Users who Dugg This
adam jones
11736 Followers
MediaSight
13125 Followers
Cass Anderson
15067 Followers
Jerry James Stone
7542 Followers
Russ Smith
18390 Followers
Miguel Lopez
27074 Followers
macbookformeApr 1, 2011
Jail all those crooky Supreme Court justices for 14 years, pls
rgb86Apr 1, 2011
Not all of them; just the five who voted to overturn the ruling--Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, and Breyer.
netantApr 2, 2011
Breyer is not the Chief Justice. You mean Roberts.
rgb86Apr 2, 2011
You are correct. My mistake, but I didn't notice until after the edit time had run out, and I was feeling too lazy to correct it. :-P
nullcodesApr 2, 2011
At least it wasn't 14 years later that you realized it.
rudegarApr 2, 2011
well I already spend the $0.00 I were to get in compensation for him not correcting for 14 years :S
roguegeniusApr 2, 2011
"Not all of them; just the five who voted to overturn the ruling--Scalia, Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, and Breyer."
You didn't really need to name them. I just call them: "The Usual Suspects"
(Yes I'm too lazy to correct too. It's good enough)
blackoculusApr 1, 2011
More than this, I want to know how those f*cking lawyers were that covered up the evidence!
They better be disbarred and serving time!
blackoculusApr 2, 2011
wish i could edit.... meant to write who not how.
" want to know who those... "
pureeviljesterApr 2, 2011
Obviously we need terms for the US Supreme Court.
rudegarApr 2, 2011
or change the name to US Average Court
roguegeniusApr 2, 2011
Or dumbass court
farboddanaiApr 2, 2011
Agree
novenatorApr 2, 2011
That's because it's the most far right activist supreme court in a century http://goo.gl/N7kx8
This has been done on purpose by the Republicans and their corporate masters, and this is just the latest case.
Mean_Mister_MustardApr 2, 2011
Ow boo-hoo
ultrasparcApr 2, 2011
Seriously the outcome from this is absolutely disgusting. The man should be rewarded one million dollars for every year he spent in prison! I think that's as fair as you can get at this point - although one hopes this would never happen to begin with.
porkfriedriceApr 1, 2011
the system fails repeatedly but nothing changes
immunofortApr 1, 2011
Yep, Just ignore every single time that the system has actually put away. Granted it does fail sometimes, you can't expect any system to be perfect.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
diggerineApr 1, 2011
Right, just ignore every single time that the system has actually failed horribly and jailed or punished an innocent person.
Granted it does work many times, but you can't expect any system to be perfect...
...except when the horrible injustice happens to you, or to your spouse, children, siblings, parents, and loved ones, in which case you'll be outraged to high heavens (and will then proceed to forget all the times the system has 'worked' for others besides you and people you care about).
Injustice coming from persons that 'the people' endow authority on and expect true justice from is the most outrageous and least forgivable form of injustice, and hence must be prevented and punished the most.
immunofortApr 2, 2011
I never said ignore every time the system has failed, but the number of times where it has actually done good far outweigh the bad.
If injustice did happen to me or someone i know then yeah I would be outraged and criticize the system, but criticism made without suggestions as to how to make the system better is useless.
khundaveApr 2, 2011
Yeah,, but it doesn't sound like you are all that outraged by this failure of the system.
alienmushroomApr 2, 2011
it's called sarcasm.
sabachApr 2, 2011
"suggestions as to how to make the system better". Uh, let's see, how about making sure DA's DO THEIR f**kING JOB. They committed perjury and should be accountable for it.
motty32Apr 2, 2011
putting an innocent man away for 14 years is FAR WORSE than any amount of good the system could possibly have done.
