-
Features
Justice?
- Thread starter none
- Start date
Valjean
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,349
- Location
- Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
- Basic Beliefs
- Vedanta. Many worlds physics, Environmentalism, Socialism.
Sounds like it might already have been dismissed.
untermensche
Contributor
What is justice?
Where does it exist?
How do we know when we see it?
Where does it exist?
How do we know when we see it?
I didn't know how much I missed singular sentence man until now. Where have you been Mr. One Hitter Quitter? Anyhow, my simple brain says as long as the defendant, defense lawyer, prosecutor, and jury (if there is one) can scrutinize it; I doubt it will be dismissed.
Alcoholic Actuary
Veteran Member
I think it's pretty common. eg, if you get stopped and charged with a DUI, but it's your first ever offense you can still receive the full punishment for a DUI but have the charge sealed from your public record. Then if you get a second DUI, they uncover the first one and both charges appear on your record and you get punished as a repeat offender. And I think there may be a sunset clause or probationary period where if you don't get another charge, the first sealed charge comes off. Are you talking about something like that?
So what's justice? You still receive punishment for legal infraction, but they are waiting to see if this was truly a 1-time error or if you are actually a serial law breaker before branding you one publicly.
aa
So what's justice? You still receive punishment for legal infraction, but they are waiting to see if this was truly a 1-time error or if you are actually a serial law breaker before branding you one publicly.
aa
Sealed records are still visible to the government.
That conviction was sealed, you don't need to disclose it at a job interview. But you had better disclose it when asked when you're applying for Global Entry (lets you in general handle US immigration without talking to anybody)--failing to do so will fail your application.
That conviction was sealed, you don't need to disclose it at a job interview. But you had better disclose it when asked when you're applying for Global Entry (lets you in general handle US immigration without talking to anybody)--failing to do so will fail your application.
And the internet is forever.
One of the legal concepts of western law is "public good". Judges can and do consider the public good when interpreting a point of law. This is often the tipping point when a law or legal application of a law is ambiguous.
This leads to the question, is the public good better served by maintaining the status quo, or by making the change you suggest? We can assume the guilt of the person who violated the law is established and the sentence has been applied, whatever it was. The law allows all of this to be concealed in some cases.
Who benefits from this? Apparently, the criminal. If the violation is concealed because it was a first offense, dismissing the charge could lead to an endless series of repeat first offenses.
I remember a scandal not far from where I live. Judges generally treat a first offense DUI very leniently, if there are no aggravating factors. The accused can submit to therapy and education, and if they stay clean for a period of time, the conviction could be expunged from their record. This depends upon the Judge being made aware of any previous convictions. The procedure in this particular jurisdiction was for the prosecutor to staple a copy of any previous DUI convictions to the presentencing paperwork submitted to the Judge.
That's where the problem arose. The collecting of records and the stapling was performed by clerical staff in the prosecutors office. There was a certain prosecutor who would remove the copies before submitting them. This resulted in quite a few people appearing in court after multiple DUI convictions, and treated as a first offender in each case. This happened often enough, questions were raised. All cases led back to the same prosecutor and he blamed the clerks. Blaming clerks for bad paperwork is always a bad idea. When the questionable presentencing reports were pulled from the files, all had staple holes in them.