DNA is proving more Innocent people have been jailed falsely shouldn't something be done to those that accuse

Answer 1

That would be another court case to prove the accusation was malicious but, yes, I think this should be looked at.

Answer 2

There are indeed circumstances where people simply do appear to be guilty; the circumstances may be that there might seem to be a probable doubt in a person's alibi or the person may have had a likely and overwhelming reason for committing the crime they've been accused of; what I do believe should be cause to prosecute a prosecutor or police personnel is when they withhold exculpatory evidence that migh have gotten the defendant off. THAT, to me, is worse than simply lying (perjury).

Mistaken identity is one thing, and making a mistake in identifying someone not of one's racial make-up isn't always easy, as difficult as this may seem to most of us (but this is actually true and well known amongst defence attorneys and prosecutors alike); that is simply human error but what about when police and others "coach" a supposed witness to give false testimoney...? THAT crime that should put the person doing the "coaching" in prison for the same amount of years as the accused may have spent or was to spend.

Right now, all of the investigations that could have taken place stop once a prisoner is executed; I wonder how many prisoners were wrongly convicted and executed before DNA... and those where DNA was not an issue but the issue was exculpatory evidence that was hidden or destroyed...!

Answer 3

Yes i think so, but in some cases the people may be innocently accsuing them, for example if the accuser did honestly think that the defendant did it then it is fair-ish, knowingly false accusation however should definitlt punished!

Answer 4

Could be done, might be being already done, and they can probably sue the one who accused, if it was the faulth of the first DNA lab in the first place, then probably no.