Justice "System" in the USA

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**BrassScorpion**

There was a case in Georgia this week where a woman, Raquel Nelson, got a longer jail sentence than the driver who ran over and killed her child. Public outcry finally changed her sentence, but it was a close one. The driver who killed her child is partially blind and admitted to consuming alcohol and pain killers before driving the car! He also fled the scene after the accident. All that and he only got 6 months in jail even though he was recently released for a similar crime he committed several years ago. The all-white Georgia jury was going to send the victim, Ms. Nelson, to jail for 3 years. Unbelievable. There's a detailed article on this hit and run case here: http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/cobb-mom-opts-for-1042791.html

I've seen cases where people served 5-7 years for killing someone and someone else gets 10-20 years for check fraud. Weird. The system is totally nuts.

http://www.ajc.com/news/cobb/cobb-mom-opts-for-1042791.html

Cobb County News 7:29 a.m. Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Cobb mom opts for new trial in hit-run case

By Marcus K. Garner and Elise Hitchcock

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

A Cobb County mother has opted for a new trial to defend herself against accusations that she was responsible for the death of her 4-year-old son, her attorney said.
Enlarge photo
Raquel Nelson, in court on Tuesday morning, confers with attorney Kelly Turner. Attorney David Savoy is at right.
Raquel Nelson, in court on Tuesday morning, confers with attorney Kelly Turner. Attorney David Savoy is at right.
Enlarge photo
In this May 2010 photo, Raquel Nelson tends to a shrine for her son A.J. Newman, 4, who was killed April 10, 2010, by a hit-and-run driver near the family's home on Austell road.
Phil Skinner, AJC In this May 2010 photo, Raquel Nelson tends to a shrine for her son A.J. Newman, 4, who was killed April 10, 2010, by a hit-and-run driver near the family's home on Austell road.

Raquel Nelson, convicted on three charges after A.J. Nelson was killed by a hit-and-run driver, was sentenced Tuesday to 40 hours of community service and 12 months' probation -- and then offered a new trial.

The judge's unusual decision was announced at a sentencing hearing Tuesday in Cobb County State Court.

“[Ms. Nelson] is planning to exercise her right to a new trial,” attorney David Savoy said.

No date has been set for the new trial.

Judge Katherine Tanksley sentenced Nelson to 12 months probation for the first two counts and 12 months probation for the third count, to be served concurrently.

Tanksley also suspended $1,000 fines that could be levied for each misdemeanor count.

If Nelson is acquitted in a new trial, her record would be cleared.

Nelson, 30, was convicted earlier this month of homicide by vehicle in the second degree, crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk and reckless conduct in the April 10, 2010 incident.

She and her three children were trying to cross four-lane Austell Road to their apartment after getting off a Cobb Community Transit bus.

A.J. was struck by a car and killed. The mother and her younger daughter suffered minor injuries, while her older daughter was not hurt.

Jerry L. Guy, the driver who admitted hitting A.J. when he pleaded guilty to hit-and-run, served six months in jail, despite having been convicted in 1997 of a similar offense. He was released in October and will serve the remainder of his five-year sentence on probation.

National media outlets, from CNN and ABC News to Reuters, were in the courtroom for Nelson's case. More than 40 people, including family and friends, came early to support Nelson and demand leniency against her, asking that she not be sent to jail.

“We thank this organization of mothers and parents who just want to see justice,” the Rev. Dwight Graves, president of the Cobb County SCLC, said as he led a prayer before the hearing.

Nelson’s brother Emoni Love, called before the judge to speak as a character witness, said his sister had compassion for Guy, even though he saw Guy as being at fault.

“When I was upset about what [Guy] got, I was angry, and my sister told me not to have hate in my heart,” Love said, shedding tears as he spoke. “Please send my sister home with us. She does not deserve to be in jail.”

Cobb County Assistant Solictor AnnaMarie Baltz told the judge early in Tuesday’s sentencing hearing that prosecutors only recommended probation and community service.

“The state never thought this defendant deserved jail time,” Baltz said.

But Beverly Ward, A.J.’s pre-K teacher, said that even probation was too much.

“The purpose of punishment is for a person to pay their debt to society,” Ward said. “Every time she has to check in with a probation officer or tell somebody what happened, she will have to relive this.

“She already has to relive it everyday. Her debt is paid. Every time she talks to her other children about A.J., or when she calls to check on his teachers, her debt is paid.”

Thomas Casillas, a family friend, read a letter from Nelson’s father, George Nelson, who is in South Africa and unable to attend the hearing.

“We want to put the negative parts of this behind us,” Casillas read from the letter. “Let my family heal.”

On Monday, Nelson discussed her case with Ann Curry, anchor of NBC’s "Today" show.

That maximum sentence would be "three years away from the two [children] that I have left,” Nelson said then.