TreesThatSwimApr 2, 2011
If the state doesn't want to cough up $14M, they should provide more than just an "oops, our mistake". This man lost YEARS (not weeks or days) of potential life and happiness with family and friends.
pureeviljesterApr 2, 2011
Because people like you settle for less, we do not have the best we could have.
immunofortApr 2, 2011
I never said I settle for less, I just said you can't have a perfect system. If there are flaws in the system you fix them, but you can't expect the system to run indefinitely with a perfect outcome.
Do you think you could come up with a legal system which is absolutely perfect with no flaws? No I don't think so.
Quote by Winston Churchill is somewhat relevant
"It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." The current legal system, likewise with democracy isn't perfect, but its the best thing around.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
meribianApr 2, 2011
Yeah, go suck a dick.
smokezzApr 2, 2011
Maybe read the article immunofort? This wasn't a flaw... this was the prosecution covering up evidence that would have proved he wasn't the person that committed the crime.
weedsoupApr 2, 2011
You're right, generally speaking, that the system isn't perfect and mistakes will be made. In this case though, the mistakes appear to be deliberately made on the part of the DA, and deliberately left unaccounted for by the Supremes. Those aren't mistakes, they're malfeasance.
vikeshpatelApr 2, 2011
Well, here's the actual ruling, but it's a pretty long-winded 64 pages long, if you're just looking for a few more details:
rgb86Apr 2, 2011
If you're going to copy my comment, you may as well copy the link, too. :P (Though, I don't understand why you'd copy it as a reply to this post....it really has nothing to do with what he said.)
==========
Well, here's the actual ruling, but it's a pretty long-winded 64 pages long, if you're just looking for a few more details:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-571.pdf
==========
http://digg.com/news/offbeat/years_in_jail_for_murder_he_didn_t_commit_18_compensation_0_00/20110401214321:90a8552d2ca24622977a449939cf7de2#20110401230155:44a6243fb5bb4f5893037eb172b54c41
murxApr 2, 2011
Just read the first two pages and I found something astonishing:
There seems to be no law regulating compensation for prosecution of innocenct people in the US.
Somehow you have to prove that the government has broken ANOTHER law or regulation to claim compensation.
And since that claim here is ...'weak' the courts were divided and thus the denial.
It seems as long as 'the state' has done everything according to law and regulations - if you're innocent but incarcerated you have no right for compensation.
cybersaurApr 1, 2011
If Mr. Thompson were a corporation the USSC would have awarded him the $14 million and fellated him before he headed to the bank!
penglustApr 2, 2011
They would have awarded him $14 billion and included all his offspring for 500 years.
alyxvanceApr 2, 2011
Some of you should actually read the ruling. Here are the details.
1. Thompson was convicted of armed robbery. There was blood recovered from the scene but was not ever used in the ruling because they didn't even have his blood type at the time. He was found fully guilty when they didn't even use the blood.
2. Only a few weeks later he was on court for murder. Because he was found guilty of the robbery he chose not to testify for himself. He was still found guilty of the murder without the blood test even being a part of this trial at all. The blood test had absolutely nothing to do with this case and he was still found guilty.
3. Thompson's private eye found that the blood had been tested from case #1 but never been disclosed. This invalidated case #1.
4. Since Thompson did not testify in case #2 because he was found guilty of case #1, case #2 was therefore declared invalid also.
So what you have here is a man guilty of armed robbery AND murder who was fully convicted in both cases without the blood sample even being used in court. If the blood had never even been tested he still would have been proved guilty without reasonable doubt. This blood test is a minor detail that freed a criminal and a murder.
