> Denny wrote:
> Correct. But I was discouraged when you said the thing about 50%--
>
> Faith in man (er, people) isn't about statistics. My god, presumed guilty!?!
>
You gotta live life how it is; faith don't get ya too far in a Bangkok
alley so you stay out of Bangkok alleys.
Because you know
On 1/26/07, GG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's a correlation-does-not-equal-causation, in that it may not be
> their race that gets them jail - at least not outright.
>
> If the 2nd person is black, and that happens 12 times in a row, should
> be say the Judge is racist because that's
> WillBo wrote:
> And what would you say the statistical probability of your scenario is?
>
I'll run it down to get to a conjecture:
The assumption tossed out is that a race-jail time correlation is
evidence of racism. In fact, it's not evidence of anything without
more data.
What I find surpri
> For example, let's assume 2 people come before the judge. One is
> repentant, is in college, and promises to get on with his life. The
> other curses out the judge. Obviously the latter goes to jail while
> the former goes free.
>
> If the 2nd person is black, and that happens 12 times in a ro
> RoMunn wrote:
> Sure, mostly for non-violent drug-related offenses. Too bad? Maybe, except
> that young black men aren't the only ones selling drugs or doing drugs. They
> are just disproportionately more likely to be jailed for it. That isn't
> justice. It's Just Us, like Richard Pryor said.
>
Sure, mostly for non-violent drug-related offenses. Too bad? Maybe, except
that young black men aren't the only ones selling drugs or doing drugs. They
are just disproportionately more likely to be jailed for it. That isn't
justice. It's Just Us, like Richard Pryor said.
On 1/26/07, Gruss wrote:
** Private ** wrote:
> We do not yet know the evidence that was used to convict him.
>
> If the police did not follow up on the previous rape (remember when that
> used to happen a lot - that police thought rape was the woman's fault?), and
> it can be proved they acted in bad faith, then I think
> RoMunn wrote:
> It is no mistake that crap like this continues to happen to young black men.
> Like Richard Pryor once said, "I went looking for justice in Georgia and all
> I found was just us."
>
Maybe, but maybe it's deserved: I've heard that 50% of young black
men are or have been in prison
OK, I didn't want to drag the race issue into this little debate, but come
on. I wonder if this guy would have been convicted had he been white.
Whenever I hear someone from the South say, "but it isn't like that", I see
or hear a story like this one, or like this case in Georgia:
http://sports.es
Shouldn't he be suing his lawyer then? Suing the city for doing their
job seems very unreasonable.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 5:35 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man seeking p
On 1/25/07, Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which I think is crazy to begin with, I think it is a nice gesture, but
> shouldn't they charge him for room and board?
Naw, he worked that off making license plates.
Imagine if he'd gotten the death penalty- The jurors are all murderers!
(an
Which I think is crazy to begin with, I think it is a nice gesture, but
shouldn't they charge him for room and board?
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 6:02 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man
It's the definition of wrongful imprisonment. The city is acknowledging as
much by offering him $500K.
On 1/25/07, Nick wrote:
>
> Partly my point, based on what I've been able to read without digging in
> to
> the case or old news clippings, this is a case where the jury convicted.
> Wrongful Imp
But, the city is the only entity to sue:
The judge is pretty much protected from any civil suits.
The individual police are almost completely protected from any civil suits.
The jurors are almost completely protected from any civil suits.
He already promised not sue the state, so the entity respo
s the imprisonment was not
wrongful, regrettable, but it was at no fault of the city today.
> -Original Message-
> From: Zaphod Beeblebrox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 2:27 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man seeking payment for "wrongful impris
I live near WS. It is an interesting story. The crime was the rape
and murder of a journalist. He was convicted on eye-witness testimony
basically. Also, several people saw this crime happening and didn't
stop to help. They should have been prosecuted as well, but that is a
different story.
W
t; >
> > If he wants to sue, sue the jury.
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:04 PM
> > > To: CF-Community
> > > Subject: Re: Man seeking payment
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man seeking payment for "wrongful imprisonment"
>
> $150,000 is a lot of money now... I don't make that kind of money (wish I
> did!)
>
> And it's a WHOLE LOT OF MONEY in 1984 dollars (the first year he ws in
> prison)
>
&
out.
>
> If he wants to sue, sue the jury.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:04 PM
> > To: CF-Community
> > Subject: Re: Man seeking payment for "wrongful imprisonment"
$150,000 is a lot of money now... I don't make that kind of money (wish I
did!)
And it's a WHOLE LOT OF MONEY in 1984 dollars (the first year he ws in
prison)
Winston Salem is offering him an additional $500,000 on top of the $358,000
the state offered him. That's $858,000, which works out to an
I do think 2.6 million is high, that is basically 150k a year.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:32 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man seeking payment for "wrongful imprisonment"
&g
> From: Rick Root [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Here's an article about the story. The man's name is Darryl Hunt
I wonder if he is related to a guy I went to college with.. his name was
Michael Hunt. Every time a professor called out his name you always heard a
few chuckles... "Has anyone seen Mike
We do not yet know the evidence that was used to convict him.
If the police did not follow up on the previous rape (remember when that
used to happen a lot - that police thought rape was the woman's fault?), and
it can be proved they acted in bad faith, then I think he may have a case.
And if the
If he wants to sue, sue the jury.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2007 12:04 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Man seeking payment for "wrongful imprisonment"
>
> He was convicted justly? No
Here's an article about the story. The man's name is Darryl Hunt
*http://tinyurl.com/344got*
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs
http:http://ad.doublecl
I think these types of cases are rare enough, and the wrong so egregious,
that yes...there should be some sort of public fund to payout restitution to
a person who has had their life unjustly ruined.
Just how I feel.
On 1/25/07, Rick Root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A winston salem man, who ha
He was convicted justly? No he wasn't. He was convicted injustly! That's the
whole point. I say he should have sued for more.
On 1/25/07, Rick wrote:
>
> A winston salem man, who had been imprisoned for 18 years for some heinous
> crime (murder, I think) was exonerated a year or so again when DN
Yes, he has lost 18 years of his life for a crime he (apparently) did not
commit. But he was convicted justly under the law with the evidence that was
available at the time. A jury of his peers reviewed the evidence and felt that
the evidence was strong enough to put him behind bars for a very
> The question is, what evidence did they have that _proved_ he was guilty.
And what about his lawyer? City/County/State provided?
I've seen some pretty piss-poor excuses for public defenders.
What about the DNA evidence was not available 18 years ago?
There apparently _was_ evidence, so was it
The question is, what evidence did they have that _proved_ he was guilty.
Was it enough? Was it honest? Was other evidence withheld?
If everything was done in a proper manner, I agree, it sucks for him.
But if the system did it wrong, it needs to be held accountable, and made to
not do it again.
A winston salem man, who had been imprisoned for 18 years for some heinous
crime (murder, I think) was exonerated a year or so again when DNA evidence
became available that proved his innocense.
The state of North Carolina, under state law, paid him almost $360,000 for
the wrongful imprisonment.
31 matches
Mail list logo
