SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Annie Dookhan's falsification of drug lab tests has become a reason for over 21,000 people to celebrate. Massachusetts will drop 21,587 cases in the largest single dismissal of convictions in U.S. history:
Massachusetts formally dropped more than 21,000 tainted drug convictions Thursday that were linked to a disgraced state chemist who in 2013 admitted to faking test results.
It's the largest single dismissal of convictions in U.S. history, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.
Thursday's dismissals by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court had been expected after several district attorneys on Tuesday submitted lists of 21,587 cases they said they would be unwilling or unable to prosecute, The Associated Press reports.
Previous Coverage:
Massachusetts: Tens of Thousands of Drug Convictions to be Overturned After Fraudulent Lab Tests.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Saturday April 22 2017, @12:23AM (19 children)
She only served a few years, and is now out on parole. WTF? Her criminal actions affected tens of thousands of people and had them in trouble with the law or in jail for offenses they didn't commit.
She should get a 10-year sentence for every person she caused to wrongly see a jail cell, and a 1-year sentence for people who had other legal problems. She should be in prison for the next 50,000 years at least.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Scrutinizer on Saturday April 22 2017, @12:37AM
Annie Dookhan should pay for her crimes, I absolutely agree. It is therefore troubling that Annie's victims, those who later found productive work, literally paid for her crimes by coughing up the tax monies used to feed and house dear Annie.
Once a person's crimes rise to the level where restitution for the victims is impossible, and the damages in money and lost life reaches far into the millions or beyond, I really only see one way for a properly-convicted criminal to pay without harming her victims all over again: exile or execution.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @01:13AM (2 children)
How about a fair punishment for her: one day in prison for each person she wrongly convicted. I'd settle for that.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:07AM (1 child)
Only if YOU pay the bill for her prison room, board, heath care, etc.
I'm only willing to pay for one bullet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @10:04PM
I've already paid for over 21k people to unjustly spend several years in prison each. What's one more person who deserves it?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:07AM (6 children)
The truly inexcusable part is that the people falsely imprisoned because of her aren't out yet. If the "justice system" actually gave a damn about justice they would have been released with a nice compensation check the instant the court found that the tests were faked. If anyone involved in that had an ounce of shame, they'd resign.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:23AM (5 children)
Making crime victims whole is indeed a worthy goal, though the "justice system", part of the US government in this case, has no money of its own with which to give to anyone else. Since I as a plebian within the USA do not have the authority to demand you give me half of your production, neither can I then delegate that same authority to anyone else.
All the funds US governments have are stolen.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:26AM (4 children)
They sure didn't mind spending taxpayer money keeping those falsely imprisoned people locked up for an extra 4 years.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:29AM (3 children)
It's a lot harder to lock innocent people in prison if there are no stolen funds to pay for prison guards, cooks, and staff; or buy prison electricity, water, and supplies.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:45AM (2 children)
Unfortunately, it's also a lot harder to lock up serial killers and scam artists.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:51AM
The former you can take care of yourself [cz-usa.com], and the latter are much less of an issue if following the axiom: "you cannot cheat an honest man".
Regardless, if you think "government" cares about you and/or your well-being, you're wrong [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @06:51PM
they don't do much of that anyways. there are hundreds of serial killers killing at will right now, but the pigs are too busy stealing to give a shit. they are preying on the weak or poor for non crimes because they are too chicken shit to go after real, dangerous criminals. the "justice system" is the biggest thief in the country. once the cops, prosecutors and judges realize this they get even more corrupt because they have been morally compromised. now they have nothing to lose except by being found out or challenged. we need to take back our streets from these scum.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:26AM
She should get a similar sentence to what civil engineers would get for approving bad dams/buildings that collapse and affect tens of thousands of people. Or professionals who repeatedly perjure themselves.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:29AM (6 children)
I don't know about ten years for each of her victims. (You can't even establish with certainty how many victims there were) No one lives that long, and at some point, that kind of math becomes an exercise in vindictiveness. It also becomes meaningless. Do we want to give her life in prison, without the possibility of parole? Let's just go with that sentence then. It doesn't require a lot of pointless calculation, it's justifiable, and it achieves the goal of ensuring that she 1) is punished severely and 2) never has the opportunity to hurt another member of society.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:33AM (4 children)
Hm. [heavy.com]
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:50AM (3 children)
The person who stabbed the prison guard shouldn't have survived the experience. He should have beed dropped, on the spot, and any medical attention delayed for "security reasons" for days, or weeks.
People shouldn't go to prison unless they are dangerous, and once there, they should be handled like dangerous animals.
If I need to spell it out, there should only be a few thousand people in prison in this country. At MOST tens of thousands. The system is broken, and we need it fixed. Only people guilty of heinous crimes should be sentenced to prison. Small time pot heads should never see prison. Petty thieves should never see prison. Your average "criminal" should be serving his home community in some fashion, working off his debt to his fellow citizens. Ideally, that petty criminal should be working for the people he victimized. If not working for his victims, he should at least be paying them restitution.
Prison is wrong in most cases.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @03:00AM (2 children)
Spot on. No victim, no crime, no need for prison time. Where there is a victim, the criminal is tried and sentenced to restitution for his victim (not "the state"); he can also pay for the costs of his capture and conviction after making his victim as whole as possible.
This is what a bootlicking authoritarian would say, supporting executions by neglect without any shred of due process.
Why should the victims pay to support the life of their victimizer? Exile or execution. Paying for one bullet, or a bus ticket and a makeshift raft, is a hell of a lot cheaper than a prison.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 22 2017, @02:08PM (1 child)
Bootlicking authoritarian. I like that. How 'bout I plant my boot far enough up your dumb ass that you can taste the leather, then pull it out and let you lick the shit off of it. Did the prison guard get your fucking "due process"? No? The prisoner deserves less consideration than he gave the guard.
"Exile or execution". Hmmmm. So - we have a problem child, and we banish him to - where the fuck we gonna send him, exactly? Export him to Mexico? Canada? Mozambique? WTF does that solve? We ship our criminals to any place on earth, because we are to candy-assed to deal with them, and all the earth learns that we are beneath contempt. Besides which, we cannot deport a citizen. Not possible. We can do a lot of things to a citizen, but we can't deport him. Execution, you say? Hmmmm - as cynical as I am, I am cognizant of the fact that people do make mistakes. A murder, in the heat of the moment? Dude has never had so much as a traffic citation, and he kills some sumbitch during an argument? So - uhhh - we execute him? Probly not. We punish him for making a mistake, then send his ass home to support his family, so we don't have to support his family. We give him x number of years in prison, then turn him loose, maybe with some supervision.
You badmouth me as an authoritarian, then you only see two fit punishments for a guy who has fucked up - deportation or execution?
Jesus Christ, man - go out and buy you a moral compass. I mean, you don't even have a broken one, do you? Go get one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 22 2017, @06:08PM
Lots of people take the extreme route of punishing the guilty in the most extreme ways. It is a terrible policy that leads to very bad consequences. It erodes the morality of everyone involved. It satisfies the emotional need for vengeance, but when you give into such impulses then yes, it does lead to authoritarian horrors. I wouldn't call you a boot licker, but you're way too cozy with authoritarian practices on occasion.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday April 22 2017, @11:36AM
I think the important goals are at first to make sure to bar this person from any position where it's possible to screw up anything else. And secondly punish enough such that others get the message sufficiently that won't ever try the same.
Vindictiveness is rarely efficient but it sure feels good.