Are we officially a part of China now?

How can a DA have more power than a Judge? He can't! Basic Constitutional Law clearly presents the relevance of the three branches of our American Government: Congress (each of us citizens by representation) MAKES THE LAWS; Executive means ENFORCING THE LAWS; and Judicial Branch INTERPRETS THE LAWS AND SEES THAT THEY ARE KEPT.

The "Executive" Branch is not being interpreted accurately today, and, in fairness, hasn't been through several administrations... it has even become beyond political factions in my book. It is about power-playing, ego-tripping, and know-it-all primitives who assssume (stet) power they do not have (like starting a war on a foreign country who has not attacked us; only Congress can declare war).

Frankly, the way the word "Executive" was used (and still is in many usages) means simply "to execute" or "make happen." It does NOT mean to "formulate" actions not on the books... like our attack on Libya in March, 2011, and what is happening with this young man who has been found innocent by the JUDGE who found him innocent on Appeal! That means the case had to have been heard by a higher level of the Judiciary.

The District Attorneys are under the control of the Executive Branch... the middle Branch ... of government.

The District Attorneys' jobs are to enforce the laws. In this case they are NOT doing that! In fact, I think they are breaking the law themselves! ... because their job is NOT to interpret laws... or tell us what they mean... THAT is the job of the Judiciary Branch of Government.

The Judges are under the control of the Judiciary Branch of our government, which tell the dimbots in Executive when they are WRONG. How dare the D.A.s BREAK OUR LAWS! Fire them. Get rid of them.

They are simply too arrogant in their power-playing to be allowed even to be lawyers.

Where the sam hill are the Supremes?

Daniel Larsen was convicted in 1999 of possession of a concealed weapon and sentenced to 27 years to life but had the conviction overturned when a judge in 2010 found his constitutional rights had been violated.

He still had an illegal weapon and prior convictions but it sounds like he "got off" on a technicality. Ironic that another technicality is keeping him in jail.

No read the story, it was under the 3 strikes law, he had two priors. It is not because he had a concealed weapon, it is because of his criminal history.

http://www.change.org/petitions/release-daniel-larsen-ruled-innocent

This isn'tabout JUSTICE is it about CONTROL and while they keep an innocent man in jail who had all charges dropped shows a dispicable waste of tax payers funds in a finanically broken state!

This is not about Justice But Control Issues. He was declared Innocent by the court and as the court refuses to set him free they continue to waste Tax Payers funds that could help that finanically broken state.

And if he Sues he will win; causing more finanical disarray for the State of CALIFORNIA!

If we can get whatever that AG is smoking we'll all be really happy for the rest of our lives.

K. Truant, did you read the article. It states there were nine witnesses, including a former police chief who saw another man toss the knife. They were never called during the trial.

K. Truant,

To call someone stupid for carrying a weapon in a low-rent area of California.. is stupid. I dont see how the 3 strikes law is not double jeopardy. Limiting someones god given right to defend themselves because they committed a previous crime they paid for should obviously not be law. If the criminal is not fit for society and the responsibilities associated with living in a society they should not be released from jail.

They are going to hold him until he signs a release of liability, Its a 10 million$ lawsuit against the prosecutor and police!

Truant and others, why don't you start by reading the article, then you can write some sort of intelligent comment. He was not found innocent because of a technicality, he is kept in jail because of one. He was found innocent because he was innocent, as reported by multiple witnesses (included a police chief) who were barred from testifying at the time of his trial. Since he was innocent of the weapon possession, the 3-strike law didn't apply. But since the AG is obviously on a power trip, his innocence doesn't matter.

The fact remains he was still guilty of carrying the concealed weapon, that did not change.

Did you read the story? One of the witnesses NOT called was a former police official who saw someone else toss the knife. Maybe he wasn't guilty - kind of sounds like reasonable doubt to me.

Its more about a DA not wanting to admit that he convicted an innocent man and sent him to prison. Its a hell of a lot easier to be innocent and get sent to prison than it is to be innocent and get out of prison. IMO the prosecutor should get 10 years because he probably knew the guy was innocent but didnt want to mess up his won/lost record.

Only in "The Land of Nuts and fruits:"

If this guy was of an ethnic background and not a plain white guy - all kinds of protesters and NAACP lawyers would have had him out 2 years ago with full media coverage, and millions in punitive damages awarded.

