Jailed For Years Without Trial, Kills Himself

VanceMack said:

No...he was offered bail options as well as plea bargains.

Click to expand...

Actually:

Three Years on Rikers Without Trial - The New Yorker

Most of the time, however, Browder had no direct contact with O’Meara; the few times he tried to phone him, he couldn’t get through, so he was dependent on his mother to talk to O’Meara on his behalf. Every time Browder got the chance, he asked O’Meara the same question: “Can you get me out?” O’Meara says that he made multiple bail applications on his client’s behalf, but was unsuccessful because of the violation of probation.

Click to expand...

But, because Browder was still on probation, the judge ordered him to be held and set bail at three thousand dollars. The amount was out of reach for his family, and soon Browder found himself aboard a Department of Correction bus.

Click to expand...

It no longer mattered whether his mother could find the money to bail him out. The Department of Probation had filed a “violation of probation” against him—standard procedure when someone on probation is indicted on a new violent felony—and the judge had remanded him without bail.

Click to expand...

So in short, he was offered a bail that was out of reach for his family at the time. In the same early proceedings, his bail was removed and he was put in the custody of the justice system. Then he was offered a plea bargain. Those aren't options. That is extortion followed by entrapment. It's telling people that they either have the money when asked for it, or they'll be sent to jail and given the "choice" of pleading guilty. In spite of the fact that he from the beginning made it clear he wanted to go to trial. The fact that you consider these as "options" is pretty weird.

Chase said:

That should be quoted as post of the day. They got all bent out of shape when he just mentions that murdered black kid could look like one of his kids.......could you imagine the crazy right wing nutz out rage if he pardoned a poor black kid. OMG Hannity, O'Riley and all the other FAUX news nutz would loose their minds if he ever did something like that.

Click to expand...

Yeah, just saying. he has the power. Wasn't at all suggesting it would be a good or prudent move on his part.

iliveonramen said:

Maybe I'm just confused why you need to continue to throw things out there as excuses for a system that both of us agree is messed up

Click to expand...

See...theres your problem. If the other possibilities are discussed...it confuses you.

Maybe. JUST MAYBE...there are other possibilities but REGARDLESS (and as I have said for the last time now) there are things that CAN and SHOULD be done better.

Hatuey said:

Actually:

Three Years on Rikers Without Trial - The New Yorker







So in short, he was offered a bail that was out of reach for his family at the time. In the same early proceedings, his bail was removed and he was put in the custody of the justice system. Then he was offered a plea bargain. Those aren't options. That is extortion followed by entrapment. It's telling people that they either have the money when asked for it, or they'll be sent to jail and given the "choice" of pleading guilty. In spite of the fact that he from the beginning made it clear he wanted to go to trial. The fact that you consider these as "options" is pretty weird.

Click to expand...

Except he wouldn't have had to wait the three years had he known that every attorney filing set him back in the queue.

Hatuey said:

Actually:

Three Years on Rikers Without Trial - The New Yorker







So in short, he was offered a bail that was out of reach for his family at the time. In the same early proceedings, his bail was removed and he was put in the custody of the justice system without bail. Then he was offered a plea bargain. Those aren't options. That is extortion followed by entrapment. It's telling people that they either have the money when asked for it, or they'll be sent to jail and given the "choice" of pleading guilty. In pite of the fact that he from the beginning made it clear he wanted to go to trial. The fact that you consider these as "options" is pretty weird.

Click to expand...

You are right. I misspoke/was wrong with regard to the "remanded without bail" comment.

clownboy said:

Except he wouldn't have had to wait the three years had he known that every attorney filing set him back in the queue.

Click to expand...

It's almost like you don't get the point of my post. I'll simplify it:

Claiming that he was provided options WHEN HE CLEARLY WASN'T is at best dishonest. The system "offered" him a pay to get out of jail card. He couldn't afford it so he went to jail. That is extortion. Then took it away and told him to plead guilty instead so that he could get things rolling faster. That is entrapment.

