JUSTICE SYSTEM FACT SHEET:
ONCE YOU ARE CONVICTED OF A CRIME,
THE SYSTEM THAT IS SUPPOSE TO
ENFORCE YOUR RIGHTS ABANDONS YOU.

PRE-CONVICTION
The justice system consistently wants you to believe that all of the people in custody are guilty of the crime. They want you to believe that if you went to court and was found guilty, you actually had a fair trial. However, the justice system is very competitive. If you want to be the District Attorney you have to have a very high conviction rate. Taxpayers and voters believe that if the prosecutors are convicting people, this solves crimes and makes this county a better place to live in. If you notice this tactic does not lower the crime rate. The seasoned criminals know how to take deals, and the people that decide to fight their cases because they are innocent, get convicted.

There are all kinds of mistakes in the legal system. Witness identification is one big factor. The police and the DA induce people to swear to the identification of an innocent individual as the person that committed the crime. These civic minded citizens come forward thinking that they are doing their civic duty. There are many cases in which these individuals were not sure of the perpetrator, but were encourage by the prosecution to testify that they saw an innocent individual commit a crime.

The pressure they applied was telling these civic minded citizens that if they do not convict this individual this individual will do the same thing to someone else. There were over 200 people released from custody serving long term to life and even death sentences that were reversed due to DNA evidence.

Prosecutors fight DNA evidence even to this day especially when it is used to release a person that they victimized. In many cases the prosecutor knows that the person is innocent, but they still do everything in their power to convict and keep the person in custody. They even go to the extreme of allowing someone innocent to be executed. Believe it or not, when an innocent persons case comes forth in court, between the police and the prosecutor they will have some form of exaggerated evidence or collaboration that they will use against the defendant. The whole object is to win the case, not to be finders of facts, or to do what is right. When the District Attorneys office was formed it was to set out to find the truth, and somehow this has been perverted into winning at all cost.

Not only do the prosecutors and police conspire occasionally to convict a defendant, the defendants own defense attorney participates. The Public Defenders office only looks to make deals on most cases, not to take them to trial. The Public Defenders are not in the least interested whether or not the person is innocent or guilty. They act like peace keepers and try to compromise and come up with a solution that will make everyone happy. Well this philosophy works with the guilty people because any deal is good for them. However, it puts the innocent person who really did not commit the crime in jeopardy.

First of all someone is handling their case that does not believe in them, and wants to compromise their innocence, really does not want to defend them. This means that they will actually have to work to prepare a case. Most Public Defenders do not like trials and are poorly prepared when they are forced into court.

Another very important issue is that the same people that pay the District Attorney, pays the Public Defender. A paid attorney usually is a better deal, but not always. Some paid attorneys will do a song and dance to get the clients case and money by telling them that they have a good case. They will charge you one fee if they do not have to go to trial, and more if they have to go to trial. All of a sudden the clients case does not look as good as it did. The client may still get the same results if the attorney does not have the interest in winning as compared to just getting paid.

What it seems to come down to is which side puts on the best show in court. Usually the best informed side wins. It does not matter who is guilty or innocent. It usually comes down to who is best prepared. Now when you see or hear the title of the case State vs a defendant or the United States vs a defendant, this is true. When the State or Country take on a defendant they have the full support of the government. For example the State has: the Police Officer, the Police Detectives, the DA investigator, the District Attorney, Coroners Office, and Forensic support. They have every investigative means at their disposal. It is like all of these people and entities gang up on one person.

However, this justice system will try to convince you that the only thing that you need is an attorney to fight for you. Most defendants who win their case won because they hired a good investigative or the attorney had an investigative staff. Investigators counter discovery evidence bought against their client and develop new evidence used in their client’s behalf.

However, most lone attorneys do not investigate anything. They try to provide a defense to counter the prosecution, but never focus on an offense. You have to have a balance attack to win.