Michelle, apparantly there were 9 witnesses including a former Judge that witnessed another man throwing the knife. The witnesses were never called to the stand. That is the main reason the Federal Judge overturned the conviction and found his civil rights violated. Guilty or innocent, the entire case must be presented...DA knew about witnesses but because the defense neglected to call on them...well...you see the picture. What a shame that getting a conviction was more important than getting to the truth.

He does make a valid point on behalf that our court system is seriously messed up..

Set the man free and let him go home!

"...that he did not present proof he was innocent quickly enough..."

Didn't realize that there was a statue of limitations on being able to prove your innocence.

When is california going to 'tumbles into the sea' as Steely Dan sings?

JQ -

Amazing you patronize others about using reason and then neglect to use it yourself.

The man was convicted of carrying a concealed weapon.

Supporters say Larsen was the victim of poor representation. His trial attorney reportedly failed to call as many as nine witnesses, including a former police chief who said he saw another man toss the knife.

He was convicted of a crime he didn't commit. I don't like the fact that he has two priors either - but the fact remains, he was sentenced to pay for a crime he didn't commit.

More than likely, he's not now - nor will he ever be - a model citizen. But to keep a man locked away who has been acquitted of a crime by a judge is criminal in itself.

Larsen has remained incarcerated since that ruling because the Attorney General claims that he did not present proof he was innocent quickly enough...

What?!?!?!? If a man is sentenced for a crime he did not commit - and evidence can be provided supporting that fact - WTF?

I am sure that there is more to this story than what we were fed here. If there weren't this guy would have been released plain and simple. Most likely if someone else tossed the knife is still came from this idiot. He was still in the act of committing acrime appearantly is why he is still locked up.

We got part of the story and that is the bottom line. I took more time to write this coment than the amount of attention this deserves.

Got to love those Public Defenders.......they care so much about their clients. (sarcasm)

St Miller, good point!

Avenger-2464988 - I fully respect the amount of hope and trust that you place in "the system", but I am doubtful that it is as respectable and well run as your faith in it warrants.

Just a game that depends on how much money u have and how bad they want u, i know a guy that was there for weed lost 70 lbs they would not let him see a dr when he got out he went straight to the hospital and never got out died 2 months later the system is f n disgusting. the rich are afraid the people are going to say thats enough

"The PRC doesnt care about justice."

What does the Pacific Rotary Club have 2 do with this?

;-)

Only in "The Land of Nuts and fruits:"

Your hate aside, this happens in every state. Even the one you reside in.

So what says you about that?

"Larsen has remained incarcerated since that ruling because the Attorney General claims that he did not present proof he was innocent quickly enough"

WTF is this? California has a time limit on proving your innocence? What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
WTF happened to the United States of America?

Are we officially a part of China now?

Hate to break it to you, but even with their vast population advantage, we have far more people in prison thatn China, or any other nation in the world. Home of the free? Not while there's a drug war and innocent people kept in cells we're not.

So now we are treating our own citizens like GITMO detainees? Get this AG out of office NOW!

hey the private prison got to make thier million dollar profit somehow. so they gota keep innocent men in prison. sad but thats how it works.

Larsen stated the knife could not possibly be his, because he doesn't remember stealing a knife.

I'm actually impressed to see so many comments that make since here. I was expecting most of them to be like Lolly's up there. Absolute ignorance and loud about it. This "innocent" guy has two prior felony convictions for burglary. No telling how many other convictions he's got. I think it is a safe to say that he should never see the light of day whilst standing outside a razor wire fence again.

NYMike, learn English. That's what I say.

...just one more sickening example of our 'criminal justice system' gone awry! Off with the AG's head with an overwhelimng recall.

Larsen has remained incarcerated since that ruling because the Attorney General claims that he did not present proof he was innocent quickly enough

What?!? What the hell happened to INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT TO A MORAL CERTAINTY???!!!??? Wow, this country really is @!$%#ED UP when even the State Attorney General of California ignores the Rights of Citizens as laid out in the precepts and spirit of U.S. Law.............

in our quest for law and order, we passed certain laws, that prevent a sentence to be overturned, unless brought within a certain time frame; justice m,ust always triumph over law and order.

As a result, Larsen was convicted and sentenced to 27 years-to-life in prison under California’s Three Strikes Law. He had two prior strikes for burglary.

Larsen was later ruled innocent by a federal judge, who reversed his conviction and declared that his constitutional rights had been violated.

So he's a three time loser that a judge says is "innocent" due only to a technicality and he might have to serve his time anyway because of a technicality. Now that's karma. ROTFLMAO!!!!