You people are so quick to scream injustice here without actually trying to see what happened. Quit rushing to preconceived conclusions and get some more information before judging for one time. Everyone on Digg is always complaining about the 'Sheep' in this country. Well this whole group is acting like sheep following a misleading and sensational article.
letherialApr 2, 2011
Its a fault of the article, it doesn't explain why...and that makes it a horrible article; clearly bias
that doesn't mean you get away with no proof; you offered as much evidence as the article did.
alyxvanceApr 2, 2011
Also, I think the more important issue here is we have 4 SCOTUS justices willing to give $14 million of taxpayer dollars to an obviously guilty man due to a minor technicality.
jefferydileggeApr 1, 2011
I bet he kills someone now.
jefferydileggeApr 1, 2011
I bet he kills someone now.
jefferydileggeApr 1, 2011
Why is this thing posting twice, I clicked it once.
neotechniApr 1, 2011
The torment of knowing his govt is going to kill him should be worth something, gees
geoffreyjewelApr 1, 2011
Now if he were a corporation then he have some rights.
cc5aliveApr 1, 2011
Justice fail.
salbatrossApr 1, 2011
That is some bulls**t.
breadfredApr 1, 2011
What a f**king joke. Maybe $14 million is a bit much, but for crying out loud - this guys life has been ruined. These bloody idiots should be made top pay this amount themselves - out of their OWN f**kING POCKET..
There are times I wish /b was my private army. This is one of them.
Closed AccountApr 1, 2011
14 million is a bit much but well worth it. It technically more than makes up for it. How much do you make in 14 years? Most people won't net more than 1-2 million combined through a lifetime of working.
Imagine it like someone said you have to go live in a small room somewhere isolated to a single complex for 14 years while they provide everything you need for free while doing nothing for it. Then after they give you more money than you'd make in over 10 lifetimes.
This guy never has to work again. That time spent not working will add up to more time than he would have spent working all those years. What I'm saying is he will have more time overall to live his life and do whatever he wants with than the average working person, and more money to do it with.
So from his standpoint, all should be more than forgiven.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
breadfredApr 1, 2011
uh - I would not like to swap with him. Would YOU like to spend that amount of time in prison? I'd rather have a bit less and live in freedom all of my life, thank you very much.
fizixmanApr 1, 2011
Or think of it as 14 years of freedom taken from you; freedom to do what you want and pursue your interests and happiness? How this affects the quality of life, stress, and happiness of your friends and family?
Or even spending 14 years trying to prove your innocence. Dealing with the stress and dread of being on death row for 14 years.
Yeah, I'd say 14 million is decent.
toxicshokApr 1, 2011
he was actually in jail for 18 years.
kuzotzApr 1, 2011
dude time is more valuable than money 14 million is too little in my opinion. That is 14 yrs of not just not making money, but 14 years of not having a life. not having a social life, not having friends, not seeing family, not seeing your lover, 14 yrs if you have kids of just not being in their life, and it was taken from you by the entity you support through taxes.. 14 million is very little for the damages done. But this is how the system works. Little guys get screwed while the rich get free money. That is 14 years gone, 14 years of being able to see the world, etc etc.. This isn't about having a job and salary and all that boring s**t. I am serious if all you gonna do in life is this then you need to go ahead and kill yourself, and let us live our lives. We don't think about the money you would be made if you were out of jail. This isn't what was going through this man's mind. He lost time he can never get back. 14 million is nothing.
worldgate989Apr 2, 2011
Don't forget, 14 years of avoiding rape in the shower, getting shanked by an inmate, being beaten to death by other inmates or police.
circeherbivoraApr 2, 2011
Yeah, throw in the mental anguish of being only weeks away from being executed...twice. All because the prosecutor decided to throw out Ethics 101 and the Brady doctrine. He (the prosecutor) should be disbarred and liable personally for a civil suit for his part in this.
nullcodesApr 2, 2011
freedom+happiness > all the money in the world
Closed AccountApr 2, 2011
think about it like this, if you work 10 hours a day, sleep 8 hours a day, you're left with 6 hours a day of actual freedom. if you work 5 day weeks, you'll have a total of 62 hours a week to yourself, or about 134 days a year. that's how much time you're not sleeping or working. so for about every 3 years he lost an actual ~1 year of freedom.
