What should you get?

[Alecto]

If you are arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, serve a sentence of, say 10 years, but just after you get out, the police discover you were innocent.

What should you get in compensation?

I say that the government should basically take care of you for the ammount of time you were in jail.

 

[DaRkWoLf]

If you are arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, serve a sentence of, say 10 years, but just after you get out, the police discover you were innocent.

What should you get in compensation?

I say that the government should basically take care of you for the ammount of time you were in jail.

That actually sounds like a good solution. Yet I feel that a few extra reparations/pleasentries would be in order.

 

[David Gould]

What do you mean by 'take of you'? Does this mean give you minimum wage, or does it mean give you 100,000 a year for 10 years, or what?

I think it is difficult to put a value on a year in a person's life. Sometimes, people get millions of dollars when they sue in situations similar to this. Other times, they get not much at all.

 

[Alecto]

Off the bat, I would say that you are tax exempt for however long you were in jail. NO taxes, income, sales WHATEVER, no taxes.

And I would say you get a monthly check of a set ammount depending on how long you were in jail, what the crime was, etc etc

 

[NothingButTheBlood]

I think it should be paid for by the jury who convicted you since they were wrong not the state.

 

[Quijote]

If you are arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, serve a sentence of, say 10 years, but just after you get out, the police discover you were innocent.

What should you get in compensation?

I say that the government should basically take care of you for the ammount of time you were in jail.

Here in WI, a simmilar think happened last year. A man was convicted of raping a woman (12yrs ago?) but now has been proven innocent thanks to DNA tests. He sued and got money from the govt....will have to look it up to give more detalis.

cheers

 

[Blackmarch]

...
I say that the government should basically take care of you for the ammount of time you were in jail.

Actually that sounds very fair. One would agree with that.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

If you are arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, serve a sentence of, say 10 years, but just after you get out, the police discover you were innocent.

What should you get in compensation?

I say that the government should basically take care of you for the ammount of time you were in jail.

That's a tough one.
We typically agree by the Rule by Consent principle that though it isn't perfect, it is the best system of justice we can devise. But does a matter of injustice or a mistake require compensation?
I would say it would be a small consolation; but if it were not done, I don't think it would be therefore more injustice.

Good question, Alecto

 

[Code-Monkey]

One thing I would expect, as soon as something came out that same the government will take care of you for X years, is that some folks may try to work the system. They may try to fabricate some crime, set themselves up and then have their buddy pop up with the evidence some time later.

Kids.. daddy's going to try to get us a plasma tv. He can't find a job right now so he's going to go away for a bit. But he'll be back soon enough and then we'll be rich.

 

[Phred]

I think it matters how you were convicted. If, in pursuit of a conviction, the D.A. or the police lie or falsify evidence then there should be more ramifications than if all the evidence pointed to you even though you were innocent. The damages you could claim would be pretty much the same for the lost time of your life, but there should be further penalties to be paid by those who lied... either prison time themselves or monetary damages paid directly to you.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

One thing I would expect, as soon as something came out that same the government will take care of you for X years, is that some folks may try to work the system. They may try to fabricate some crime, set themselves up and then have their buddy pop up with the evidence some time later.

Kids.. daddy's going to try to get us a plasma tv. He can't find a job right now so he's going to go away for a bit. But he'll be back soon enough and then we'll be rich.

Someone that shares my skeptical cynicism... not of all people, but in a realistic sense.

 

[Lokisdottir]

One thing I would expect, as soon as something came out that same the government will take care of you for X years, is that some folks may try to work the system. They may try to fabricate some crime, set themselves up and then have their buddy pop up with the evidence some time later.

Kids.. daddy's going to try to get us a plasma tv. He can't find a job right now so he's going to go away for a bit. But he'll be back soon enough and then we'll be rich.

That seems pretty farfetched. Who the hell would actually do this? Sure, you might get some money when you get out (if your little harebrained scheme actually works), but then you'll have no job, and... well, you'll have just spent the last several years in jail. It doesn't seem at all worth it.

 

[Code-Monkey]

That seems pretty farfetched. Who the hell would actually do this? Sure, you might get some money when you get out (if your little harebrained scheme actually works), but then you'll have no job, and... well, you'll have just spent the last several years in jail. It doesn't seem at all worth it.