Who are the nubags that constantly get the "star" go no one can comment on their lies.They certainly are not legitimate thinker but intead are bomb thrower.They alwaysake the uber left leanibg position and no one can drive them out.Why are they treated as being special.If getting your friend to vote for you,over and over or learning how to game the system,is rewarded with such abhoreent thoughts,then these threads should just stop presenting any comments!

K Truant and JQ

I really hope the two of you get locked up for the rest of your lives for something you didn't do. It's absolutely pathetic that you sit behind your keyboards and laugh at an innocent man who's been locked up for years already unjustly. By both of your posts, you seem to feel that it's justified to just lock anyone up for anything if they have prior convictions. I think it would do you both a lot of good to have to experience the feeling of having your freedom taken away, not knowing when the next time you'll feel the warmth of the sun will be. You two either have no idea how inhumane the process of incarceration is, or you simply have no soul.

StMiller, Your thought process is warranted, if only you headed the Judicial system. We would all be in a utopian society if your ideas came to fruition, have you ever considered Public Office? It takes a village, or so it is said, lets make changes and take a stand, one person at a time people. There are no rights and no wrongs in my opinion, but my opinion doesn't seem to matter now does it? I am only one voter in a world of uneducated people in my opinion, now what?

I'm not sure what the exact deal is with this guy. I can only describe my ex's dealings with he criminal 'justice' system.

He has multiple (at least three pages (in which he has multiple crimes on each case) on the supreme court docket background checker anyone can find available on line) of felonies for things like burglary, breaking and entering, receiving stolen property, drugs over and over and over again, his time in jail amounts to months (he spent less than six months in prison for three felony conviction on the same trial/sentence without any parole). Disgustingly enough just having drug paraphernalia or being under the influence is only a misdemeanor or he'd have even more felonies.

I'm positive the judges, lawyers, etc. pick and choose what to guidelines for crimes they want follow and who goes away. What happened to putting someone away for being a habitual criminal, much less a three striker? Worse, why are only some people on any type of parole, while others get off scot free for the same exact crimes? Maybe this is why people aren't afraid of committing crimes any longer.

So...what a lot of you fools are saying is that "He's probably committed way more crimes than he's done time for so he's got this time coming regardless of whether he actually is guilty or not"? And that mentality right there is why there are so many innocent people in our system. That's like saying "Well let's just lock 'em up, eventually they'll commit a crime and deserve it!" @!$%#, listening to you people, it's no wonder most of our judges, all our D.A.'s and Public Pretenders are brainless idiots....there's not a lot out there to choose from!!! Oh and one more thing, THE THREE STRIKES LAW IS BULL@!$%#, the punishment is suppose to fit the crime...life for a knife is cruel & unusual punishment. Just like 32 to life for a copier! What happened to "Paying your debt to society". I understand a year or two for priors but to spend the rest of your life for some stupid petty crime is unbelieveable and unacceptable.

To quote / paraphrase a law professor: "our justice system buries its mistakes." As a lawyer, I think that is one of the truest statements I've heard about our justice system. It is incredibly difficult to get a wrongful conviction overturned, and every member of the justice system that convicted the man will work twice as hard to bury their mistake, even when presented with overwhelming evidence. The press also consistently refuses to publish the names of the cops and prosecutors who were negligent, protecting them and allowing them to make the same mistakes again.

One of many issues: there is a rule that allows prosecutors to determine what evidence they hold that benefits defendants and then turn only that evidence over to defense attorneys. Time and again, prosecutors do not turn over all the evidence that should be turned over. Change the law. Force prosecutors to turn over all the information collected in the case. Otherwise, our justice system will continue to be slanted in the government's favor, and mistakes will continue to be made.

In trying to preserve the respect for our court system, our court system refuses to acknowledge its many problems, refuses to acknowledge that as a human system it is subject to human frailties. And that is why it continues to bury its mistakes.

Get over it, Oregonpat. The process of incarceration is not supposed to be one of rainbows and butterflies; it's called punishment. The man committed and was convicted for three crimes; two of them were for robbery of which I have been a victim. A judge decided he didn't have adequate representation for the concealed weapon charge so he threw out the case. There hasn't been a retrial where evidence could be presented; he just threw it out. That doesn't indicate innocence and my heart doesn't bleed for the man. You don't know the evidence against him; only what is reported in this story and I have learned to be a cynic when it comes to any news article. The omission (or the selective inclusion) of information in a news story isn't punished, it's celebrated and idiots ingest every word and accept it as settled authority. I stand by assertion that people without the commonsense to question what they read or hear should be embarrassed. As I said earlier, the case was dismissed on a technicality and he continues to be held based on a technicality; I find the irony strangely satisfying.

