What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[grumbler]

Then there's Missouri keeping the wrongly convicted in prison: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-are-wrongly-convicted-people-still-imprisoned-in-missouri/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=124619844

Those are exactly the kinds of situations for which pardons were created.  Unfortunately, the pardon power cannot correct injustice if the wielder is a partisan hack more concerned for his image amongst his voters than for justice.

[Berkut]

Then there's Missouri keeping the wrongly convicted in prison: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-are-wrongly-convicted-people-still-imprisoned-in-missouri/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=124619844

Those are exactly the kinds of situations for which pardons were created.  Unfortunately, the pardon power cannot correct injustice if the wielder is a partisan hack more concerned for his image amongst his voters than for justice.

I can sort of see the courts position at this point.

There does have to be some kind of finality to the appeals process. But that finality has to be based on some actual rigor such that it is pretty clear that the chances of someone being convicted falsely are very, very small.

And even then - there still has to be some kind of recourse - and of course...there is - the governor at the end of the day.

What a fucking piece of shit human being leaving someone in jail like this - he is vastly worse then the man who ACTUALLY committed the murder of Marcus Boyd.

[Caliga]

I mean... How do these people sleep at night?

Most politicians are sociopaths?

[The Minsky Moment]

I can sort of see the courts position at this point.

There does have to be some kind of finality to the appeals process. But that finality has to be based on some actual rigor such that it is pretty clear that the chances of someone being convicted falsely are very, very small.

And even then - there still has to be some kind of recourse

Yes there does.

Every state now has a post-conviction DNA testing statute that permits vacating conviction based on DNA evidence.  Some of them have time limits some do not.

A number of states also have statutes that allow vacating conviction based on non-DNA grounds, such as newly discovered evidence.  And in a few states who did not have such statutes, the state Supreme Court ruled that constitutional due process required consideration of such claims, even if the absence of a written statute.  The reasoning, which IMO is unimpeachable, is that the state does not have the power to continue to deprive a person of liberty when it knows that person is innocent.

The states that have permitted such claims (New York is among them) seem to be able to manage them.  The criminal justice system hasn't fallen apart just because people are allowed to present meritorious claims of actual innocence after conviction.

A governor's pardon power is not an adequate substitute.  That is not just because of the dangers of bad governors or the risks of corruption, although those are significant problems with the pardon power.  It is because the power itself is inherently at odds with constitutional rule of law.  The pardon power is a vestigial viceregal power, tracing back to the time when colonial governors exercised royal authority in the name of the King. It is a personal power bound up in the charismatic and mystical authority of kingship.

The core value of the American republic is that the people are sovereign and that individual liberty can only be curtailed on proper cause and subject to due process of law. It is the responsibility of the legal system and the courts. Courts that refuse to take up that responsibility because they find it impolitic or inexpedient are in dereliction of their duty.

[jimmy olsen]

Then there's Missouri keeping the wrongly convicted in prison: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-are-wrongly-convicted-people-still-imprisoned-in-missouri/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=124619844

What a travesty.

[Sheilbh]

I can sort of see the courts position at this point.

There does have to be some kind of finality to the appeals process. But that finality has to be based on some actual rigor such that it is pretty clear that the chances of someone being convicted falsely are very, very small.

And even then - there still has to be some kind of recourse - and of course...there is - the governor at the end of the day.

In the UK and I think other commonwealth countries there's often a body that has the power to basically re-open an appeals route.

So in the UK (in each of the four nations) there's a Criminal Cases Review Commission whose job is to investigate possible miscarriages of justice. They are wildly underfunded and very slow. But they have the power to send cases back to the Court of Appeal (even if appeals have previously been exhausted) if there's a real possibility the court will overturn the conviction or reduce the sentence. Generally it's on the basis of new evidence but exceptionally it might be without new evidence - so if there emerged significant issues around the investigation or court process that were serious enough to make a conviction unsafe.