Is this too hard for you? Or are you going to waste a lot of forum bandwidth defending the indefensible?

CanadaJohn said:

Clearly, you didn't read the OP in this thread and you're more invested in interpreting my post to suit your need to call me a racist than you are in understanding what was posted.

The OP posted the story with video and claimed that this is a "symbol of America's broken criminal justice system". Got it.

Now, I reviewed the story and reviewed the video and I saw very little that was truly evident about a broken American justice system but I did see a lot of black youth who spat on, kicked, stomped, and beat upon another black youth in the confines of a jail and even with a couple of jail guards trying to control the situation continued to do so. That is what I commented upon. In the context of what happened in Ferguson, what happened and is happening in Baltimore, what's happening daily in Chicago, and in other cities in America, where black on black crime is rampant, where black youth kill other black youth for sport and pleasure, and where respect for others and the property of others is often non-existent, the video in the OP and the actions of these youth said more about blacks in America than it said about the American justice system.

That is a fact, it is a difficult fact, but it is the truth - I can see you don't like it and so need to misinterpret what I said in order to counter it and claim I'm a racist. That's fine. But don't expect me to change my views of what I saw in this video and what is happening in America today because you find the truth uncomfortable. That's your problem, not mine.

Click to expand...

It's not at all "fact" that a video of some people in jail tells us a thing about "blacks in America." It tells us the same amount of information that reviewing Stormfront tells us about "whites" in America.

And you didn't expend much effort reviewing the stories. I spent a few minutes. What I learned was that bail was revoked in month 2 of 36. It made no sense to you that the family didn't bail him out, but they could not bail him out after bail was revoked. I learned his trail was delayed for years because the prosecution wasn't "ready" for trial, prosecutor on vacation, assistant on vacation, etc. years after he was charged, and that each requested "one week" delay ended up being 6 or 8 weeks, but the additional weeks past the "one" week requested didn't count towards the speedy trial limit. That's how 10 or 15 "one week" requests turns into 60 or 80 or 100 weeks, all perfectly legitimate in that system, through no fault of the defendant. I learned that his lawyer was overworked and had almost no direct contact with the defendant, so his right to counsel was pretty hollow. The only thing that could have gotten him out of jail early was pleading guilty to a crime he maintained from minute 1 of the ordeal he did not commit. I learned that there are almost no actual trials:

In 2011, in the Bronx, only a hundred and sixty-five (165) felony cases went to trial; in three thousand nine hundred and ninety-one (3,991) cases, the defendant pleaded guilty.

Click to expand...

If the alternative is rotting in prison waiting for a trial date that is years away in reality, that might explain it.

But, sure, maintain that a video of some blacks in prison is a reflection of blacks in America, and that this case illustrates what could be a criminal justice system working as intended and dispensing justice. But if you want to make ridiculous generalizations like that, don't be surprised when you're called out on it.

Hatuey said:

It's almost like you don't get the point of my post. I'll simplify it:

Claiming that he was provided options WHEN HE CLEARLY WASN'T is at best dishonest. The system "offered" him a pay to get out of jail card that he couldn't afford or go to jail. That is extortion. Then took it away and told him to plead guilty instead so that he could get things rolling faster. That is entrapment.

Is this too hard for you? Or are you going to waste a lot of forum bandwidth defending the indefensible?

Click to expand...

The system offered him a bail even the poorest in NY could afford. It would have been the princely sum of $300. But he wasn't entitled to bail after all. That happens when you commit a felony while on probation/parole. What part of that is unjust in your made up manual? He was offered a plea bargain and time served, that's NOT extortion, at least by any legal definition of the word.

And no, it's not entrapment either. Again by any legal definition of the word.

As to that very last, I've been wondering how long you were going to waste a lot of forum bandwidth making up your own definitions and language just so you can support a busted argument.

clownboy said:

Except he wouldn't have had to wait the three years had he known that every attorney filing set him back in the queue.