It should not matter if he has priors. He already paid his debt in those cases. What matters is he is innocent of this particular charge (once again cops lied when they said they saw him throw the knife--btw, I am not anti-cop, my grandpa was a police officer, but they are not the same kind of people on the job as they used to be). Three strikes is a horrible miscarriage of justice. It was supposed to only be for 3 VIOLENT felonies originally. Not one, not two, not some other stupid "enhancements" or priors... Somehow, it was changed and nobody challenged it. I have seen people go to jail for life over stupid nothing cases since. Now, there is supposedly some STUPID law that says if you don't prove your innocence quickly enough they can keep you for life??? There is no freedom anymore. There is no justice anymore. We have too many excessive laws on the books nowadays. We also need to give discretion back to judges and get rid of the mandatory minimum laws have resulted in even more miscarriages of justice.

FYI, my roommate told me they are planning on putting 3 strikes on the ballot again. I hope so and I hope people will finallly repeal it.

2 previous counts of burglary, can't say I'm gonna push to hard to get him released.

@Janine, so a guy burglarizes twice, is then convicted (improperly) on a concealed weapons charge. Until the case is tried properly, don't you think that your attitude is a little premature. Burglary IS a violent crime; it destroys the feeling of security in your own home. If he truly did have a concealed weapon, he needs to go away for life, so those poor people that he has victimized can sleep at night

I've always wondered why this "Three Strike" law is only valid for ordinary citizens, but when it comes to the wealthy, actors and other celebrities, this law doesn't apply. I mean seriously, how many times has Robert Downey Jr. alone been arrested for drug possession and not fallen under this law? It seems like there is one law for the elites and another law for everyone else! Man, and I remember a few years back, a hit man got 10 years for killing 11 people - what kind of wacked out justice system to we have?

Yes Mike C, Burglary is a serious crime. I'm sure I wouldn't like the fact that someone came into my home & tried to take my things...or the fact that I'd have to explain (probably more than once) the dead body that was the guy that tried to take my things! The article said he was found not guilty by an appellant(?)judge, which means it won't go back for a trial unless the D.A.(dumb-ass) appeals to a higher court, so they need to follow the judges orders and let the innocent guy out. They are keeping an innocent guy in prison for crimes he's already paid for. But hey, that's our justice system at work for themselves just like the rest of our government.

The state has no right to keep him in prison after he was found innocent by a federal judge. Evidently there is someone too stubborn (or stupid) to obey the laws they are supposed to uphold by keeping him in jailed.

He is lucky to have people on his side who are working so hard on his behalf. I hope he is released soon and takes advantage of this and gets his life straight.

On a different note, could this inncocent man be Ryan ONeil, jk. Lighten up people, I dont think we can solve injustices making comments on a internet sight but weirder things have happened.

Did not present proof that He was innocent quickly enough??????????? That Attorney General needs the very hell beat outta Him/Her. Gwaddamn! What the hell is going on in this Country?

Demar..I read NYMike's post...what's wrong with it? Oh..you mean the "what say you?"

From what I remember of some of the movies I have seen, there were countless court room scenes, some dated where the judge asks, "what say ye?" of the jury or the one on trial.

NYMike was just trying to be funny...so get off the rant, please.

China's prison system is not overwhelmed because they use the 'arrest them poste-mortum' method - (see story of serial killer apprehended years later in shoe factory.)

Larsen has remained incarcerated since that ruling because the Attorney General claims that he did not present proof he was innocent quickly enough -- a legal technicality that could keep him in prison for life, according to the California Innocence Project.

Wow ....i don't even know what to say to this ....

Guilty and violent offenders get out. If you're in there for a victimless crime you aren't getting out.

You are a SAD SAD person with so much hate inside..Why don't you move to another country.

Actually I am, next yr. I also cant wait to start my new job. Teaching foreigners about American ideals and traditions. Just think ill be molding hundreds, maybe even thousands of foreigners..

Sam, I know you can't wait, either can we. By the way you can't spell either.

Dennis and Colorado.... such petty nincompoops who cannot even deal with the facts.

You two go first.... -Sam... lol non carborundum bastardus!

Boo hoo

Colorado, you do see the irony in your comment?

Marvin Young,

When was the last time the "black community" marched for a white person? Al Sharpton? Jesse Jr? lol... White people are just starting to act like black people have for the past 40 years. I thought thats what you wanted? reap what you sow.

So Marvin, it is ok to judge someone by the color of their skin and not by the content of their character if the skin color is WHITE?!?