considering he doesnt have to work for the rest of his life he's gaining far more time than he lost by all the time that money buys him from not having to work. In his life time he will have more free time than the average person will. this isn't just about the money, it's about the total freedom he has to have every waking moment to himself without needing for anything.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
healiousApr 2, 2011
wow man, you work 70 hours a week? impressive
Closed AccountApr 2, 2011
actually if you work 10 hour days for 5 days a week that would be 50 hours.
alienmushroomApr 2, 2011
Hi Mr. Slave.
circeherbivoraApr 3, 2011
I suppose you consider all the nonconsensual buttsecks an additional bonus too? Just THINK of the money he didn't waste dating and hookers...
goweigusApr 1, 2011
It should be law that people in cases like this they get at least compensated with the value of a full time federal minimum wage job and the paid sick and holidays all added up over the time they spent wrongly imprisoned. That should be automatic, I think they should get even more than this but I don't know where one could reasonably draw the line.
accordenatorApr 2, 2011
whatever that prosecutor had as a salary + benefits with interest for those 14 years - alternately, that prosecutor should be put in prison for 14 years with no possibility of parole or early release. imo
topperpopperApr 2, 2011
I think numbers like this are based on some legal value that is a combination of average salary and a federal survey of what one would pay to remain free and raise a family. I'd guess that the loss of a potential family is where the number came from.
captainbukkoApr 1, 2011
Anyone know why the Supreme Court ruled the way it did? The article is very scarce on details and I'd like to know what possible justification they would have for reversing a lower courts decision.
templedogApr 1, 2011
According to ABC, "The Supreme Court this week overturned the award. The court said while Thompson indeed had been wrongly convicted, he had not proven that the district attorney in New Orleans at the time, Harry Connick, deliberately failed to train his prosecutors about their obligation to turn over exculpatory evidence." Link to full article follows:
Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/04/01/Ex-inmate-stoic-after-Supreme-Court-defeat/UPI-14471301690914/#ixzz1IJJgoj4A
sloppyjoes7Apr 1, 2011
Dugg captainbukko and templedog for having the first non-knee-jerk posts.
oxyrubberApr 2, 2011
And, yet, when you dig deeper:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Connick_Sr.
The DA at the time, Harry Connick Sr. (not to be confused with the singer, his son, Harry Connick Jr.) looks to be pretty shady. This John Thompson's case is only one of more than 19 similar cases. "Failure to train a prosecutor" is a big deal in law (it's their job to know the law).
The worst part is that DA is an elected position and Connick Sr. is since retired from the DA. The only reason the current New Orleans DA's office challenged this case up to the SCOTUS is because they don't want the other 19 death row cases that were overturned to see similar payouts.
If an employee steals 18 years of a citizen's {life / liberty / pursuit of happiness} because that employee failed to do their job (which, in my mind, is a violation of Due Process), something more than $0 is appropriate whether ignorance or naïvity is to blame.
immunofortApr 2, 2011
Thats the thing about digg though. Its usually the 1-2 line comments which are like "corporations are evil" which get voted up simply because they don't take any real effort to read, and most are too lazy to read into the comments which provide any proper critical thinking about the article.
sloppyjoes7Apr 2, 2011
Initially, there were literally about twenty reactions from people, ranging from "kill the judges" to "fire the judges."
Nobody questioning "why'd the judges do this?"Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rgb86Apr 1, 2011
Well, here's the actual ruling, but it's a pretty long-winded 64 pages long, if you're just looking for a few more details:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-571.pdf
yaosioApr 2, 2011
He's guilty. He knows it, they know it, everybody knows it, but he got off on a technicality. We know he's guilty, he was declared guilty a long time ago, now he's going out because Obama wants to destroy the country with criminals.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
grammerpantsApr 2, 2011
wow you fit a little bit of everything in there didn't you?
lunarparcelApr 2, 2011
April Fools, right?
Uh.....right?
Oops, I guess not.
Foolish? yes.
