The Judge, The Judged, The Lawyer and The Law.

The bible say "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven." 22:17 Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians (can mean certain ancient religion or people with no specific religion), Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- God will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for God (alone) is witness of all things.

Believing in an involved, morally active God makes people less likely to punish others for rule-breaking, new research finds. However, the researchers also find that religious belief in general makes people more likely to punish wrongdoers – probably because such punishment is a way to strengthen the community as a whole. In other words, religion may introduce two conflicting impulses: Punish others for their transgressions, or leave it to the Lord. Punishment is good for the community as a deterrent to criminals, cheats and liars. And research suggests that a desire for punishment is ingrained, with babies as young as 8 months preferring to see a wrongdoer punished. But actually punishing someone is costly. Imagine a friend of yours says something nasty to another of your friends. As a bystander, you could punish Friend A by shunning her or telling her off — but it might cost you your friendship. An effective judiciary guarantees fairness in legal processes. It’s a powerful weapon against corruption. But people’s experiences in court are often far from fair. In some countries, most people in contact with the courts face demands for bribes. Their payments total staggering amounts. Court efficiency is crucial. A backlog of cases creates opportunities for demanding bribes to fast-track a case. Court personnel can be paid to slow down or speed up a trial, or dismiss a complaint. Judges can also bribe or be bribed, or they can suffer pressure from above. If politicians abuse their power, they can influence decisions and distort appointment processes. No criminal justice system is perfect, and fallibility leads to miscarriages of justice. Even when all the standards for a fair trial are upheld, wrongful convictions can occur. Many countries that practice capital punishment, however, do not meet these standards. For instance, in Japan, the prosecution’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence has led to a number of wrongful convictions. In India, prosecutorial misconduct has also led to several high profile cases of wrongful convictions. In China and the United States, torture and police misconduct have contributed to the conviction of innocent persons, Inadequate legal representation, shoddy police investigations, eyewitness misidentification, racial prejudice, and falsified evidence are additional factors that contribute to wrongful convictions around the world. As recently as last year, there were innocent men inside Britain's prisons - as these high-profile cases that were eventually ruled as wrongful convictions show. Nealon spent 17 years in prison for attempted sexual assault – though police officers never carried out DNA testing on the victim’s clothing. At his trial in 1997, the court was told that no DNA evidence was available. But privately funded DNA tests discovered that the victim’s clothes had been kept sealed and untested. In fact, the garments did contain DNA samples - from a man who wasn’t Nealon. The Criminal Cases Review Commission refused to investigate the evidence twice, and only carried out a review at Nealon’s third appeal. When Nealon was released in December 2013, he was given just £46 discharge money and spent his first night of freedom on the streets. This June, the Ministry of Justice ruled that Nealon would not get compensation for his 17 years behind bars. Hallam was 18 when he received a life sentence for the death of trainee chef Essayas Kassahun, but judges were told that Hallam was the victim of a “serious miscarriage of justice” when his conviction was quashed in 2012. Evidence from Hallam’s mobile phone showed he was not at the crime scene, and judges found that, for “reasons that escape us”, his phone was not investigated by the police. Hallam also suffered the loss of his father, who committed suicide when Hallam was sent to prison. “He’s never going to get over his miscarriage of justice,” says Dr Naughton. (Pittsburgh, PA; August 13, 2015) – With the consent of the District Attorney, an Indiana County Judge today reversed the 1982 conviction of Lewis Fogle who has served more than 34 years for the murder of a 15-year-old girl. Recent DNA testing of newly discovered crime scene evidence excludes Fogle and points to an unidentified male as the likely perpetrator. Fogle was released from prison on an unsecured bond while the district attorney decides how to proceed with the case. 1. Cameron Todd Willingham—In 1992, Willingham was convicted of arson murder in Texas. He was believed to have intentionally set a fire that killed his three kids. In 2004, he was put to death. Unfortunately, the Texas Forensic Science Commission later found that the evidence was misinterpreted, and they concluded that none of the evidence used against Willingham was valid. As it turns out, the fire really was accidental. 2. Ruben Cantu—Cantu was 17 at the time the crime he was alleged of committing took place. Cantu was convicted of capital murder, and in 1993, the Texas teen was executed. About 12 years after his death, investigations show that Cantu likely didn’t commit the murder. The lone eyewitness recanted his testimony, and Cantu’s co-defendant later admitted he allowed his friend to be falsely accused. He says Cantu wasn’t even there the night of the murder. 3. Larry Griffin—Griffin was put to death in 1995 for the 1981 murder of Quintin Moss, a Missouri drug dealer. Griffin always maintained his innocence, and now, evidence seems to indicate he was telling the truth. The first police officer on the scene now says the eyewitness account was false, even though the officer supported the claims during the trial. Another eyewitness who was wounded during the attack was never contacted during the trial, and he says Griffin wasn’t present at the crime scene that night. 4. Carlos DeLuna—In 1989, DeLuna was executed for the stabbing of a Texas convenience store clerk. Almost 20 years later, Chicago Tribune uncovered evidence that shows DeLuna was likely innocent. The evidence showed that Carlos Hernandez, a man who even confessed to the murder many times, actually did the crime. 