Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Independent: Black man will spend six years in Georgia prison despite jury finding him 'not guilty'

Bozo the kKklown

By Bozo the kKklown
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

bearrock

bearrock

Posted
Posted

Probation violations are by preponderance of the evidence.  Criminal convictions require beyond reasonable doubt.  Evidence did not support a criminal conviction, but was sufficient to support preponderance standard.  It is hard to say whether the judge got it right or not without examining the evidence, but the two results are not inconsistent with each other (furthermore, even if the order of the trials were reversed, acquittal of the criminal charge would not have resulted in dropping the probation violation because the standard is different.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pick6

Pick6

Posted
Posted

This could be bs, but...

 

Pulled this from a guy on Reddit on the same article:

 

Bugtusslebugsy:

"Criminal Defense lawyer/ former prosecutor and judge here.

The jury did not find him " innocent ". They found him not guilty.

There is a huge difference between the two.

A finding of "not guilty" means that the jury was not convinced by the evidence that he was guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt".

The standard of proof for a conviction is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

The standard to revoke somebody's probation, is different; for example, in Alabama, the standard is whether or not there is "some evidence" that the person violated a term or condition of their probation.

If the judge was reasonably satisfied (as opposed to convinced beyond a reasonable doubt) that the person violated a term or condition of their probation, he is free to revoke their probation.

The reasoning is that Probation is an act of grace from a court to someone who has either previously plead guilty or been found guilty and that grace can be easily removed .

Whoever wrote this article was confused about the different standards required to convict verses to find someone in violation of the terms or conditions of probation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RonArtest15

RonArtest15

Posted
Posted

This is HORRIBLE!  I dug around reading more about the story, because my initial thought was that there had to be more to it.  Nope, just another instance of the justice system being messed up beyond belief.  Hopefully this story gets more press and Chatman gets an actual impartial judge to oversee this awful ruling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, RonArtest15 said:

This is HORRIBLE!  I dug around reading more about the story, because my initial thought was that there had to be more to it.  Nope, just another instance of the justice system being messed up beyond belief.  Hopefully this story gets more press and Chatman gets an actual impartial judge to oversee this awful ruling. 

it is telling to me that so many on here are looking for any reason why this could have happened other than the obvious one that most oppressed people saw as soon as they read this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcsluggo

mcsluggo

Posted
Posted

without reading more than was in this thread..... a possibility timeline:  (borrowed and altered from Timmy Smith):

 

 

2012 Commits crime, we have to assume he was sentenced to 5 years, suspended, and put on probation conditional of staying out of trouble

 

2014 Accused of separate crime

 

2014 or 15 .... Judge and or probation officer look at evidence for second crime, and either determine that he is likely guilty or was involved enough with the crime (and involved with the criminals involved in the crime) to violate his probation, which is usually stricter than "do no crime", and found in violation of terms of probation  (being involved with firearms or with felons or any other number of things short of actual armed robbery) 

 

2015  probation revoked, and original sentence imposed  

 

2016 Found not guilty of the second crime (not the same as being found innocent)

 

 

I don't have more details.... but in the above scenario it is POSSIBLE that the sentence is harsh, but ok.... Probation means keeping your nose clean MORE than just not committing additional Armed Robberies.   It is also possible that it was a reasonable finding in 2015,  but one that was overturned with a more extensive look for the trial in 2016 and the courts have to process through the fact that he was acquitted of the 2nd crime, and then he will be eventually released (in which case... this needs to happen QUICK, and is an example of rich man/poor man differences.  If he had a personal attny to push this through the system, it would happen faster).   It is also possible that it just plain an unjust situation all around  (as everyone in this thread seems willing to immediately assume and assert, without any more information than i have) 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcsluggo

mcsluggo

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

it is telling to me that so many on here are looking for any reason why this could have happened other than the obvious one that most oppressed people saw as soon as they read this.

 

it is also telling that you are immediately able to assume the single worst possible interpretation of events, every time.   In THIS case based on a single news article from a UK tabloid that i have never heard of.... 

 

i KNOW that there is injustice and bias in the US judicial system.   I also know that YOU see blatant abuse and criminal injustice in every single conceivable scenario.   If you went into a prison, and 95% of the people loudly declared their innocence... you would believe that 89% were unjustly incarcerated.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TimmySmith

TimmySmith

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

it is telling to me that so many on here are looking for any reason why this could have happened other than the obvious one that most oppressed people saw as soon as they read this.

Is it also telling that it is very likely the man committed 2 crimes and some in here would have him serve no jail time at all.  If he was put in jail for the 1st crime he couldn't have committed the second, and no one in here would be talking about him at all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The actual timeline

 

http://www.11alive.com/news/local/serving-10-years-after-not-guilty-verdict/440450636

 

Quote

► July 16, 2012: Ramad Chatman pleads guilty to felony theft by taking for breaking through someone’s window and stealing a $120 TV from the apartment (along with three other defendants).  He is sentenced as a first offender and given five years probation. 

