zlacker

But those two are not the same right ? In elections everyone involved (candidates and voters) have agreed to the system. If they feel the system is not working as such they could always check the results. Sometimes something may pop up and we update the results. This is not the case in the justice system you mentioned above where it's not possible to correct any mistakes after the fact

>>rdedev+(OP)
You are saying pretty much the opposite of reality. For elections there is an emphasis on finality and we would never overturn an election years later because of something like I had "an incompetent campaign manager." You can do things like recounts but the process ends shortly after the election and then that's it. But for criminal trials the appeals process is effectively endless, in most cases if there's new evidence that that proves your innocence you can get a new trail or if it's definitive enough just be let out of jail with an "our bad." I think this is good but Thomas wants it to be more like elections where once it's decided it's decided, you go through your punishment and we just accept that sometimes mistakes will be made.