Why is it that affluent people seem to catch brakes in the legal system?

Question

I mean, I am keeping up with the Boulder, CO, case on a child abuse that ended up taking a 2 onth olds life. Well it took almost a year after the Coroner determined it was a homicide to bring charges up against the Parents. The Father's, father owns a lot of land in Boulder and has lots of money. Also in the stebic missing wife case in Illinois, the husband is just a person of interest although they were going through a divorce, and he has no alibi, that I have heard of. He is swimming with the reporter covering his case. The police have said he has offered little cooperation. Yet he walks a s free as a bird. Is this not a problem?

Answer 1

I think it was George Bernard Shaw who said, "The Courts are there to separate the Rich from the poor and free the Rich."

A large part of the problem is that Prosecutors are politicians. Most see the job as a way of building a resume on which to seek higher office. The same is also often true of Judges.

So, they tend to shy away from offending influential people, which might hurt them when they run for office.

Also, because they care more about their futures than their jobs, conviction rates become more important than Justice.
We had a case, also in Illinois, where a woman's murder conviction was overturned because she had the perfect alibi. She was in prison when the crime occurred. Nobody bothered to check.

Poor people are easier to convict. Their Legal Aid Lawyers like to plead them out even if they are innocent, because an adequate defense is expensive. Lazy prosecutors get so good at railroading the poor and middle class that they don't build the cases they need to convict someone who is well defended. This shows up in any number of High profile cases.

It can't be denied that R. Kelly likes his 15 year olds. He married Aliyah when she was fifteen. But he's going to walk on his Statuatory Rape Case, Because Prosecators filed charges with no real evidence except a videotape with no time stamp and no provenance. There's no way of proving how old the woman in the tape is, and the "Victim" denies that it's her.

Gil Garcetti failed to convict the cops in the Rodney King Case even though the whole world, almost literally the whole world watched them commit the crime.

Mike Nifong wouldn't have gotten caught trying to rig the Duke Rape Case if the defendants parents weren't rich enough to afford good attorneys.

The Stebic case is the kind that makes prosecutors especially antsy. They don't even have proof that there was a crime. Lisa Stebic might turn alive up in a crack house raid any day now, or some carjacker could confess to her murder.
Without a body, it's tough to press charges and could blow up the Prosecutors faces pretty easily. Is Stebic guilty? Probably. It's usually the husband. But, because he can afford a good lawyer, the Prosecution has to prove it. And right now they can't.

A few hours after I answered this question, I took a look at a map. Both the Stebic case and the case of the woman who was wrongfully convicted of a murder that was committed in Bolingbrook, Il while she was in prison elsewhere, happened in Will County, Il. Same State's Atty in both cases.

Answer 2

sure, it truly is a difficulty which there seems to be no prospect of addressing. With different matters it truly is not substantial lots, yet with regulation it truly is mandatory to renowned which equipment one is speaking approximately. each each now and then you certainly can artwork it out from vocabulary and references to convey varieties of courtroom or a definite enactment, yet with the terrific will interior the international it variety of feels perplexing to ward off falling into blunders each each now and then. you may sense the final inflammation while a questioner specifies a definite legal equipment and however this human beings leap in and initiate touching on a diverse legal equipment -- even however this acts as a defend in itself, because it shows that the answerer hasn't stricken to study the question, so the solutions are not going to be stable besides. in this actual website we could desire to constantly have the flexibility to apply some identity tag which will practice "nationality", yet so a ways recommendations to this result have been handed over.

Answer 3

This is very unfortunate, yet it happens a lot.

Don't know if you have heard of the UK kidnapping case of Madeleine Mccann.

Her wealthy educated parents left 3 kids under 3 alone in a room while they left the building for dinner, and one went missing.

They have wandered around since then living the high life, it is disgusting.

Double standards, a single mum would have been in the immediate firing line.

Answer 4

Yes! and I agree with you 100% but the key word in your question (Affluent) and money like all of these high profile or dirt bag celebrities that get themselves in trouble (Hilton) they think because they have or there parents have money they can get out of anything or they may have contributed to a judge's re-election campaign.
I hope all of these parents get nailed to the cross on offense intended but to take a life of a young child I'd throw there behinds under the jail and you better believe when they get put in jail the general population is not going to welcome them with open arms or hugs and kisses either right or wrong?

Answer 5

Because they got the money to pay big shot lwayers that can essentially buy justice. Because we got a government that sees that the rich get richer while everty one else gets poorer. Did you know that a billionaire pays a lower percentage of their income in income tax than then an auto worker or a carpenter? That's why. If you ain't rich you are in the way of government and a burn on rich people getting richer, that's what the government want's.

That's why.

Answer 6

Generally speaking, more money brings better representation....better representation means more contacts in the judicial system and/or better resources to serve a client. I am not familiar with the cases you mention; but I feel justice is blind until the roll of $100 bills is heard.

Answer 7

If the affluent ones were disliked by certain people in the community, affecting their assets, you can bet they'd not be catching those breaks. The justice system is warped.

Answer 8

I definitely thinks it's a problem. I think that people who are in the public eye, such as rich people, political figures and celebrities, should be held to even higher standards and have even higher consequences for their actions, as they are the ones the rest of the public looks up to. (unfortunately)

Answer 9

Rule one of life - Dem dats got gits.

It takes money to afford the lawyers and pay all the fees. We have richman's justice.

Answer 10

Quite simple.

They can afford the lawyers who know all the loopholes, the normal man in the street just gets one who goes by the book