But April 1st is purely coincidental.
nullcodesApr 2, 2011
What technicality? Oh I know, the technicality was that someone else did it.
emecksApr 1, 2011
That works out at a quite incredible $0 per year of being jailed!
darkmatter911Apr 1, 2011
It sounds pretty crappy if you only read the five short paragraphs in a article with an agenda. How many of you have done additional research?
Me? I have not done additional research I just am not jumping to any conclusions as to what resulted in this ruling.
NickCobbApr 1, 2011
He did 14 years in prison and was acquitted. That's one fact we know.
darkmatter911Apr 1, 2011
You are correct. We know a couple of the facts but we do not know them all. I am also only talking about the facts & details of the Supreme Court ruling.
I am not in the least defending the actions of the prosecutors. Personally I think they should be in jail - if they intentionally withheld evidence they are committing a crime and should be held to a higher standard.
circeherbivoraApr 2, 2011
I am sorry, but I think the judicial reasoning in this matter HAS to be faulty. Turning over exculpatory evidence that may exonerate the accused is BASIC. Having that evidence and deliberately excluding it....that's the exact opposite of what our judicial system is about. Think about it- this is the GOVERNMENT deciding that they're going to prosecute you and even though they have evidence that you're NOT the perpetrator, you're going to be held guilty for a capital crime. That is madness! We might as well be a third world country and just stone people to death at the first accusation.
lucasvictoryApr 2, 2011
no... THIS. IS. SPARTAAAAAAAAAA
rgb86Apr 2, 2011
Actually, it's 14 years on *death row*--he spent a total of 18 years in prison. (Just to keep facts straight, even though it doesn't really affect the argument much.)
kovac9478Apr 1, 2011
while i think this sucks you have to think about this: this could be used as precedent for every person that is wrongly accused or gets an infraction. "the cop pulled me over and i wasnt speeding so now im suing the police for $1 million." sure that sounds far fetched but we live in america... and i wouldnt be surprised if someone had already tried that.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
logancrestApr 1, 2011
that is already happening... however, when the "Authorities" are wrong, they need to be held to the same standard... it sucks that there are so many lame law suits... because when one like this comes along we all think and say what you posted. I'm not jabbing you, I just think that as a society, we are sort of numb to real justice... What if this was your uncle, your Father or brother... I would fight tooth and nail until "justice" was served!
canadianmacfanApr 2, 2011
The article is short on details so I'm making a general statement. If a person is wrongly convicted and evidence turns up later that proves their innocence (or they had a crap defence lawyer) then I don't believe that they should be compensated. But if an unlawful act, such as tampering with evidence, was the cause of their conviction then compensation should be paid.
The problem of paying people wrongly convicted because the police or prosecutors made mistakes is that it opens the door to lawsuits when a mistake leads to a guilty person being found innocent. Say a person is found not guilty because a police officer had a bad day and didn't find a crucial piece of evidence. (It happens. See the Paul Bernardo case.) What if that person then goes out and commits a serious crime? Does that victim, or family of the victim, have the right to sue the government because justice wasn't served the first time?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
netantApr 2, 2011
How about if the gov't loses a civil lawsuit award, the gov't can avoid paying it by successfully convicting the prosecutors to a preset prison sentence based on the victimized length of stay?
sabz5150Apr 2, 2011
And their lawyers must share in that sentence.
That is how you make a lot of this shady s**t stop.
nullcodesApr 2, 2011
Uh, what do you mean .. you're saying that a person convicted due to paranoia, racism, or incompetence is not entitled to SOME help in getting a few remnants of their life back? How are they to get a job with no experience? How are they to explain their years of blank in their resume without a potential employer wondering "hmm, it's not worth the risk on this guy .. what if he got off on a technicality?" Maybe his kids grew up all screwed up with no dad. All those things .. it takes money to patch up. If the state ruins someone's life, they should pay. If I run over your mailbox by accident .. can I plead lack of intent and not pay for it?
