[speaker002:] yeah so what do you think about that
[speaker001:] um I I have I get frustrated sometimes with our legal system I think it's a bit lenient um giving giving in in most in a lot of cases the the criminal the benefit of the doubt or the I guess the criminal you can't say they're criminal yet but they would be the uh the defendant
[speaker002:] yeah the accused
[speaker001:] the accused right and if you um if you require the jury to be unanimous I'm afraid there'd there'd be a lot of there'd be a lot of cases where just a single person is being stubborn and um and someone would would get off when they really shouldn't
[speaker002:] yeah I hear that the uh my problem with the courts and the that systems is just the fact that it's almost completely broken down most cases that go on aren't even tried but are plea bargained so that the guy can get off a certain amount of time in exchange for not spending time in the courts but the uh the worst part is that the jails are being filled with political criminals I mean since nineteen eighty six we've been undergoing a major witch hunt in this country were the question isn't who's hurt anybody but uh is the individual has been engaged in unauthorized behavior and we are now ahead of South Africa and Russia in locking up a higher percentage of our citizens than any other country on this planet we've beat even beat out the Muslim countries something is major wrong here and uh we can trace it to the right wing witch hunt there isn't any room for the real criminals
[speaker001:] what what's a political criminal
[speaker002:] uh it's when uh the government decides that a certain behavior uh shall not be authorized anymore and that anybody who is then caught doing it is guilty of violating the crime
[speaker001:] like what
[speaker002:] when in fact nobody has actually been hurt oh smoking weed growing marijuana patronizing prostitutes things like that
[speaker001:] oh I see okay you're calling them political prisoners
[speaker002:] well that as as as opposed to the kind of the more European political prisoners where someone actively uh speaks out and opposes the government if if if if a crime involves no complainant then it's the government doing the complaining and that sounds political to me
[speaker001:] okay yeah I understand I uh actually actually for my perception is that most people having having to do with those things you mentioned seems like they tend to get off most of the time I don't really have a lot of data but that's my perception
[speaker002:] um it depends on what and who uh the largest number of people who are convicted of various crimes and in jail today are drug crimes that are not accompanied by other crimes it's sort of a thing that because someone who is inclined to use some of the nastier drugs will then also go out and commit other crimes that that means that the other crimes are no longer a valid point of contention it's sort of like saying somebody should be able to do all the Coke they want but as soon as they violate any other law and actually hurt somebody whether it's stealing money to get the Coke loosing control and beating someone up that they should be treated the same way as someone who looses control and beats someone up without being under the influence of chemicals whose they can't use it as an excuse
[speaker001:] I certainly agree
[speaker002:] but the way that it's come now to the the trials and the judges it's it's it's almost completely manipulated uh in in favor of the government's position so uh while I'm willing to sacrifice the danger of having a a few people who are guilty getting off because it's far to easy when the government decides someone did it hey they did it and if it and whether the innocence or guilt is true or not becomes irrelevant in fact Texas has gone totally crazy on this Texas has a guy on death row now and the convicted convicted of a crime that someone else has come out and admitted to and that story has been corroborated but they're still arguing whether that's grounds for uh commuting his sentence or not because guilt or innocence is not a constitutional question so Texas could conceivably it's that close execute someone who they know didn't commit the crime because of the points of law involved so there there's a point that's left logic and reason and broken down completely
[speaker001:] huh what do you think do you think the jury ought to do the sentencing or the judge
[speaker002:] oh the jury definitely and uh whether it's unanimous or not I think that it could be uh there there there needs to be lots of evidence for appealing um I have a friend who uh took his trial by judge and that's the worst mistake anyone can ever make because at least with the jury even though you're going to be tried by six or twelve people who weren't able to get out of jury duty that's an old joke but it's still true a lot of the people who you would want to have on your jury don't want to have anything to do with it
[speaker001:] uh-huh
[speaker002:] so it's risky real risky but still I take my chance with the odds of twelve and we have to sacrifice letting a few people get away with things because eventually they're going to be caught then for my personal risk of being in the wrong place at the wrong time
[speaker001:] yeah I disagree I actually disagree on both of them