Paying for testimony should put someone in jail.

And the prosecutor who coached that up probably needs to do a few years

OP literally led with a link.

It’s not hard to figure out it’s a copy/paste.

Agreed...

I was listening to Emily Baker's podcast (law nerds) and while I consider myself a smart person and all that, those jury instructions she was reading had me all confused...

I mean, you have experienced law professionals trying to explain to Joe/Jane Blow how to review facts, elements needed to make a finding on a certain crime...and, it gets worse when you have more than one charge/crime and can only rule on 1 or 2 or 1, 2 and 3....

Required by SCOTUS for the death penalty if I’m not mistaken.

He may be guilty.  If the only evidence the state brought to trial was the testimony of one witness they did not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.

I know there’s no way I can convince you this is not one of their tricks. But I don’t care. I am me.

My name is Samueladams1776. I think i’ll get the ban hammer soon and I wanted to tell someone about my life. This is the only autobiography that i’ll ever write, and – God – i’m writing it on GD.

I was born in Nottingham in 1985. I don’t remember much of those early years. But I do remember the rain. My grandmother owned a farm in Tottlebrook, and she used to tell me that God was in the rain.

I passed my eleven plus. It was at school that I met my first girlfriend. Her name was Sarah. It was her wrists – they were beautiful. I thought we would love each other forever. I remember our teacher telling us that it was an adolescent phase that people outgrew.

Sarah did.

I didn’t.

In 2002 I fell in love with a girl named Christina. That year I came out to my parents. I couldn’t have done it without Chris holding my hand.

My father wouldn’t look at me. He told me to go and never come back. My mother said nothing.

I’d only told them the truth. Was that so selfish? Our integrity sells for so little, but it is all we really have.

It is the very last inch of us.

And within that inch, we are free.

I’d always known what i’d wanted to do with my life, and in 2015 I started my first film: The Salt Flats.

It was the most important role of my life. Not because of my career, but because that was how I met Ruth. The first time we kissed, I knew I never wanted to kiss any other lips but hers again.

We moved to a small flat in London together. She grew scarlet carsons for me in our window box. And our place always smelt of roses.

Those were the best years of my life.

But America’s war grew worse and worse, and eventually came to London.

After that there were no roses anymore. Not for anyone.

I remember how the meaning of words began to change. How unfamiliar words like “collateral” and “rendition” became frightening. When things like norsefire and the articles of allegiance became powerful. I remember how different became dangerous.

I still don’t understand it: why they hate us so much.

They took Ruth while she was out buying food. I’ve never cried so hard in my life. It wasn’t long until they came for me.

It seems strange that my life should end in such a terrible place.

But for three years I had roses – and apologised to no-one.

I shall die here. Every inch of me shall perish. Every inch.

But one.

An inch.

It is small and it is fragile, and it is the only thing in the world worth having. We must never lose it or give it away. We must never let them take it from us.

I hope that - whoever you are - you escape this place. I hope that the world turns, and that things get better.

But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that even though I do not know you, and even though I may not meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you: I love you.

With all my heart.

I love you

"12 Angry Men" should be mandatory viewing for all jurors at time of selection.

physaical evidence isn't worth a shit anymore...too many crime labs fucked with the DNA etc.

I am 100% completely against the death penalty

Prosecutors only care about convictions, they have zero care for justice. Public defenders or publi prentenders are over worked or lazy or suck at their job.

Working in a prison I can't tell you how many guys I have met who are probably innocent or were wronged by the system I can't even count.

I did have one inmste the other day thank me for helping win a new sentencing trial because the judge pooch screwed it so bad that even a novice like me could tell he fucked up. The inmate is still guilty which he admits to, but was able to get his sentence reduced by 14 years with my help.

No shit....

I think the problem is, when the innocent project or whatever group they call themselves gets involved, they have a boilerplate protocol they follow. One is peppering media with the story he’s innocent. So, now if  you google the case, it’s pretty difficult to find much beyond the stories they seeded. As to the money, she provide information they led to the arrest and conviction… it was a reward, and to be honest, sounds pretty standard. The admission she overheard on a 3 way call was set up between her boyfriend and a jailed Toforest Johnson, where he laid out what he did. When confronted about that conversation, he admitted he said those things but only in the context that that’s what the police said he did…so,how was he in jail already, I think another witness put him and a codefendant at the shooting scene, but article not clear on that. The same article said Toforest  drew a public defender who made $20 an hour…I doubt that on a captain murder case, even in 1998

I imagine if you could access the trial transcripts you could read what actually happened that convinced a jury to find him guilty.

I don't understand why it's hard to suss that out. I was 99% sure just from reading the thread title alone that it was the title of an article.

The possibility of innocent (or at least mistakenly convicted) deaths becomes a certainty on a long enough time scale.

The argument then becomes one of whether or not it is right to knowingly sacrifice innocent lives for that greater good objective of collective security.

Easy question for me... I don't belive government can make me safer on an individual criminal basis.  And I don't want it to try.

Well done.

I looked it up. Not required at all, weird thing is, a judge has even overruled a full jury more than once to sentence people to death. That's f**king crazy.

I do not trust our legal system.

I trust click bait journalism less.

Taking a life in defense is a biological imperative.

The death penalty is revenge and we get it wrong far too often for me to be comfortable with.

Oh fuck off Kardashians, you get off guilty black men as a family business.

ARFcommers are as credulous as this alleged juror.

I watched it before my time as a juror on an aggravated assault case.  Still convicted the black man who tried to strangle his white wife.

