Bells
Staff member
You sure about that?The US isn't Mother Russia. It takes more than just a confession to convict someone of a crime in the US. That conviction must be backed with evidence. No evidence, no conviction, even with a confession. The confession must be credible and backed with evidence in order for it to have legal merit.
Because there are many cases that show otherwise.
Glenn Ford is a prime example.
Ford was assigned two attorneys by the state due to his inability to pay for a lawyer on his own. Both were selected from an alphabetical listing of lawyers from the local bar association.[5] The lead attorney was an oil and gas lawyer who had never tried a case, criminal or civil, before a jury.[5] The second attorney had been out of law school for only two years and worked at an insurance defense firm on slip and fall cases.[5] Prosecutors were able to take advantage of the defense's inexperience and use a peremptory challenge capacity to keep African Americans off the jury, resulting in an all Caucasian jury with a Caucasian judge.[6][7] Ford was convicted and sentenced to death by the jury without a murder weapon linking him to the crime, and with evidence from confidential informants withheld.[1]
[...]
In 2000 the Louisiana supreme court ordered a hearing on Ford's claim that the prosecution suppressed evidence that might have showed Jake and Henry Robinson to be responsible for the murder (the two were initially implicated in the crime).[9]
In 2013 an unidentified informant told prosecutors that Jake Robinson admitted to shooting and killing Rozeman. This led to Ford's legal team filing a motion to vacate his conviction and sentence in March 2014, stating that "credible evidence...supporting a finding that Ford was neither present at, nor a participant in, the robbery and murder of Isadore Rozeman."[3] State District Judge Ramona Emanuel overturned his conviction that same month.[8]
Ford is one of at least 150 people sentenced to death in the US who were later exonerated and released.[10]
[...]
In 2000 the Louisiana supreme court ordered a hearing on Ford's claim that the prosecution suppressed evidence that might have showed Jake and Henry Robinson to be responsible for the murder (the two were initially implicated in the crime).[9]
In 2013 an unidentified informant told prosecutors that Jake Robinson admitted to shooting and killing Rozeman. This led to Ford's legal team filing a motion to vacate his conviction and sentence in March 2014, stating that "credible evidence...supporting a finding that Ford was neither present at, nor a participant in, the robbery and murder of Isadore Rozeman."[3] State District Judge Ramona Emanuel overturned his conviction that same month.[8]
Ford is one of at least 150 people sentenced to death in the US who were later exonerated and released.[10]
Or the case of Adrian Thomas, who was forced to confess to a crime he never committed after the police used coercive interrogation techniques, after his 4 month old son died. The child had actually died from a bacterial infection, which caused brain swelling and sepsis.
Jeffrey Deskovic is another case, where there was no evidence to support a conviction. He was a teenager and he had been made to endure a coercive interrogation, where he was fed information from the crime scene. The police initially arrested him because they saw him crying at the funeral of the victim, a girl who had been one of the few students to be nice to him at school.
The crime occurred on November 15, 1989 in Peekskill, New York. Correa had gone out with a portable cassette player and a camera for her photography class. Her body was found two days later. Although Correa and Deskovic were not close friends and Deskovic was not popular in school, Correa had been one of the few students that had been nice to him, even helping him with algebra. Deskovic has explained that this was the reason he had cried so much during Correa's funeral. The police, however, thought Deskovic was showing suspicious behavior. After his release from prison Deskovic explained he fabricated a story based on crime scene information police officers had fed to him during the course of the interrogation.
Deskovic also stated: "By the police officer's own testimony, by the end of the interrogation I was on the floor crying uncontrollably in what they described as a fetal position".[2]
On December 7, 1990 a jury convicted Deskovic based on testimony from Peekskill police detective Daniel Stephens that Deskovic had confessed to the crime. Deskovic proclaimed his innocence on numerous occasions after his conviction, but was repeatedly denied a reopening of the case by then district attorney Jeanine Pirro.[3] Since at least 2000 Deskovic also appealed to D.A. Pirro to run DNA testing to help prove his innocence. Pirro declined to run any DNA tests that could help release Deskovic from prison.[4]
In 2006, a new district attorney authorized a DNA test which led to Deskovic's exoneration. The DNA from the crime scene was matched to that of another prison inmate who was serving a life term for another murder, and this inmate confessed to the Correa murder. Deskovic's conviction was overturned and he was released.[5]
Deskovic also stated: "By the police officer's own testimony, by the end of the interrogation I was on the floor crying uncontrollably in what they described as a fetal position".[2]
On December 7, 1990 a jury convicted Deskovic based on testimony from Peekskill police detective Daniel Stephens that Deskovic had confessed to the crime. Deskovic proclaimed his innocence on numerous occasions after his conviction, but was repeatedly denied a reopening of the case by then district attorney Jeanine Pirro.[3] Since at least 2000 Deskovic also appealed to D.A. Pirro to run DNA testing to help prove his innocence. Pirro declined to run any DNA tests that could help release Deskovic from prison.[4]
In 2006, a new district attorney authorized a DNA test which led to Deskovic's exoneration. The DNA from the crime scene was matched to that of another prison inmate who was serving a life term for another murder, and this inmate confessed to the Correa murder. Deskovic's conviction was overturned and he was released.[5]
Or Gary Gauger.