kuzotzApr 2, 2011
we're not that sue happy I mean you might be but this is serious. Obviously you have no idea how valuable time is, and 14 yrs of a man's life was wasted away not by his own choice. luckily men such as yourself are incompetent.
logancrestApr 1, 2011
Three cheers for the US Constitution! I am so proud that we live in a country that believes in paying the price for your actions... except when it is the government... they can do what they want and they are untouchable... because it's not like they were elected to rally for the "voice of the people" ... WE ARE THE PEOPLE... Listen up, bitches!
alyxvanceApr 2, 2011
Quit throwing around the constitution when it doesn't apply. If you disagree with the ruling then you can that it is unjust but they did nothing to violate the constitution here.
amorougenApr 1, 2011
Cut to the chase! Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas were the ones who voted against any justice. But what is new in that?
rgb86Apr 1, 2011
Imagine that.....the same exact split as it was back in the Citizens United case that gave corporations unlimited influence over campaigns. Surely it's just a coincidence.
vladamirApr 1, 2011
I wish this was an April Fools joke.
donutdan4114Apr 1, 2011
If someone paid me $5000, I would spend a week in jail. So to spend 15 years, that would be around $3.5 million. So maybe that would be 'fair' compensation. Quite honestly though, no amount of money can get you back lost time...
immunofortApr 1, 2011
Well it sort of could, considering if he got $3.5million he'd never have to work again. Assuming he would have otherwise ended up in an 8 hour/day job, with $3.5million he'd never have to work again and therefore have about twice as much leisure time as everybody else for the duration of his otherwise working part of life.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
donutdan4114Apr 1, 2011
I don't know about his case specifically, but what if he had a kid or something. You would miss their entire child hood. All relationships ruined... Time is a lot more powerful than money...
immunofortApr 1, 2011
Oh well I was just talking about the time itself, not the experiences otherwise foregone but you're right considering even if he didn't have a child he still missed out on on what could have been the prime years of his life 26-40, considering hes 40 now.
sabz5150Apr 2, 2011
"If someone paid me $5000, I would spend a week in jail. So to spend 15 years, that would be around $3.5 million."
If someone gave you $3.5 million, would you spend fifteen years in prison?
donutdan4114Apr 2, 2011
No I wouldn't. But as I tried to say before, you can't put money on time, not really anyway... No amount of money can compensate for 14 years of prison, but trying to rationalize SOME amount of money is necessary, since that's really the only way to legally 'apologize' to someone. But giving the guy no money is like punching him in the face every day for the rest of his life.
rblancarteApr 1, 2011
Skip the blog, go to the source @ the NY Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-court-prosecutors-20110330,0,1730487.story
The main reason; this blog is very short on good information. The biggest key is that the DA's office didn't simply make mistakes, they had covered up this evidence. The blood test which revealed that Thompson was not the killer was known about by FOUR prosecutors. There was also eyewitness testimony that was also covered up including a description of the possible murderer that Thompson didn't fit.
Thompson's attorney demonstrated that this was a coverup by the DA's office and that this is not the only case that the New Orleans DA's office had concealed evidence from defense teams. Despite this, the majority "described the case as a 'single incident' in which mistakes were made. He said Thompson did not prove a pattern of similar violations that would justify holding the city's government liable for the wrongdoing."
BTW - the split of the justices was 5-4: The Majority: Clarence Thomas, John G. Roberts Jr., Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito Jr.