► July 9, 2014: Someone robs a convenient store at gunpoint.  The clerk's only description was a black man with a revolver.

► Nov.- Dec. 2014: Clerk sees Chatman’s picture was scrolling through pictures on Facebook.  She’s convinced he is the guy.  Police give her a picture lineup based off driver license photos.  She identifies him again.

► Nov. 18, 2015: Chatman hears police are looking for him.  He turns himself in to police, convinced it’s some kind of mix up.  He’s arrested.

► Feb. 24, 2016: A hearing is held to revoke his probation.  After hearing testimony from the clerk and police officer, a judge decides Chatman did likely commit the convenient store robbery.  He is re-sentenced for his original crime and ordered to serve ten years in prison, back dated to the day of the crime. According to court documents, he did everything asked of him during his probation: checked in, paid restitution, finished community service, and was holding a job.

► August 2016: A jury finds him Chatman not guilty of the convenient store robbery.  Judge still upholds his probation revocation.

► July 16, 2017: Chatman would have finished his probation on this date and had his felony conviction sealed had his probation not been revoked.

► July 16, 2022:   The day Chatman will now finish serving his sentence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

it is telling to me that so many on here are looking for any reason why this could have happened other than the obvious one that most oppressed people saw as soon as they read this.

i prefer to call it "looking for the answers to the questions that popped up."

 

I think is how justice is served best, by knowing as much of the facts as possible. For me, i try to assume nothing until I know more, especially with as many questions as I had based on what we have to go by here.

 

~Bang

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sacks 'n' Stuff

Sacks 'n' Stuff

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

it is telling to me that so many on here are looking for any reason why this could have happened other than the obvious one that most oppressed people saw as soon as they read this.

I would say that the people who are jumping to conclusions, either way, are unwise and yeah, quite possibly racist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcsluggo

mcsluggo

Posted
Posted

I'm not AT ALL convinced that he is guilty, nor that he should be in prison at this point.  

 

i AM convinced that the Judge had more information on this case than i have at this point.

 

just given that information, there are 3 most likely scenarios that i can think of (which i already stated):

 

  1. 1.  Something that came out in the pre-investigation was viewed as a legitimate probation violation, even though he wasn't eventually found guilty for the crime.
  2. 2.  Judge &/or Probation officer thought the evidence in the second case was compelling enough that he WOULD be convicted, so they revoked probation based on that?  (I don;t know how this works...?)  
  3.  
  4. if 2 was the case, then there would have to be some sort of process to re-examine the probation revocation?   Either that is in process (and the slow wheels of justice are unkind and unjust to the poor, who don;t have a lawyer pushing their case), or that process has already taken place...... in which case, either the guy has been screwed (and again, the poor don't have the same sort of legal representation as the rich), or there was information we don't know about.   
  5.  
  6.  
  7. the second website (11alive.com) paints a more damning picture than the UK tabloid did, and seems to point much more to the possibility that the guy is being screwed   (i.e.  the judge just *thinks* he is guilty of the crime, no matter what the jury said, and is using the probation to essentially "convict" him of the second crime on his own impetus)... but i am still willing to accept that that its possible that there is information that i don;t know about. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BurgundyMalaise

BurgundyMalaise

Posted
Posted
On 5/25/2017 at 4:40 PM, Gibbs Hog Heaven said:

You guys SERIOUSLY make it harder and harder for the rest of the World who've always looked upto you to continue to do that and defend you by the passing day. 

 

Hail.

 

Many, if not most, American civilians don't give a **** what citizens of other countries think.

 

If this were a board situated in the UK, I'm sure there would be plenty of instances of judicial racism there. Perhaps not to the proportions of stuff here but still enough to where your chaps over here can snub their nose too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Springfield

Springfield

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/05/26/judge-tosses-out-dc-sniper-ife-sentences/102207898/

 

 

I dont get it.  He is black so its impossible for the judical system to care aboit him.

 

I was just reading about this.

 

The judge is just abiding by a 2012 Supreme Court ruling that juveniles mustn't receive life without parole and a later Supreme Court ruling that says that it can be retroactive.

 

Malvo will be resentence and I would be shocked and appalled if he ever sees the light of day again.  He's been found guilty, it's just the sentence that needs to be corrected.

 

Also, I think he was found guilty and is serving life in other jurisdictions as well, or can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sacks 'n' Stuff

Sacks 'n' Stuff

Posted
Posted
On 5/25/2017 at 3:25 PM, Gamebreaker said:

For those who are convinced he committed the second crime, explain to me why someone would turn themselves in if they actually did it? 

Not a comment on his guilt or innocence but when he found out that he was wanted, his choices were to either turn himself in or have the police come and arrest him. I could see where turning yourself in is a better option even if you are guilty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...