Can The Number Of Innocent Inmates Be Accurately Estimated?
Coming up with an exact number of wrongly convicted people is virtually impossible. It would be necessary to review records from the court and prison systems at the federal, state, and county levels. Then, even with all of the information we could actually gather, there are still many cases of convictions that never went through a trial. These cases leave almost no traceable records. Estimates show that about 95% of all convictions in the U.S. are the result of a plea bargain deal and not a trial.
The only data that we can quantify with any certainty are the numbers we get from exonerations and death penalty records. As of January 2020, there have been 2547 exonerations nationwide since 1989—which is when record-keeping began. It’s also estimated that somewhere close to 4% of defendants sentenced to the death penalty are later proven to be innocent of their crimes.
A study was conducted in Ohio where a total of 798 police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges were asked to give their own estimate of how many of the convictions across the United States have been imposed upon innocent people. 75% of the respondents answered with a number greater than zero but not more than 5%.
If we put those estimates up against known numbers, we come to some startling conclusions. If there are 2.3 million people in prison and just .5% of them (half of one percent) are innocent, that’s 11,500 people serving time in jail for something they didn’t do. If there are about 195,000 new convictions across the country every year, that would mean 975 innocent people are being locked up every year; an average of more than two people every day.
Looking at it another way, if 975 innocent people are convicted, but only 136 people were exonerated in 2019, that means 839 more people are still wrongfully behind bars. That would indicate that about 85% of those who are wrongfully convicted are never able to prove their innocence.
More than 2.3 million Americans are currently incarcerated within the U.S. prison system. The reality of their everyday life is isolation; days, months, and years spent in what amounts to a small cage. There is almost no variety in food, activity, or social interaction. Visits with family members are restricted to certain days and times. Everything they do is under surveillance and supervised. It’s not an easy life by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s even more difficult for the innocent few that have ended up there because of a wrongful conviction.
The American justice system is considered to be one of the best in the world, but that doesn’t mean it is completely free of problems or errors. Sometimes the justice system does fail. In 2016, a record number of people in the U.S. were exonerated of crimes they didn’t commit, 180 in all. In 2019, 136 wrongly convicted people were exonerated.
This, of course, leads to an inevitable question. How many people are currently serving time in jail for crimes they didn’t commit?
We the people must know when we are to talk to law enforcement and when we are not to talk to any law enforcement officers.
This remains critical!
The Case Against Innocent People Talking to the Police
Imagine, every day you are in an assimilation game, lets just call it a game like Monopoly but in this game like Monopoly, they are playing a game in which the stakes of the game are extremely high and losing the game could result in loss of your job, rights, freedom, or ultimately your life. You’ve never played the game before.
The only rule you’re given is how to stop the game. When playing, you’re only limited to the information you personally possess. Finally, if you lie during the game (intentionally or inadvertently), you could be subject to additional punishment which may be severe.
Your opponent is a trained professional and a [m]agi-cian and has played the game hundreds, if not thousands, of times. Your opponent knows the rules and can change the rules at any time. Your opponent also has an entire team of individuals gathering information and they have all of the government’s resources at their disposal to assist them during the game. Finally, your opponent can lie and deceive you during the game, without any threat of punishment. In fact, you think it is a game, even though the rules and mandated disclosures have not been disclosed to you, to the contrary.
Knowing this, would you play the game? Of course not, but many people do involuntarily and unknowingly of the dangers that may affect their lives and ultimately pay for it dearly, by trading in their true innocence for years of being unlawfully imprisoned!
We Must First Address Answering Law Enforcement Questions
Our members often would call asking us what was our opinion on people answering law enforcement questions or would we cooperate with a police investigation? Our answer is uniformly, “No.”
It doesn’t matter if a member is guilty or innocent, our answer will always be a resounding, NO! Do not speak with law enforcement.
To support our stance, I’m going to describe a picture and specifically talk about the dangers of a police interrogation with people that are actually 100% innocent.
We as the people must learn how to properly answer and not answer any question by any law enforcement officer.
A couple of things to remember but first we want to make clear of a couple truths!
First, know that the police aren’t stopping random strangers off the street to ask if they want to meet at headquarters to ask questions about certain events or incident. They just don’t do that.