CONVICTION THAN APPEAL
After a defendant gets convicted of a crime, there is a process known as an appeal. This process can be useful if there were very serious constitutional or judicial issues that were not properly taken care of in the original trial. However, less than 3% of defendants are released on cases that are appealed. New issues can not be raised during an appeal. Only issues that were mishandled in the original trial can be appealed. A defendant may win on some issues in an appeal, but they will not be relevant enough to initiate a retrial or an exoneration.

Defendants are made to believe that the appellate process is a good opportunity to win their cases. Their attorneys include all of these arguments that really do seem like violations, and in most cases really are good arguments. However, they usually lose these appeals not because the issues are not legitimate, it is the fact that they do not have proof of these accusations. This is because appellate attorneys do not investigate either. They raise interesting issues, but without facts that support these issues, they just fall on death ears.

LIFE FOR AN INMATE AFTER OR BETWEEN APPEALS
Nobody does anything useful for the defendant and his case. Time seems to stands still for the inmate. Nobody is working on their case. Nobody with the exception of the inmate, really seems to care. This is probably the worst time for an inmate, knowing that they are innocent and have been wrongfully convicted, and no one is fighting for them.

HOW DEFENDANTS ARE MISLEAD REGARDING THEIR
CASE
Defendants are mislead into believing that they do not have anything to do with their case. The defendant is lowered into a false sense of security that the attorney has their best interest and is properly representing them. Many defendants do not do any independent research on their own cases. They are told by their current and former attorneys that they do not need to know or have in their possession information regarding their cases.

However, this is just so that the attorney can keep the inmate in the dark about what happened to them. Inmates should demand transcripts, reports, statements, and all other copies of information regarding their trials. Defense attorneys will tell their client that having information in their possess about their case is not safe when they are in custody. There are some situation when this is true. I still believe that the defendant should have this information. There should also be a family member or a person that the inmate trust keeping copies of their case on the outside. An inmate has the right to have copies of this information themselves and to have a person appointed to keep this information. I always recommend to my clients that they do this.

Defense attorneys will tell their client that they know more about the inmates case then they do. Somehow they try to convince their client that they should remain silent, not get involved in their case, and just blindly listen to them. In most case the attorney will not even really discuss the case with their client, when the client most likely has important information to share.

However these types of attorneys already know how they are going to defend their client and they really do not care what the client has to say. Another tactic used by the defense attorney is to have the inmate wave time or consistently ask for continuances. If the defense is not prepared then this might be a good move. However, some defense attorneys wave time and continue cases because the prosecution is not ready. This is absolutely ridiculous. Why give the other side time to plan, falsify, and manipulate evidence.

Some defense attorneys will tell their clients to remain silent after they are convicted and not try to attract publicity on their case. This is also a fallacy. If an inmate has been wrongfully accused and falsely convicted, sentenced to a long term, especially life or death cases, I recommend that the inmate make all the constructive noise they can. Nobody cares about the inmate in custody if they do not care for themselves, or try to attract attention to their case. I can assure you that these attorneys that give this type of advise messed up on the inmates case and they do not want anyone to know because it is bad publicity for them. These defense attorneys are still living a good life, still making money, and still getting more clients. They really do not take their former clients conviction personally or as hard as their client did.

There is no real downside for an attorney that did not do their best for an client, even if it is proven in the long run. This justice system does not punish attorneys that do not live up to the standards of providing a good defense. First of all the justice system sets the standards really low. All an attorney really has to do is just show up most of the time, not be intoxicated, and stay awake. The court is not concerned with the fact that these attorneys did not investigate or put on a good case in behalf of their client. After their client is convicted, the defense attorney may tell their client that they always thought that they were innocent, but they will not do anything else, without being paid, on their own to help the client or remedy mistakes that they made.

A good rule of thumb for a client is to take control of their case and make sure that the attorney is working for them. A client should always have information and have knowledge about their case. If they really have serious issues with their attorney they should make these issues known. The client should document these issues, preferably in open court or by letters to the judge.

The other alternative is to fire the attorney, or at least make the attempt to. The client/attorney relationship should be a working relationship by being two ways. The client has to always know that the attorney is working for them, not visa versa.