Prosecutors not doing their damn jobs

[draco664]

Link

Back in August 2007, a young woman was brutally murdered. One Carlos Lagantta was arrested for the crime. He has been in jail for 5 years waiting for a trial.

Last month, the prosecutors finally got around to asking the judge for permission to seize Lagantta's shoes, to try and match them to bloody footprints left at the scene.

That delay was indefensible, says the judge. But okay, you get the shoes.

However, it seems to be a last ditch effort to actually *link* Lagantta to the crime. DNA tests that were ordered 3 years ago were finally done. And guess what? They implicate the witness against Lagantta - the witness who happens to be the boyfriend of the woman in question, and was the last person to see her, and who discovered the body.

Funny that.

[bara]

FIVE years and no trial?

Bull fucking horse shit insane.

Bill of Rights... speedy trial... seriously.

[Duelist925]

Ok, I'm smelling a hefty, HEFTY lawsuit.

Five years? Speedy trial...dear lord, that alone wins him the damned lawsuit. And its looking like hes Innocent? Oh, wow. I hope he takes'em to the cleaners.

[s_stabeler]

please tell me this is a joke.....

[draco664]

A lot of people waive their right to a speedy trial, typically on advice from their lawyer. You need a lot of time to mount a proper legal defense.

It's one of the reasons OJ's prosecutors messed up so bad. He did not waive it, and they were unprepared.

[s_stabeler]

Draco664, that's true, but the stuff the prosecutors are doing now should really have been done by the cops in the initial investigation. right now, the key witness is discredited- his DNA is under the victim's fingernails, and that is suspicious. for heaven's sake, right now, unless he was convicted of the murder charge, he would likely walk free from court due to time served (the other charges are tampering with evidence, burglary and robbery. none of them typoically get more than 5 year sentances, AFAIK.

second, DNA testing doesn't take THAT long. Generally, a few weeks for the lab to get around to performing the test and ~1 day max for the actual test. 3 years? how difficult WAS it to track down everyone who they wanted to test? ( for that matter, why could they not have tested the suspect's DNA first, since thye almost certainly had it? that'd immediately flag up thhta ti was not the suspect's DNA, indicating somethign else could be going on.

as for a speedy trail, in kentucky, you have to request one. and the defense were waiting for evidence, specificalyl the DNA tests.

to be blunt though, right now, the case has two possible suspects, so you probably should NOT be trying to prosecute one before you eliminate the other.

[draco664]

Draco664, that's true, but the stuff the prosecutors are doing now should really have been done by the cops in the initial investigation. right now, the key witness is discredited- his DNA is under the victim's fingernails, and that is suspicious. for heaven's sake, right now, unless he was convicted of the murder charge, he would likely walk free from court due to time served (the other charges are tampering with evidence, burglary and robbery. none of them typoically get more than 5 year sentances, AFAIK.

second, DNA testing doesn't take THAT long. Generally, a few weeks for the lab to get around to performing the test and ~1 day max for the actual test. 3 years? how difficult WAS it to track down everyone who they wanted to test? ( for that matter, why could they not have tested the suspect's DNA first, since thye almost certainly had it? that'd immediately flag up thhta ti was not the suspect's DNA, indicating somethign else could be going on.

as for a speedy trail, in kentucky, you have to request one. and the defense were waiting for evidence, specificalyl the DNA tests.

to be blunt though, right now, the case has two possible suspects, so you probably should NOT be trying to prosecute one before you eliminate the other.

I agree 100%. I was just pointing out to some other posters that just because you have the right to a speedy trial, that right is often waived, so the 5 year delay is not unconstitutional as such.

The thing I don't get about the blinkered 'get the guy at all costs' view that prosecutors seem to get is that if they do managed to convict the guy and he is innocent, then the guilty party is still out there at large.

[Andara Bledin]

The thing I don't get about the blinkered 'get the guy at all costs' view that prosecutors seem to get is that if they do managed to convict the guy and he is innocent, then the guilty party is still out there at large.

The types who get like that fall into two camps.

The bad ones are the ones that just want another tick on their Conviction list. Those are complete trash and need to be kicked to the curb.

Far worse, however, are the ones so blinded by their own convictions that they honestly believe the person they're going after is guilty and there's no way at all they could possibly be mistaken.

They go so far down that road that to backpedal and admit that they could possibly have been mistaken is too painful a schism to face. This is how gambling establishments and Nigerian scammers get so much profit; people cross a line at which point, they're psychologically incapable of walking away.

^-.-^

[Aria]

And this is why innocent people should be afraid of the law.