Know that there is a reason why they want to talk to you. Usually, it’s because they have evidence you committed the crime or they think you have information to get them closer to discovering who committed the crime or they are racially profiling and harassing you, to unlawfully find something on you. Either way, you are a potential suspect and a number in the hat.
The second part is that you’ll never be able to talk yourself out of a charge. Many have tried, and all have failed. If law enforcement obtains enough evidence against you, by you saying too much, giving them permission to search and/or plant something on you or in your mode of conveyance, regardless of what you say, you will be charged.
Hypothetical Situation:
Dallas, Texas
On June 17th, 2019, in Dallas, Texas, there was a gang-style slaying resulting in one person’s death. It’s now been several months since the crime occurred. There have been no arrests and the police are actively looking for suspects.
Now, you just receive a call from a local Detective asking you to come into headquarters to talk. The Detective seems very nice over the phone, and he tells you that he has information that you were present during the incident/altercation several months back, but he wants to clear your name. He doesn’t think that you did it, but he’s just doing his job, he tells you.
Innerstanding, you were always taught to tell the truth and obey authority figures, especially law enforcement. So, your initial reaction is that you want to help law enforcement. Plus, you know that you didn’t do anything wrong, so why not talk to the Detective, you ask yourself.
In addition, you also don’t want the Detective to think that you have something to hide. You don’t want to get lawyers involved, because only guilty people need lawyers, right? Therefore, you agree to talk to the Detective.
First Mistake #1: The Fifth Amendment is meant for Guilty AND Innocent People
The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution states in relevant part,
“No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.”
By agreeing to be interviewed by law enforcement you are voluntarily waiving your constitutional right against self-incrimination. This constitutional right is for everyone, regardless of guilt or innocence.
What the Supreme Court has Stated About Self-Incrimination
In the 1956 case of Ullman v. United States, a United States Supreme Court held,
“Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege.”
More recently, in the 2001 case of Ohio v. Reiner, the United States Supreme Court held,
“We have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendment’s basic functions … is to protect innocent men … who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances.”
While the Detective has you on the phone, he asks,
“Do you know the altercation I’m talking about?”
In which you respond,
“I don’t even own a gun.”
Mistake #2: Talking to the Police Always Gives Them Something They Can Use Against You
During this non-recorded phone call, the officer didn’t tell you that it was a shooting. While someone who read the news story may assume a shooting based on “gang-style slaying” the Detective didn’t specifically say a gun was involved.
While in Court, the prosecutor will ask,
“Did you notice anything odd when he answered your question by saying ‘I don’t even own a gun.’?”
The officer will respond,
“I did. There was no mention of a gun prior to him making that statement.”
Again, while on the non-recorded phone call, the Detective asks you,
“How do you know the victim?”
You respond by telling a long-winded story explaining how you and the victim went to school together, how the victim was always the most popular growing up, how he got all the girls, how he was the most athletic, how he used to pick on "me sometimes." Then you finish the story by discussing how you’ve since reconciled your differences and consider the victim a friend.
Mistake #3: Officer Doesn’t Recall Your Testimony 100%
During this non-recorded call, the officer can now take your statement out of context (mistakenly or inadvertently). When taken as a whole, everything that you said is honest, non-incriminating, and harmless.
However, because the conversation was not recorded, the officer may only remember that you stated he picked on you or that you were jealous of him growing up. Now the prosecutor has a motive. Then at trial, you’d be forced to combat that theory and present evidence about your good recent relationship with the victim.
Also, to make matters look worse, while on the phone call, the officer asks you where you were on April 1st, 2019. You respond by giving the officer a description of your day’s events, including stopping to get a cup of coffee then heading to Louisville for the day to visit family.
Once at headquarters, he leads you to a small room with a table and three chairs. The room is being recorded.
The Detective starts out friendly and asks some background questions like:
- where do you live,
- how do to spell your name
- where are you from
- what is your phone number and/or what is another some other person you know phone number
- where do you work
Then he starts reading you, your Miranda Warning:
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you.
After you agree to continue the questioning, the Detective asks you to repeat what you did on April 1st, 2019. You tell him about your morning, and you explain going to Houston to see family, except this time, you neglect to mention you stopped for coffee.
