Should folk who are falsely incarcerated be compensated when they are found to be innocent?

[Duchess Jack]

If so, how much is fair? Should it be based on one's salary, or should it be the same amount for all everybody? Or perhaps a set amount, plus salary.

[Duchess Jack]

ooops, eh. wrong forum.

[Avernus]

yes, and by a whole frickin lot.....I know someone who was locked up for molesting his girlfriends daughter, but the girl came clean on it after she realized how serious things were.......but it was around election time and they wanted to make an example so he did some serious time....

 

the girl made it all up......and nothing could be done....

 

I believe he should be off on a beach right now with 3 personal assistants paid for by the government for life for spending what I think was 15 years or so in jail over a misunderstanding by a little girl who didn't want her mommy to marry this guy in particular....

[SEC=UGA]

No.

[Savage Beatings]

Yes, they probably should be compensated. But it should not be based upon salary. It should probably be based upon time served. A guy who wrongfully serves 90 days should not be compensated the same as someone who loses 10 years of their life.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Savage Beatings

[Yukon Cornelius]

No.

I agree with the Arab

[Duchess Jack]

No.

really? so if a guy is put away for 20 years and than is found out to be innocent, the government is in no way responsible for damages?

[Puddy]

really? so if a guy is put away for 20 years and than is found out to be innocent, the government is in no way responsible for damages?

He was found guilty by his peers. Maybe his crappy defense attorney should pay him

[matt770]

Median income for the 3 years prior to being locked up multiplied by number of years served, plus $1 million for pain & suffering. They were traumatized and will have difficulty finding a job, so it's only fair.

[Perchoutofwater]

Median income for the 3 years prior to being locked up multiplied by number of years served, plus $1 million for pain & suffering. They were traumatized and will have difficulty finding a job, so it's only fair.

 

I think this is a logical approach thought I think the pain and suffering amount should probably be adjusted to something like $10,000 a month with a maximum of $1 Million. I'd also say that the government should pay all legal costs incurred by the wrongly accused, and that payment should include interest.

[Yukon Cornelius]

really? so if a guy is put away for 20 years and than is found out to be innocent, the government is in no way responsible for damages?

it will throw the whole judicial system into a tailspin. not that it isn't already.

[Savage Beatings]

Their wrongful incarceration was part of our system of Justice. And Justice would seem to demand that wrongs are righted to the extent that they can be. If they get no compensation for losing their freedom, then it is no longer a system interested in Justice. Something was taken from the innocent man that was locked up. Part of his life was taken. If he is not repaid, then aren't we saying that life has no value?

[wiegie]

I think this is a logical approach thought I think the pain and suffering amount should probably be adjusted to something like $10,000 a month with a maximum of $1 Million. I'd also say that the government should pay all legal costs incurred by the wrongly accused, and that payment should include interest.

Holy crap--Perch and I pretty much agree on something.

 

As for Yuke's comment that such changes will put the whole judicial system into a tailspin, well, if that is the case, then it means a whole lot of people must be wrongly going to jail, in which case the system NEEDS to be put into a tailspin.

[wiegie]

Their wrongful incarceration was part of our system of Justice. And Justice would seem to demand that wrongs are righted to the extent that they can be. If they get no compensation for losing their freedom, then it is no longer a system interested in Justice. Something was taken from the innocent man that was locked up. Part of his life was taken. If he is not repaid, then aren't we saying that life has no value?

replace "life" with "freedom" in the last two sentences and I am with you 100%

[SEC=UGA]

Our justice system is inherently imperfect. Peers, members of his community were responsible for convicting said person of the crime for which said person was incarcerated. The people on the jury used the evidence before them and after deliberation decided on the guilt/innocence of the person, the state did not, thus the state should not have to compensate the person.

 

In the example above where the girl accused the guy of molesting her, well, that is not the state's fault that the girl perjured herself, it is not the fault of the state that the jury took the evidence presented to them and used this to convict the man. The person who should be held financially and criminally liable in this case is the girl who made the false statements and she and whoever knowingly supported this lie should be held culpable for any restitution.

[Yukon Cornelius]

Our justice system is inherently imperfect. Peers, members of his community were responsible for convicting said person of the crime for which said person was incarcerated. The people on the jury used the evidence before them and after deliberation decided on the guilt/innocence of the person, the state did not, thus the state should not have to compensate the person.

