More than 500 people were wrongly imprisoned in Denver's jails over a seven year period, with some of them spending weeks behind bars. In many of these cases defendants pleaded guilty to crimes they did not commit before authorities realized they had arrested the wrong person. That's a great injustice in the court system, it often coerces defendants into pleading guilty rather than risk the chance of a much longer sentence (It's not uncommon for those accused of relatively minor crimes to be immediately released and put on probation as soon as they accept the prosecutor's offer to plead guilty). http://www.denverpost.com/ci_19697991
Ex-lawyer jailed 14 months, but not charged with a crime Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- Once a dapper Beverly Hills attorney known for his bow tie, Richard Fine has been held in solitary confinement at Los Angeles County Men's Central Jail for 14 months, even though he's never been charged with a crime. Fine, a 70-year- old taxpayer's advocate who once worked for the Department of Justice, is being held for contempt of court. Superior Court Judge David Yaffe found Fine in contempt after he refused to turn over financial documents and answer questions when ordered to pay an opposing party's attorney's fees, according to court documents. Fine says his contempt order masks the real reason why he's in jail. He claims he's a political prisoner. "I ended up here because I did the one thing no other lawyer in California is willing to do. I took on the corruption of the courts," Fine said in a jailhouse interview with CNN. http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/24/jailed.lawyer.richard.fine/ Can freedom really get any better than this? Hua! Its a bit depressing that nowhere in church or government can we find anything but total corruption at its base.
His imprisonment without a charge or jury trial is 100% an act of tyranny. Freedom came because of revolutionaries who killed tyrants and their agents - French Revolution and American Revolution most come to mind. There is NO constitutional basis to put someone in jail for contempt without bond and a trial by jury. This is absolutely contrary to the Bill Of Rights and a power judges just made up and declared they have.
Really begs the question of what exactly a "quick and speedy trial" means, and what exactly constitutes "probable cause". Many people may not be aware of this, but under the legal system people can still be jailed without being accused of having committed a "crime". Under common law it is considered civil contempt. If the judge feels that anyone is not following their orders, relating to a case, they can issue an arrest order. In the U.S. federal courts, the maximum period of time someone can be held under civil contempt without trial is limited to 18 months by law. Of course, there is always the Appeal process, but those are very unlikely to be granted in instances of civil contempt, and even if an appeal is granted from another judge the process is likely to take over 6 months. A judge has the power to coerce people to do all sorts of things—the question such an individual under a court order has to ask themselves is which is worse: to spend several months in jail or to comply with the order? Usually the individual is released as soon as he is willing to obey, however there have been rare cases where individuals have claimed they were unable to comply with the court order but the judge did not believe them: Man held behind bars for civil contempt over 14 years, never charged
Personally, I would acquit that man held for 14 years with no bond, no trial and no jury if he ever got out and took out that judge, literally. Judges are tryants who conveyed to them 100% unconstitutional power.
Its anything goes! Probable cause has been abolished and replace with reasonable bull(*)(*)(*)(*). I edited this to give the main points I want to bring to your attention. Now, caveat; I agree that the guy was up to no good, but when these people break the law to make their charge stick how do we tell the difference between the criminals, and, well, the criminals? In the late evening hours of May 8, 1996, Iowa State Trooper Mary Miller was on routine patrol on a state highway near Anamosa. A black Ford pickup drove by and Miller's attention was drawn to the muffler on the vehicle, which she believed to be excessively loud. She decided to stop the vehicle to investigate and issue a citation based on Iowa Code section 321.436, which prohibits excessive muffler noise. [meantime since he had no drivers license they searched his car.] The State subsequently charged Kinkead by trial information with the following offenses: possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance, manufacturing a controlled substance, and operating a motor vehicle without a valid license. [Kinkhead proves the muffler was in fact working properly and despite that: Now the below court ruling is so incredibly bogus I lack sufficient words] Kinkead next argues that because he submitted evidence showing that the vehicle's muffler was in good working condition, the stop should be invalidated. We have considered this issue before and held that a mistaken basis for a stop does not necessarily render the stop invalid, but is merely a factor to consider in the reasonable suspicion analysis. See State v. Melohn, 516 N.W.2d 24, 25 (Iowa 1994) (stop of vehicle speeding away from vicinity of gunshots upheld as reasonable under the circumstances even though facts later showed the individual was not involved in the gunfire); State v. Jackson, 315 N.W.2d 766, 767 (Iowa 1982) (stop of vehicle for failure to display license plates and subsequent request for driver's license held valid even though officer later learned the vehicle was displaying paper plates issued by the department of transportation); State v. Ewoldt, 448 N.W.2d 676, 678 (Iowa App.1989) ("Information