Quantcast

Do you think a suspects prior bad acts should be known by the jury?

Sister Jean 2012/06/19 17:15:36
Related Topics: Guilty, Bad, Workers
You!
Add Photos & Videos
I sure would want to know ..jury I was in we knew as this guy was in a mental institution for yrs for killing 4 co workers......we found him guilty
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Brosia 2012/07/20 04:22:34
    yes,cuz_____
    Brosia
    +1
    So long as the acts have something to do with the trial, sure. I don't care if they once ran a red light and crashed their car on purpose for insurance fraud, if the charge is rape. One has nothing to do with the other. Now, if the person had been charged previously for sexual assault, damn right I would want to know.
  • Jerry 2012/07/18 21:43:37
    None of the above
    Jerry
    +1
    .............I'm not sure, I guess it would mean if it would be whether that would lopsidedly decide the judgment of the case, by knowing evidence that may not be pertinent to the man on trial, I may be wrong on what I'm saying, because I'm not a legal expert on such things, interesting question You pose though........... thanks.........
  • purpleicecreamvan<3 2012/07/01 23:18:37
    no,cuz_____
    purpleicecreamvan<3
    +1
    everyone should get a second chance, and the jury would be biased by whatever their previous crime was. it shouldn't affect their ruling unless it's directly related to the current case.
  • Joel Buccellato 2012/06/22 04:03:11
    yes,cuz_____
    Joel	 Buccellato
    +1
    Only if the past actions are relevant to the trial.
  • fcombs 2012/06/21 03:57:35
    no,cuz_____
    fcombs
    +1
    It's not relevant to the issue at hand unless the person has been accused of murder and is known to have killed before - I think that would be relevant. If somebody drug up every stupid thing I've ever done to make a point about one thing I did, I would most llikely be judged to be at the very least insane.
  • Anna 2012/06/21 00:47:50
    yes,cuz_____
    Anna
    +2
    It shows the character of a defendant. Their good deeds should also be brought up to do this more thoroughly.
  • teckila 2012/06/20 18:36:31
    yes,cuz_____
    teckila
    +2
    Yes it can be very important to understand the story of the suspect.
  • angie45 2012/06/20 18:14:53 (edited)
    None of the above
    angie45
    +1
    hard one to answer, could be yes, and no, yes if he/she was once before found guilty of the same crime, no, he/she is being tried for what they just done..not the past.
  • lolitalovely 2012/06/20 18:02:49
    yes,cuz_____
    lolitalovely
    +2
    because otherwise they have to assume this is the first offense, just a stupid mistake. Repeated offenses aren't just stupid mistakes that you learned from.
  • hannah 2012/06/20 16:00:24
    yes,cuz_____
    hannah
    +1
    it could aid in the evidence placed before the jury AND it could also aid in figuring out the motives and patterns of the suspect and whether or not it fits with the person's who committed the crime. it could help put a connection between that person and the crime.
  • Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥ 2012/06/20 15:45:03
    no,cuz_____
    Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥
    +2
    He/she is being tried for a particular act (or set of acts) and only evidence regarding those acts should be submitted to the jury.
  • Phil 2012/06/20 15:39:43
    yes,cuz_____
    Phil
    +1
    It would give insight to who that person is over all,
  • ♒ßεllεchεvεllε®♒ 2012/06/20 15:35:44
    yes,cuz_____
    ♒ßεllεchεvεllε®♒
    +2
    establishes character
  • Sister ... ♒ßεllεc... 2012/06/20 16:04:03
  • gkirmani 2012/06/20 15:34:26
    no,cuz_____
    gkirmani
    +1
    otherwise it will influence the judgment
  • beach bum 2012/06/20 09:52:49
    yes,cuz_____
    beach bum
    +1
    it shows that they may be a deviant
  • Beat Magnum True Hero 2012/06/20 05:39:54 (edited)
    no,cuz_____
    Beat Magnum True Hero
    +4
    For actual convictions? No. Your past is not on trial and is therefore irrelevant. A jury must therefore focus solely on the evidence and testimony given on the current and relevant charges.

    Now, if a defendant is found guilty, then the past can be brought out for sentencing. Is this a pattern? Is this a one time offense? Okay, now we can use a person's past, but other than that, a fair trial means that past events are no longer relevant.
  • Christian 2012/06/20 03:14:12
    None of the above
    Christian
    +2
    If the defense is doing that to the witnesses to discredit their testimony.