Mistake #4: It’s Almost Impossible to Tell a Consistent Story
It’s hard for anyone to repeatedly tell the same story, without forgetting any details, while being completely 100% consistent. In this instance, neglecting to mention stopping for coffee can be a tool for the prosecution to show that you are lying. When the Detective testifies in court, he’ll say,
“He gave me inconsistent stories about his whereabouts. I thought that was very suspicious.”
You then give the Detective details about your time in Houston. Again, you are telling the 100% truth. Unfortunately for you, an old classmate swears that they saw you at the scene in Dallas during the “gang-style slaying.”
Of course, the classmate is wrong, as you were in Houston. However, due to a false identification statement, the classmate has put you in Dallas in the middle of the altercation.
Mistake #5 – Police Can Use Your Truthful Statements Against You, If They Have Evidence (Mistaken or Unreliable) That Your Statements Are False
False identifications happen all the time. Honest, good people, wanting to seek justice, make mistakes. If you had chosen to invoke your Fifth Amendment right and remain silent, at trial it would be the old classmate’s recollection vs. your defense.
Unfortunately, since you gave the statement, at trial, it’s an old classmate and Detective vs. your defense. Instead of focusing on whether or not you committed the crime, the jury is now focusing on how credible you are.
The officer now asks you what route you took to Houston. It’s now been over four hours and you are exhausted, nervous, and have had to repeat your (true) story of being in Houston and knowing nothing about the crime multiple times.
It’s been several months since that actual day. You’ve visited your family in Houston several times since that day. You aren’t really sure what route you took to Houston that day. But you want to sound truthful and cooperative, so you respond by saying,
“I took Broadway to I-45-south, then got on I-10.”
However, that’s not true. You took I-35 South to Austin and from Austin you took Highway 290 to Houston, then got onto I-10 East heading toward Beaumont because you stopped to get coffee at Starbucks. Little do you know the Detective already has traffic surveillance footage of you on the highway near the Woodlands in the Houston area and you’re now caught in a proven lie.
Mistake #6: Filling in the Blanks or Getting Carried Away with the Story
Instead of saying that you didn’t remember, you made up an answer that the Detective could prove to be untruthful. You weren’t intending to lie. You were trying to be cooperative. But instead of relying on your memory (which often fades over time), you just filled in the blanks.
The trained, skillful Detective now sees an opportunity to seize. It’s now been several hours, and you’ve been peppered with questions. There’s been times when the Detective has walked out of the room, only to leave you sitting alone in a small room at the police headquarters in complete silence.
You are beaten down and are starting to second guess everything. All you want to do is go home. The Detective comes back in the room and says they have a recording of you at the scene. They tell you that there is cell phone video, cell phone location data, and building surveillance video that places you at the crime scene. The Detective then says,
“We already know he used to bully you, you must have hated that, I’m sure that kept eating at you. We also know that you were jealous of him growing up. He used to get the girls, he was the popular guy, and the most athletic. We also have a witness that saw you there. We know you did it, you’ve lied and lied to us all day, the judge isn’t going to like that. If you tell us the truth, we can help you – why did you do it?”
Tired, exhausted, nervous, and shaken, you respond by saying,
“I don’t know.”
Mistake #7: False Confession
The Detective now has a recorded confession. Even though it’s a false confession, the prosecutor can and will use it against you at trial. Of the 365 DNA exonerees to date by the Innocence Project, almost a third of those individuals gave false confessions, 28%.
Don’t Hesitate to Contact a Trusted Criminal Attorney
If you or a loved one are approached for questioning by law enforcement, please contact a knowledgeable criminal defense attorney immediately. While everyone has the right to remain silent, few choose to do so.
By invoking your right to remain silent and hiring an attorney immediately, you give yourself the best chance to avoid criminal charges completely. The earlier an attorney is retained, or you invoke the 5th Amendment, the more control you have over your difficult situation.
It's always wise to learn law yourself, just like it's wise to know how to fish because you will always know how to feed yourself and your family. This is why we offer the # 1 Most Sophisticated Law Membership in America! With the Copper Membership you have access to many documents that will bring you relief. You must go to the Documents and Forms Section.