5. David Wayne Spence—Spence was put to death in 1997 for the murder of three teenagers in Texas. He was supposedly hired by a convenience store clerk to kill someone else, but he allegedly killed the wrong people by mistake. The supervising police lieutenant said “I do not think David Spence committed this crime.” The lead homicide detective agreed, saying “My opinion is that David Spence was innocent. Nothing from the investigation ever led us to any evidence that he was involved.” 6. Jesse Tafero—In 1976, Tafero was convicted of murdering a state trooper. He and Sonia Jacobs were both sentenced to death for the crime. The main evidence used to convict them was testimony by someone else who was involved in the crime, ex-convict Walter Rhodes. Rhodes gave this testimony in exchange for a life sentence. In 1990, Tafero was put to death. Two years later, his companion Jacobs was released due to a lack of evidence…the same evidence used to put Tafero to death. 7 & 8. Thomas Griffin and Meeks Griffin— The oldest case on this list dates back to 1915. The Griffin brothers, two black men, were convicted of the murder of a white man. The reason they were convicted is because Monk Stevenson, another black man suspected of committing the murder, pointed to the brothers as having been responsible. He later admitted the reason he blamed them is because they were wealthy, and he assumed they had the money to beat the charges. The Griffin brothers were completely innocent, but they were put to death no CAUSES AND REMEDIES OF WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS While in many ways exemplary, Minnesota criminal procedure suffers from correctable flaws. Biological evidence is among the most reliable evidence, yet it is frequently not preserved. We advocate changes to preserve the biological evidence used to identify perpetrators. We are working with many groups, including prosecutors and police, to make this happen. The result will be better access to more evidence. While evidence preservation is our current policy focus, there are a number of ways in which the criminal justice system can fine tuned. They include: Line-ups which are sequential, double-blind and otherwise arranged to avoid bias; improved instructions to lineup witnesses; statements from witnesses which indicate their confidence in their identification; adequate funding for public defenders; training on innocence and forensics issues for defense attorneys and prosecutors; oversight of any suspicious lab or prosecutorial behavior; fuller disclosure of snitch testimony so juries can better appraise its veracity; and limits on the information about the case provided to snitches Some of these require changes in laws; but others are best practices which can be adopted by criminal justice professionals, raised by defense EYEWITNESS MISIDENTIFICATION Misidentification is the number one cause of wrongful convictions. Whether by perjury or eyewitness/victim error, innocent people are spending time behind bars for crimes they did not commit. The criminal justice system puts a lot of faith in eyewitness testimony, but there is no way to guarantee their testimony is fact. Only after innocence is proven is it made evident that eyewitness testimony was erroneous. Due to this fact, it is not possible to know the number of wrongful convictions by mistaken identity, because many who are mistakenly identified will never have a chance to prove their innocence. Furthermore, the scope of the problem cannot be known because of instances where prosecutors drop the case or in cases where people are acquitted after reversals on appeal. While appellate decisions are published and readily available online, the problem with trial acquittals or dropped cases, is that they are not systematically catalogued and made public, so there is no way to be sure of the role of eyewitness testimony in those cases. FORENSIC SCIENCE: Limitations and Misconduct False testimony, exaggerated statistics, and laboratory fraud have all led to wrongful convictions. Jurors often give forensic science more weight, because it is provided by “experts.” However, when misconduct occurs the added weight is damaging and can lead to wrongful convictions. In some cases, labs and their personnel are not impartial, because they are too closely tied to police and prosecutors. Other times, a criminologist who lacks necessary knowledge may exaggerate findings and does not have to worry about being caught because the lawyer, judge, and jury have no background in the relevant science. In many cases, critical evidence is destroyed making re-testing to uncover the misconduct is impossible. FALSE CONFESSIONS The Causes In more than 25% of exonerated cases the defendants made incriminating statements or gave outright confessions to crimes that DNA evidence proves they did not commit. There are many reasons why defendants give false confessions: Duress Coercion Intoxication Diminished capacity Mental impairment Ignorance of the law Fear of violence Infliction of harm by interrogator Threat of harsh sentence Misunderstanding of situation GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT Official misconduct includes both police and prosecutorial misconduct. Coercive conduct and poor investigation by police can lead to wrongful convictions. Law enforcement officials have also used forced confessions, violence toward suspects, and manufactured evidence, which have led to wrongful accusations and convictions. Prosecutor misconduct includes suppression of exculpatory evidence, destruction of evidence, use of unreliable and untruthful witnesses and snitches, and the fabrication of evidence. INFORMANT TESTIMONY The Facts In over 15% of wrongful conviction cases reversed using newly discovered DNA evidence, a snitch or informant testified against the defendant. It should not come as a surprise that snitches lie or falsify evidence on the stand. For a desperate inmate, incentives like a shortened sentence can become very enticing. Similarly, snitches facing possible jail time are often compelled to testify on behalf of the prosecution as a way to avoid incarceration themselves. This kind of informant testimony can literally make or break a case when no hard evidence is involved. People have been wrongfully convicted in cases where the snitch: BAD LAWYERING The Causes There are a number of reasons why a defendant’s defense may not be sufficient: Resources in judicial system are stacked against poor defendants. Defense lawyers can be ineffective, incompetent, or overburdened with too many cases. Overworked lawyers may fail to properly investigate, call key witnesses, or adequately prepare for trial. Public defenders and court-appointed attorneys are not able to access adequate resources because of decreased funding. A review of exonerated cases has shown a trail of unacceptable defense lawyering practices at the trial and appeal levels. In some of the worst