I've met a bunch of crazies in my life. Certainly nobody really reasonable would do it... but not everyone is reasonable.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

That seems pretty farfetched. Who the hell would actually do this? Sure, you might get some money when you get out (if your little harebrained scheme actually works), but then you'll have no job, and... well, you'll have just spent the last several years in jail. It doesn't seem at all worth it.

It's not supposed to make sense for those that have rational. I can see it happening due to a few that have been known and have even made public statements that life in prison is better than being out and jobless, homeless, have to work, etc.
Scheme wise, people don't usually do something wrong thinking that they will get caught or the penalty is too severe if they are caught and there are some lazy people in this world that would rather be locked up and taken care of than to struggle in the real world.

I can see it happening... doesn't make sense, but I can see it happening.

 

[TuxThePenguin]

There was an interesting case of a man in britain being found innocent of murder on appeal after 20 years in jail. He was refused compensation.
The issue came up on a telephone talk show and one member of the public commented.
"He should go out and kill someone, then hand himself in to the police and ask if that makes them all square"

 

[HouseApe]

I think it matters how you were convicted. If, in pursuit of a conviction, the D.A. or the police lie or falsify evidence then there should be more ramifications than if all the evidence pointed to you even though you were innocent. The damages you could claim would be pretty much the same for the lost time of your life, but there should be further penalties to be paid by those who lied... either prison time themselves or monetary damages paid directly to you.

Convictions don't just happen because because evidence is falsified or people lie. Police, states attorneys, et. al. are under a lot of pressure to solve crimes. Evidence is often scanty. But they will often take someone to court based upon the evidence they have, and really talk it up to a jury. And poor defendents often have very poor, even lackadaisical defense attorneys.

The jury often gives the benefit of the doubt to the police. Combined, these things cause a lot of innocent people to go to prison. And once that is done, your life is basically ruined. You will never be able to get a decent job, it will be a lot harder to find a decent mate, and there will be a layer of distrust from most folks around you.

 

[ChristianCenturion]

There was an interesting case of a man in britain being found innocent of murder on appeal after 20 years in jail. He was refused compensation.
The issue came up on a telephone talk show and one member of the public commented.
"He should go out and kill someone, then hand himself in to the police and ask if that makes them all square"

How about he starts with the caller.

 

[Cerberus~]

I think it should be paid for by the jury who convicted you since they were wrong not the state.

Penalizing jurors is a good way to stop jury trials.

I think they should be compensated generously. Don't know how, just throw money at em.

 

[Alecto]

One thing I would expect, as soon as something came out that same the government will take care of you for X years, is that some folks may try to work the system. They may try to fabricate some crime, set themselves up and then have their buddy pop up with the evidence some time later.

Kids.. daddy's going to try to get us a plasma tv. He can't find a job right now so he's going to go away for a bit. But he'll be back soon enough and then we'll be rich.

People try to stage crimes to make them look like accidents and 99 times out of 100, they fail.

Its extremely hard to fabricate something or change a crime. Forensics and crime detection is very advanced these days

 

[dkara]

That's a tough one.
We typically agree by the Rule by Consent principle that though it isn't perfect, it is the best system of justice we can devise. But does a matter of injustice or a mistake require compensation?
I would say it would be a small consolation; but if it were not done, I don't think it would be therefore more injustice. Good question, Alecto

I think it unreasonable to believe that every conviction will be correct. The juries and judges go by what is presented as evidence, evidence rules, and so on. As with any system, there will be those who get off and those who should have and didn't. But the law of average needs to be high here for us to say our justice system is working.

When it hasn't worked and a prisoner is found to not be guilty and released--then that person needs some 'help' getting back on his feet. He doesn't need to be compensated so he can sit in comfort in his new house. He needs to be encouraged back into life.

Most exonerated are NOT eligible for social services, job training, placement, counseling, etc. And this they surely need and are entitled to have. If they were IN prison a long time then chances are good that their support sytem has died down or just died because of old age.

So I believe the government has an obligation to help them reenter society--there needs to be a 'resettlement program' to help them live "life after exoneration."