Originally Posted by ItsTheSheppy
The prison system is almost immeasurably broken, I agree. If that was in fact what you were alluding, which is what I'm assuming it was. If it wasn't, it still works to bolster my statement.
The prison (and lockup) he was sent to had no reason to believe he was guilty of anything. He hadn't been prosecuted, convicted, sentenced... any of that. This isn't the 17th century. It's not like they had to wait for that information to show up via the Pony Express. There should have been no question at any time of his 'guilt' or 'innocence'. On another thread on this board I happen to know that you, Malorn, are vehemently defending an individual who is being convicted in the public eye of a possible crime not yet investigated.
In this thread's care, this was a man who was definitely innocent, and yet subjected to a humiliating violation of his rights, and the Supreme Court upheld the treatment. That is a bit more severe than being a public pariah. This is the highest court in the land saying 'Even though you were wrongfully arrested and innocent of any crime, we were well without our rights to violate yours.'
If you're going to stand up for the rights of a man you presume is innocent, then stand up for the violated rights of someone we know was innocent.
|
He was guilty of the crime of speeding, dont get that wrong, he was guilty. He had a chance to contest the ticket in a court but he chose to admit guilt and pay the fine and he did. The court system dropped the ball and thought he hadnt paid. The prison
did not know he had paid his punishment. From the point of view of the prison, he was caught evading the punishment for his self-admitted crime.