* much less likely to be participating in a lengthy appeals process
* subject to corrupting influences such as for-profit prisons
* vastly dominated by "plea agreements" in which people are convicted via coercive influence rather than any evidentiary process (and far worse if socioeconomically disadvantaged or non-white).
If 4% only refers to death row errors, the overall error rate for wrongful convictions is likely in the double digits.
Also, the error rate probably goes up again for non-incarceration results which let the system "slap people on the wrist" since that is seen as less serious (despite high incidental cost to life, career, mental & physical health). It's the legal system's equivalent of closing a support ticket.
And this is only classifying "correct judgement" vs. "wrongfully convicted." It fails to model cases where a criminal conviction was a really stupid way to deal with the problem, which could have been addressed via non-criminal means.
I agree w/ the stupidity of treating certain issues as criminal. This is, I think, where the bulk of the problem really lies. The judicial system is overstressed and trying cases is very expensive, leading to lower quality investigations and the plea situation you mention.
I guess what bugs me about this is that the wrongful conviction issue is always presented alongside the capital punishment issue. They are separate issues and, I think, related only in that both deal with the criminal justice system. Wrongful conviction is awful no matter what the sentence.
Yes, the study found that on for death row inmates, but there are many reasons to suspect that it's likely not significantly lower in other populations.
I commented on this in my original comment, but ran the numbers to get a sense of the potential scale of the problem.
If there's even a potential for 100,000 innocent Americans to be subjected to prison, I think that justifies a serious inquiry in to the criminal justice system be made.
Yes and that is the lowest possible rate because death rows are the most scrutinized cases.
And if we stretch innocent as "No jury would find this person guilty if it gets to trial and they knew the real size of the mallet the DA was swinging" then you probably could get to above 80% in some cases of war on drugs.
