zlacker

>>mikeyo+(OP)
fwiw, it appears one of the named here is a YC Alum: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=il https://www.linkedin.com/in/unrealdutch/

>>albrol+l5
Let's be fair to these individuals and not presume guilt.

In the US, it's "innocent until proven guilty".

Media is so quick to assume the person is guilty just because of an allegation.

>>tiffan+Hn
The federal government has a ridiculously high conviction rate: 99.96% [1]. They basically only bring the case if they have everything they need to convict.

1. https://www.bhlawfirm.com/blog/2021/05/the-federal-convictio....

>>grumpl+hD
What portion of those convictions are plea bargains?

This article says 97%: https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/prisons-are-packed-bec...

Why are people so eager to confess their guilt instead of challenging the government to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the satisfaction of a unanimous jury?

The answer is simple and stark: They’re being coerced.

>>tnorth+cF
This is a pretty silly argument. I'm not opining on whether or not prosecutions are coercive; I'm certain they are. But a lower conviction rate would be a bad thing: it would mean the DOJ was bringing more cases they weren't certain they would win, and even exoneration comes with immense costs to the accused.

>>tptace+nH
I wasn't replying to a claim that a high conviction rate is a good thing (or better than a lower one).

I was replying to a claim that a high conviction rate somehow suggests we should dispense with the idea that, as a society, we should not presume guilt.

grumple, who I replied to, seemed to me to be suggesting that because the federal government has a high conviction rate, we should assume the accused are guilty.

I'm suggesting that because there is compelling evidence that many guilty verdicts are obtained through coercion, we should not make that assumption.