RTColorado, Wow, talk about the "pot calling the kettle black" (and no that's not a racial slur!). "either can we"?! Shouldn't that be "neither can we"? Maybe you're the one that needs to learn to spell!

Back to the issue at hand: I'm sooooo sick of hearing about people being given long sentences for victimless crimes. Let's give life (or long) sentences to those who truly deserve it like child molesters, wife abusers, etc.

marvin young.........who are these innocent black men, you are claiming are still in jail?, or you are just spewing lies to interject racism with high statistic of black male imprisoned than white,,,,,,,,injustice in line with skin color without valid proof is a stale rant.

Rosebud

Let's give life (or long) sentences to those who truly deserve it like child molesters, wife abusers, etc.

Im with you on that, especially pedophiles, the only way they can be rehabilitated is with a lobotomy, a ballectomy, and a trip to the mini-guillotine.

Well said Steve.

Marvin Young, wow black people are so racist. How about this, if I wanted to know how a black man feels I'll go rob someone at knife point. Like it now?

Two can play the race game.

When was the last time a white person was accused, arrested, charged and/or convicted of a crime BECAUSE they were white? Please, give some links to DOCUMENTED facts.

Sam, if you are teaching American ideals, I don't quite understand that. Unless you mean IDEAS. That L on the end makes it a whole new word. Please study before "teaching".

Sam

I feel truly sorry for anyone who learns from you if what you say is true. I've never met you, but your avatar about says it all. You obviously have some serious race issues (and clearly know nothing about communism, yet you feel free to berate the president for something he isn't). The last thing this world needs right now is more hatred and intolerance.

@grmasissa--uh, what is the issue here? Sam can teach 'ideals' if he wants to. it is a proper use of the word. perhaps you should look it up before criticizing him for using it.

grmaissa, ideals mean the principles that a person upholds. Ideas are conscious thoughts that may lead to action. For example, I may have an ideal that the government supports the idea of innocent until proven guilty, or innocent if proven not guilty. The government may not uphold my ideal, and my reject my idea.

Marvin...you don't speak for me...and I am as white as can be.

You see, unlike what you may believe, most of us whites don't give a @!$%# what color someone is...if they do a crime, they should be punished. If they are innocent, they should NOT be punished.

Try not to spread the hate you obviously feel for others...frankly, all this bigotry and racism is getting very old, and it's just embarrassing for those of us who are smart enough NOT to believe everything we are told.

I might have felt the same if the convictions had been for robbery, but burglary? There just isn't enough information on those crimes to make that kind of judgement.

That's usually how fascists talk

It's not worth crapping on the Constitution over.

He may have had prior convictions, but that also means he already served those sentences. He's now doing time for a crime for which the conviction has been overturned. If the conviction is invalid, so is the sentence. The DA just sounds vindictive to me.

Beyond Vindictive---controll issues have no place in the law!

WTMF? If a higher court overturns a conviction it makes no sense for a lower court to be able to hold a person. 3 strikes is ridiculous law. The same thing happened in TN last year, the former prosecutor was now a politician and was keeping a man exonerated by DNA in prison for life because he was afraid to look weak on criminals. The trouble is the man was proven to not be a criminal. Have people lost their minds. The politicians and the courts need to be purged. Laws changed and rules rewritten to protect people from these abuses.

Sure Chirs, let's put people in jail for life at the first offense. And if it's not what the law say, let's make up additional offenses. Now just be careful what you wish for. Your next speeding may land you in jail for good!

Republicans are so tough on crime but they never bother to think what the cost to the taxpayers is for jailing people for life for non-violent crimes. Or drug related offenses. If they truly were fiscally responsible they would be looking at other options.

By that logic, Chirs, if you are suspected of a crime that it's later determined you didn't commit, you should be kept in jail forever because 20 years ago when you were 17 you stole a car to go joyriding. Granted I don't know the details of this mans burglary charges, but it's the same idea as you're presenting.

Randy

Sorry to intrude on your anti-Republican rant, but the current Attorney General of California is Kamala Harris, a Democrat. She was preceded by none other than Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown, also a democrat, Brown was preceded by Bill Lockyer, also a democrat.

Maybe if the Democrat Attorneys General were truly fiscally responsible they would be looking at other options.

We all need new babysitters

Chirs150

Well, the man had prior convictions, so I see no reason to let him out. They should just lock him up, and throw away the key. I don't see what the fuss is over.

You just remember that when YOU have been wrongly accused, tried and convicted. I cannot help but wonder if you call yourself "Christian".........

