# Crime committed, it must be one of two people but they don't know which one **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 23, 2012, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583 "2012-10-23T01:02:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2012, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/21 "2012-10-23T14:32:44Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > The answer to the OP and notwithstanding the other responses here, in the absence of evidence, the proper action would be to let them go and I really cannot imagine any prosecutor behaving properly, who would not do this. > > A prosecutors duty is to serve justice, not to get a conviction at any cost. I have a nice bridge I would like to sell you. I still recall the Attorney General of Florida, faced with an exoneration by DNA of a guy on death row, who said his job was to see the guy executed and he was going to fight in court for the right of the state of Florida to execute him even if he were presented with, and I quote, “absolute proof of innocence”. The thing is that prosecutors get reelected on the basis of their “success rate” and success doesn’t mean doing justice, but getting convictions, no matter by what means. Let me mention another case I recall from many years ago. A guy was convicted of murder in a suburb of Toronto. He had an alibi for the actual time of the murder (he left work at a certain time, it took a certain time to drive home, etc.). The prosecutor convinced the murdered girl’s that her kitchen clock had mysteriously advanced by 20 minutes before her daughter went out of the house and then equally mysteriously moved back by 20 minutes later on. I guess the mother was sufficiently distraught to buy into this. Or she wanted a conviction, any conviction, to achieve “closure”. This misplaced the time of the murder by enough that the poor guy could have gotten home in time to do it. With this and no actual other evidence (except the guy was French-Canadian and considered a shady character) they got a conviction. Somehow the case fell apart after the guy had spent a decade of so in prison and the mother finally admitted what had happened. It’s for things like this that I don’t trust cops or prosecutors. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2012, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/22 "2012-10-23T15:03:45Z")
> [@panamajack](#): > > Related question: Can you plead guilty to a crime that someone else has been convicted of? I’m assuming that two people can plead guilty to the same crime, but is that even true as well? Maybe not post-conviction, but I know a guy who confessed to a crime his friend had been arrested for. He served almost three years of a five to seven (?) year sentence. Had his buddy been convicted, it would have fallen under the third strike law in California. Personally, I could never be _that_ good a friend. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2012, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/23 "2012-10-23T15:43:41Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > The vast majority don’t. Stanley Milgram showed most people will torture someone to death because an authority figure told them to. . The studies showed nothing of the sort. Both sides knew the other was there voluntarily and getting paid for it. And, everyone knew this was at a University were actual torture wouldn’t be allowed. I am sure a large number of “evil torturers’ were just playing along. Have you ever seen Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” where he asks simple questions but gets stupid answer/ The dudes being questioned know damn well that it’s all a game and that only those with really stupid but funny answer have a chance of getting on the Tonight show. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2012, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/24 "2012-10-23T15:45:39Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > The last time something like this was Doped, it was two co-conspirators committing a crime, then under questioning both say they are innocent and it was all the other guy. In fact, each person alleges they were trying to _prevent_ the crime. > > I think the consensus there was, absent any other evidence, and if no individual account can be shown to be self-contradictory (Columbo doesn’t show up), they walk free. Umm, no. if it can be shown there is a criminal conspiracy you don’t need to prove exactly who did what. Murder trial out here where one hood was the driver the other was the shooter, both claimed that the other guy was the shooter, both went to prison for murder. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2012, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/25 "2012-10-23T16:04:16Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Umm, no. if it can be shown there is a criminal conspiracy you don’t need to prove exactly who did what. Murder trial out here where one hood was the driver the other was the shooter, both claimed that the other guy was the shooter, both went to prison for murder. Agreed, but that wasn’t the kind of example I was trying to describe. Let’s say three friends are playing poker, but guys A and B have made a plan and one of them shoots C. In questioning, A claims B flipped out and pulled out a gun, and though A did everything he could, he couldn’t stop the shot being fired. B says the opposite. There’s no other evidence to go on; no prints, no apparent motive, no evidence of collusion between A and B, and they played poker every week so it’s not like just being there implies anything. Neither story has any obvious holes. I don’t see how this could be a conviction, even though we know at least one man is guilty. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/26 "2012-10-24T00:01:13Z")
> [@Simple\_Linctus](#): > > That depends on the juristriction, you would not be allowed to do that in the UK for example. Police and Criminal Evidence act, innit. > > This is to guard against the enormous number of false confessions that the approach you are referring to produces. You’re not allowed to use the Reid technique either. In the US the police are allowed to lie about most anything (except offering you leniency if you cooperate). ---