sufficient to establish reasonable cause to stop is not defeated by an after-the-fact showing that the information was false."); see also 4 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure ยง 9.4(b), at 147-48 (3d ed.1996) (noting that the principal function of an investigatory stop is to resolve the ambiguity as to whether criminal activity is afoot and, therefore, that the "possibility of an innocent explanation does not deprive the officer of the capacity to entertain a reasonable suspicion") [and continue with a search regardless] (quoting In re Tony C., 21 Cal.3d 888, 148 Cal.Rptr. 366, 369, 582 P.2d 957, 960 (197). [In other words they can make up any damn story that sounds good if it can be presented in a manner to sound reasonable to get a charge to stick] The Judge: Thus, the fact that the muffler on Kinkead's vehicle was later determined to be operating properly does not invalidate the otherwise lawful stop. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...g+Allen+KINKEAD,+Appellant.&hl=en&as_sdt=4,16 So despite the officer had no legitimate probable cause the unreasonable search was conducted anyway and evidence resulting from the unlawful search upheld in court anyway! Anyone else see the gross constructive fraud going on in the courts et al to keep the extortion revenue flowing while stomping the rights of every american in the process?
This is why I am Libertarian—because a countless list of different things could be used as a pretext, and once they have "probable cause" they can do whatever. While many have complained that it's almost getting to the point where most everyone is violating some sort of law, the issue that seems to not get as much attention is that it has already reached the point where there is always probable cause to be found that anyone might be breaking any one of the countless laws now on the books. If police want to search a vehicle, they will find some reason. Maybe the drug-sniffing dog barks when it's leash gets yanked, maybe the officer "smells" what he believes could be drugs, etc. There was one case where police were digging through someone's trash and found what they described as "marijuana", actually later determined to just be mushed up wet green tea leaves, but it was enough for them to get their search warrant to raid the house (The reason the house had fallen under suspicion in the first place was simply that they had ordered hydroponic grow lights—for their children's science fair project). As you can see, any number of things could be construed as "evidence" that a law might have been broken... all the more so when there are more laws.
once they have "probable cause" they can do whatever. sort of but not exactly. read the court cases in connection with the case I posted above. its proof probable cause no longer exists and has been replaced with probable suspicion by court and legislative fiat and completely contrary to the constitution in form and effect. The courts no longer if they ever did fulfill their function to insure remedy
We were warned about this, looks like it has already just started. A New Jersey man sued police and prosecutors, claiming he was wrongly arrested and jailed after facial recognition software mistakenly linked him to a hotel theft. Nijeer Parks, 33, a Black man from Paterson, said his grandmother told him on Jan. 30, 2019, that an arrest warrant had been issued for him, according to the civil lawsuit filed in Passaic County. He was accused of shoplifting from a Hampton Inn gift store in Woodbridge and then clipping a police car as he sped off. But Parks said in early 2019 that he didn't own a car and that at the time had never possessed a driver's license. Parks said he went to Woodbridge police headquarters on February 5 to clear up the mistake and was arrested. "As he had previously told the clerk, plaintiff told the interrogators that [he] had never had a driver's license, that he had never owned a car, and that he had never even been in Woodbridge," according to the lawsuit by Parks' attorney, Daniel Sexton. "Plaintiff also gave ... a solid alibi that proved he could not have done what he was suspected of doing," the suit says. Parks claimed that as he sat in jail for 10 days, police and prosecutors didn't bother to check fingerprints and DNA at the scene that could have cleared him. "Defendant police department was relying solely on the faulty and illegal [facial recognition software] or some analogous program while all evidence and forensics confirmed plaintiff had no relationship to the suspect for the crimes," according to Sexton. Sexton said all charges were dropped. County prosecutors and jailers, Woodbridge police and the mayor are named as respondents. A Woodbridge spokesman declined to comment Tuesday, claiming that no one from the township had been served with the lawsuit yet. Representatives for prosecutors and jailers didn't immediately return messages seeking their response. While use of facial recognition technology is growing, critics say algorithms struggle to distinguish faces of people with dark skin. Nathan Freed Wessler, a staff lawyer for the ACLU's Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said Tuesday that Parks' arrest was the result of "flawed and privacy-invading surveillance technology." "There are likely many more wrongful interrogations, arrests, and possibly even convictions because of this technology that we still do not know about," Wessler said in a statement, adding that "this technology disproportionately harms the Black community." Black man in New Jersey misidentified by facial recognition tech and falsely jailed, lawsuit claims, NBC News, by David Ki Black man in New Jersey misidentified by facial recognition tech and falsely jailed, lawsuit claims
Ah, life in the land of the free and home of the brave where men are considered innocent until proven guilty. Fantasies abound....