Minority: Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg
(IE- Party lines)
bigbaddukeApr 1, 2011
These right wing activist judges need to be impeached. What total douche bags!!!!
toxicshokApr 1, 2011
this isn't judicial activism its judicial ass hattery.
yaosioApr 2, 2011
You mean the four left wing activist judges, right? They wanted a guilty person to also get rewarded for murdering somebody. The left loves murder, that's why they want to tax the rich and give money to the poor, poor people are murders and with the extra money they can buy more guns and weapons to murder people.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
karloffbApr 1, 2011
Yeah these guys are so on the take
notachickenhawkApr 1, 2011
Regular courts should never, ever be allowed to preside over this sort of case. The justice system protects itself and all of its players over all else, every single time. The idea that the prosecutor could actually claim he owed no damages to this man, after INTENTIONALLY covering up the evidence that exonerated him, stinks of hubris and arrogance at a level rarely seen.
banderwockyApr 1, 2011
Seriously, how much longer will it take for the people to be screwed over by their Government/Corporations before an actual revolution begins? What is the breaking point?
chilidogsApr 1, 2011
You first. The rest of us are right behind you...no really.
travelsonicApr 1, 2011
... he was asking a question.
netantApr 2, 2011
There should be a good sociologist who can give you a theory.
Study the Rodney King beating/LA riots of 1992. I remember something about other atrocities before that point, including a disgruntled, black police officer having law enforcement standards demonstrated on him with a 60 Minutes camera recording the event. My point is A LOT of police injustice had occurred beforehand. Its a shame that the trigger point of a deadly riot was police mistreatment of a drunken piece of garbage.
The American riot occurred because a group of rich guys thought themselves beyond the grasp of the British gov't. The French riot a few decades later seems to be pretty comprehensible. (Who can say what was the US's South's breaking point? They rioted before the guy they hated came to power. This should be a lesson in pre-emptive action; make sure its worth the consequences, and don't do it if you can't get something out of it.) The Russia riot occurred because of huge amounts of suffering inflicted by the ruling dictatorship (is it really better if its a hereditary dictatorship?).
I think in (almost) all cases, there needs to be an extreme amount of privation, AND injustice before you can get the heads rolling. I don't think we'll see it for a long time in the US.
roguegeniusApr 2, 2011
We don't need a revolution. It won't help. What we need is smarter voters. This is a country where people would rather vote for moronic egotists Sarah Palin or *shudder* Donald Trump than an intellectual like Barack Obama. I'm sorry, but as long as we are that dumb, we are f**ked. Have a revolution and we are back in the same place in ten years: idiots electing idiots while the rest of the world zooms past us laughing.
alxnavaApr 1, 2011
The US Supreme Court is controlled by Conservative elitists who are controlled by the Wall Street Empire!
norman619Apr 1, 2011
how are you going to take 18 years of an innocent person's life and NOT compensate them for it?
netantApr 2, 2011
You do it, because you're above the law...
brynnApr 2, 2011
I remember reading a similar case in the uk a few years back where the guy had been locked up for thirty years, he got £750 000 or something like that and then the govt sued him for £595 000 room and board and left him with just enough to buy a small house. Bastards.
lordbuttersiApr 1, 2011
"John Thompson, a man who spent 14 years on death row because bad prosecutors hid a blood test that would have exonerated him from a murder case and proved his innocence."
That prosecutor needs to be killed. Nothing else is good enough punishment, John needs to be handed a gun and allowed to personally murder that disgrace to the species.
lordbuttersiApr 1, 2011
Preventing an innocent man from accessing evidence that would prove his innocence so you can get a conviction you know for a fact is not true is the absolute definition of pure evil.
theghoulApr 1, 2011
You want to know why there should never be a death penalty? This is it.
You'll never see this story on Foxnews. What now digg patriots?
kuzotzApr 1, 2011
that is the system you don't deserve s**t if you were wrongfully arrested. he needs to sue the surpeme court.. dunno that'll be counter productive. if I was him I would move to another country. America is f**ked up
dethblowApr 1, 2011
Seems to me that at the very least, the prosecuting attorneys need to be dis-barred. Then they should either have to pony up the money or spend 18 years in the slammer for hiding the evidence.
fodderboiApr 2, 2011
Law firms and lawyers make money like crazy.
This is one of the reasons they do make this much money.
