There's the problem this man was wrongly convicted. There's the problem he was sentenced to life in prison. There's the problem it took 44 years to correct. There's the problem that NC thinks $50,000 a year is a fine compensation for an innocent person imprisoned for a year. And there's the problem that they cap that at 15 years, so he got nothing for the other 29 years.
Ronnie Long: After spending 44 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, this man says his life is worth more than $750,000 - CNN
Was there prosecutorial misconduct?
If yes, the prosecutor should spend as much time in prison as his victim, and be responsible for his restitution.
If not, unfortunate as this case is, he doesn't deserve a cent on principle.
If all the prosecution did was follow the evidence, is that really a "miscarriage of justice?" If there was no misconduct on the part of the prosecution, is the state really at fault?Why not, Grizzly Adams? Why shouldn't the state compensate those who it has injured through a miscarriage of justice? What principle does this serve beyond rex non potest peccare?
If all the prosecution did was follow the evidence, is that really a "miscarriage of justice?" If there was no misconduct on the part of the prosecution, is the state really at fault?
I'm not against compensation for persons who are later found to be factually innocent where no misconduct exists, but I'm not convinced they are entitled to it as a matter of principle.
You are owed due process. Absent misconduct, you received it. If you have received due process, nothing has been stolen from you, and your conviction is not unjust. Again, I am not against compensation for wrongful convictions. I am just not convinced the convicted person is entitled to it as a matter of principle.Well yes. When I say "miscarriage of justice", I mean it in the classic sense, that being when an innocent person is convicted and sentenced for a crime they did not commit. It is the greatest underminer of the legitimacy of state power and must be addressed with the greatest care by government.
Well I must disagree, Grizzly Adams. And here is why: If the state takes your land from you against your desire, you are entitled to fair and reasonable compensation for the land that was taken from you. And if the state robs you of the best years of your life when you would have raised a family and pursued a career, you should be compensated for that stolen time. A government that can unjustly take your life, liberty or property without redress or compensation is per se illegitimate and invites its dissolution. Our country was founded having fought and won a war over that very subject.
You are owed due process. Absent misconduct, you received it. If you have received due process, nothing has been stolen from you, and your conviction is not unjust. Again, I am not against compensation for wrongful convictions. I am just not convinced the convicted person is entitled to it as a matter of principle.
I don't know how you compensate for that. But then I don't know how you compensate a family that has a member murdered in cold blood and the killer winds up out of prison at some point.There's the problem this man was wrongly convicted. There's the problem he was sentenced to life in prison. There's the problem it took 44 years to correct. There's the problem that NC thinks $50,000 a year is a fine compensation for an innocent person imprisoned for a year. And there's the problem that they cap that at 15 years, so he got nothing for the other 29 years.
Ronnie Long: After spending 44 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, this man says his life is worth more than $750,000 - CNN
I don't know how you compensate for that. But then I don't know how you compensate a family that has a member murdered in cold blood and the killer winds up out of prison at some point.
Lol, arguing that convicting and imprisoning the wrong person for 44 years isn't a miscarriage of justice is one of the most disgusting things I've even seen someone say. You should be ashamed.If all the prosecution did was follow the evidence, is that really a "miscarriage of justice?" If there was no misconduct on the part of the prosecution, is the state really at fault?
I'm not against compensation for persons who are later found to be factually innocent where no misconduct exists, but I'm not convinced they are entitled to it as a matter of principle.
I don't know how you compensate for that. But then I don't know how you compensate a family that has a member murdered in cold blood and the killer winds up out of prison at some point.
Good old Ronnie Long. Sent to prison for 44 years based on a handful of circumstantial evidence and no definitive victim identification by the rape victim. The SAME Ronnie Long suspected in a prior burglary and rape, where he was not clearly identified, but where for some reason his SOCIAL SECURITY CARD was found at the scene of the crime. No charges filed there--- a "mystery" I guess?
Karma----it's a tricky bitch sometimes ain't it?
There's the problem this man was wrongly convicted. There's the problem he was sentenced to life in prison. There's the problem it took 44 years to correct. There's the problem that NC thinks $50,000 a year is a fine compensation for an innocent person imprisoned for a year. And there's the problem that they cap that at 15 years, so he got nothing for the other 29 years.
Ronnie Long: After spending 44 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit, this man says his life is worth more than $750,000 - CNN
Labeling it "stolen" implies nefarious action on the part of the state. If there was, I am all in favor of mandatory compensation and even prison time for those involved in the malfeasance.If you are an innocent man who just spent 2/3 of your life in prison for a crime you didn't commit, you have had about as much stolen from you as is humanly possible other than your entire life.
The idea that a person in that situation is not entitled to some compensation is a rather strange "principle".
Labeling it "stolen" implies nefarious action on the part of the state. If there was, I am all in favor of mandatory compensation and even prison time for those involved in the malfeasance.
Again, if there was no malfeasance on the part of the prosecution, nothing was stolen. Though the wrong result was achieved, due process was afforded. That is what's owed to criminal defendants.
You are owed due process. Absent misconduct, you received it. If you have received due process, nothing has been stolen from you, and your conviction is not unjust. Again, I am not against compensation for wrongful convictions. I am just not convinced the convicted person is entitled to it as a matter of principle.
Lol, arguing that convicting and imprisoning the wrong person for 44 years isn't a miscarriage of justice is one of the most disgusting things I've even seen someone say. You should be ashamed.
I think it's crazy and totally disgusting that you guys are trying to justify this. It's easy for you to dehumanize black people. I hope your "karma" leads you to being wrongfully imprisoned for a few decades so you have time to think about yourself and how you treat others.
It's another instance of "this kind of thing doesn't happen to me or my own. It happens to those people. So **** 'em"
Labeling it "stolen" implies nefarious action on the part of the state. If there was, I am all in favor of mandatory compensation and even prison time for those involved in the malfeasance.
Again, if there was no malfeasance on the part of the prosecution, nothing was stolen. Though the wrong result was achieved, due process was afforded. That is what's owed to criminal defendants.
Due process is not infallible.You are owed due process. Absent misconduct, you received it. If you have received due process, nothing has been stolen from you, and your conviction is not unjust. Again, I am not against compensation for wrongful convictions. I am just not convinced the convicted person is entitled to it as a matter of principle.
I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that there's no objective right to compensation for an incorrect conclusion by a panel of twelve disinterested jurors if there wasn't any malfeasance. You got the due process to which you were entitled. Your rights weren't violated.We should strive to offer a little more than the bare minimum to those in our criminal justice system. We all have a limited amount of time on this planet. If we strip years away from an innocent person, whether through malfeasance or accident, attempting to make that right in some way is the moral choice.
Please, so I know exactly why I should be pissed at you and dump your garbage onto my ignore list, tell me who "those people" are.It's another instance of "this kind of thing doesn't happen to me or my own. It happens to those people. So **** 'em"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?