Nelson’s aunt, Loretta Williams, said on the show that she and the rest of Nelson’s family hoped that the judge “is compassionate and will let my niece remain with her other children.”

In court Tuesday, Tanksley acknowledged that her office had received numerous letters and emails requesting leniency.

The standing-room-only courtroom erupted in applause when Tanksley initially announced the sentence – and that Nelson would not go to jail – but the judge quickly silenced family members and well-wishers who crowded in to support the mother.

Then, after reading through more legalese, Tanksley released the bombshell decision.

“The court grants you a new trial as to all the charges,” she said to Nelson.

During the trial, Nelson said she and her children crossed Austell Road outside a crosswalk because the nearest one was 0.3 mile away, and she was “trying to hurry up and get home so we wouldn’t have to be in the dark.”

Sally Flocks, president and CEO of the nonprofit pedestrian advocacy group PEDS, said Cobb County and CCT should revisit how bus stops are placed.

“Cobb needs to modernize,” Flocks said. “The population here has evolved. It’s not all just people who drive. And that [vehicular homicide] law needs to be amended to make it only apply to people in vehicles.”

**Soladrin**

I don't get it.

**Ahtman**

It isn't the 'systems' fualt so much as the Prosecutor's Office; they are not required to press charges in the first place. Once the ball is rolling though the system isn't designed to treat each case like a special snowflake and you don't make sentencing based on someone else sentencing for a different crime. As for varying sentences for crimes, well, it is complicated but a lot of it comes down to how good of a defense attorney one has.

**mattyrm**

I dont wish to sound callous, but the mother sounds like a fething idiot as well as the idiot driving.

**biccat**

Different cases brought by prosecutors on different charges before different judges and juries get a different sentence.

News at 11.

There are a lot of issues to complain about in the US Justice System. This isn't one of them.

**Melchiour**

I'm confused. He got 6 months in jail with 5 years probation, she got 12 months probation. He did get a worse sentence from what I read. Did I miss a part?

**Ahtman**

mattyrm wrote: I dont wish to sound callous

I don't believe you!

**illuknisaa**

Hey OP atleast US have a justice system. Things ain't that great in Finland. If you want steal somebody's wallet you better first murder your victim because that way you can keep the wallet and you only get like a year in prison if you are first timer, didn't cause terror to the victim and behave well in prison. Although you shouldn't try cheat government on taxes as that might get you to a prison for life (aka 12 years).

Finlands highest court goes through 20 000 cases a year the funny thing is that court has only 10 members and a single year holds 365 days.

**Grakmar**

BrassScorpion wrote:There was a case in Georgia this week where a woman, Raquel Nelson, got a longer jail sentence than the driver who ran over and killed her child. Public outcry finally changed her sentence, but it was a close one.

This is entirely wrong. She did NOT get a longer jail sentence than the driver. She got zero days of jail. The driver got 6 months.

And, her sentence hasn't been changed. The judge offered her a new trial, which she accepted.

And, it was immediate. There was no drawn out public outcry that "finally" changed her sentence.

**SOFDC**

Brass, were you truly not aware that the United States has the finest legal system money can buy? What do you want this whole "Justice" thing for anyway? You truly think that killing a child with a ton of speeding metal is less offensive than CROSSING THE ROAD ANYWHERE OTHER THAN A CROSSWALK?!?!?! Where did -you- come from?!

Now, putting aside the hyperbolic satire...3 years probation for jaywalking? And a homicide conviction to sit there on your record for the rest of your life? Good luck finding a job, lady!

One white man who would've voted not to convict, she lost a kid. That is more than enough punishment for stupidity.

**BearersOfSalvation**

Melchiour wrote:I'm confused. He got 6 months in jail with 5 years probation, she got 12 months probation. He did get a worse sentence from what I read. Did I miss a part?

The initial sentence for her was 3 years in jail, the 12 months probation is the reduced version.

**Grakmar**

BearersOfSalvation wrote:
Melchiour wrote:I'm confused. He got 6 months in jail with 5 years probation, she got 12 months probation. He did get a worse sentence from what I read. Did I miss a part?

The initial sentence for her was 3 years in jail, the 12 months probation is the reduced version.

No. The maximum sentence her charges could resulted in was 3 years. She was NEVER sentenced to 3 years.

**SOFDC**

Still a homicide conviction and all the non-jail strings that come with it. Ones that follow you until you are dead. As I said, I wish her luck in finding a job that is not flipping hamburgers in the future.

**Grakmar**

SOFDC wrote:Still a homicide conviction and all the non-jail strings that come with it. Ones that follow you until you are dead. As I said, I wish her luck in finding a job that is not flipping hamburgers in the future.

Well, it looks like everything that she was convicted of is a misdemeanor. So, she can still answer "no" to "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?". And, she can have her record sealed after she successfully completes her probation.

