QUOTE(Bobaloo @ Aug 21 2007, 11:08 AM)
It is sad the stronghold the corrupt, ratings-hungry media have on the opinion of today's society. it's a shame that you are so easily maniuplated as to have the typical opinion of those who are influenced by the media hype. Many people are considered guilty before trial... IN THE MEDIA. The courts go through great, and often time-consuming, measures to assure a just trial where the defendant will be considered innocent by the jury. The jury are the sole judges of the facts which are to be applied and weighted according to the terms of law that the judge gives them. If the DA cannot prove their case, then the defendant is acquited. the burden of proof is upon the AD to prove the defendant guilty, not upon the defendant to prove his innocence.
Thank goodness the media are not the ones who decide the outcomes of trials.
Of course, there are ways to manipulate that system, as no system is perfect. But that's not what we're talking about. You stated that the court systems view defendants as guilty before a fair trial... that simply just is not true.
I am curious to know about your nephews. did they do something wrong and had to hire big expensive attornies in hopes of not getting in trouble, or were they wrongly accused of something?
one was accused of involuntary manslaughter , wrongly for sure as he had air tight alibi , however the DA was up for election , he had some pretty shaky testimony from some less then desirable witnesses , he felt it was a open and shut case , the judge felt it was a open and shut case , the sherriff felt it was open and shut ,, as you say it was up to the courts to decide dont ever think that money and politics dont play a part in things , they shouldnt but they do , my family hired my nephew a attorney that cost $ 25,000. just for a retainer , he set up a ppointment with the DA and in a matter of minutes they were offered a plea bargin to a much lesser charge ,, what does that mean you ask ? the case wasnt nearly as open and shut as they felt , but in the papers , in the court house, on the streets , evrywere you went he had already been tried and found gulity , in a nut shell they went to trial he was aquitted of all charges , now it doesnt work that way evrerywere but there are some not guilty people serving time , if we had let him use a court ordered attorney he would have been in jail for probably no less then 10 yrs for a crime he didnt commit ... But as I said before the american way is to believe the law , the DA, have all the fact to find a person guilty before they arrest him ,therfore the person is guilty . they go to the media with tidbits , so in the publics eye there guilty , I have served on jury duty 2 different times and both times the guy's were guilty without question , however it took days to sit a jury cause to many of us had already made up our minds that they were guilty and after 4 days of people sitting waiting to be picked some would just lie so they could get on the jury , now in Chicago thats probably not a problem cause the population is so large and alot of people dont pay attention to the news but in smaller communities I mean my county has 8000 registered voters we all know everybody and we see and read all the news in the county papers ... it matters alot on the people ... SPend some time in the Cook county court house id bet there are some of the same issues I spoke of ..maybe not .. A large case load here is DUI and the fact is there is a attorney that charges 15000 to represent ya , he has never lost , and in evry case the sherrif and DA have taken and impounded there cars with the intent to sell them as seized cars , again they assume the case is open and shut and once this lawyer walks in things change .. Im not trying to aurgue here Bob its just my experience that tells me its the american way to think a person is guilty until he proves his innocents ..