[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Bait Car and Due Process (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 4/10/2011 2:38:35 PM EDT
| I enjoy watching Bait Car. However, it occurs to me that the amount of process due when a person has been videotaped in the commission of a felony, and caught in the act, is close to zero. I see no real objection to having a judge view the video at the back door of the jail and with his approval shooting the thief in the back of the head on the spot. I have not seen anybody on the show whose death would make any difference to the welfare of mankind, and it is inescapable that a full-blown trial would add nothing to the factual certainty of their guilt or the integrity of the judgment. |
|
Quoted: I enjoy watching Bait Car. However, it occurs to me that the amount of process due when a person has been videotaped in the commission of a felony, and caught in the act, is close to zero. I see no real objection to having a judge view the video at the back door of the jail and with his approval shooting the thief in the back of the head on the spot. I have not seen anybody on the show whose death would make any difference to the welfare of mankind, and it is inescapable that a full-blown trial would add nothing to the factual certainty of their guilt or the integrity of the judgment. Due process cannot be abbreviated. I share your sentiment on this. I'm a former vehicle theft investigator and have had close friends murdered during the apprehension of auto thieves. BUT, due process is afforded to ALL persons charged with criminal offenses in our state and federal systems. While it wouldn't hurt my feelings seeing auto thieves hung from the nearest tree like horse thieves in previous centuries, we really cannot abridge certain protections like this. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because of this thing called the Constitution of the United States that gives people the right to life and a fair trial. and a speedy trial. When the evidence is so overwhelming why do lawyers fight it. Why not plead guilty and face the music? Because they have to pay their Mortgages, BMW payments, Health club memberships and Alimony. No slight against lawyers - they take a case and do their best to get their client off prove their client innocent. |
|
Quoted:
I enjoy watching Bait Car. However, it occurs to me that the amount of process due when a person has been videotaped in the commission of a felony, and caught in the act, is close to zero. I see no real objection to having a judge view the video at the back door of the jail and with his approval shooting the thief in the back of the head on the spot. I have not seen anybody on the show whose death would make any difference to the welfare of mankind, and it is inescapable that a full-blown trial would add nothing to the factual certainty of their guilt or the integrity of the judgment. I disagree. Their absense would be a marked improvement for the rest of mankind. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. and also take into account how many are already on probation or parole and just get violated. and if they weren't dumb and poor, they wouldn't be on that show in the first place. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them.  |
|
I don't know about you guys, but I hesitate greatly at giving the government powers to speedily prosecute someone, and I certainly don't want to give them the power to "shoot someone in the back of the head" after a judge watches a video tape in the back of a police cruiser.
Due process is there to protect us. If you guys have an issue with crime, I'd suggest solving it at the source, not at the prosecution level, and certainly not by giving our "estimable" elected officials a quicker avenue into the privatized prison system. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because of this thing called the Constitution of the United States that gives people the right to life and a fair trial. and a speedy trial. When the evidence is so overwhelming why do lawyers fight it. Why not plead guilty and face the music? Because they have to pay their Mortgages, BMW payments, Health club memberships and Alimony. No slight against lawyers - they take a case and do their best to get their client off prove their client innocent introduce reasonable doubt as to their guilt. Fixed it for ya. They're also there to ensure that the criminal, sorry I meant the accused, gets his due process. Fucking scum bag lawyers (until I need one, then I want the scummiest one I can buy) |
|
Quoted:
...But, but, but you would deprive all of those lawyers and prosecutors and judges and clerks and bailiffs and jailers of the ability to enrich themselves at the expense of the taxpayer! I didn't sign up to assure, "justice for most." It might seem pointless defending the obviously guilty, but cases like that are few. When you figure out a great place to draw the line, you let me know. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them.
I don't understand why they don't follow the car for more than a block and see if it's an actual car thief that might be taking the car to a chop shop |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them. I don't understand why they don't follow the car for more than a block and see if it's an actual car thief that might be taking the car to a chop shop Because that might solve the problem. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them. I don't understand why they don't follow the car for more than a block and see if it's an actual car thief that might be taking the car to a chop shop Because that might solve the problem. Most of them aren't professional thieves with contacts to chop shops. They're dumbasses who wanna go for a joy ride... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them.
I don't understand why they don't follow the car for more than a block and see if it's an actual car thief that might be taking the car to a chop shop Because that might solve the problem. Most of them aren't professional thieves with contacts to chop shops. They're dumbasses who wanna go for a joy ride... No doubt. But if they're trying to curb auto thefts, it couldn't hurt to at least try to catch some real car thieves. |
|
The part of due process which is almost always overlooked is that it requires only such process as is due. On the facts in the OP, what could possibly be done to enhance confidence in the accused's factual guilt, which is already known to a scientific certainty?