Even if you consulted and hired a lawyer, your attorney is unable to prevent criminal charges from being filed, however, there are several benefits of obtaining a good attorney in these situations. Especially, if you don't know how to properly defend yourself, then it's innerstandable that you retained an attorney pre-charge, including:
Stand up for your rights, use the tools you have access to and save thousands of dollars being just as effective
as a good law firm. However, if you don't have access to or know someone that has the time or resource to file the documents, if your pockets allow, some people may want to consult an attorney because there are some benefits:
- Your attorney/private investigator can begin gathering helpful evidence and can conduct witness interviews.
- Your attorney can negotiate with the prosecutor to issue a criminal summons, rather than an arrest warrant.
- In certain situations, your attorney can negotiate immunity for your cooperation.
- Your attorney can share beneficial information to investigations on your behalf, such as private polygraph tests or exculpatory evidence.
If you still haven’t been persuaded, take the advice of former United States Supreme Court Justice, United States Attorney General, United Solicitor General, and Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremburg Trials, Justice Robert H. Jackson:
“Any lawyer worth his salt will tell [a] suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to police under any circumstances.”
Why Is It Called Miranda Rights?
The term “Miranda Rights” comes from a historic 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case called Miranda v. Arizona. The court held that if the police want to question (interrogate) a person in police custody, they must tell them of the Fifth Amendment protection against self-incriminating statements and their right to an attorney.
The following is an overview of your Fifth Amendment Miranda rights, including when police must read you your rights and what happens when they fail to do so.
What Are Your Miranda Rights?
The Miranda warning outlines the following rights:
- You have the right to remain silent
- Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law
- You have the right to an attorney
- If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you
This means you can choose not to answer an officer’s questions and may request an attorney.
When Are Miranda Warnings Used?
While TV shows and movies often show officers giving the Miranda "warning" when they arrest someone, this is not always the reality. A police officer or other official must, by law, tell you the full Miranda warning before custodial interrogation starts. This type of interrogation happens when you are in police custody (when you have been arrested) and are being questioned. It can also be called “adversarial interrogation.”
Police do not always need to warn you about your rights during the arrest or while you are waiting at the jail. Simply being arrested or detained by police (in custody) does not mean you will hear the Miranda warning. You will hear it before the interrogation starts. If you don’t, law enforcement may have to throw out anything said in the interrogation.
In any case, it is advisable to stay silent to avoid saying anything that might make you look guilty whether you hear the warning or not. (Note that you may need to provide identification and answer basic questions.)
Fifth Amendment Miranda Rights at a Glance
Miranda rights are rooted in the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination. Petitioner Ernesto Miranda confessed to a violent crime after two hours of police interrogation and signed a statement that he confessed: "with the full knowledge of [my] legal rights, understanding any statement I make may be used against me." However, he was never explained these rights.
The Court ruled that the interrogation was coercive in nature and that he wasn't informed about his right to an attorney. Therefore, they concluded, he didn't voluntarily waive these rights when he signed the statement because he didn't understand his rights. Had he retained legal counsel, he probably wouldn't have been so forthcoming during the interrogation.
What if the Police Fail to Advise Me of My Miranda Rights?
When police officers question a suspect in custody without first giving the Miranda warning, any statement or confession made is presumed to be involuntary and can't be used against the suspect in any criminal case. Any evidence discovered as a result of that statement or confession will likely also be thrown out of the case.
For example, suppose Dan is arrested and, without being read his Miranda rights, is questioned by police officers about a bank robbery. Unaware that he has the right to remain silent, Dan confesses to committing the robbery and tells the police that the money is buried in his backyard. Acting on this information, the police dug up the money.
When Dan's attorney challenges the confession in court, the judge will likely find it unlawful. This means that not only will the confession be thrown out of the case against Dan, but so will the money itself because it was discovered solely as a result of the unlawful confession.
FindLaw Legal Dictionary
The FindLaw Legal Dictionary -- free access to over 8260 definitions of legal terms. Search for a definition or browse our legal glossaries.
term:
Fruit Of The Poisonous Tree
fruit of the poisonous tree
1 : a doctrine of evidence: evidence that is derived from or gathered during an illegal action (as an unlawful search) cannot be admitted into court
2 : evidence that is inadmissible under an evidentiary exclusionary rule because it was derived from or gathered during an illegal action see also Wong Sun v. U.S. in the Important Cases section compare independent source, inevitable discovery, plain view
Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law ©1996. Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. Published under license with Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.