    For example:If a girl is raped by a man and they are saying that she is a person that sleeps around then use the prior history of the defendant against him to make it fair.
  • xxx 2012/06/20 03:05:01
    yes,cuz_____
    xxx
    +1
    It's part of their criminal history and could or could not relate to the current crime. Regardless it needs to be used as a sort character reference
  • cjd 2012/06/20 01:28:25
    yes,cuz_____
    cjd
    +1
    need to know if there is a history of criminal acts
  • nenenae 2012/06/20 01:20:36
    yes,cuz_____
    nenenae
    +1
    If lets say he a record for being a rapist. Or murder. Or drug dealer
  • Andy Fletcher 2012/06/20 00:07:18 (edited)
    None of the above
    Andy Fletcher
    +2
    For me this is a tough one. Civil case, no problem. I firmly believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty. I think it's fine for when setting bail, or if it's up before a grand jury, but when it comes to the actual trial, I get cautious. The prosecution has a duty to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Their case MUST be based on the evidence that relates to the case. Because someone stole a candy bar doesn't go to showing they are guilty of murder. For me, the process is far more important than the outcome. It is the process that protects the truly innocent.

    *EDIT* And as Jackie G below says, it is a valuable tool in sentencing.
  • Sister ... Andy Fl... 2012/06/20 00:10:05
    Sister Jean
    agree
  • Wayne TH G 333 2012/06/19 23:50:15
    no,cuz_____
    Wayne TH G 333
    +3
    The evidence alone should prove someones guilt or not, otherwise people will jump to conclusions and often the wrong one.
  • **StarzAbove** 2012/06/19 23:43:58
    yes,cuz_____
    **StarzAbove**
    +1
    Yes, if there's a pattern of their crimes, the jury should know about it.
  • AngelaDuke 2012/06/19 21:39:15
    yes,cuz_____
    AngelaDuke
    +2
    They need to know if he has priors. Convicting someone who has killed 3 people is a lot easier than convicting someone that has never killed before. (Or whatever the crime may be)
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2012/06/19 21:01:39
    None of the above
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +1
    Only at sentencing - our justice says that past bad acts for which time has been served should not be considered for a current alleged crime.
  • sglmom 2012/06/19 20:58:21
    yes,cuz_____
    sglmom
    +2
    Here's my thoughts ..
    if there's a distinct pattern .. to the crimes committed ..
    the crimes are the same now ..
    and these heinous ones ..
    the Jury should have the knowledge that this is NOT the first time ..

    (I would not want to know .. that any jury had no knowledge of the nature of the crimes, let the criminal off with benefit of doubt .. and the criminal once again returned to predation (more innocence lost)).
  • Veritas 2012/06/19 20:51:21
    no,cuz_____
    Veritas
    +1
    If I acted poorly in the past . . . involved in petty crimes (maybe I was publicly intoxicated, maybe I got into a fight when I was 21, maybe I got caught with one marijuana joint) -- then I find myself in a murder trial -- NO, I wouldn't want my past brought up. Maybe the events occurred some time ago.

    Even though I can see everyone taking another side, I just can see things go badly for someone who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I wouldn't want that miscarriage of justice to play out on me or anyone I love.
  • Sew 2012/06/19 19:54:23
    no,cuz_____
    Sew
    +2
    Are said "bad acts" directly related to the case? If not then no. You are there to evaluate the evidence for what they are currently being charged for. Having done something in the past is no promise of what they'll do in the future. Such information could lead to you using their prior deeds to pass judgemnt instead of the evidence being presented. unless you want to turn the courtrooms into our political system where mudslinging is rampant I highly advise against it. Besides consider yourself in such a case. Would you want something you did as a stupid kid or adult from decades ago being presented as "evidence"? No this is not objective in the least bit.
  • RoyDMercer - IFOTFD 2012/06/19 19:43:20
    yes,cuz_____
    RoyDMercer - IFOTFD
    +3
    Whether or not there is a history of offenses could be vital.
  • Sister Jean 2012/06/19 19:43:00
    yes,cuz_____
    Sister Jean
    +3
    lets you see their character
  • Pops 2012/06/19 19:40:47
    yes,cuz_____
    Pops
    +2
    they are aren't they?
  • Sister ... Pops 2012/06/19 19:42:31
    Sister Jean
    +2
    not allowed
  • rugrat1411 2012/06/19 19:12:19
    yes,cuz_____
    rugrat1411
    +2
    If he/she is a rapist, killer, or molester I would want to know if this is the first time or the 10th time because it shows a pattern of behavior
  • Willski 2012/06/19 18:02:47 (edited)
    None of the above
    Willski
    +3
    only relevant ones.
    If as a child i was caught shoplifting, and 40 years later i accidently hit a man with my car, i wouldn't want that connected, with the time it's no longer relevant.
    But if i was on trial as a suspect for murder, and 3 years earlier i'd burned down an orphanage and it's residents, then that would seem relevant.
  • Sister ... Willski 2012/06/19 18:17:39
  • Jan Haskell 2012/06/19 17:49:28
    yes,cuz_____
    Jan Haskell
    +5
    It shows a pattern in the person's behavior.
  • Sister ... Jan Has... 2012/06/19 18:17:52 (edited)
  • Katey 2012/06/19 17:23:58
    yes,cuz_____
    Katey
    +7
    If they did something horrible once they could do it again

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/11/28 00:28:09

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals