[Vision2020] 05-08-04 NY Times: Mistreatment of Prisoners Is Called Rout...
Tbertruss@aol.com
Tbertruss@aol.com
Sun, 9 May 2004 06:36:49 EDT
--part1_1e9.1fe0aa1c.2dcf63c1_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Debbie:
Consider that the subject heading and content of my post yesterday, where I
referenced your comment "pity party for criminals," which I suspect hardly
anyone remembers from Jan. 04 on V2020, contained information about abuses of
prisoners here in the US, not just in Iraq. Your original use of this phrase
"pity party for criminals" was in the context of a discussion on V2020 regarding
the competency and/or access to fair and proficient public defense in the
courts, focusing on one Greg Dickison, local PD.
My comments yesterday focused on abuses in US prisons that appear to not
generate the same moral outrage as the abuses in the US controlled prisons in
Iraq. I was suggesting that the mentality that judges serious objections to the
justice system in the US to be an expression of a "pity party for criminals,"
is questionable, as I also raised the issue of racism, both in the US prison
system and in the treatment of Iraq prisoners by the US. Note that I did not
quote you by name in the post yesterday. But that phrase has such a terse ring,
it fit.
Indeed, I too was talking about sentencing during the two day period, January
6-8, 2004, when you originally used the phrase in question. You made
comments, quoted at the bottom here, contradicting the position I took in Jan. 04
that public defense in the US is too often not sufficient to offer those with
limited resources a reasonable defense in court, leading to conviction of the
innocent. I have placed the post where you used that phrase, and a particularly
barbed post you penned aimed at yours truly two days later, where you appear
to suggest there is no major problem with the system of public defense in the
US, at the bottom of this post for reference.
Your comment "pity party for criminals" seems to suggest that my concerns for
unfairness in sentencing regarding insufficient public defense in US courts
were somehow misplaced. I stand by my original assessment that public defense
in the US justice system is far too often lacking, leading to conviction of
the innocent, and I do not agree that this perception is in any way described in
thought or feeling by the phrase "pity party for criminals." Nor do I think
serious objections to the current abuses in US prisons, some of which are
described in the very article Wayne Fox posted to V2020 that I responded to
yesterday, should be described as a "pity party for criminals."
I applaud you on coming up with such a pithy pointed phrase, if it was your
invention. And I am not saying you used this phrase in all the exact contexts
in which I use it above. But you did use it in reference to sentencing in US
courts, and your response offered below does suggest you think there is no
major problem with the system of public defense in the US court system.
Your right, Debbie, I am uninformed and watch too much TV, etc.
Now, I'll give you a break, as you requested. Read all the content at this
site:
http://www.innocenceproject.org
Thank you for your response.
Ted Moffett
[Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues
Debbie Gray dgray@uidaho.edu
Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:20:07 -0800 (PST)
Previous message: [Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues
Next message: [Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
But I think you are misreading his article. Nowhere does it call for the
execution of homsexuals, non-believers, and disobedient children. It
quotes those passages from the bible, certainly.
The whole gist of his article seems to be that God wants judges to judge
the crime that is committed (any crime, not specifying), not letting PITY
for the individual person who committed the crime get in the way of harsh
sentencing. I am a total non-believer (and have disobedient children! slay
me!) but happen to agree that this whole pity party for accused criminals
gets in the way of sentencing that can punish, provide retribution,
rehabiliation, prevent recidivism and act as a deterrent for other
criminals.
[Vision2020] The niceties of public defense
Debbie Gray dgray@uidaho.edu
Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:26:38 -0800 (PST)
Previous message: [Vision2020] The niceties of public defense
Next message: [Vision2020] Cable's comments
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ted
Have you BEEN to court lately (to observe)? Maybe you should try it. I can
assure you that public defenders and law enforcement are hardly working
hand in hand to make sure to shaft innocent citizens. Are you assuming
that the people that become public defenders are less than competent? Have
you looked at their case load? How many people they 'successfully' defend?
Or are you just flinging out a bunch of uninformed assumptions you have
gleaned from watching too much TV? Apparently, in your world, all cops are
corrupt, all accused are innocent, all public defenders are more than
willing to send their clients down the river in order to rake in the 'huge
bucks' with little effort and who knows what you think of judges and jury
members... Are there any 'criminals' that have committed actual crimes in
your world? Or are they all being framed and but for an Alan Dershowitz,
they are shafted? And the majority of 'good lawyers' are too busy chasing
the dime to represent Joe Six Pack. How does that make them 'good'
lawyers? How do you define 'good'? You are forgetting that many people
give up higher paying jobs to do other things that are important to their
own social conscience.
Give me a break...
Debbie
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 Aldoussoma@aol.com wrote:
>
> Auntiestablishment et.al.
>
> Oh, but indeed, the public defenders are there to make life easy for law
> enforcement and to make friends with the prosecutor. Can you imagine what
would
> happen to our law enforcement and legal system if public defenders were
like
> Alan Dershowitz? Cops would be testifying in court so often, and be
charged
> with misconduct with such regularity, that the Feds might have to send 87
billion
> to America's cities as an infrastructure rebuilding grant to help secure
> Democracy in the USA.
>
> And being buddy buddy with the prosecutor, swapping deals on cases so both
> the PD and prosecutor get what they want, helps keep both sides happy. If
> public defenders were defending all their cases aggressively, the courts
could not
> handle the work. Oh, sure, there are innocent people who get sent up the
> river, while some real scary bad asses go free, but as long as the voters
think
> the prosecutor is taking on the dangerous crime, i. e. the stuff the media
> pushes to exploit the hysteria of the public to push the nielsen ratings
and sell
> advertising, then the prosecutor is an electable savior.
>
> Till we regulate the cost of lawyers to bring it closer to what the average
> Joe or Jane can afford, we will never have a fair legal system. Not many
> public defenders will work hard on a defense with the pay they get, and the
best
> lawyers, with only a few exceptions, go for the money, which means they are
NOT
> doing PD cases.
>
> Ted
>
--part1_1e9.1fe0aa1c.2dcf63c1_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=
=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><BR>
Debbie:<BR>
<BR>
Consider that the subject heading and content of my post yesterday, where I=20=
referenced your comment "pity party for criminals," which I suspect hardly a=
nyone remembers from Jan. 04 on V2020, contained information about abuses of=
prisoners here in the US, not just in Iraq. Your original use of this=
phrase "pity party for criminals" was in the context of a discussion on V20=
20 regarding the competency and/or access to fair and proficient public defe=
nse in the courts, focusing on one Greg Dickison, local PD. <BR>
<BR>
My comments yesterday focused on abuses in US prisons that appear to not gen=
erate the same moral outrage as the abuses in the US controlled prisons in I=
raq. I was suggesting that the mentality that judges serious objection=
s to the justice system in the US to be an expression of a "pity party for c=
riminals," is questionable, as I also raised the issue of racism, both in th=
e US prison system and in the treatment of Iraq prisoners by the US. N=
ote that I did not quote you by name in the post yesterday. But that p=
hrase has such a terse ring, it fit.<BR>
<BR>
Indeed, I too was talking about sentencing during the two day period, Januar=
y 6-8, 2004, when you originally used the phrase in question. You made=
comments, quoted at the bottom here, contradicting the position I took in J=
an. 04 that public defense in the US is too often not sufficient to offer th=
ose with limited resources a reasonable defense in court, leading to convict=
ion of the innocent. I have placed the post where you used that phrase=
, and a particularly barbed post you penned aimed at yours truly two days la=
ter, where you appear to suggest there is no major problem with the system o=
f public defense in the US, at the bottom of this post for reference.<BR>
<BR>
Your comment "pity party for criminals" seems to suggest that my concerns fo=
r unfairness in sentencing regarding insufficient public defense in US court=
s were somehow misplaced. I stand by my original assessment that publi=
c defense in the US justice system is far too often lacking, leading to conv=
iction of the innocent, and I do not agree that this perception is in any wa=
y described in thought or feeling by the phrase "pity party for criminals."&=
nbsp; Nor do I think serious objections to the current abuses in US prisons,=
some of which are described in the very article Wayne Fox posted to V2020 t=
hat I responded to yesterday, should be described as a "pity party for crimi=
nals." <BR>
<BR>
I applaud you on coming up with such a pithy pointed phrase, if it was your=20=
invention. And I am not saying you used this phrase in all the exact c=
ontexts in which I use it above. But you did use it in reference to se=
ntencing in US courts, and your response offered below does suggest you thin=
k there is no major problem with the system of public defense in the US cour=
t system.<BR>
<BR>
Your right, Debbie, I am uninformed and watch too much TV, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Now, I'll give you a break, as you requested. Read all the content at=20=
this site:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.innocenceproject.org<BR>
<BR>
Thank you for your response.<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett<BR>
<BR>
<P ALIGN=3DCENTER></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"=
BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D6 PTSIZE=3D20 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"><B>[Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues <BR>
<P ALIGN=3DLEFT></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BA=
CKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"A=
rial" LANG=3D"0">Debbie Gray </B><A HREF=3D"mailto:dgray%40uidaho.edu">dgray=
@uidaho.edu </A><BR>
<I>Tue, 06 Jan 2004 18:20:07 -0800 (PST)</I> <BR>
Previous message: <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004=
-January/006427.html">[Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues </A><BR>
Next message: <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-Jan=
uary/006435.html">[Vision2020] Public Defender Religious Issues </A><BR>
<B>Messages sorted by:</B> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision=
2020/2004-January/date.html#6428">[ date ]</A> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.=
net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-January/thread.html#6428">[ thread ]</A> <A HR=
EF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-January/subject.html#6=
428">[ subject ]</A> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2=
004-January/author.html#6428">[ author ]</A> <BR>
<BR>
But I think you are misreading his article. Nowhere does it call for the<BR>
execution of homsexuals, non-believers, and disobedient children. It<BR>
quotes those passages from the bible, certainly.<BR>
<BR>
The whole gist of his article seems to be that God wants judges to judge<BR>
the crime that is committed (any crime, not specifying), not letting PITY<BR=
>
for the individual person who committed the crime get in the way of harsh<BR=
>
sentencing. I am a total non-believer (and have disobedient children! slay<B=
R>
me!) but happen to agree that this whole pity party for accused criminals<BR=
>
gets in the way of sentencing that can punish, provide retribution,<BR>
rehabiliation, prevent recidivism and act as a deterrent for other<BR>
criminals.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR:=20=
#ffffff" SIZE=3D6 PTSIZE=3D20 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"0"=
><B>[Vision2020] The niceties of public defense <BR>
<P ALIGN=3DCENTER><BR>
<P ALIGN=3DLEFT></FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#000000" BACK=3D"#ffffff" style=3D"BA=
CKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3D2 PTSIZE=3D10 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=3D"A=
rial" LANG=3D"0">Debbie Gray </B><A HREF=3D"mailto:dgray%40uidaho.edu">dgray=
@uidaho.edu </A><BR>
<I>Thu, 08 Jan 2004 09:26:38 -0800 (PST)</I> <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Previous message: <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004=
-January/006462.html">[Vision2020] The niceties of public defense </A><BR>
Next message: <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-Jan=
uary/006459.html">[Vision2020] Cable's comments </A><BR>
<B>Messages sorted by:</B> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision=
2020/2004-January/date.html#6465">[ date ]</A> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.=
net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-January/thread.html#6465">[ thread ]</A> <A HR=
EF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2004-January/subject.html#6=
465">[ subject ]</A> <A HREF=3D"http://lists2.fsr.net/pipermail/vision2020/2=
004-January/author.html#6465">[ author ]</A> <BR>
<BR>
Ted<BR>
<BR>
Have you BEEN to court lately (to observe)? Maybe you should try it. I can<B=
R>
assure you that public defenders and law enforcement are hardly working<BR>
hand in hand to make sure to shaft innocent citizens. Are you assuming<BR>
that the people that become public defenders are less than competent? Have<B=
R>
you looked at their case load? How many people they 'successfully' defend?<B=
R>
Or are you just flinging out a bunch of uninformed assumptions you have<BR>
gleaned from watching too much TV? Apparently, in your world, all cops are<B=
R>
corrupt, all accused are innocent, all public defenders are more than<BR>
willing to send their clients down the river in order to rake in the 'huge<B=
R>
bucks' with little effort and who knows what you think of judges and jury<BR=
>
members... Are there any 'criminals' that have committed actual crimes in<BR=
>
your world? Or are they all being framed and but for an Alan Dershowitz,<BR>
they are shafted? And the majority of 'good lawyers' are too busy chasing<BR=
>
the dime to represent Joe Six Pack. How does that make them 'good'<BR>
lawyers? How do you define 'good'? You are forgetting that many people<BR>
give up higher paying jobs to do other things that are important to their<BR=
>
own social conscience.<BR>
<BR>
Give me a break...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Debbie<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 <A HREF=3D"mailto:Aldoussoma@aol.com">Aldoussoma@aol.com<=
/A> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
><I><BR>
</I>><I> Auntiestablishment et.al.<BR>
</I>><I><BR>
</I>><I> Oh, but indeed, the public defenders are there to make life easy=
for law<BR>
</I>><I> enforcement and to make friends with the prosecutor. Can y=
ou imagine what would<BR>
</I>><I> happen to our law enforcement and legal system if public defende=
rs were like<BR>
</I>><I> Alan Dershowitz? Cops would be testifying in court so ofte=
n, and be charged<BR>
</I>><I> with misconduct with such regularity, that the Feds might have t=
o send 87 billion<BR>
</I>><I> to America's cities as an infrastructure rebuilding grant to hel=
p secure<BR>
</I>><I> Democracy in the USA.<BR>
</I>><I><BR>
</I>><I> And being buddy buddy with the prosecutor, swapping deals on cas=
es so both<BR>
</I>><I> the PD and prosecutor get what they want, helps keep both sides=20=
happy. If<BR>
</I>><I> public defenders were defending all their cases aggressively, th=
e courts could not<BR>
</I>><I> handle the work. Oh, sure, there are innocent people who g=
et sent up the<BR>
</I>><I> river, while some real scary bad asses go free, but as long as t=
he voters think<BR>
</I>><I> the prosecutor is taking on the dangerous crime, i. e. the stuff=
the media<BR>
</I>><I> pushes to exploit the hysteria of the public to push the nielsen=
ratings and sell<BR>
</I>><I> advertising, then the prosecutor is an electable savior.<BR>
</I>><I><BR>
</I>><I> Till we regulate the cost of lawyers to bring it closer to what=20=
the average<BR>
</I>><I> Joe or Jane can afford, we will never have a fair legal system.&=
nbsp; Not many<BR>
</I>><I> public defenders will work hard on a defense with the pay they g=
et, and the best<BR>
</I>><I> lawyers, with only a few exceptions, go for the money, which mea=
ns they are NOT<BR>
</I>><I> doing PD cases.<BR>
</I>><I><BR>
</I>><I> Ted<BR>
</I>><I><BR>
</I><BR>
</P></P></P></P></FONT></HTML>
--part1_1e9.1fe0aa1c.2dcf63c1_boundary--