Black Man Found Not Guilty of Crime, Still Sentenced to 7 Years In Prison

http://www.theroot.com/black-man-fo...m_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=tuesdayPM

I'm sure Tardforge will be along shortly to whine that the source is biased, and that "criminals" have it coming.

That would be just as pathetic as lefty loons taking every word of this cartoonish account as gospel without bothering to delve any deeper into the details of the story.

I mean, why would you? It's the perfect SJW bedtime story.

There's a piece that's missing. Probation violations aren't usually longer than the term of probation, in this case five years. So how is he incarcerated for seven?

I can't take a "report" seriously that's this clearly biased and unsubstantiated.

It presents racism as the cause of the man's probation being revoked without any evidence. Leave the word black out of this article and nothing changes, other than some unsupported allegations about the judge's motivations.

It does not present the reasoning for removing the man's probation, nor does it offer a clear account of why he became a suspect in the first place--Someone just happened to see their armed robber on Facebook? That's the implication-- nor does it report why the man was willing to plead to lesser charges.

I suspect this is one of those "Man Given Life Sentence for Breaking a Window" stories that, when researched, will show that the facts are very different.

None of the sources running this story are very revealing on details.

Got a little bit of bias in that article?

The Root isn't a very good source - good chance there's more to this.

Here's a local newspaper account. The basic facts seem to be more or less as represented.

Hers the local story with a few more details. The judge believed him guilty and revoked his probation. He's serving time for his original sentence, not the robbery.
http://www.11alive.com/mb/news/local/serving-10-years-after-not-guilty-verdict/440450636

But the only reason he's serving it, instead of being on probation, is that he got arrested for the robbery. Despite having been acquitted of it.

Yeah, apparently a probation judge can just decide you're guilty anyway. It's pretty fucked up.

Using "The Root" as a source means you have no business complaining about any source that anyone on the right uses. None.

Trying to plead guilty to assault was also a stupid idea. I get the general idea behind it but guess what happens if you are on probation and you plead guilty to another crime? You've just admitted you broke your probation.

Is the judge an asshole in this case? Yeah. Hopefully this guy can get some legal help fast.

Sounds like a miscarriage of justice.

With a statement like this near the beginning it is hard to take seriously

You read that right. He was 19, and a judge thought it necessary to make him property of the state for half a decade.

In what way does "probation" make one the "property of the state"??

I've known quite a few criminals and they all seemed quite happy to get probation.

I've known quite a few too.

Most do not want probation. Why? It's way too easy to fuck up and end up getting arrested again.

I share the incredulity at the original article, which as presented is so outrageous that it's hard to believe. It would seem that the legal system could not work that way. So it's possible that it doesn't point out the full facts.

Yet no-one has yet pointed out what it has omitted...

I took the liberty of bolding the last sentence - allow me to retort: DUDE IT'S FUCKING GEORGIA! I live here and personally know people currently on probation, just finished probation or are about to be on probation. It's a fucking extortion racket and it's so ineptly/haphazardly/corruptly ran that it's nearly impossible to make it through five years unscathed.

As for the the original sentence of five years probation for breaking into a home unarmed to steal (breaking & entering, burglary, criminal trespass or any combination of these three charges) is not unheard of for white people too. One of my white army buddy's kids a few years back got a five year PRISON sentence for a similar crime. My buddy wasn't going to pony up for a high profile billboard-advertising lawyer - and you get what you pay for. Justice costs money, plain & simple, nothing to see here.

That said if all the facts are true, this guy got the rail-road treatment from an ignorant judge. Georgia justice is a crap-shoot at best. Charges/sentences/probation/fines etc. are all over the map on any given day. IN THIS CASE the guy was unwise to trust "the powers-that-be". He did what would appear to be smart thing since he knew he was innocent and assumed he would be treated accordingly. Indeed the store robbery was tossed, so the jury would agree that up to this point the guy was doing everything right. But the judge was the final hurdle, and that was his downfall.

So let me break this down for you - once you are in the Georgia justice/penal system you are always open to future fucking. You are officially "down" and now the kicking begins!
Your only defense is to lawyer up with the best you can afford. Hell even if you can't afford it, you still better rob Peter to pay Paul or you will get fucked at some point. Spend money now or spend money later, because Georgia probation will milk you dry. So either way you better shit some money, so you don't end up with a bad judge - I'd rather give my money to a lawyer.

