An accused person will be held in jail until the trial. The prosecutor (DA) will not investigate any facts, but changes the charges as the story of the accuser changes. Polygraph exams are thrown out if the accused person passes them but will be used against the accused if they don't pass them. The DA represents the 'people'...don't the people have the right to proceed with all the facts known rather than using 'witch-hunt' tactics?
2007-01-13 16:12:54 · 18 answers · asked by Jalapinomex 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
We have many innocent people in jail. Additionally, it's important to know the actual definition of sex offender. For example, a 16 year old girl can date an 18 year old boy and if they have consentual sex, the boy can be tried as a sex offender because a 16 year old girl is deemed unable to consent -- underage. This young man's life can be ruined and he could be required to register as a sex-offender for the rest of his life simply because he had consentual sex with a girl would might be considered an adult if she commits murder or some other crime, but is considered unable to decide how to use her body.
Our laws are not fair and these registries are just a means of controlling people and red-lining them. The child abuse registry doesn't even provide for a trial and a right to confront your accuser but your name can be placed on that registry for 50 years if Child Protective Services says you're a child abuser or if an anonymous person bribes a CPS worker to make a finding of "credible evidence of abuse". If you're accused of child abuse and your name is placed on the child abuse registry, you can't teach school, babysit children or have anything to do with children.
Do everything in the name of protecting children -- today it's child abuse registries and sex offender registries because those are saleable registries. We can't have illegal alien registries but we can have american citizens barred from owning guns etc.
Years ago, we had communist registries. All these registries were designed to encourage people to take away the rights of others and to blackball certain groups. While it looks good today, what happens tomorrow when the "mark of the beast" determines who can and cannot do business in the world and who lives and who dies?
2007-01-13 16:33:00 · answer #1 · answered by MH/Citizens Protecting Rights! 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No not all sex offenders are guilty and I have known a few who were able to prove their innocence. However, if anyone is accused of a crime the first person they should talk to is their lawyer not the police.
This is good for two reasons. The first is for the suspect. With a lawyer he has someone there who will look out for his legal rights and can advise him as to how to answer any questions
The second reason is for the state. I have found at times a lawyer can assist me when the case comes to trial. If I interview a suspect with a lawyer present then this makes it more difficult for the the lawyer to state I coerced or threatened or violated any rights of the defendant during trial.
As for the District Attorney representing the people you are partly right. The D.A. becomes the victim and the original victim becomes a witness to the crime. If there is enough probable cause for the issuance of a warrant and to be true billed in a Grand Jury then the "Witch Hunt" Tactics are justified.
However are Innocent people found guilty yes. I did not say our system of justice is perfect but it is far better than most.
2007-01-13 16:27:49 · answer #2 · answered by JAMES H 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not all ACCUSED sex offenders are guilty. All it takes is one person to accuse another of a sex crime and the systems goes into action. A false accusation which is later proven to be false can still ruin a person's career and marriage. An accused is not necessarily held in jail until the trial. That's what bail is for. The prosecuting attorney is required by law to investigate all aspects of the charge. Where in the world do you get your mis-information? Some yahoo on Yahoo? Do some research before making yourself look foolish on a public forum.
2007-01-13 16:19:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Reality is that bail for the accused is set so high the majority do end up sitting in jail until they either plea or go to trial. The DA looks better the more cases they win. Ultimately all facts are supposed to be made available but unfortunately they have ways around facts and if you opt to trial and lose you get max plus so why not just plea and get out now.
I also believe they all deserved hanging until this happened to my brother he had a vindictive ex-wife who owed big bucks in back child support.
2007-01-13 16:38:48 · answer #4 · answered by tammy c 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Grow up people, what you see on crime shows is not reality. Most of you have no idea how corrupt our Justice system is. I have known of people that were totally not guilty but went to jail anyway because they did not have the funds for a good lawyer to fight their vindictive ex-spouses. In one case there was a 16 year old girl who was known to be sexually active by the other kids. When she got caught by her parents, she called rape on the 18 year old she was with so that her parents wouldn't get mad at her. Yup off to jail he went. But then Joseph in scriptures was also falsely accused. Mmm PS polygraph exams are only 96% accurate and the DA doesn't use them unless it is in their favor.
2007-01-13 16:57:02 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Polygraph exams are never admissable in criminal cases.Innocent people are convicted about 3% of the time,in all categories.The problem with sex offender cases is the broad terminology,and high emotion involved in the cases,like the truck driver who stopped along a deserted highway to take a leak,and an old lady picking blackberries saw him,so now hes a registered sex offender.
2007-01-13 16:31:20 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No i can answer this question with an emphatic no...
I have a Friend for the purposes of this answer let's call him Joe...
Joe is a good man loving father, provider and is a good Friend to me to this day!
Joe was living in Utah in the the the religious right state where you are guilty before you are even charged with a crime!...
He out of the goodness of his heart took in his sister who was between marriages and divorces and gave her a roof over her head and feed her and his niece until they got on there feet and could take care of them selves!...
Well to make a long story short the niece told mom "hay he put his hands on me" well off to court he went and got 15 years no questions asked do not pass go or collect 200 dollars!...
The public defender said he would not take the case to trail and he would have to come up with 5000 for a lawyer of his own which he did not have so he was s.o.l. and thus is where he is on 2 1/2 before consideration on 5 to 15.. So no not all are guilty just made to feed the prison machine weather they want to or not they told him that if he fought it and lost it would be 35 to life so there you have it another worthless public defender!...
End of answer
2007-01-13 16:44:56 · answer #7 · answered by no one here gets out alive 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
NO, you will only be charged with the crime that your lawyer pleads to. The plea varies on how much you can afford to pay your lawyer. Don't let TV fool you. Most cases these days are settled long before a judge sees anything.
2007-01-13 16:21:55 · answer #8 · answered by MAD MEL 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If California state prosecutors (or likely federal) sense that her previous "youthful indiscretions" ought to warrant a criminal study, then they are interior their authority to succeed in this. it would not count number number even if she changed into 15 or 17 nor does it count number number what certain venue changed into used to distribute such "sexually specific" textile. less than cutting-edge regulation, basically the mere creation and/or possession of such textile depicting minors, on my own, is adequate to justify criminal prosecution. With that in recommendations, that's a judgment call on the component to the authorities even if to apply their time and components with this particular case.
2016-12-02 05:59:36 · answer #9 · answered by jaffar 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know there are lots of sex offenders that arent convited or even chared for the crimes they commit , some plea to lesser charges(those that hire a lawyer) and never have to register as a sex offender. I have no sympathy for anyone acussed of sex crimes
2007-01-13 22:13:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