Click to expand...

The "attorney filings" were by the prosecutor, approved by the judge, and every "one week" delay request turned into 6 or 8 weeks. What could the defendant do about it? Besides plead guilty, have a criminal record, lose his right to vote in many states, right to various aid programs, right to own a firearm. Sure, why not plead guilty?

JasperL said:

The "attorney filings" were by the prosecutor, approved by the judge, and every "one week" delay request turned into 6 or 8 weeks. What could the defendant do about it? Besides plead guilty, have a criminal record, lose his right to vote in many states, right to various aid programs, right to own a firearm. Sure, why not plead guilty?

Click to expand...

Nope, it's not the prosecutor's filings that reset the speedy trial clock. He already had a felony criminal record.

clownboy said:

The system offered him a bail even the poorest in NY could afford. It would have been the princely sum of $300. But he wasn't entitled to bail after all. That happens when you commit a felony while on probation/parole. What part of that is unjust in your made up manual? He was offered a plea bargain and time served, that's NOT extortion, at least by any legal definition of the word.

Click to expand...

When was it demonstrated he committed any felony while on probation? He maintained his innocence from minute 1 of the ordeal till he was released without trial.

And it's mind boggling you conclude that it's "just" that a person never even TRIED for a crime spent his 17th, 18th, and 19th years of life in prison for a crime he was never even allowed to contest in court. Or that the offer to plead guilty to a crime is a mitigating fact when discussing the fairness or justness of the criminal justice system. Only in up is down world is rejecting an "offer" to plead guilty a way to shift blame to the defendant for waiting over 3 years for a trial.

clownboy said:

The system offered him a bail even the poorest in NY could afford. It would have been the princely sum of $300.

Click to expand...

First, you don't know his family's living standards, their economic resources or for that matter their income. So claiming that the "poorest" in New York could afford it is absolutely absurd and devoid of any facts to back it up.

Secondly, bail bondsmen require that additional people guarantee reimbursement. So it's not as easy as simply paying $300. It's finding people willing to put up the additional $3K if things were to go wrong. This is specially true in NYC where even the average law firm worth its salt has a page dedicated to the actual dynamics of bail.

Finally, the fact that his family claimed they didn't have the money is enough for your claim to be nothing but hogwash. They simply didn't have it. It doesn't matter what you think they should have. They didn't. :shrug:

But he wasn't entitled to bail after all. That happens when you commit a felony while on probation/parole. What part of that is unjust in your made up manual? He was offered a plea bargain and time served, that's NOT extortion, at least by any legal definition of the word.

Click to expand...

Lmao, it's almost like you don't know what extortion means. He was offered two options, pay and leave, or go to jail. He didn't have the money in time so he went to jail. That is extortion. Would you like a dictionary definition of it or what? Here is the definition:

Extortion | Define Extortion at Dictionary.com

Law. the crime of obtaining money or some other thing of value by the abuse of one's office or authority.

Click to expand...

If you want to claim that making somebody wait 3 year for a trial and give them the option of pleading guilty is not an abuse of authority, you're more of a lackey than I thought.

And no, it's not entrapment either. Again by any legal definition of the word.

As to that very last, I've been wondering how long you were going to waste a lot of forum bandwidth making up your own definitions and language just so you can support a busted argument.

Click to expand...

You mean like this made up definition?

Entrap | Definition of entrap by Merriam-Webster

Full Definition of ENTRAP

transitive verb
1
: to catch in or as if in a trap
2
: to lure into a compromising statement or act

Click to expand...

clownboy said:

Nope, it's not the prosecutor's filings that reset the speedy trial clock. He already had a felony criminal record.

Click to expand...

What does a felony criminal record have to do with anything?

You don't get to make up facts. This is from the story. If you have other evidence, please present it: (the People is the prosecutor)

This time, the prosecutor said, “The People are not ready. We are requesting one week.” The next court date set by the judge—March 9th—was not one week away but six. As it happened, Browder didn’t go to trial anytime that year. An index card in the court file explains:

June 23, 2011: People not ready, request 1 week.