The fact that due process is a situational and not a mechanical concept is proved by the fact that unanimous verdicts are not constitutionally mandated in civil cases; agreement of a majority of jurors is process enough to pauperize someone. You are not constitutionally entitled to a jury for "minor offenses" where incarceration will not exceed 6 months. You are not constitutionally entitled to appointed counsel or to a jury if the court guarantees that you will not be incarcerated if convicted of a misdemeanor crime. Bear in mind that no defense to auto theft rises to the level of constitutional dignity: the simple fact of taking unauthorized possession of a vehicle not your own is sufficient to justify a felony conviction regardless of your reasons, and no one caught in the Bait Cars has permission to take them. So what (other than the assuagement of delicate feelings) is accomplished by lawyers and juries - or by trials - where the legitimacy of the prohibition is unassailable and the guilt of the accused is a matter of absolute historical fact? |
|
Quoted:
Joy riding is not a capital offense. FWIW, I think drunk driving is just as harmful to society. You gonna be okay with summary execution next time you get caught over .08? There is no reason, other than illegitimate legislation by the federal judiciary, that it could not be. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Because of this thing called the Constitution of the United States that gives people the right to life and a fair trial. and a speedy trial. When the evidence is so overwhelming why do lawyers fight it. Why not plead guilty and face the music? Basically 90% or more of criminal defendants plea bargain to a lesser charge. The vast majority of criminal cases are plead out. The system would simply grind to a halt if every criminal defendant went to trial, we'd need 9 times as many judges and prosecutors to handle all the trials (or 90% less laws to be broken). And in some cases, the prosecution doesn't even offer a plea bargain. If the prosecutors don't offer a plea, you might as well roll your dice with the judge or jury. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I doubt that many of those cases go to trial This... I'd bet that only 1-2% don't take a plea bargain. When the cops have you on tape from 5 different angles stealing a car, it is kinda stupid to take that to trial. Or snitch on whatever chop shop buys parts from them.
I don't understand why they don't follow the car for more than a block and see if it's an actual car thief that might be taking the car to a chop shop Because that might solve the problem. Most of them aren't professional thieves with contacts to chop shops. They're dumbasses who wanna go for a joy ride... No doubt. But if they're trying to curb auto thefts, it couldn't hurt to at least try to catch some real car thieves. Your car is just as stolen if a joy rider takes it out and wrecks it or it ends up in a chop shop. If the joy rider a-holes realize the penalty is bad enough, they might think twice. If they manage to catch a preo heading for a chop shop at least the first level of the crime is impaired. There have been a few shows they waited to see what was going to happen, but at some point they need to make the bust and get the car back. |
|
Quoted:
Darn that Constitution, always getting in the way... Trial by jury, who the hell needs that? What value is promoted by a jury trial when guilt is a matter of perfect and undeniable factual certainty? How is the outcome of a jury trial in such a case more accurate (and therefore more just) than a summary proceeding ? ETA: Consider that guy in Atlanta who killed a CO in the holding cell, a court reporter in court , a judge on the bench, and a DEA or Customs agent on the street? IIRC, at least the first and probably the first three murders were on videotape. The defense was at one point literally bankrupting the county judiciary, running into the millions. Any outcome other than a conviction and a death sentence would be an abomination. What good thing is done by spending millions which can do nothing good except (if you consider it good) create the possibility that 12 fools could set him free or leave him alive? What injustice is done if the certain facts are acted upon without the dangerous charade of a trial, and without skinning the taxpayers to fund the production? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
No doubt. But if they're trying to curb auto thefts, it couldn't hurt to at least try to catch some real car thieves. Your car is just as stolen if a joy rider takes it out and wrecks it or it ends up in a chop shop. If the joy rider a-holes realize the penalty is bad enough, they might think twice. If they manage to catch a preo heading for a chop shop at least the first level of the crime is impaired. There have been a few shows they waited to see what was going to happen, but at some point they need to make the bust and get the car back. there's a difference between arresting someone who steals cars for a living and can lead LE to an actual chop shop so you shut down the operation, versus arresting a 16 year old who went for a joy ride. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No doubt. But if they're trying to curb auto thefts, it couldn't hurt to at least try to catch some real car thieves. Your car is just as stolen if a joy rider takes it out and wrecks it or it ends up in a chop shop. If the joy rider a-holes realize the penalty is bad enough, they might think twice. If they manage to catch a preo heading for a chop shop at least the first level of the crime is impaired. There have been a few shows they waited to see what was going to happen, but at some point they need to make the bust and get the car back. there's a difference between arresting someone who steals cars for a living and can lead LE to an actual chop shop so you shut down the operation, versus arresting a 16 year old who went for a joy ride. It's no different for the poor bastard who steps outside to drive to work in the morning and finds no car out front. |
|
The thing I think most folks are missing is that a trial is not just to determine the facts it’s to determine guilt.
