tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post637165292650368270..comments2024-01-02T10:09:58.744-08:00Comments on Preaching to the choir: Supreme Court Bizarro WorldShttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12429147325673256508noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post-87708105253543388702009-11-05T09:35:19.876-08:002009-11-05T09:35:19.876-08:00I have no strong hopes given the decisions coming ...I have no strong hopes given the decisions coming out of the Roberts' Court.<br /><br />Of course, not allowing for compensation makes the US system of justice look corrupt in the eyes of the world. That also knocks the US off its moral high horse.Laci the Chinese Crestedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07371541369012938298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post-90827213782688248682009-11-05T08:36:09.692-08:002009-11-05T08:36:09.692-08:00Nobody seriously disputes that using fabricated ev...Nobody seriously disputes that using fabricated evidence at trial to secure a conviction is a constitutional violation because it is a deprivation of liberty without due process of law. But, the prosecutor who uses that evidence at trial is absolutely immune from civil suit. A police officer who fabricated that evidence could be liable. Yesterday's case was asking the question of whether the prosecutor who fabricated the evidence could be liable or whether his absolute immunity at trial would protect even his pre-trial shenanigans. It seems a little absurd to think that a prosecutor can protect himself from civil suit simply by convicting the defendant using the evidence he fabricated.<br /><br />If the defendant is not convicted or even sent to trial, but is arrested or jailed pre-trial based on fabricated evidence, the violation there is considered to be a 4th Amendment violation. But that absolute immunity at trial will still protect a prosecutor who takes the case to trial. I don't know how the Court would answer the question of whether a prosecutor can be sued under the 4th Amendment for fabricating evidence that results in a wrongful charge being filed.<br /><br />I think we'll have to see how this decision comes out to know more about when, if ever, prosecutors can be sued.Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12429147325673256508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post-70298515403659361312009-11-05T08:25:28.061-08:002009-11-05T08:25:28.061-08:00S,
Have a question about this statement:
OF COUR...S,<br /><br />Have a question about this statement:<br /><br /><i>OF COURSE defendants should be able to sue prosecutors who fabricate evidence against them to secure convictions. </i><br /><br />Couldn't, in some cases, the point be made that the prosecutor wouldn't have gone to trial or pressed charges if the evidence wasn't fabricated?<br /><br />Does the defendant have any recourse in that type of situation?Bob S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15882819735831651314noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post-57957742841606312692009-11-05T07:09:52.740-08:002009-11-05T07:09:52.740-08:00Sotomayor did seem screwed defendant-friendly. Ke...Sotomayor did seem screwed defendant-friendly. Kennedy just loves being that all-powerful swing vote, doesn't he.<br /><br />His first question to the prosecutor's lawyer was, "Your case is a polite way of telling us we wasted our time in Buckley v. Fitzsimmons?" Not a great start for that side. Then he also posed the question, "So the law is the more deeply you're involved in the wrong, the more likely you are to be immune? That's a strange proposition." He came back to that point several times.<br /><br />During the defendants' argument, he was asking what exactly the constitutional violation is and when it occurs. I really don't get a sense for where exactly he will fall, but I don't think he's comfortable with blanket immunity.Shttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12429147325673256508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2248881149749925934.post-49971321696691704142009-11-05T05:47:40.324-08:002009-11-05T05:47:40.324-08:00Well, it all really comes down to Anthony Kennedy,...Well, it all really comes down to Anthony Kennedy, doesn't it? We know that Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito will vote for the prosecutors; we know that Stevens, Ginsburg, Breyer, and presumably Sotomayor will vote for McGhee.<br /><br />What kinds of questions was Kennedy asking? Did he leave any clues about how he was leaning? As I recall, he's generally pro-government on criminal law issues, which if true does not bode well for the result.Burt Likkohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16060980744675990412noreply@blogger.com