Innocent until Proven Guilty

[LittleNemoNES]

A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

 

[dguy6789]

That's how things work. Innocent until proven guilty is more a myth than anything else.

 

[Zenmervolt]

First of all, you get your bail money back after the trial as long as you make all of your court dates (you get your bail deposit back even if you are convicted, actually).

Second of all, what's so hard about photocopying the acquittal documents he received from the court and mailing them to the department that processes immigration renewals? I mean, yes, it's annoying, but I hardly see how the immigration department asking for copies of the court documents is some huge burden.

ZV

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
First of all, you get your bail money back after the trial as long as you make all of your court dates (you get your bail deposit back even if you are convicted, actually).

Second of all, what's so hard about photocopying the acquittal documents he received from the court and mailing them to the department that processes immigration renewals? I mean, yes, it's annoying, but I hardly see how the immigration department asking for copies of the court documents is some huge burden.

ZV

Photocopies are like a nickel apiece!

:Q

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

It sure seems like much to do about nothing until you are the person who is involved! Not a news article -- real life (family)

@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

It sure seems like much to do about nothing until you are the person who is involved! Not a news article -- real life.

@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

I'm fairly certain that the city/state/fed will provide a lawyer if one cannot be afforded, at taxpayer expense, of course...

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

It sure seems like much to do about nothing until you are the person who is involved! Not a news article -- real life.

@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

I'm fairly certain that the city/state/fed will provide a lawyer if one cannot be afforded, at taxpayer expense, of course...

Sure that's an option if you enjoy prison time. From what I've seen of state provided attorneys, they suck. Granted, I only know second hand from someone close to me.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: AyashiKaibutsu

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

It sure seems like much to do about nothing until you are the person who is involved! Not a news article -- real life.

@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

I'm fairly certain that the city/state/fed will provide a lawyer if one cannot be afforded, at taxpayer expense, of course...

Sure that's an option if you enjoy prison time. From what I've seen of state provided attorneys, they suck. Granted, I only know second hand from someone close to me.

But from what I understand from the OP, the person was already acquitted. There wouldn't be any jail time, since they were already declared innocent. They would just need legal counsel to advise and represent them in the formal proceedings.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShafferBut from what I understand from the OP, the person was already acquitted. There wouldn't be any jail time, since they were already declared innocent. They would just need legal counsel to advise and represent them in the formal proceedings.

then he wouldnt be given a free attorney. he was already found innocent so no threat of jail time.

 

[jonks]

Innocent until proven guilty is about as widely misunderstood a phrase as free speech.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: waggy

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShafferBut from what I understand from the OP, the person was already acquitted. There wouldn't be any jail time, since they were already declared innocent. They would just need legal counsel to advise and represent them in the formal proceedings.

then he wouldnt be given a free attorney. he was already found innocent so no threat of jail time.

Maybe...it all depends on the law in that city and/or state. It's my understanding that the government will provide legal counsel for "free" in any and all formal court proceedings, regardless of threat of jail time.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: gersson
@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

As others have said, there are public defenders available. Despite anecdotal stories and TV portrayals, the majority of public defenders are not inept bumblers and are in fact highly competent lawyers.

Also, what alternative do you suggest? Prohibiting all arrests? Requiring complete proof of guilt before arrest? Neither is a plausible option.

ZV

 

[Thump553]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
First of all, you get your bail money back after the trial as long as you make all of your court dates (you get your bail deposit back even if you are convicted, actually).

Second of all, what's so hard about photocopying the acquittal documents he received from the court and mailing them to the department that processes immigration renewals? I mean, yes, it's annoying, but I hardly see how the immigration department asking for copies of the court documents is some huge burden.

ZV

ZV-you are technically correct about bail, but it still could have cost him substantial $$. If he had to go to a bail bondsman (almost always the case, except for a very small bail) the bondsman charges a premium-usually 10%-which you don't get back. For example, for a $25,000 bail (about as low as they go here) expect to lose out of pocket $2500 to the bondsman.

As far as photocopying the acquital documents, odds are he needed a certified copy of the court records for his immigration file-at least I certainly hope so (far too easy to fake otherwise). Not too expensive, but probably lose half a day getting them.