Yea, the guy was stealing the car… Was he being forced into it? Was he stealing it so he could visit his dying mother in the hospital in another city? Was it to buy drugs? Was it part of an organized theft ring? Was he in his right mind when he did it? Is he mentally ill? None of those things excuses the thief. But they do tell us a lot about what kind of punishment is appropriate. And that’s why you have to have a trial. |
|
Quoted: Joy riding is not a capital offense. FWIW, I think drunk driving is just as harmful to society. You gonna be okay with summary execution next time you get caught over .08? Speaking only to the laws in my state, driving at .08 or over is a class B misd. "joy riding" as you call it, is a felony, regardless of the value of the vehicle. It's called Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle (UUMV). A much more serious offense than 1st offense DWI. UUMV usually accompanies other offenses, such as robbery, PCS/DCS, vehicular evading (also a felony), etc. "joy riding" is outdated vernacular. Try walking outside to go to work, to pay for the roof over your head, and medicine your kid needs to live, and find your only source of transport missing out of the driveway. Now, think about using the term "joy riding" and if its really appropriate. As a sidenote: "Chop-shops" are a thing of the past, a blast from the 80's. Very few vehicles are stolen without the keys these days. Whie sometimes vehicles are stolen to scavenge a motor or transmission, most auto thefts involve vehicles stolen to traffic aliens and dope, to use in the commission of robberies/burglaries, or to sell outside the US (usually central and south america, maybe Guatemala) |
|
Incidentally, I just happened to bring this idea up with a friend last night…
Imagine a bait car with bullet proof glass that was engineered to be escape proof. When the thieves start it up the doors lock and the engine shuts off. And here’s the funny part… you just leave them sitting there. After a couple days you just come by, let them out, hose the crap and urine out of the car, and repeat the process. No one has to go to jail but I bet the thieves would learn their lesson… at least the ones that didn’t die from dehydration would. |
|
Quoted: Joy riding is not a capital offense. FWIW, I think drunk driving is just as harmful to society. You gonna be okay with summary execution next time you get caught over .08? No, it's auto theft. Death has been an acceptable punishment for thievery until very recently in the grand scheme of things for every culture in the world. In cases of extraordinary evidence like being caught red handed on video, summary judgment and execution sounds plenty reasonable to me. I wouldn't cry if drunk drivers caught a bullet for DUI either, living in a rural county I've seen firsthand the carnage and deaths that result from fuckheads with such poor self control they can't do something as simple as not get drunk before driving. |
|
Quoted:
Incidentally, I just happened to bring this idea up with a friend last night… Imagine a bait car with bullet proof glass that was engineered to be escape proof. When the thieves start it up the doors lock and the engine shuts off. And here’s the funny part… you just leave them sitting there. After a couple days you just come by, let them out, hose the crap and urine out of the car, and repeat the process. No one has to go to jail but I bet the thieves would learn their lesson… at least the ones that didn’t die from dehydration would. adult diapers, problem solved |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What value is promoted by a jury trial ...is irrelevant. Its prescribed. Gotta do it. We already adjust due process to meet circumstances. The fact that due process is a situational and not a mechanical concept is proved by the fact that unanimous verdicts are not constitutionally mandated in civil cases; agreement of a majority of jurors is process enough to pauperize someone. You are not constitutionally entitled to a jury for "minor offenses" where incarceration will not exceed 6 months. You are not constitutionally entitled to appointed counsel or to a jury if the court guarantees that you will not be incarcerated if convicted of a misdemeanor crime.
|
|
Quoted:
The thing I think most folks are missing is that a trial is not just to determine the facts it’s to determine guilt. Yea, the guy was stealing the car… Was he being forced into it? Was he stealing it so he could visit his dying mother in the hospital in another city? Was it to buy drugs? Was it part of an organized theft ring? Was he in his right mind when he did it? Is he mentally ill? None of those things excuses the thief. But they do tell us a lot about what kind of punishment is appropriate. And that’s why you have to have a trial. We don't ask why Junior had 401 grams of cocaine. In Florida, the sentence is at least 15 years, no matter why he did it. |