the kind of retarded that has infiltrated American Law.
It's a rare case that the prosecutor will put someone in front of a Jury who doesn't deserve to be sentence for the crime in question.
|
I have heard that in some other countries courts use common sense. Relating to that evidence tampering and such.
What comes to that prosecutor thing; he isn't the one who decides someone being guilty or not. So, how we know that does the accused deserve something or not, as it is the court that decides that deserving part? And anyways, in 90 % of cases he does plea deal, no court, no peer-review, nothing. And many of these plea deal guys/girls are innocent even in very hard crimes (those they haven't actually done). It has been studied.
What comes to the hard penalties you seek after, I have just one word: Merica.. well.. and Isis.. jihadist Somalia.. actually there are lot of words.
By the way, your pre-something murder rates are not probably that well compared to these days, you know: methods/ resources to even define crime having been happened, population number, etc. have all changed.