There is a feeling that the law is here to protect all. Should you follow the law, you will have no problems. Should you choose not to follow the law, you are in for trouble. Should you choose to follow the law, you may also be in trouble. All you have to do is watch the news and with some regularity you will see that someone was released from prison because they were wrongly convicted. How can this happen? It is not as difficult as you may think.
Let us begin with a premise. The law is truth. The law and truth have nothing to do with one another. Why is that? Here is some input. There are times that the police are under pressure to apprehend an offender of the law, for the more serious offenses. In a rush to make someone accountable, details may be overlooked in an arrest to placate the public and authorities. There are even cases where there is such pressure on a person of interest that they confess, in some instances, after many hours of interrogation where no respite was provided for the accused.
After the arrest, the defense attorney begins his or her portion of the process. There is always a “not guilty” plea for how else could the attorneys maximize their income. At fees of sometimes hundreds of dollars an hour, why would the attorney be in a hurry to get justice? There are interviews, inspections of evidence, and a host of other tasks for which a lawyer charges a fee. For many of these tasks, however, a great many of the tasks are performed by interns and other hired help. These assistants work for much less of an income, but there must be a portion of the fees for the law firm, who know whom to contact. Perfectly permissible under the law; one guess as to who wrote the laws. They will say, in the effort to be accurate, it is a possibility. If there is a possibility of innocence, the defense attorney will exert enough effort to free his client. This is done for many reasons. His record in court is important to him. He can raise the point of his efforts to potentially new clients. This provides the incentive to be successful. Does this sound like a game? For them, that is one perspective.
Now for the prosecutors; their entire existence is based on how many people they can convict. That, in most cases, is a good goal. But if you look further into prosecutions, what do you see? Evidence withheld, witnesses that don’t help their case not called, et cetera. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. Both sides play the same game; it is not in what is best for the community that is foremost in their minds, it is what is best for their image. Just look at how many convicted felons are being released because of errors by the judicial system. It doesn’t cost anything for the attorneys because the financing comes out of the taxpayer's wallet.
The judge has similar incentive. While his salary is fixed, what is it that motivates him? If someone is guilty, the judge, in order not to be perceived as soft on crime, will hand out a severe sentence. If there is a volatile issue in front of him, he will lean toward leniency, so as not to radicalize either side. Why would a judge be so flexible on his rulings? He must get elected. If he doesn’t get the proper publicity, he may not get his job back, although not many voters are that attentive to the election of judges. At the time of the writing of this article, there are two thousand convicted felons in prison that are known to be innocent. Why are they then not released? Read the above.
Retired. Looking to create controversy.