Let’s say you’re found guilty of a serious crime (murder, for the sake of it), but are innocent and somehow manage to escape custody. You know who the real killer is, the police don’t believe you, so you hunt him down yourself.
You eventually find him, and through some miracle, you actually convince them to go to the police and confess. All the cops, lawyers, judges, etc… are satisfied that it’s a real confession, not under duress, and so he goes to jail for the crime, and you’re exonerated.
So what happens to you? Yes, you did commit a crime, but had you not, you would have gone to jail for an even bigger crime. Do they basically say “one hand washed the other,” or do you still go to jail? I mean…seems kind of a dick move…sending you to jail because you prevented a big injustice.
My gut feeling says you will probably either get a simple plea agreement, probation or something, or go to trial and have a pretty good chance of jury nullification.
Very likely the State is going to try it’s damnedest to get you sent to jail for the breaking, otherwise every one incarcerated will attempt to break out and “find the real killer, thief, rapist, tax fraudster”.
There’s also the option of a pardon from the executive authority of the jurisdiction (the governor of the state or the President) with respect to whatever crimes you may have committed in the course of escaping custody. Strictly speaking, a pardon means you are guilty of the crime in question, but they’re forgiving you and agreeing not to punish you for it, which fits–you really did break this and that law in the course of escaping to prove your innocence, but it would arguably be an outrage to justice (not to mention public opinion) to send you back to prison.
Of course, this will also depend on the circumstances of your escape. If you escape after (by sheer coincidence and no contrivance on your part) a freight train demolishes the prison bus you were riding in–stopping on the way to heroically save the life of a guard at risk to your own life–the law may view you differently than if you killed or seriously injured anyone in the course of escaping.
A prosecutor’s ethical duty is to see that justice is done, not just to get a conviction. Nevertheless, you’re probably going to be getting yourself into a lot more trouble by breaking out, even with the best of motives. That’s pure Hollywood.
In the first or second Book of Lists by David Wallechinsky, Irving Wallace and Amy Wallace there is a list of, I think, Great Miscarriages of Justice.
As I recall one story was about an innocent guy who was imprisoned for taking part in a bank robbery. Rather than rat on a friend the actual robber had fingered this guy as his accomplice. While in prison he heard from another inmate who the real accomplice was and escaped, tracked him down, captured him and took him to the police. The real crook confessed but the hero of the story was returned to jail because he had been lawfully convicted.
Maybe someone with a copy of the book can provide some more details. I am trusting to memory about a book I read 30 odd years ago.
If you think that’s a miscarriage of justice, google “McMartin preschool” some time. IIRC even the former prosecutors of the case have been begging for clemency for the people they convicted, but the governor or others refuse to do so because to admit error would undermine confidence in the justice system, or something like that. I may have details wrong, but not gonna look it up because I don’t feel like getting angry this afternoon.
I would think you are very unlikely to be charged with prison breach if you have established that you were wrongly convicted in the first place (as in, you get your conviction formally reversed).
But if you committed other crimes like, say, killing or assaulting someone in the course of your escape, you could well be charged for those.
Basically the plot of the film Negotiator (Samuel L. in the lead role): faced with bogus charges, he kidnaps some people at gunpoint, eventually tricks the head conspirator into confessing, and apparently gets off scot-free at the end.
Of course you are guilty of lawfully eescaping custody… The question would be whether the DA wants the hassle of the trial. If you can afford a fancy bad-ass lawyer, the jury is going to hear how you were railroaded in loving detail, plus how incompetent the cops and DA’s office were. (IANAL - any lawyer comment on whether the DA can likely keep that detail out of court as irrelevant?)
So it’s not that you can get off, it’s whether the DA/state/governor will want the expense of a trial where you might get off, and be seen persecuting an “innocent man”.
Another possibility is whether the charges will be droppped over the negotiations in the lawsuit for wrongful imprisonment. “Take 10 million off the demands if you want us to drop the charges…”
Abbsolutely, positively NOBODY was ever CONVICTED in the McMartin trials. Cite.
The whole thing was a product of therumors of ritual satantic sexual abuse of children that have never even been proven, though the topic was heavily investigated and written about in the 1980’s. A lot of totally innocent people’s lives were destroyed by it.
It’s like Linda Tripp, she commited a crime by taping but was giving immunity. So if you were really innocent, they would likely charge you and work out a plea deal.
And of course, if you play demolition derby on the deck of a ferry to escape (If Im not mixing up my movies from a while ago), dont expect that all will be forgiven when you find the real culprit.