 

In the example above where the girl accused the guy of molesting her, well, that is not the state's fault that the girl perjured herself, it is not the fault of the state that the jury took the evidence presented to them and used this to convict the man. The person who should be held financially and criminally liable in this case is the girl who made the false statements and she and whoever knowingly supported this lie should be held culpable for any restitution.

bingo. i was typing something similar.

but i suppose they could take money from somewhere in government and use it to pay off people.

Edited April 20, 2011 by Yukon Cornelius

[matt770]

it will throw the whole judicial system into a tailspin. not that it isn't already.

Legalize drugs, release anyone who is in for simple possession, use the billions saved on drug treatment, education and job training. You'll still have plenty left over to pay off innocent people locked up in error.

 

I think this is a logical approach thought I think the pain and suffering amount should probably be adjusted to something like $10,000 a month with a maximum of $1 Million. I'd also say that the government should pay all legal costs incurred by the wrongly accused, and that payment should include interest.

Good idea. I was only envisioning people locked away for years and years. $120,000 per year plus their annual wages seems fair.

[i_am_the_swammi]

The person who should be held financially and criminally liable in this case is the girl who made the false statements and she and whoever knowingly supported this lie should be held culpable for any restitution.

 

yep.

[keggerz]

Our justice system is inherently imperfect. Peers, members of his community were responsible for convicting said person of the crime for which said person was incarcerated. The people on the jury used the evidence before them and after deliberation decided on the guilt/innocence of the person, the state did not, thus the state should not have to compensate the person.

 

In the example above where the girl accused the guy of molesting her, well, that is not the state's fault that the girl perjured herself, it is not the fault of the state that the jury took the evidence presented to them and used this to convict the man. The person who should be held financially and criminally liable in this case is the girl who made the false statements and she and whoever knowingly supported this lie should be held culpable for any restitution.

I am sure it can be argued that since jurors are compensated for their time that they are in essence working for the state thusly making the state liable for their wrong conviction

[Caveman_Nick]

Our justice system is inherently imperfect. Peers, members of his community were responsible for convicting said person of the crime for which said person was incarcerated. The people on the jury used the evidence before them and after deliberation decided on the guilt/innocence of the person, the state did not, thus the state should not have to compensate the person.

 

It was the state's decision to prosecute in the first place. Your argument leaves out this fact.

[i_am_the_swammi]

It was the state's decision to prosecute in the first place. Your argument leaves out this fact.

 

Correct....if you are going to find fault in the government, it lies in the fact that they chose to prosecute this case without being 100% certain that no one was lying, and the man was indeed guilty. I would guess that several hours in a interrogation room with threats of jailtime against the girl if it were ever proven she was lying would have resulted in her breaking, and recanting her story.

 

However, I think that is impossible, and we could never bring the majority of cases to trial. Many have been incarcerated on circumstantial evidence/verbal testimony.

 

Again, if there a party most at fault that should be liable, its the persons who committed a crime (lying under oath, falsifying testimony) that resulted in an innocent person being prosecuted.

[SEC=UGA]

It was the state's decision to prosecute in the first place. Your argument leaves out this fact.

 

Thank you for that. So, we do away with all law enforcement by the state so that they won't be held liable for restitution should a person be wrongly convicted by a jury of their peers. Sounds good, anyone want to join me for some blow, drunk driving, and underage hookers?

[caddyman]

Correct....if you are going to find fault in the government, it lies in the fact that they chose to prosecute this case without being 100% certain that no one was lying, and the man was indeed guilty. I would guess that several hours in a interrogation room with threats of jailtime against the girl if it were ever proven she was lying would have resulted in her breaking, and recanting her story.

 

However, I think that is impossible, and we could never bring the majority of cases to trial. Many have been incarcerated on circumstantial evidence/verbal testimony.

 

Again, if there a party most at fault that should be liable, its the persons who committed a crime (lying under oath, falsifying testimony) that resulted in an innocent person being prosecuted.

 

 

Maybe if we threw the book at people that wrongly accuse someone of a crime that would put a dent in this issue. It is all too easy for someone(especially a female) to accuse someone of a serious crime and ruin their life. Most people are so sympathetic to someone(rightly so) that has been abused, or raped that they rush to judgment on the accused. I have seen this first hand in the Pa. Domestic Relations office and courts. If you are the man you are assumed the bad guy.

[Savage Beatings]

Sounds good, anyone want to join me for some blow, drunk driving, and underage hookers?

 

I'm up for two of those.

[gbpfan1231]

If the wronged person makes over $250k per year then the answer is no. Why? - because they can afford it - this money should not go to the person wronged it should go to the govt and be considered part of the budget cuts. Isn't this how the system is supposed to work???