I really hope you "tough on crime" folks get a taste of your own medicine some day. One of the scariest concepts is that a lot of prisons in the country are privately owned and run for profit. Chris, hopefully someday you'll hear the horrible sound of a reinforced steel door slamming behind you, wondering why you're being imprisoned for something you didn't do. Maybe then you'd have some compassion for your fellow man.

Hey everyone!

I got a question - If there were 9 other witnesses that did not get called to the stand during the trial, who else knew about them? Did the prosecuting attorney know and didn't say anything? Isn't the DA bound by law to show all the evidence even if it would free the defendant? If the DA knew of the 9 other witnesses and didn't say anything, then he/she broke the law. It is the famous Watergate saying here - What do you know and when did you know it? There is a lot more to this story.

Another thought - since when is having a stupid lawyer a violation of your constitutional rights? You have a right to representation - whether that representation is smart or dumb, is something to the defendant to determine and say something about. Did he know about the 9 witnesses and didn't say anything? Really? Is he that dumb?

Atomant...The guy was found INNOCENT. It isn't like he is getting a pardon.

AtomAnt....No the DA is NOT bound by law to present any witnesses he/she does not choose to....The prosecutor is NOT bound by law to present all the evidence, especially evidence that may undermine their case....Presenting the defense is not the prosecutors job.

If your lawyer is not doing their job then you did not get the representation the constitution guarantees you... Clearly this man's lawyer did NOT do his job...and the AG of California is not doing his job either.

I would like to see the Judge place the Attourny General of California in prison for every day that this man has been in jail innocently. Of course he would lose his job, his pay and his freedom until he is freed (of course if he does not present proof that he is innocent soon enough he may become a resident for life)...

It is time to remove him and place someone competent there. We need to remove our criminal vice governor too and put him in jail as well.

No the federal judge needs to have the DA and sheriff charged with false imprisonment

The correct charge would be contempt of court. Let them sit in a cell for a while.

3 strikes is a ridiculous and poorly implemented law. Welcome to California.

Sit in a cell for a while? Let them sit in the general population as somebody's boitch for a couple years and see how they like abuse of power!

Not necessarily. I hope he cannot be bothered. He's young enough to want to be the best he can be after having been vindicated.

Money from a lawsuit isn't worth the time of day.

Do you think that's more sad than being incarcerated for something you didn't do? And possibly being locked up for life just because you didn't present your evidence for being innocent "quickly enough?"

Correction HEARTS

It is not worth the the lawyer's fees who commonly get the majority of the funds in a lawsuit or settlement.

I personally love how they charge you for 45 minutes when all you did was leave a 2 minute message!

The settlement would be cheaper than the cost of keeping him in prison for the rest of his life.

No he won't. 27states including California have a set amount that they pay people who have been wrongly incarcerated. For CA it's $100 per day spent behind bars. The only catch is that it can take 2 years to process and simply being exonerated doesn't mean you'll get it; there's a series of things you have to prove. From this case it sounds like he may be able to qualify.

screminmimi

Lawyers like to play legal games, and since there are no consequences for them, they will play them all day long, maybe we need to make it so that they have to serve the sentence of person they put in prison when they knew they were innocent.

That's as dumb as this whole 'War on Religion' nonsense. White men have it made; I should know, I'm one of them.

Well, actually, JTM... i think you are incorrect. I am a "white woman" and one of the latest population analyses of the United States shows that "white" folks (both men and wimmin) have slipped into the minority these days.

Food for thought, if true, huh.

Hearts, however, we get around better than others of different complexions, still a fact.

So JTM what you are saying is that "white people" should just sit there and take it because of their skin color! I bet MLK is spinning in his grave with ignorant words like that still being spewed! Our justice system, although flawed, is supposed to be color blind!

I hear blacks complaining that they are more likely to do prison time because they get poor legal representation, how about this, if you cant afford a good lawyer dont you think the best thing to do would be to quit committing crimes!

California is a crazy state. Pocket knife becomes concealed weapon. Baseball bat in your car becomes a concealed weapon. That's what you call a police state. People should NOT give that kind of power to any organization, especially one as easily corruptible as law enforcement and the judiciary. Attorneys are just looking for a high conviction rate so they can run for a higher office or become a judge, no interest in justice. Our court system and our country has become overrun with lazy corrupt opportunists.

Only in California! I once got arrested in LA for having sex in my car, the cop walked up and the girl I was with flipped him off and started cussing him, and they had the nerve to charge me with having an offensive person on my weapon, only in California!

