I get convicted for a crime I did not commit, what happens when the truth comes out?

Factual Questions
1

This is a hypothetical question, but I seek factual answers.

Let’s say I get convicted for killing someone. The jury find me guilty and the judge sentences me to life in prison.

Thing is, I didn’t do it. So 25 years pass while I remain int he slammer where I’m used and abused by the inmates. Eventually however, new evidence comes to light and after several appeals, I’m given a new trial where I’m found innocent.

What happens now? The state made a mistake that has cost me 25 YEARS of my life. My wife has since remarried. My kids don’t know me. I have no work experience or training in my field, I’m 25 years behind the times.

Will the state compensate me somehow? Will they just say: “Eh, chucks, we’re real sorry we screwed up your life. Well, here’s the clothes you came in here with and your wallet with the 20 spot in it, have a nice day!”.

What would happen?

Additionally, have there been cases such as this? (I would imagine yes, and in the order of hundreds given our system is hardly perfect), what has happened in some of those cases?

Finally, what do you think SHOULD happen when somethign like this occurs?

2

I imagine they say “You got nothin’ comin’.”

3

That’s a good question. You may be factually innocent, but were you technically wrongfully convicted?

The question for me hinges on whether the prosecutor actually do something wrong, such as witness or evidence tampering, or really convicted you in “good faith?” (I.E all evidence pointed to you, and you looked as guilty as hell when you testified.)

I have heard of judgements on behalf of freed convicts, but I don’t know if they were in cases of malfeasance, or just because the state was sorry for what had happened.

4

relevant link:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/LAW/06/20/bloodsworth.profile

short answer is you get nothing without fighting for it, and some people will always think you’re guilty.

5

There’s no law against the government being stupid.

As a generality, governments are allowed to make mistakes or use poor judgment. The principle is called “soveriegn immunity”.

No, it is not fair. It is, however, often necessary. If the U. S. government was ever held truly liable for the bone-headed things it has done in the past and made to pay restitution, the monstrous national debt that has already been accumulated would be a shadow of an iota of what would result. How much would it make to come close to truly making amends for slavery, for child labor, for outrages against the American Indians, for mishandling nuclear waste and being slow to restrict the use of lead and asbestos, etc., of actually spraying children with DDT on purpose in the belief it was good for their lungs? (Okay: that last one may have just been the fault of state and local governments.)

And if governments were aware they could be held to absolute acountability, what, exactly, would officials be willing to do in the future? Would anyone get out on parole?

In an especially egregious case a legislature may elect to give compensation. This would be an example of a private relief bill–an extremely common form of legislation in which an individual or small group are cut a special break.

While private relief bills are extremely common, I have no idea how common one of this type is. I’m guessing they happen very, very rarely. A famous instance of something which is similar, but hardly the same, is the Robert Burns case. Burns was the author of a best seller called I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang. A kind of real life Jean Valjean, he was effectively granted asylum by the State of New Jersey, which refused to send him back to serve the remainder of his sentence.

The situation is different if a wrongly convicted person can show actual malfeasance was the likely cause of his conviction; if, for example, he can prove that the prosecution knowingly suppressed evidence which was in his favor, he can be in a position to collect damages.

6

In Canada, at least, some wrongly convicted people have been awarded compensation. The David Milgaard case springs to mind. He spent 23 years in prison for the murder of a nursing aide in Saskatoon, and was cleared using DNA evidence in 1992. He received $10 000 000 compensation from the Saskatchewan government.

This site : http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/facts/wrong_convicted.html contains information on proposed changes to the Criminal Code of Canada to prevent false convictions, and also gives examples of others wrongly convicted in Canada.

7

Hire Johnnie Cochran. He got some guy named Geronimo Pratt several million bucks, after Pratt was locked up 20+ years.

How much did Hurricane Carter get? He spent 20+ years in the slammer too.

8

I would imagine that after spending a decade or more in the slammer for something you didn’t do, you’re so fuckng afraid of the gummint that you wouldn’t have the balls to do anything to bug a gummint official, even if they admitted they did something wrong. Who knows what other crimes the gummint might gin up against you? You smile and accept the gummint’s apology and try to slide back into whatever remains of your life. I’ll bet that’s what happened with most of the guys released from Illinois’ death row who were found to be innocent.

9

Here in the UK it is unfortunately not that unusual for us to hear of cases of wrongful imprisonment.
One such case involved Michael O’Brian who served 11 years for murder before being cleared on appeal. He received £650,000 compensation. It was reduced by £37,000 to pay for his “living expenses” while in prison!
I’m afraid there are many more.

V

10

Not in the case of Rolando Cruz

Nor in the case of Alejandro Hernandez.

11

The cases I have heard of where there was large compensation involved actual malfeasance on the part of the police or prosecutors. They hid evidence of innocence or fabriacted evidence of guilt and you could prove it. There was a case in Ontario in which the cops convinced the mother of the victim that her kitchen clock had spontaneously jumped ahead by 20 minutes and then spontaneously jumped back. The real time would have absolutely exonerated the convicted party. On rehearing (after DNA evidence was presented many years later) she admitted what had happened. Of course, the defense attorney, even assuming he was awake at the trial, never knew about this, but can you imagine the cross-examination if he had?