I think they refer about 30-40 cases a year and, according to Wiki, 2/3s of those are successful appeals - and they get over a 1000 applications from

It was set up precisely because of this problem. There were a number of huge miscarriages of justice from counter-terrorism/IRA convictions (Guildford Four, Birmingham Six etc). They had basically exhausted their appeals and all that was left was directly appealing to the Home Secretary for them to use their power to refer cases back to the Court of Appeals. Those convictions were absolutely horrendous - and people were in prison for 15+ years, but they all eventually got referred for a new appeal and were quashed in quite a damning way at around the same time.

There was some commission to study options around this and to try to restore trust and they basically hived out the power to re-open the appeals route from the Home Secretary to the CCRC. But my understanding is that there are similar processes in Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. I wonder if that would be an option for the US - in the UK it is underfunded but it's incredibly cheap, I think it's £5-6 million pa for the English bit which is about the same population as California.

[Razgovory]

Then there's Missouri keeping the wrongly convicted in prison: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-are-wrongly-convicted-people-still-imprisoned-in-missouri/?ftag=CNM-00-10aab7e&linkId=124619844

I honestly didn't know about that.  The prosecutor in St. Louis, Kim Gardner, is prone to showboating, but is fighting the good fight.  I suspect she'll run for AG sometime in the future.  She has my vote.

Our Governor is a coward.  He's scared of both the crazy base and the crazy leader of the GOP, Donald Trump.  He's not running for reelection or higher office.  Still, he was an improvement over the last governor who was a sociopath.  Politics no longer make any sense in Missouri.

[Sheilbh]

All of the reports about the people around Trump with links to the Middle East and some really harebrained schemes that they tried (with varying degrees of success) to get US support on are crazy and an indication of how much worse it could have been. From the suggested Saudi invasion of Qatar to the Jordanian palace coup - this stuff is alarming. Not that it will matter to Republicans but still.

Edit: Or basically they were far to interested in backing MBS and MBZ - both of them are worrying for the future of the Middle East. But hopefully there'll be sensible US administrations instead of Jared Kushner running policy for the region

[Razgovory]

What are you talking about?  Where have these harebrained been reported at?

[Malthus]

I can sort of see the courts position at this point.

There does have to be some kind of finality to the appeals process. But that finality has to be based on some actual rigor such that it is pretty clear that the chances of someone being convicted falsely are very, very small.

And even then - there still has to be some kind of recourse - and of course...there is - the governor at the end of the day.

In the UK and I think other commonwealth countries there's often a body that has the power to basically re-open an appeals route.

So in the UK (in each of the four nations) there's a Criminal Cases Review Commission whose job is to investigate possible miscarriages of justice. They are wildly underfunded and very slow. But they have the power to send cases back to the Court of Appeal (even if appeals have previously been exhausted) if there's a real possibility the court will overturn the conviction or reduce the sentence. Generally it's on the basis of new evidence but exceptionally it might be without new evidence - so if there emerged significant issues around the investigation or court process that were serious enough to make a conviction unsafe.

I think they refer about 30-40 cases a year and, according to Wiki, 2/3s of those are successful appeals - and they get over a 1000 applications from

It was set up precisely because of this problem. There were a number of huge miscarriages of justice from counter-terrorism/IRA convictions (Guildford Four, Birmingham Six etc). They had basically exhausted their appeals and all that was left was directly appealing to the Home Secretary for them to use their power to refer cases back to the Court of Appeals. Those convictions were absolutely horrendous - and people were in prison for 15+ years, but they all eventually got referred for a new appeal and were quashed in quite a damning way at around the same time.

There was some commission to study options around this and to try to restore trust and they basically hived out the power to re-open the appeals route from the Home Secretary to the CCRC. But my understanding is that there are similar processes in Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. I wonder if that would be an option for the US - in the UK it is underfunded but it's incredibly cheap, I think it's £5-6 million pa for the English bit which is about the same population as California.

I'd never heard of the Canadian version (I don't do criminal law) - your post got me interested so I looked it up. Here's an interesting report on it:

https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/202077E#a4

Key point: though it exists, it is really unusual to get a successful application through the hoops. In ten years, there have been only six successful applications!