As for the OP, your complaints have nothing to do with innocent until proven guilty. You're real gripe is expecting life to be all sunshine and roses 24/7.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

much tadoo about nothing...in the scheme of things it is still that persons responsibility to possess the documents that show he was aquitted.

By the way what case or what news article are you talking about....

It sure seems like much to do about nothing until you are the person who is involved! Not a news article -- real life (family)

@ Zenmervolt
Sure but who's going to pay for the attorney? Again on a crappy $300 a week salary it can be devastating

I'll PayPal you a quarter for the copy.

But I agree... it does suck.

 

[Arcex]

Many of the time and money consuming issues inherent to navigating through our judicial system are the cause of a badly out of date system. If it was updated and more computerized we would be in a much better situation. Overall the burden of proof is always on the individual when providing proof of innocence after you have been acquitted, it's less than ideal but there is no better way in our current system. Sorry.


And yes, innocent until proven guilty is simply not how our system works any more and it's been like that for some time.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: Arcex
And yes, innocent until proven guilty is simply not how our system works any more and it's been like that for some time.

Innocent until proven guilty is exactly how our legal system works.

How public perception works is a different and entirely unrelated matter.

ZV

 

[her209]

Sue said accuser in civil court.

 

[Arcex]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: Arcex
And yes, innocent until proven guilty is simply not how our system works any more and it's been like that for some time.

Innocent until proven guilty is exactly how our legal system works.

How public perception works is a different and entirely unrelated matter.

ZV

Public perception has far too great an impact on our legal system but that has nothing to do with innocent until proven guilty or vice versa.

As it currently stands if you are suspected of a crime our criminal system proceeds under the assumption that you are guilty and works to gather evidence to support that conclusion. If in the course of that investigation they gather evidence that disproves the theory that the person is guilty then that person is off the hook, so to speak, but the operating principle is proving guilt, not the other way around. I know I don't speak for every police officer or detective but that is how the majority works.

Moving over to the judicial system, at most levels of court it is more about the lawyer you have than the evidence against you because "not guilty" is not synonymous with "innocent".

I apologize for going off on a tangent since this is not the original topic of this post.

*edit* typo

 

[Double Trouble]

It does suck, and it can impose a big burden on someone, even if they are innocent of any wrongdoing. There just isn't a much better alternative though.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
First of all, you get your bail money back after the trial as long as you make all of your court dates (you get your bail deposit back even if you are convicted, actually).

Wrong. If your bail is $8,000, and you put the whole amount up, you get it back. If you need a bailbondsmen to come up with the $8,000, you have to give him 10% that you never see again.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: gersson
A family member was falsely and maliciously accused of a felony (grand theft) and was aquitted of his crime. However, he had to spend a night in the slammer, pay 800 bail, pay a lawyer, and waste time off work to go to court.

Once aquitted of all wrong doing, had to pay to erase record of being arrested. However, when applying for immigration renewal, the gov. wants this person to prove innocence by submitting proof of aquittal.
More time and money wasted.

This person is a poor SOB who barely even has enough money to make ends meet. Something is wrong with this pic and I'm not sure I know what it is.

/rant.

So he should just send a copy of acquittal paperwork to INS. I don't see what the big deal is.
They aren't asking him to present his case to them, just that he send them paperwork from his trial.
Lots of people have to send a lot of paperwork to INS, has nothing to do with guilty or innocent, just the way it works.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: her209
Sue said accuser in civil court.

I wanted him to but the truth is the guy who sued has tons of cash and has lawyer friends. It is a losing proposition. On top of that -- more $ + time wasted.

Besides, the accussed is a simple family man who just wants to get on with their life.

The person who sued was a big a-hole who sued a few other people that worked for him because city caught him doing some big work on his home without permits (HUGE pool, etc). He was told that's what he had to do and he neglected it.

 

[Dari]

Judges gotta eat. Baliffs, bondsmen, prison guards, court clerks, gotta eat.

 

[Caecus Veritas]

actually, having to prove that one's been acquitted is quite a bitch. many government, banking and other businesses often ask on many different forms/applications if you've ever been charged or convicted of a felony or misdemeanor.

so.. if you've been falsely accused at the age of say 18.... presumably, you'll need to go through the hassle of explaining and carrying proof for the rest of your life whenever you need to fill out some important application/form. not to mention the delay in processing whatever it is you need doing.

records need to be expunged for good if the government cannot prove your guilt.