Must have been a big knife. A pocket-knife would be considered a concealed tool by anyone with any sense.

Hope they're chasing down those viscious Boy Scouts with their Swiss Army knives and charging them for each pointy object attached to them =/

I thought the same thing Bernie, judges don't declare anyone "innocent". Sounds like this article was written by a family friend or something.

Insane that someone gets 27 years for carrying a knife...people get less for 1st degree murder.

They used the word "exonerated" within the article.

The headline is dumbed down for those who don't know what "exonerate" means.

Bernie and John, that's a non-issue don't you think. Today's journalism has its flaws, I agree... and uses words that we are supposed to be more likely to understand (which says something about our mental capabilities LOLOL).

I suspect that the legal jargon might be more like the upper court reversed the decision of the lower court... which translates, it appears, by journalists to ... hey, they didn't prove their case, and since the Constitution says we are innocent until proven guilty it is a kind of transliteration.

Further, they have to use shorter words/phrases for the headlines.

Agreed, but at this point, reopen the case and get him released. Where is his attorney?

Why would two police officers testify against their Chief of Police, ( meaning they said they saw him and the chief said it was someone else) and what made the police get involved from the beginning?

I mentioned before that the word "innocent" is for our dimbot sakes.... why be offended..? ... remember if the case against the guy was not proven (and that, I think, is what the higher court decided) he was not proven guilty... aaaaaand....

... what are we if we are not guilty??? hmmm?

Innocent.

Why fuss about that?

I hope he sues their pants off.

FrankGruden> Actually it does happen on occasion. People are occasionally declared "innocent" rather than "not guilty". A jury is never given that option but a judge can declare a person "innocent". In either case, however, once this man was found to be either "not guilty" or "innocent" it doesn't matter. At that point, unless they were holding him on other charges, they no longer had a right to hold him. Period.

This is HORRIBLE! Let the poor man go!!

Well, kountyKing... hate to disabuse you but... ROFL... if you subscribe to that line of logic, the occasional squatters from Mehico Fremont may have found here had no right to that land either.

The first occupants of North and South America were the Eastern Mongolians who traveled over the then Bering Bridge to what is today Alaska. They moved south over the ages, and occupied North America, exploring and settled those southern lands, even into Mexico and Central and South America long, long before the European Adventurers snuck in... and there have been no archaeological finds of any humans before them at all.

And, parenthetically, the original European and Middle East adventurers predating Columbus have been established to have been Vikings (from Scandinavia, particularly Norway), artifacts and scripts pin-pointing Celtic adventurers from Ireland 3rd and 4th centuries A.D., and.. this may surprise you, from the Middle East enterprising Hebrew traders sailed into the west to arrive on the shores of Mexico in the third centruy B.C.

Soooo even all these different enterprising peoples were still subject to those already there... our American Indians.

This is discussed in an interesting article perdurabo10.tripod.com/mystory/id48.ht, and in other studies that show that human occupation in today's geographical United States began in Mesoamerica,-15,000 B.C. (not all paleo-archaeologists and paleo-anthropology agree on the exact dates, but they all are still aeons back in time).

These are the ancestors of what we once called the American Indians. There is controversy today, however, as to what is politically correct. One term is the word "Indigenous" but if "American" can be thought of as geographical rather than political, it might be appropriate to use the term Indigenous Americans...

In that case, those trying to support the illegal aliens predominately coming up from Mexico as being here "first," are incorrect. If we use that concept fairly, we should return control of this country to our Indigenous Americans... (and that may not be a bad idea at all... they have a remarkable ancestry, and some of you might have to agree excels the European adventurers who came to settle our land later than their occupation).

This is the here and now, though, and we are stuck with it. The past is locked in concrete; however we want to interpret it, it cannot be changed. The future is guess work, speculation, with no assurance our guesses are correct.

All we have is the here and now of our life times. That is all we can control, and that means ourselves ... we cannot even control another human being. :) Any parent can tell you that... although most of us try.

But it is only self-control that is available to us. How we do it is up to us, too.

Lotsa luck, group... :)

HeartsQuest

Thanks for the interesting history lesson, Ive always wondered what caused the break in history from the ancient to the modern, there seems to be a gap in history where nothing was recorded, or at least we havent been able to interpret what happened.

The ancient Egyptian civilization is readily available to study, even if we cant really interpret what we find, the ancient civilizations of Central and South America arent, the reason, vegetation, wouldnt it be interesting to know what lies beneath centuries of rain forest?