Since when they f'up it's really really bad so you hire the best so they f'up less often. They should have to pay restitution and do jail time if they did this intentionally.
dethblowApr 1, 2011
Seems to me that at the very least, the prosecuting attorneys need to be dis-barred. Then they should either have to pony up the money or spend 18 years in the slammer for hiding the evidence.
dachipzApr 2, 2011
"The 5-4 decision, which was hotly debated by the justices, shielded the New Orleans district attorney’s office from being held liable for its mistakes." - That was no 'mistake', that was a criminal conspiracy to suppress evidence! If Thompson had done anything similar, he would have been charged with perjury. Long live 'justice for all'.
netantApr 2, 2011
Prosecuting attorneys need the same legal deference to their position as any corporation. And look, the US Supreme Court agrees!
Ah Conservatives, look to the fruit of your right wing efforts!
yaosioApr 2, 2011
Yet another criminal cheats the systems and gets off free. I'm sick and tired of our government letting guilty people go. Once you are declared guilty that should be the end of it. Name one spot in the constitution that says once you are declared guilty you get to be declared innocent? Not one spot. Kick out the trash and get a real president in!Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
evildeadashApr 2, 2011
I'm sure i speak for at least a few people that hope you get wrongly convicted of something horrible and get sent to death row. f**king idiot..
apokalyps2547Apr 3, 2011
Obvious troll
is obvious
slangitmanApr 2, 2011
The Asst. D.A. who headed the case--who knowingly withheld evidence, and that's reiterated by the Leon Cannizaro, the present DA--was Harry Connick, the father of the douche.
kevinbedfordApr 2, 2011
OMG what the hell is wrong with the supreme court
netantApr 2, 2011
Bush v Gore
Kelo v City of New London
Citizens United v FEC
Thompson v Connick
Well, these cases have the following in common...
1) They were all egregious travesties of justice.
2) They have all happened in an 11 year span of time.
3) Three of the Justices were in the majority of 3 of these outrages.
4) Three of these outrageous decisions had a Republican appointed majority.
Apparently, our Supreme Court really sucks, and we have to hope enough of these bad Justices kick the bucket so Obama (or someone better) can replace them.
netantApr 2, 2011
Supreme Court Death Pool, anyone?
roguegeniusApr 2, 2011
I'm too good of a man to shoot someone. That would be why I lean left. All the murderous dumbf**ks are on the right. So even THAT won't solve our problems.
reddog_x2000Apr 2, 2011
It's stuff like this that makes me hope there's a hell for the DA's & supreme court justices to pay for this in. Or, at least a purgatory.
GrandFatherHighApr 2, 2011
They must be living in hell at home these court people to pass on such hatred without taking the time to read all the evidence-evaluate-they seem to like their own pay checks and blabbing, boasting about their power! (please excuse if this is rude but it kinda relates-$2.54 ebook Harmony...life, love, and the lord Lulu.com-look inside at Amazon hard cover 58 pgs) This ebook might be fun for this type of situation-shares the insight on selfishness and greed. Sorry again if this is out of place and please ignore if you feel it is so.
trade4targetasdfghjkApr 2, 2011
how
amitha143Apr 2, 2011
Yes, i agree with the statement.. Online internet dating is one of the best way to find a partner for a busy people like me.. Thanks for site..
towlie2110Apr 2, 2011
F**KING BULLS**T
gulabsinghApr 2, 2011
Thompson was charged with and convicted of an attempted carjacking near the Superdome as a prelude of charging him with the unsolved murder of a hotel executive. The case was later overturned when a private detective discovered that the man wanted in relation to the carjacking had a B blood type, while Thompson was type O.
bhuvanaragavApr 2, 2011
nicre
thundatundrApr 2, 2011
1212
moonriderApr 2, 2011
The prosecutor should have been censured, removed from office and charged/convicted of the crime of withholding exculpatory evidence. Thompson should have been compensated.
kingpin08Apr 2, 2011
That's pretty shocking! Poor fella deserves something. Even if it's just a dime!