**Author:** ![Simple\_Linctus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Simple\_Linctus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simple_Linctus)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/27 "2012-10-24T00:05:27Z")
> [@Wesley\_Clark](#): > > In the US the police are allowed to lie about most anything (except offering you leniency if you cooperate). I do appreciate that. Indeed I think they can even offer you leniency. Certainly the Reid technique involves impressions of offering leniency. I totally recommend reading [Criminal Investigations and Confessions](http://www.amazon.com/Criminal-Interrogation-Confessions-Fred-Inbau/dp/0763747211) by the way, which describes various things but mostly the Reid technique. It’s amazing. I got it from an appendix in doper **ianzin** ’s\* amazing book about cold reading. \*who I THINK was the first to mention me the SDMB during a lecture when he spoke of goat felching. ---
**Author:** ![cmosdes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a587f6/32.png) [@cmosdes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmosdes)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/28 "2012-10-24T00:15:52Z")
How would it work out if both people were charged and tried and convicted? One of them is guilty but not both. Would the second trial end as soon as the first was found guilty? What about the case of a plea bargain and both sides agree to it? Both figure it is better to serve less time than risk a longer sentence. Do the proceedings of the second one end as soon as the first one concludes? ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/29 "2012-10-24T01:53:39Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > I have a nice bridge I would like to sell you. I still recall the Attorney General of Florida, faced with an exoneration by DNA of a guy on death row, who said his job was to see the guy executed and he was going to fight in court for the right of the state of Florida to execute him even if he were presented with, and I quote, “absolute proof of innocence”. The thing is that prosecutors get reelected on the basis of their “success rate” and success doesn’t mean doing justice, but getting convictions, no matter by what means. > > Let me mention another case I recall from many years ago. A guy was convicted of murder in a suburb of Toronto. He had an alibi for the actual time of the murder (he left work at a certain time, it took a certain time to drive home, etc.). The prosecutor convinced the murdered girl’s that her kitchen clock had mysteriously advanced by 20 minutes before her daughter went out of the house and then equally mysteriously moved back by 20 minutes later on. I guess the mother was sufficiently distraught to buy into this. Or she wanted a conviction, any conviction, to achieve “closure”. This misplaced the time of the murder by enough that the poor guy could have gotten home in time to do it. With this and no actual other evidence (except the guy was French-Canadian and considered a shady character) they got a conviction. Somehow the case fell apart after the guy had spent a decade of so in prison and the mother finally admitted what had happened. > > It’s for things like this that I don’t trust cops or prosecutors. If you want examples of prosecutorial misconduct, then I have some real nice stories to share with you. Then again, I also have stories of doctors acting more like glorified drug dealers, pilots being inebriated on duty and Army officers running a gun running operation. The fact that a handful of professionals violate and breach codes of conduct and standards does not mean that all or indeed most do. For every Mike Nifong, you have hundreds of state counsels who do their duty in difficult circumstances. Also, you seem to misunderstand the role of a prosecutor. A prosecutor does not make a determination of guilt nor doe s/he decide whether a person actually goes to trial, that is a determination made by the Court after viewing evidence. The system has in built checks and balances, a witch hunting prosecutor wkill eventually run afoul of Judges, whether trial or Appellate and also his own supervising authority, to say no mention of being hauled up before the regulator on professional misconduct charges (like the aforementioned Mr Nifong, and I sure the examples that you gave.). ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2012, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/30 "2012-10-24T02:37:10Z")
> [@Simple\_Linctus](#): > > That depends on the juristriction, you would not be allowed to do that in the UK for example. Police and Criminal Evidence act, innit. > > This is to guard against the enormous number of false confessions that the approach you are referring to produces. You’re not allowed to use the Reid technique either. I thought that was only banned against minors? ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2012, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583/31 "2012-10-27T05:19:42Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The studies showed nothing of the sort. Both sides knew the other was there voluntarily and getting paid for it. And, everyone knew this was at a University were actual torture wouldn’t be allowed. I am sure a large number of “evil torturers’ were just playing along. “I’m sure” is not a valid basis in which to do science. The actual studies showed people actually acting very much like they thought the torture was real, being very reluctant to choose, sweating, showing fear responses. All the data shows they thought they were actually hurting the other person. You are making excuses to discount experimental data you are uncomfortable with. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crime-committed-it-must-be-one-of-two-people-but-they-dont-know-which-one/638583.md?page=1)