zactly! The very people entrusted to protect our rights instead violate them at every turn. The gov reserves the right to falsely arrest you without compensation. Welcome to the upcoming totally intrusive new culture in america!
A homeless man was arrested and institutionalized, held at the Hawaii State Hospital, for more than two years before authorities realized they had the wrong man. Joshua Spriestersbach was imprisoned for four months and spent another 28 months in a state mental hospital after police mistook him for a man named Thomas Castleberry in 2017. He was released in January 2020 when authorities finally realized he wasn't Castleberry. Spriesterbach was institutionalized under Castleberry's name but had never met Castleberry, who was wanted on drug-related charges. "No one would believe him or take any meaningful steps to verify his identity and determine that what Mr. Spriestersbach was telling the truth - he was not Mr. Castleberry," Spriestersbach's lawyers said in a petition to vacate his prison record. The Times reported that neither doctors nor psychologists believed Spriestersbach when he told them he wasn't the man police said he was. The man is suing the state, The New York Times reported. A Man Locked up for 2 Years Because of Mistaken Identity Sues Hawaii (insider.com) Sarah Al-Arshani, November 24, 2021
Then taxpayers have to foot the bill. Start hitting the police pension funds, they'll knock it off then.
California woman jailed for 13 days after being mistaken for person with the same name Celina Tebor, February 23, 2022, USA TODAY A California woman claims she was arrested and held in jail for almost two weeks before authorities realized they arrested the wrong person. Bethany Farber was preparing to fly out of Los Angeles International Airport to Puerto Escondido, Mexico, in April 2021 when she was stopped by the Transportation Security Administration and told there was a warrant for her arrest in Texas. Farber says she told them that she had never visited Texas and that she was innocent. "I asked them repeatedly to double-check, and they completely blew me off," Farber said. "They said 'Nope, Bethany Farber, we have you.'" Police arrested her at the airport and took her into booking at a Los Angeles Police Department station, the lawsuit says. Authorities reportedly mistook Farber for a woman with the same name, who had a warrant for her arrest in Texas. The Bethany Farber police arrested is young, with long, blonde hair, opposed to other Farber, whose older with short and brown hair. According to the lawsuit, police arrested the wrong Farber without checking her driver's license, date of birth, or any other identifying information. Rodney Diggs, Farber's attorney, said the Bethany Farber that police meant to arrest already has a criminal history. "Her fingerprints are in the database," he said. "LAPD could have checked the fingerprints, her birthday, social security number, or even a photo. They did none of that," Diggs said. Farber was held in jail for 13 days in Lynwood Women's Jail in California before she was released. She said those days in jail caused her emotional distress, having to put warm food inside her sweatshirt to keep herself warm and witnessing other inmates throw feces and smear it across the wall. The lawsuit also alleges that the Los Angeles Police Department knew Farber was innocent for three days before she was finally released. California woman sues Los Angeles alleging she was wrongly imprisoned (usatoday.com) So apparently with airports being used like police checkpoints, it's dangerous to even travel by plane without taking the risk that you might be arrested and confused for someone else because you happen to have the same name as someone else with an arrest warrant?