If this guy would have seen a lawyer before he turned himself in he wouldn't be in this situation now. He probably figured he didn't need to since he (and the jury) knew he was innocent of the store robbery. But even if he thought he needed a lawyer he couldn't have afforded one most likely. This is why blacks get harsher sentences - it's a FACT that on average they have less money than whites. Let me repeat - you get the justice you can afford. Rich people get lighter sentences because they can hire better lawyers - it's simple math. Low hanging fruit gets picked more often.

it likely hasn't omitted anything - I live here in Georgia and it's a very typical situation. Yes it happens to blacks more often because they generally have less disposable income for lawyers.
Your only defense is a good offense - lawyer up fast & hard or you get trampled.

Since that would seem to deny some very basic freedoms, how has the supreme court not stepped in?

Because the courts do provide a lawyer if you can't afford one. The trouble is, public defenders are never as good the high priced attorneys. There's no way the supreme court can change that.

I'm not talking about the lawyers, but about the court sentencing people who have been found not guilty.

I'm not certain but aren't judges somewhat reluctant to override the decisions of other judges? Could be wrong.

In regards to the state providing a publicly funded lawyer IIRC there was a high court ruling in one of the notorious Texas cases where a guys public defender actually FELL ASLEEP in the courtroom during the trial where it was ruled that basically

"the state is required to provide you with a lawyer if you cannot afford one.....but there is no constitutional right to a GOOD lawyer"

About the only time you see the state provide a defendant with an outstanding top of the line lawyer is a case like the Oklahoma City bombing. An extremely high profile capital murder case.

The Supreme Court can't just step in without lower courts ruling first, as I understand.

Probation is at the probation judge's pleasure. He was found guilt in 2012 and was on probation in lue of jail. The judge changed his mind and decided jail was more fitting.

Southern states suck.

http://www.npr.org/2017/03/10/519211293/public-defenders-hard-to-come-by-in-louisiana

I've always said they need to pay public defenders much more. As is unless lawyers in the public defender's office are extremely idealistic and willing to make lots of sacrifices (there are several) then they have a strong incentive to gain experience and then leave for private practice as soon as possible.

That said, I don't know of a state in the country where higher pay and resources for public defenders is a popular move for elected officials. They would have to sell it as a money saver in the long run as better representation in initial court proceedings would likely greatly reduce successful appeals and overturned convictions.

It's not that they need more money, maybe they do, the (biggest) problem is that they are bogged down with cases, there's not enough resources. But we all know throwing money at the problem solves nothing.

You can either improve pay or improve working conditions when you can't keep staff. Both cost more money so pretending money isn't solution is retarded.

bottom line the ones in control (the judges and law makers) don't give a fuck because they will never experience "the shitty end of the stick" so why should they give a fuck? As long as their family members stay in their good graces, they will never experience the shitty end of the stick. Basically those in control of the justice system have no skin in the game and their lives will never be negatively impacted even if they fuck up the lives of every powerless person in the US. There is no pressure on them from outside sources to reform the FUBAR system so again, still no reason for them to give a fuck. Those of us not "in the loop" just hope we don't get caught on the business end of a cuff & stuff (knock on wood) because things will go south sooner versus later especially here in Georgia.

Here is an example: friend of ours down the street (elderly widow) went to jail for having too many cats and being a nuisance to the neighborhood. So she had to pony up money for a lawyer (duh) and the lawyer could only do so much, so she had to pay him and go to jail and monthly probation costs. Yeah, if you get sentenced to three months but only serve two weeks, hide your wallet! The county saves money by releasing you early but the probation payments will eat you alive. Also you can start paying the fines (if you are fined as part of your sentence) once they release you, so they end up making much more money in the long run.

So now her neighbors are planting cans of cat food in her bushes and filming stray cats milling around her house (duh, cats like cat food) and using the video footage to lodge a complaint. So now the senile judge (not giving a shit about how the footage was filmed) who will not allow her to speak except through a lawyer (of course!) can sock her with thousands of dollars in fines.
Basically she will now be a steady source of county income for the rest of her natural life unless she can drum up the money to sue Columbia County Georgia or her neighbors for making false videos, while paying fines because the judge has his mind set,and only a Scrooge McDuff amount of money thrown his way can get his attention. Extortion 101 - nothing to see here kids.

It's not just LA, but everywhere. As Federal Farmer pointed out, they're all bogged down in cases where they may have an average of ten minutes to review a case.