Below, is general description and brief information regarding Our, Writ of Habeas Corpus and shall not be construed to represent the federal rules of Civil Procedure nor any state rules of civil procedure. For more information you must be a Copper Member to gain access.
HOW IT WORKS!
A writ of habeas corpus (which literally means to "produce the body") is a court order demanding that a public official (jail commander, a warden), deliver an imprisoned individual to the court and show a valid reason for that person's detention. The concern here is to make sure there has not been a person put in a false imprisonment or an unlawful detention situation. The procedure provides a means for prison inmates, or others acting on their behalf, to dispute the legal basis for their confinement verse the imprisoned person showing a clear case of False Arrest, False Imprisoned, Unlawful Detention or Unlawful Imprisonment. Habeas corpus has deep roots and comes out of common law of England.
Very often, the court will hold a hearing on the matter, during which the inmate and the government can both show evidence whether there is a lawful basis and reason for jailing the individual or living person. The court may also issue and enforce a subpoena signed order to obtain additional evidence that may be needed.
After reviewing the evidence and depending on what the evidence revealed, the judge may grant the inmate relief such as:
- Release from prison,
- Reduction in the sentence,
- An order halting illegal conditions of the prisoner(s) confinement, or
- A declaration of rights.
People sometimes confuse the Writ of Habeas Corpus with the right of Direct Appeal. Alleged Criminal Defendants are always entitled to appeal a conviction or sentence to a higher court, which will then review the trial judge's rulings. However, history has shown this is not always fair or in the benefit of the alleged Criminal Defendant.
The Writ of Habeas Corpus provides a separate avenue for challenging imprisonment and is normally used after a Direct Appeal has failed. It often serves as a last resort for inmates who insist that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, and their rights surely have been trespassed on. Statics have shown this has happened and is happening to many [m]inorities who are currently being incarcerated and the numbers are rapidly growing.
Limitations of Habeas Corpus
A writ of habeas corpus is not available in every situation. Because judges receive a flood of habeas corpus petitions each year, including some that inmates prepare without the assistance of a lawyer, strict procedures govern which ones are allowed to proceed. Inmates are generally barred from repetitively filing petitions about the same matter.
NORMAL COST OF A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
The cost of a Writ of Habeas Corpus scares people alone. You almost have to sell the farm just to help yourself, a family member and or a friend, in many cases. The normal cost of the Writ of Habeas Corpus with many law firms will be between $20,000-$40,000 USD. Often there are investigations and research that may easily be an additional $15,000-$20,000. According to many law firms, they may consider it to be a lengthy investigation to prove there's been a False Arrest, False imprisoned, False Imprisonment, Unlawful Detention, and Unlawful Imprisonment.
Should it really cost you all those thousands of hard-earned dollars, just to tell the court truth and show the facts and evidence on why you, a family member or a friend have being unlawfully detained, false arrested, false imprisoned, unlawful imprisonment, wrongfully incarcerated, etc.? It takes all that just to get the record straight to be released.
We at American National Common Law Group innerstand the difficulties the people are experiencing. Considering there is a on-going National debate among attorneys, regarding the lack of evidence and the validity of mass incarnations of many prisoners, unfortunately many people who have been unlawfully made a prisoner, do not have the dollars and finances to prove their situation of justice and incarceration is unlawful. This is why our Law Group provides extremely affordable cost and dynamic a limited time, special price to sign up as a Copper Membership member.
We lowered our prices to extend savings to our Law Membership members, so they can get the law research material and legal services they need, especially in delicate times and life-changing situations.
When you sign up to become a member of the Copper Membership you will see there is no price in the America lower than our price for Our Writ of Habeas Corpus which is powerful and gets straight to the point. There are an extensive amount of documents and pages in the Habeas Corpus that you will received from us that will exceed 75 pages. Depending on severity and difficulty of your situation, the documents you will receive could easily be over a 100 pages of diligently research information for your situation.
If you are interested in finding out more and are ready to start the process of Releasing the body or the Prisoner immediately, sign up for Our Copper Membership, where you will get the necessary information, documents, forms and relief you are looking to achieve.
Compare our Special limited time only price for Our "Writ of Habeas Corpus," after you purchase and sign into the Copper Membership.
