[ad_1]
Wrongful Convictions: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)
[ad_2]
View Reddit by BoogsterSU2 – View Source
[ad_1]
Wrongful Convictions: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)
[ad_2]
View Reddit by BoogsterSU2 – View Source
People still watch this fool?
Holy shit. Is there any hope left for that woman?
Is she really going to be executed next month while there are no actual clues of her being guilty?
John sounds angry as fuck over this, and fuck, so am I. God I wanted to reach into my screen to punch that prosecutor in his stupid face for blaming that woman.
I’d say one of the weakest episodes in while. Felt very, very phoned-in and a “seen this already” type of way.
Disappointed, but on to next Sunday.
I just wish he could do something lighter sometimes. I have a lot of trouble putting on his show anymore. I have enough to be down about as it is.
Interesting how 7 years ago, the second week of this show they did a piece on the death penalty and the first clip played was someone saying it should only be used for guilty people.
Was a good laugh at the ridiculous idea that that needed to be specified.. Turns out maybe it does need to be said.
The story about the woman about to be executed sounds abhorrent. But I know LWT’s writing crew the last couple years has been downright sneaky in their content. Does anyone know the case? Is there more to the story than they said?
There’s so much glossed over information in the first 5 minutes that is frankly incorrect. I think his overall argument is fair and accurate, but it’s cheapened by the pretty blatant bullshittery.
Yes, our justice system is a fucking sham, and yes, plenty of obviously innocent people go to jail all the time – which is an absolute tragedy and a shame on our nation.
But, when he says “innocence alone isn’t enough to appeal a conviction” as though it’s a damnation of the judicial system…not quite. Innocence is no longer presumed when someone has been convicted, you cannot just appeal a conviction with “im innocent.” And new evidence that exonerates you *does* qualify as grounds for an appeal.
The letter sent to the convicted guy by the supposed real killer? How in the world would a judge or jury ever be able to trust that this letter was legitimate unless the person then turned themselves in?
The heartless attorney who wouldn’t reply to a journalist? Sure, he could have said something generic like “we believe the arguments laid out in our first case remain pertinent and accurate and stand by the initial court’s findings.” And yes, the AG’s office could have absolutely used the exonerating alibi to go back to the court and ask for it to re-examine the case, but Assistant AG does not mean second in command AG, it means he’s just one of a number of attorneys. He’s probably very cautious of saying anything to the press for fear of fucking up any other active cases he might have.
I 100% agree our judicial system is fucked and overly punishing, but come on, using niche examples and twisting them outside the realm of reality while refusing to provide the legal context for their existences is pretty shameful.
Edit: Not to mention Oliver’s shameful “Biden voted for it anyways” without acknowledging how large the margin of passage was and that party politics *DO* matter. But fuck it, let’s sling mud and bring Trump back in 2024 because we crushed the favorables of our own party and then act shocked, right?
Amazing. Our law school offered a class on Habeas last semester. John managed to sum up an entire semester’s worth of frustrations over the AEDPA in 20 minutes. Reading the actual opinions in some of these appeals was maddening. This doesnt even get into the exhaustion requirements or tolling provisions to determine if that 1 year has actually lapsed. 2244, 2254, and 2255 are just a fucking pain to work with.