2006-11-01 02:35:25 · 3 answers · asked by pooldawg73 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No! If you pay attention you will understand we are a country of laws not justice. I would rather see 100 guilty go free then 1 innocent be imprisoned. But today it is win at all cost and the people don't seem to care. O.J. is a good example I watched the entire trial and I would have voted not guilty too. Dr. Lee is the leading forensic scientist in the world, and he pointed out people don't bleed blood preservative. Most people in this country talk as if O.J. was found guilty even though the prosecution had no real evidence against him, only tainted evidence. Why didn't anyone follow through with the evidence Dr. Lee presented that said there were other people at that crime scene other then police, and the footprints were much too small to be O.J.? It is a spin of a wheel when you walk into an American court.
2006-11-01 02:49:33 · answer #1 · answered by dakota29575 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the prosecution's duty to convict a criminal, given the evidence they have received. It is the police's job to analyze and report the evidence. If evidence given is enough to support a trial, it is the lawyer's job to defend his client to refute the evidence. Then it is the jury's job to weigh the evidence given. So, yes, the fair trial really does exist. It's up to the players involved as to how it is all played out in the courtroom
2006-11-01 02:58:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is not the job of a prosecutor to seek a conviction. It is the job of a prosecutor to seek Truth.
2006-11-01 04:53:27 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