HeartsQuest,

I really do appreciate your knowledge and logic of the situation. What I don't appreciate is the context of the situation needed to "bestow" this knowledge upon people. Knowledge of this nature is valuable and should be used to help others better themselves, not to be used as some tool to mock some person you disagreed with on the internet.

And as you of all people should already know, people are upset more about the crowds behavior and not about the situation itself. The man is legally innocent and should legally be let go. We have laws, they must be followed or if at least altered to suit a future predicament. The crowd does favor this man regardless of his past "endeavors." And it's mostly upsetting to some because most of these same people would be calling for the exact opposite had it been someone they deem as not-so-favorable. Which is most likely a reason msn chose to post this article, to get a rise out of people regardless if he was found guilty or not.

So in conclusion, I just dislike to see people who have such potential as yourself use their knowledge for such trite and pointless arguments

From what I understand the "Native Americans" were not the first ones here after all. There are artifacts and findings that indicate that other kinds of people were here long before the people we call Native Americans.

Just some fact correcting-Kamala Harris is a female.

You beat me to it, Charle7834. What an insane statement/reason!

Quite the contrary.

It is a fact that innocence is not a reason to release a person who has been legally convicted. There has to be a technical judicial point that can be made as a reason for the release. And there is a "drop dead" date for filing.

I found this out while reading a novel by one of our most famous writers, an attorney who is now an author. It was about such a technicality. The afterword of the novel covered this very subject, and the author stated that attorneys are trying to get this changed but judges are fighting it.

American justice system. Go figure.

Screminmimi - Actual innocence is not grounds for release in many states.... you are correct. If people who were innocent had thoir sentences overturned, judges would have higher reversal rates and lose their claimed "infallible" status.

I realize no one wants to defend the DA, who is indeed coming across as a schmuck, but his/her job is to work with the laws as they are currently on the books. It may not be "right", but technically correct that the exonerating evidence was presented after the legal time limit - if so, it was legally "too late."

Houstondave, I would bet that the prosecution had this information and chose not to give it to the defense! It just disappeared never to be seen again. I believe that an investigation should be started and the governor should issue an immediate pardon.

Sorry, I disagree with the novelist... don't forget "novels" are considered fiction, but even-nonfiction books are opinion pieces, and the authors, even if they are lawyers... in fact, I suspect, especially if they are lawyers... have a predilection to giving opinions and that is not evidence.

Evidence is facts. If this has devolved into a constitutional argument (which I think it has), the young man can be released on bail while the judges and the lawyers fight over the "interpretation" of our constitution.

This Kamala "lawyer," and male or female I think she might a serious psychological disorder where she wants to change our whole constitution bass-ackwards.

Read the Bill of Rights, folks. We ... all of us ... are innocent until proven, yes proven guilty. Kamala didn't prove anything but that she shouldn't be a lawyer. You folks are right about who pays her. We do... So WE are her bosses. And therefore we have the right to decide she must go.

And Congress Are Us!. My take on this is that Kamala is a self-serving hypocritical ego-tripping fembot. So she should be fired, and do it now. And whoever her boss is better withdraw their attempt to keep this young man in jail based not just on absurdities and trivia designed for their convenience, but illegal in his case.

This whole incident is outrageous!!!!!

DA's are not so much interested in justice as they are in their won/lost record, this is what propels them to higher office, they are much more interested in not losing than they are in seeing that justice is done.

It was NOT him that the girl lied about. The guy she had lied about was there supporting him. Let him go. 2 other convictions for robbery? See if he stays straight this time or if he gets that 3rd time the 2nd time!

He wasn't the one who was charged and sentenced for rape.

3 strikes, read the whole article bud.

Right... possession of a concealed weapon not guilty. two strikes let him out

3 comes after 2, just FYI.

And no, they actually push a lot a cases back to PD or don't charge at all because if they were as reckless as you say, they'd be disbarred.

Of course you don't just believe what they say, that's why you have a jury trial.

We cant let him out just because he is innocent, it will mess up my political career!

Absolutely correct, Steve.

1 One

2 Two

3 Three

Like that, that is how you count, unless you are a mathematician, and do the the worlds real calculations like Social Security!.

But put the prosecutor in Jail and give him 3 times the amount he wronged the guy, and pay the wronged guy 1,000,000, Dollars a day for the wrongful jail, and that would be mandatory for entire USA-- and a lot of these cases would be solved for the entire country in one day! And we would be sending about 450,000 people home from jails tomorrow, when they started to doubt the phony finagling they did at the trials!--I do wish I was kidding USA!--But of course that might not be a job creators standpoint!