|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 行政领导选举是西方民主制度的糟粕。 |
 |
| 所跟贴 |
行政领导选举是西方民主制度的糟粕。 -- 大改锥 - (2515 Byte) 2005-1-16 周日, 上午9:16 (486 reads) |
ltlee
[博客]
[个人文集]
游客
|
|
|
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
几年前美国洛杉矶Rampart地区警察局爆发大丑闻。丑闻始于警察局，也暴露司法制度的问题。其中一项是法官为当选引至司法时有偏颇。
http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20001001mag-lapd.html
"While Rampart started as a police scandal, it has rapidly exposed deep flaws in the entire Los Angeles County legal system.
According to Michael Judge, the city's chief public defender, "The criminal-justice system in Los Angeles County is seriously out of balance." Corrupt police officers have been protected by laws, ballot initiatives and court decisions that have tipped the scale against defendants. "Taken together, these changes in the criminal justice system have made it easier for police to lie and get away with it," said Harland Braun, a defense attorney who represents Michael Buchanan, one of the Rampart officers about to go on trial.
California's "three strikes" law, one of the nation's toughest, has played a special role. The law carries a 25-years-to-life sentence. To avoid being subjected to "three strikes," many defendants plead guilty. Guilty pleas, in turn, reduce the chances of police officers getting caught in lies. "Police officers aren't stupid," said Judge. "They know that less than 5 percent of felony cases come to trial. So the odds are very good they won't face cross-examination on what is in their report."
In those cases when Crash officers were compelled to testify, they were often helped along by Los Angeles County judges. In an astonishing number of Crash cases, these judges showed an almost total lack of skepticism about whether the officers had made legitimate arrests. The L.A.P.D. Board of Inquiry report on the Rampart scandal cites a case in which members of Rampart Crash searched the cars of people attending a gang member's funeral. Drugs were found in one vehicle, and the driver was tried and convicted. Commenting on this case, Dan Koenig, the L.A.P.D. commander who wrote the board of inquiry report, asked, "Where is the probable cause in a case like this?"
Five Los Angeles County judges interviewed for this article said that they have presided over trials in which they suspected police officers of lying. "When police officers lie, it's usually about probable cause," said Judge Czuleger, who handled the Ovando trial. But another veteran judge, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, "An officer who will lie about probable cause will lie about anything."
A Los Angeles judge with long experience, who also insisted that he not be named, believes that judges were perhaps unwittingly complicit in the Rampart scandal. "It's said we need to change the police culture, and that's absolutely necessary," he remarked. "But we have to change the judicial culture too. The judicial culture is hostile to the defense. You'll hear judges talking at lunch about some stupid thing a defense attorney did -- they rarely talk that way about a prosecutor. I don't think they're aware how biased they sound."
Judges are also under tremendous pressure to keep their jobs. "If a judge is labeled soft on crime, it's a sure ticket to no longer being a judge," said McKesson, Perez's lawyer. A judge who doesn't seem tough enough can pretty much expect an election challenge from an ambitious prosecutor, a daunting prospect in Los Angeles County, where even a bare-bones campaign can cost $100,000."
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