The ‘wrongful  conviction industry’  is not credible… I’d recommend  a book called Crooked City, and it will give you insight into not only how they accept these cases, their underhanded tactics and practices, but also how the attorneys are often linked with prosecutors, judges, and politicians, often working both sides of street, with the motive being financial gain, but also a liberal leftist attack of the countries criminal justice system.

Jail?  Whoever did that should be liable for whatever the person they set up was liable for.

They should also be able to ask their own questions of each witness.

Prosecutors do continuing education classes not to learn how to administer justice, but to get convictions.  Any way they can.  At any cost.  

If you carry a gun, you better get some training on how to handle the aftermath because some young, crooked, corrupt prosecutor knows every trick in the book on how to convict you of murder, or a lesser included, or get to plea to something you didn't do.

99% of GD crowd won't go to a class on how to prepare for this, or a class on how to use a sling.  But I told you so.

Add the defendent had a shit lawyer.    The defense team should laways ask a witness about any motives to what they are testifying to.  "Mam did the state offer you anything in exchange for your testimony?"    That question and her syaing "$5,000" would have changed the outcome of this case.

I completely understand that and I don't trust the government one bit.
The problem is life in prison for an innocent man isn't really any better, and while I understand in theory the conviction can be reversed I suspect in reality that barely ever happens.

For every high profile innocent man getting a conviction reversed I suspect there is many many that did not and never will.

So what's the solution there? It's almost more cruel to put a man in prison for life for something he didn't do then put him to death.

There was no physical evidence against Mr. Johnson and no eyewitnesses claimed to see him at the scene of the crime. I joined the other jury members in voting to convict based on the testimony of one witness, a woman who claimed that she overheard him confess to the crime during a three-way-call that she eavesdropped on.

This is why we need people that aren't idiots to be on juries, not using their brains to get out of it. Also, in some countries witness testimony is to be ignored by the jury unless it is corroborated by some other evidence (which is not also witness testimony). In this case, the witness can't even prove that she did hear the conversation, let alone the contents.


Our decision relied so heavily on this witness’s credibility, but now I know something critical was hidden from Mr. Johnson’s legal team for nearly 20 years: this witness was paid $5,000 for her testimony. It turns out that she was the state’s witness in many other cases as well, and we never knew about it.

Why is the prosecutor not on trial right now?

Yup.
Not even a matter of sentencing someone to death that sounds like the kind of weak evidence that should never result in any conviction at all.

How did this even go to trial? Surely the judge should have thrown it out at the pre-trial hearing when that was all they had?

We have an appeal process for a reason. It is part of the justice system because we know, mistakes can be made. Nothing is perfect nor can it ever be.  Our founders knew this. They were a lot smarter than the people we have today.

Jurors can be convinced that a guy is guilty just as easily as arfcommers can be convinced that a guy is innocent.

Also, OP is a British lesbian in the custody of the US government that convicted this guy?

I am old, and I was a New Yorker. Poetic justice is a thing. It was well known that known bad actors were framed for other crimes.

It was a bad deal all around yet the guilty were put in prison.

I would be much happier with wood chippers for most crimes with absolute proof. You cannot blame the Leo’s from the past for working within the system that was presented to them.

There’s a lot of sketch shit out there regarding convictions back in the day.

We also have a lot of people who should probably have been shot five crimes ago out on the street.

Quite a conundrum

One homicide detective who worked in my area has had 15 of his murder cases' convictions overturned so far. His paid crackhead CI was an "eyewitness" in numerous cases handled by him. I guess the DA's office didn't think that was too much of a coincidence.

I love the Reddit post titles “I did this and “

No you didn’t, you clickbait piece…

Agreed.

This.   Many of the DA’s and the Cops who we rely upon for “justice” are no more ethical or trustworthy than the criminals they oppose.

As a simple taxpayer, we’re stuck between a crook and a hard case.  
All we can hope to do, is try to earn enough money to Buy some measure of justice, if (God forbid) we ever have the misfortune to get caught up in our legal system.

Life without parole.

I'm sure he won't have a good time in jail. Make the bastard live and suffer. Death is the easy way out for someone like that.

Cons have kids, too. They don't like people like that.

Yes and no.

You go into a trial presumed innocent, the state has to prove you guilty.
You go into an appeal presumed guilty, you have to prove your innocence.
It's a very high hurdle to get over.

The state throws all their legal team and unlimited amounts of money against you, you defend yourself with what you can afford.

The only problem with that is, over time, what constitutes "irrefutable" will become less and less irrefutable. Count on it.
Any power you give the government will abused, that’s just the nature of government. I don’t trust the state to mete out irrevocable punishments. Period.

They're called sheeple for a reason. Most people don't have the character to stick to their guns and be the odd man out.

Sounds like a Brady violation to me.

meh. he was guilty of something.

WTF!

More anti death penalty nonsense.

Meanwhile in Maryland a judge recently gave out a life sentence, and then suspended all but 15 years of it. Given time for good behavior; this "life sentence" is likely to be out in 7.5 years.

That case FYI, was about a guy who got into an argument with someone else on a mass transit bus, then followed them off the bus and stabbed them to death.

Meanwhile back in Kansas, the Carr Brothers STILL HAVE NOT BEEN EXECUTED DESPITE IT BEING 24 YEARS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wichita_Massacre



The entire fucking point of all this lawfare funded by NGOs is to make the process of executing people so slow that they die in prison before the sentence is carried out; and also so that they can claim to gullible idiots that "it costs more to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life" -- well no shit, you make it cost more by dragging it out in 23,213 appeals over 40 years.