On April 9, 1993, Gary Gauger called the U.S. emergency number 9-1-1 after finding his 74-year-old father's body. Paramedics were summoned, as well as the McHenry County Sheriff's Department, who soon found the body of 70-year-old Ruth Gauger in a trailer on the property.[dead link][1]
Gauger told officers he was asleep when his parents were murdered. Despite this, Gauger was interrogated for 21 hours by the police. Officers lied to Gauger and told him that they had found evidence against him. "They told me that they had found bloody clothes in my bedroom; they found a bloody knife in my pocket," he said. After showing Gauger gruesome photographs of his parents, Gauger broke down and confessed. Though Gauger had no memory of the crime, he believed what police had told him. "I thought I must have done it in a blackout," he said. Though he had given a confession, there was no physical evidence held against him in court. Gauger was found guilty of the double murder, and was sentenced to death.
On March 8, 1996, the Second District Illinois Appellate Court unanimously reversed and remanded the case for a new trial on the ground that Cowlin erred in failing to grant a motion to suppress Gary’s allegedly inculpatory statements. In an unpublished opinion written by Judge S. Louis Rathje, with Judges Robert D. McLaren and Fred A. Geiger concurring, the court held that the statements were the fruit of an arrest made without probable cause and therefore should not have been admitted at the trial.
Without the confession, McHenry County State’s Attorney Gary W. Pack had no choice but to drop the charges, and set Gary free. Pack continued to suggest publicly that Gary had in fact committed the crime and was freed only because the prosecution could not meet its burden of proof without the confession. He was pardoned in 2002 after two motorcycle gang members were ultimately convicted of the crime. Despite this, Pack continues to profess that Gary had committed the crime. Gauger was denied the right to receive compensation for his imprisonment, citing immunity to the police, detectives, and prosecutors.
Gauger told officers he was asleep when his parents were murdered. Despite this, Gauger was interrogated for 21 hours by the police. Officers lied to Gauger and told him that they had found evidence against him. "They told me that they had found bloody clothes in my bedroom; they found a bloody knife in my pocket," he said. After showing Gauger gruesome photographs of his parents, Gauger broke down and confessed. Though Gauger had no memory of the crime, he believed what police had told him. "I thought I must have done it in a blackout," he said. Though he had given a confession, there was no physical evidence held against him in court. Gauger was found guilty of the double murder, and was sentenced to death.
On March 8, 1996, the Second District Illinois Appellate Court unanimously reversed and remanded the case for a new trial on the ground that Cowlin erred in failing to grant a motion to suppress Gary’s allegedly inculpatory statements. In an unpublished opinion written by Judge S. Louis Rathje, with Judges Robert D. McLaren and Fred A. Geiger concurring, the court held that the statements were the fruit of an arrest made without probable cause and therefore should not have been admitted at the trial.
Without the confession, McHenry County State’s Attorney Gary W. Pack had no choice but to drop the charges, and set Gary free. Pack continued to suggest publicly that Gary had in fact committed the crime and was freed only because the prosecution could not meet its burden of proof without the confession. He was pardoned in 2002 after two motorcycle gang members were ultimately convicted of the crime. Despite this, Pack continues to profess that Gary had committed the crime. Gauger was denied the right to receive compensation for his imprisonment, citing immunity to the police, detectives, and prosecutors.
The justice system is full of faults. These are just some of the cases of wrongful convictions based on little to no evidence, and sometimes with forced or coerced confessions with little to no evidence to support it. Blanket statements like the one you just made are rarely reality. The ideal is that the system is as you say. It is not, however, in reality.