August 24, 2011: People not ready, request 1 day.

November 4, 2011: People not ready, prosecutor on trial, request 2 weeks.

December 2, 2011: Prosecutor on trial, request January 3rd.
....
June 29, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

September 28, 2012: People not ready, request two weeks.

November 2, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

December 14, 2012: People not ready, request one week.

By the end of 2012, Browder had been in jail for nine hundred and sixty-one days and had stood before eight different judges.

Click to expand...

JasperL said:

When was it demonstrated he committed any felony while on probation? He maintained his innocence from minute 1 of the ordeal till he was released without trial.

And it's mind boggling you conclude that it's "just" that a person never even TRIED for a crime spent his 17th, 18th, and 19th years of life in prison for a crime he was never even allowed to contest in court. Or that the offer to plead guilty to a crime is a mitigating fact when discussing the fairness or justness of the criminal justice system. Only in up is down world is rejecting an "offer" to plead guilty a way to shift blame to the defendant for waiting over 3 years for a trial.

Click to expand...

Was he on probation? And for a felony? If the answer is yes to both those then you need to understand what it is to be on felony probation. Why there is even such a thing as probation. One of the conditions is that you are not even to be charged with another crime, that you stay far away from situations where you might be.

JasperL said:

What does a felony criminal record have to do with anything?

You don't get to make up facts. This is from the story. If you have other evidence, please present it: (the People is the prosecutor)

Click to expand...

The thing is that the clock wasn't set back. By New York's own laws his trial should have happened within 6 months. What he seems to want to do is blame the damn kid for city's backlog. That's even sillier than claiming with such pompous authority that the poorest in NYC can afford $300 for bail.

JasperL said:

What does a felony criminal record have to do with anything?

You don't get to make up facts. This is from the story. If you have other evidence, please present it: (the People is the prosecutor)

Click to expand...

It answers part of YOUR post that I quoted when I responded to it. Here you go:

Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post

The "attorney filings" were by the prosecutor, approved by the judge, and every "one week" delay request turned into 6 or 8 weeks. What could the defendant do about it? Besides plead guilty, have a criminal record, lose his right to vote in many states, right to various aid programs, right to own a firearm. Sure, why not plead guilty?

Click to expand...

As I said, that horse had already left the barn. He had a previous felony conviction.

clownboy said:

Was he on probation? And for a felony? If the answer is yes to both those then you need to understand what it is to be on felony probation. Why there is even such a thing as probation. One of the conditions is that you are not even to be charged with another crime, that you stay far away from situations where you might be.

Click to expand...

You said "commit" a felony. He was charged with a crime. It's an important distinction - the whole 'presumed innocent' thing....

And how in the world is a kid supposed to "stay far away from situations" where he might be UNJUSTLY CHARGED with a crime he didn't commit, assuming he's innocent since that is the best evidence we have.

Sheesh, the effort a few are going through to defend the indefensible is pretty astounding.

Hatuey said:

The thing is that the clock wasn't set back. By New York's own laws his trial should have happened within 6 months. What he seems to want to do is blame the damn kid for city's backlog. That's even sillier than claiming with such pompous authority that the poorest in NYC can afford $300 for bail.

Click to expand...

Read post number 116. It rebuts what you believe.

clownboy said:

It answers part of YOUR post that I quoted when I responded to it. Here you go:

As I said, that horse had already left the barn. He had a previous felony conviction.

Click to expand...

His record was as a juvenile. That matters, or at least it does in Tennessee, a great deal. Those records are sealed and don't follow you around for life like a guilty plea as an adult.

And you claimed the delay was caused by filings by his lawyer, the defense. Present evidence for that claim, or back off it.

JasperL said:

You said "commit" a felony. He was charged with a crime. It's an important distinction - the whole 'presumed innocent' thing....

