Sunday, April 09, 2006

Snitches top list of unreliable sources causing wrongful convictions

Snitch testimony is the number one type of unreliable evidence in wrongful conviction cases, according to Talk Left's reporting on a conference on wrongful convictions this weekend in Los Angeles. (Click on the graphic to enlarge.)

3 comments:

OSAPian said...

This shouldn't surprise anyone who gives any thought to who snitches are and what usually motivates them.

Catonya said...

Snitches...classic example of govermental double standards.

It's OK for the prosecution to offer something to a "witness" in exchange for their testimony.

It's 'tampering with a witness' if the defense offers something to a "witness" in exchange for their testimony.

food for thought...

Anonymous said...

Look a little closer at the ISSUE:

If a snitch or bad testimony from anywhere gets into the courtroom, it's filtered by the POLICE and the PROSECUTOR. That should bother most people but everyone tends to just look at the police.

Second Issue: It's very easy to tell when snitches are lying long before they testify. Stories don't make sense, there's no corroboration, and too many holes have to be plugged. They're like bad journalists who use good facts to lie.

There's adequate tests to prevent the problem, just like other bad evidence issues that DNA now highlights.

The courtroom essentially belongs to the prosecutor and the police. They have the burden but the burden is alot lighter because they also have all the resources.

If bad evidence is the issue, it's a police prosecutor problem, not just the police.