**halonachos**

www.ajc.com wrote:Nelson, 30, was convicted earlier this month of homicide by vehicle in the second degree, crossing roadway elsewhere than at crosswalk and reckless conduct in the April 10, 2010 incident.

She and her three children were trying to cross four-lane Austell Road to their apartment after getting off a Cobb Community Transit bus.

A.J. was struck by a car and killed. The mother and her younger daughter suffered minor injuries, while her older daughter was not hurt.

She made a horrible decision and it caused her son to be killed and for another one of her children to be harmed as well as herself. In the road, pedestrians do not have right of way so that's why crosswalks exist, because in crosswalks pedestrians do have right of way.

I've seen people trying to cross four lanes of traffic and I almost brained a kid who was running across the street with his family. They were running to the median and the kid was about to jump into my lane before his mother yanked his ass back onto the median. I have a truck with a lift kit on it, if I hit that kid his head would be going against my bumper and I'm sure the truck would win. Luckily she managed to yank him and the driver in the lane to the right of me swerved to the right when I did.

So, don't cross in the middle of the street when there are four lanes of traffic. Walk the extra 0.3 miles to the crosswalk and it'll be safer, and as far as I'm concerned she did endanger her kids by having poor judgement. The man comitted a lot of errors as well, and if he's partially blind he shouldn't be driving unless he has some sort of corrective lenses. He was also driving impaired so he should have a sentence as well.

She didn't want to walk 0.3 miles, there and back to the apartment would be 0.6 miles. Would it take longer, yes but that extra 20 or so minutes would've kept her son alive.

**thedude**

Yeah i'm irritated that the driver got off with such a light sentance relative to the crime in my mind, especially considering the alledged history of this behavior. Its sad what happened and i have no idea how big or small this road really is (not bothering the look) so perhaps it was the kind of mistake any one of us could make but she does have some of the blame here for sure, thats why the city takes the time to designate places to cross the road.

**Melissia**

You mean like how a person who steals millions of dollars often gets a slap on the wrist anda minor fine, but someone who steals a few hundred gets time in prison?

Yes, the US justice system is messed up. I'm fairly certain most justice systems are to some extent...

**halonachos**

Melissia wrote:You mean like how a person who steals millions of dollars often gets a slap on the wrist anda minor fine, but someone who steals a few hundred gets time in prison?

Yes, the US justice system is messed up. I'm fairly certain most justice systems are to some extent...

Depends on how the money is stolen. If you go through the computer and pyramid schemes there's no physical threat to a person. If you threaten them at knife point then that's a different story. Still messed up, but physical endangerment is a part of it I believe.

**sebster**

I really don't get the idea of prosecuting a parent for reckless endangerment or whatever after they've lost a kid. I mean, what can the state do that's any worse than what the woman is going to put herself through?

**Melissia**

halonachos wrote:Depends on how the money is stolen. If you go through the computer and pyramid schemes there's no physical threat to a person.

And yet, you still stole millions upon millions of dollars. Far greater harm was done to a far greater number of people.

**Sir Pseudonymous**

sebster wrote:I really don't get the idea of prosecuting a parent for reckless endangerment or whatever after they've lost a kid. I mean, what can the state do that's any worse than what the woman is going to put herself through?

While people always say things like this, it rings false to me. Throughout all but the last .1% of human history, and that only in the very richest and most advanced nations, losing at least one child to disease, malnutrition, or wildlife was a normal fact of life, and we've developed to compensate for it. Really, we've developed to compensate for loss in general. The average person may never stop caring about it, but anyone who's not mentally unhealthy won't suffer for an undue period of time. Compound that with studies showing that humans have a significantly harder time dealing with the loss of a partner than that of a child, and the image in popular culture of losing a child being some sort of ultimate and unending grief that's "literally worse than anything else, ever" really gets shown for the lie it is.

**sebster**

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:the image in popular culture of losing a child being some sort of ultimate and unending grief that's "literally worse than anything else, ever" really gets shown for the lie it is.

So you're not a parent?

**Ensis Ferrae**

sebster wrote:I really don't get the idea of prosecuting a parent for reckless endangerment or whatever after they've lost a kid. I mean, what can the state do that's any worse than what the woman is going to put herself through?

The state should take the other kids away for starters, simply because she can't follow one of the easiest laws in the US to follow: using a crosswalk. The picture on the news article makes her look like a real winner (in the sarcastic sense). As a parent, if I don't use a crosswalk, or do any other simple task that keeps my kid alive, then I really don't deserve to be a parent.

That said, the law is the law. If the police gave the driver a citation, which is right, but not the jaywalking pedestrian trying to cross a busy street by any means OTHER than a crosswalk, then the whole situation is wrong because the cop did not apply the law equally. I know it sounds callous, but I hope she gets the same result in the retrial.