They compare and contrast the Canadian system with that in the UK (the bar is set higher in Canada, and the ultimate decision in Canada is made by the Minister, not an independent commission).

[Sheilbh]

What are you talking about?  Where have these harebrained been reported at?

So the Jordanian coup was - possibly - going with the support of Saudi Arabia. It's not clear that the US were in on it. But Jordan had been frozen out by Trump (because Kushner and MBS saw them as "takers" with no ROI, like Lebanon) and by 2020 reportedly the White House was looking for bits of US support to Jordan that weren't authorised by Congress so they could be cut. And the US started hearing the coup chatter which they warned Amman about - as I say no indication that the US was in on it, but according to one diplomat if Trump had won it would have happened.

There's been other reports that in 2017-18 Saudi and UAE were planning to invade Qatar. Apparently Tillerson and Mattis were key in warning Saudi and UAE not to do it - according to other reports Trump was opposed when it was suggested to him by the Saudi king. But again a harebrained MBS/MBZ scheme.

Plus the Barrack indictment of acting as an agent for UAE and using it to push their agenda while Trump was in office.

As I say the real danger seems to be MBS/MBZ's ideas for the region - the problem with Trump was Kushner (and I think to an extent Trump) were strong supporters. The US is going to need to be a level-headed actor in the region - which at the minute probably depends on electing Democrats.

[Sheilbh]

I'd never heard of the Canadian version (I don't do criminal law) - your post got me interested so I looked it up. Here's an interesting report on it:

https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/202077E#a4

Key point: though it exists, it is really unusual to get a successful application through the hoops. In ten years, there have been only six successful applications!

They compare and contrast the Canadian system with that in the UK (the bar is set higher in Canada, and the ultimate decision in Canada is made by the Minister, not an independent commission).

Interesting - yeah the UK system was set up to remove the Minister's discretion.

On stats there have been a huge number of applications. So from 1997 (when they started work) to 2021 they've received over 27,000 applications. 760 have been referred for appeal, 689 have been heard by the courts with 466 successful appeals and 210 that were dismissed. Apparently there 589 cases currently under review with 115 in the queue.

[Malthus]

Yes, it seems in this area the UK has the better system set up.

Hopefully, Canada will implement a copy of it, though I'm not holding my breath - it's pretty low on the totem pole of priorities.

[Sheilbh]

The context was egregious - with both the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six. In both cases police were (unsuccessfully) prosecuted for perjury, fabricating evidence and perverting the course of justice.

It was the classic scenario of, I suspect, when police corruption is most likely - there were bombings, they were convinced they had the right people so they lied and invented evidence to get the convictions. And the justice system failed for 15 years before those innocent people were released.

[garbon]

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/564492-qanon-shaman-negotiating-plea-deal-following-mental-health-diagnosis

'QAnon shaman' negotiating plea deal following mental health diagnosis

The "QAnon Shaman," a participant of the Jan 6. insurrection at the Capitol, is negotiating a possible plea deal with prosecutors after prison psychologists found he suffers from various mental illnesses, his attorney said according to Reuters.

The "QAnon Shaman," whose name is Jacob Chansley, was diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety by the federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), defense lawyer Albert Watkins said in an interview with the publication.

Watkins says that the BOP's diagnosis suggests that Chansley's mental state deteriorated while in solitary confinement at Alexandria, Virginia jail.

"As he spent more time in solitary confinement ... the decline in his acuity was noticeable, even to an untrained eye," he said.

He added that Chansley's 2006 records from his time in the Navy reflect a similar diagnosis.

In the past, Watkins has also said that his client has Asperger's syndrome.

Watkins has repeatedly condemend former President Trump, blaming him for Chansley's participation. He even compared Trump to Adolf Hitler, saying that the world has not seen "propaganda" like Trump's since "Hitler."

Chansley was first photographed inside the Capitol shirtless wearing a horned headdress and heavily tattooed. He gets his nickname from his belief in the QAnon conspiracy theory, presenting Trump as a savior and Democrats as a group of satanist, pedophiles and cannibals.