The USA’s judicial system is unfair and heavily slanted toward the prosecution. I’m going to explain how and why. Here, I’ll break down three obvious ones.
If you can guess that a criminal entertainment channel disguised as a news outlet is one of ‘em … you’d be correct. Can you guess who I’m referring to?There’s only 1 media outlet
Balance is sorely missing, as HLN, which is mere tabloid yellow journalism, has a monopoly on the market. There needs to be a news source under the auspice of a large corporation like CNN that balances things out. Perhaps a source for news that reflects a website like this one. And watch this 2-minute pop-up video of Brian Stelter the NY Times explaining: how HLN influences media outlets -- even their own sister channel yet competitor, HLN.
Prosecutors have absolute immunity
Strengthened by the Rehberg v. Paulk SCOTUS decision, prosecutors like Linda Drane Burdick and Jeff Ashton can knowingly lie under oath about chloroform searches with no worries. Mike Nifong can charge Duke Lacrosse players with a serious charge like rape while knowing he’s completely lying with little punishment. Juan Martinez can throw pens and papers, bully witnesses, and cut the testimony of witnesses out with no recourse. Heck, ,Juan Martinez can even tell the jury to put themselves in Travis Alexander’s shoes — a blatant violation of US law — without an admonishment or a mistrial. Judge Sherry Stephens just has to say “the jury is to disregard what the state said.” How can they? It’s already been said!The prosecution gets 2 closing arguments while the defense gets 1
Wrong! In the USA, the prosecution gets a 2nd closing argument. Some people call this a “rebuttal”, but all it really is, is another closing argument. Where’s the fairness there — especially considering the entire trial is slanted toward the prosecution in the first place?
What are your thoughts? Leave your comments below!