**Sir Pseudonymous**

sebster wrote:
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:the image in popular culture of losing a child being some sort of ultimate and unending grief that's "literally worse than anything else, ever" really gets shown for the lie it is.

So you're not a parent?

You left out the "Compound that with studies showing that humans have a significantly harder time dealing with the loss of a partner than that of a child" part of that. It seems hypothetical fears are quite divorced from the actual results when the matter is examined.

**Ahtman**

Studies also show that if a child dies the partners almost always split up, so it seems you can't win either way when a family member dies.

**sebster**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:I know it sounds callous, but I hope she gets the same result in the retrial.

It doesn't just sound callous, it sounds plainly bonkers. And it might shock you to realise there is considerable scope in the law for judges to apply reason and compassion. We do not live in the world of Judge Dred.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:You left out the "Compound that with studies showing that humans have a significantly harder time dealing with the loss of a partner than that of a child" part of that. It seems hypothetical fears are quite divorced from the actual results when the matter is examined.

I did leave it out, because I went to break it down, point by point, and then decided it was just too silly.

But if you're really going to insist, then okay.

1) It's a nonsense to point out that people suffered in the past, and then assume we are somehow equipped to suffer similarly today. Of course we'd cope with 25% infant mortality, were it to return somehow, because you don't die from being sad. But being still sucks.
2) I have no idea why, even if it were objectively proven, that people struggle more with the loss of a partner, that it would mean dealing with the loss of a child wasn't still incredibly difficult, and more than enough punishment for an act of contributory negligence.
3) I know people who've lost a child, who continue to struggle with it years later. I have no idea if these people would struggle more in dealing with the loss of their partner, but I know that had they contributed to the death of their child in any way, it would have been entirely pointless, and even a little gruesome, to drag them through the courts over it.

**SOFDC**

I stand corrected, 2nd degree vehicular homicide is a misdemeanor in georgia.

**thedude**

Sir Pseudonymous wrote:the image in popular culture of losing a child being some sort of ultimate and unending grief that's "literally worse than anything else, ever" really gets shown for the lie it is.

I cant imagine anything worse happening in this life to me than loosing either of my children. I can't say for sure that it would be something I would have to deal with every day even 20 years after the incident as some pop culture suggests but I would think there is a high probability that is true. As much as I love my wife, if it came down to it, we would both prefer the other choose to let our child live than the other spouse not only for moral reasons but because I think we both understand that you can move on from the death of a spouse in a way we dont feel it is possible to move on from the death of a child. I think your statement belies your entire arguement as it makes it pretty clear you do not have children so you cannot comphrehend the complex emotions involved with having children(not trying to talk down, simply stating from a personal viewpoint, I had no idea the impact children would have on my emotions until I had my own and started watching them grow and this is true for all parents I know personally)

**Dark Scipio**

I might sound vain, but as somebody who studied german and (although much less) US-Law, I would say everything would be better if the Anglo-Saxon nations would adopt the german legal system.

**Ensis Ferrae**

thedude wrote:
Sir Pseudonymous wrote:the image in popular culture of losing a child being some sort of ultimate and unending grief that's "literally worse than anything else, ever" really gets shown for the lie it is.

I cant imagine anything worse happening in this life to me than loosing either of my children. I can't say for sure that it would be something I would have to deal with every day even 20 years after the incident as some pop culture suggests but I would think there is a high probability that is true. As much as I love my wife, if it came down to it, we would both prefer the other choose to let our child live than the other spouse not only for moral reasons but because I think we both understand that you can move on from the death of a spouse in a way we dont feel it is possible to move on from the death of a child. I think your statement belies your entire arguement as it makes it pretty clear you do not have children so you cannot comphrehend the complex emotions involved with having children(not trying to talk down, simply stating from a personal viewpoint, I had no idea the impact children would have on my emotions until I had my own and started watching them grow and this is true for all parents I know personally)

My younger brother died in a car wreck, and I can tell you from personally seeing my Father, that while he may not actively think about it everyday, and that he has "moved on", but there are still times where one little tiny thing will remind him of only my little brother in some way that it will still cause that pain. I do think that there is a huge difference in dealing with the passing of your child, to the passing of the child where your actions directly led to their death; so perhaps the "pop culture suggestions" could ring true for this lady, in the fact that she now has to deal with the fact that it was quite literally her fault for jaywalking, because due to physics, I highly doubt that she could walk to the nearest crosswalk AND cross it before the car that hit them was well passed them.

Though one thing that does boggle my mind a little bit, is how jaywalking can be brought all the way up to vehicular manslaughter. Were there eyewitnesses that said that she purposefully placed her kid in harms way (as in the proverbial "pushed into the path of a moving bus" type situation)??