And how in the world is a kid supposed to "stay far away from situations" where he might be UNJUSTLY CHARGED with a crime he didn't commit, assuming he's innocent since that is the best evidence we have.

Sheesh, the effort a few are going through to defend the indefensible is pretty astounding.

Click to expand...

Once again you seem to not understand the terms of felony probation. In many states, if you are on felony probation you are ineligible for bail on any future felony charges (while on probation). Sheesh, the effort a few are going through to twist and misunderstand in order to carry their arguments is astounding.

JasperL said:

His record was as a juvenile. That matters, or at least it does in Tennessee, a great deal. Those records are sealed and don't follow you around for life like a guilty plea as an adult.

And you claimed the delay was caused by filings by his lawyer, the defense. Present evidence for that claim, or back off it.

Click to expand...

This wasn't TN. See post number 116.

JasperL said:

You said "commit" a felony. He was charged with a crime. It's an important distinction - the whole 'presumed innocent' thing....

And how in the world is a kid supposed to "stay far away from situations" where he might be UNJUSTLY CHARGED with a crime he didn't commit, assuming he's innocent since that is the best evidence we have.

Sheesh, the effort a few are going through to defend the indefensible is pretty astounding.

Click to expand...

It's mental acrobatics 101. His options from the onset were:

1. Pay bail or go to jail. - Extortion
2. Go to jail and plead guilty so you can get out faster. - Entrapment

After it was exposed that those weren't really "options" in any sense of the damn word, he shifted his argument to be about how it's his fault that the clock was stopped and how his family could have afforded it even if they were poorest of NYC. The latter statement is unsubstantiated and refuted by the very fact actual workings of bail. The former, we know to be a lie seeing as the actual motions file didn't request for his file to be held for 6 weeks at a time instead of 1. You're seeing clownboy's approach to debating. When one thing doesn't work, it's move on to the next argument and forget everything previously said.

clownboy said:

Read post number 116. It rebuts what you believe.

Click to expand...

LOL, that post is unsubstantiated half truths at best. Yes, if the defense files a motion, while the motion is being considered it tolls the clock.

In this case, the great bulk of the delay is the prosecutor, years after the indictment, repeatedly going to court and claiming he's not ready for trial and asking for a "one week" delay, which because of the backlog in court turns into 6 or 8 weeks, until 10 or 12 "one week" delays turns into years of delays.

Hatuey said:

It's mental acrobatics 101. His options from the onset were:

1. Pay bail or go to jail. - Extortion
2. Go to jail and plead guilty so you can get out faster. - Entrapment

After it was exposed that those weren't really "options" in any sense of the damn word, he shifted his argument to be about how it's his fault that the clock was stopped and how his family could have afforded it even if they were poorest of NYC. The latter statement is unsubstantiated and refuted by the very fact actual workings of bail. The former, we know to be a lie seeing as the actual motions file didn't request for his file to be held for 6 weeks at a time instead of 1. You're seeing clownboy's approach to debating. When one thing doesn't work, it's move on to the next argument and forget everything previously said.

Click to expand...

Just keep repeating the same lies and hope they stick through repetition, it's not working for you. Once again, neither bail nor plea bargains are legally defined as extortion or entrapment. No matter how you word the semantic games, reality thwarts your effort.

clownboy said:

Read post number 116. It rebuts what you believe.

Click to expand...

Lmao, what I believe. Alright, let's look at the post, shall we? Seeing as how you don't actually have a rebuttal of your own. On post 116:

1. It has absolutely nothing to do with your pompous and unsubstantiated claims that his family should have been able to afford it.
2. The motions filed in his case requested 1 week at most though there were various, even if you were to group them all together, it wouldn't come close to 3 years in prison.
3. Unless you're stating that the NYer is wrong, and some guy on the internet is right, there is nothing to discuss here.

Do you have any other non-arguments you'd like to present? Or are you ready to show his family's financial statements so that we can judge your claim that they should have been able to afford it?