A delayed $175,000 for 50 years? Remind me to never go to Oklahoma.
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
436 points (98.9% liked)
News
23310 readers
3443 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
A while back I had a cousin living in Oklahoma. He had some troubles and was hanging out with some not great people. An acquaintance's gf/wife ended up dead and the guy pointed his finger at my cousin. He was held in jail charged with murder, but all his hearings kept getting kicked down the road. After a year they released him and told him to GTFO of the state and never return.
Which, to me, screams that they found evidence he didnt do it, but didnt want to invest money in a trial to prove his innocence, or on finding the actual suspect.
I've lived there, and it sucked ass. I ran away from that shit State
$175,000 for 50 years? He's 71 now so he went into prison at 21. That means he spent virtually his entire life in prison. He could have done so many things, but instead he needed to sit in a prison cell. All because he was wrongly convicted.
And because I'm a math geek and need to figure this stuff out, $175,000 over 50 years is $3,500 a year. If we calculate what he would have earned at the federal minimum wage over that time frame (ignoring bank account interest or inflation just to keep things simple), we'd get over $500,000.
They're giving him a third of what he should have earned at bare minimum. (And that ignores all the other horrible things involved with being wrongfully imprisoned for 50 years.)
Yeah. The sum they owe him should be a "whoops we fucked up badly, sorry. Take these 175k while we think about what you could have made if we didn't. It's just to get you started, there'll be more next month."
When you did your calculations did you factor in the change in minimum wage and inflation? I'm sure the state owes him more than $500k.
I didn't factor in inflation as I was trying to keep it quick and simple. I also didn't factor in any interest he might have received from a bank account. This was purely "he works minimum wage and stuffs all the cash he gets into a big jar - how much does he have after 50 years."
I was also using the federal minimum wage. Obviously, many states have higher minimum wages so he might have made more than the federal minimum wage had he been free to move to another state.
Of course, the $500,000 figure only accounts for money that he would have made. It doesn't include all the suffering he had to endure or the fact that the state basically ended his life at 21. He didn't get to live his life and his future life is going to be rough. Not only does he need to adjust to life out of prison, but he likely has nothing. It's not like many places are rushing to hire a 71 year old with no job experience for the last 50 years because they were in prison. The money he gets should at least be enough for him to comfortably retire.
This man likely does not have children or any close family left. He's probably very alone out here and I'd argue that he was better off in prison, as sad as it sounds. In prison he would have had a carr to look after him, guards that (on paper) have to keep him safe, three meals a day, and a life he's already used to. He literally has no experience on living on the outside as an adult and like no support system.
So the prosecutor is going to be held liable for stealing 50 years of this man's life, right?
Compensation, though, is likely years away, Norwood said and Simmons is currently living on donations while undergoing treatment for cancer that was detected after his release from prison.
Reminds me of that joke, what did the wrongfully convicted man, who spent 50 years in prison because a prosecutor hid exonerating evidence, get for Christmas? Cancer.
The world is a chaotic, horrid unforgiving place. Have fun while you can because any second now who the fuck knows what's going to happen to any of us.
I get what you're saying, but I've also seen similar sentiment used to justify cruelty, as if the unpredictable nature of existence somehow absolves people of actively contributing to the misery of others.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Prosecutor is probably dead of old age. And if thats the case, I vote we dig them up
175k for 50 years it's bullshit.
the fact that they're gonna fight him on it until he dies is part of the fun, too. he'll never see a nickel of the pittance he's entitled to because the state arbitrarily stole and discarded most of his life.
Time to play a game: Without opening the article, guess Mr. Simmons' skin color.
You almost certainly guessed correctly.
"Your honor the defendents skin color was Guilty at the time."
I like to play this game when it comes to sex related crimes and politicians guessing their party affiliation and I'm almost never wrong.
If the state stole 50 years of my life and offered me 150k as an apology, I know what candles I'd be lighting.
Shit like this is Fucking disgusting.
I don’t understand why cases like this aren’t the only rationale needed to abolish the death penalty.
Also, that poor man - I hope he is able to live as happy a life as can be expected given the injustice that he endured.
Because death penalty supporters are okay with killing innocents if they get to feel retribution and kill someone, regardless of "justice".
And prosecutors who intentionally withhold evidence in cases like this and death penalty cases are also "taking someone's life", so to speak. They're no better than cold-blooded killers.
(Speaking of which, if only the State of Florida would stop f**king around with Tommy Zeigler.)
Lawyer here: Lock'em up. Maybe this is a radical position, but these kinds of cases demonstrate the need to do away with absolute immunity for prosecutors and judges. Qualified immunity would be more appropriate, and unlike with police, there's never a question whether judges and prosecutors know their obligations. If you withhold evidence in order to take another man's freedom and it can be proved against you, you should go to the penitentiary, full stop. And if you sell kids to prisons in exchange for kickbacks, you should be hanged.
This is part of the problem with having a self-regulated profession. As much as I appreciate that the ethical rules to which I'm beholden are created by people who are similarly educated and have experience with the practice of the profession, we're well past the point that good lawyers and judges need to be holding bad ones genuinely accountable. 50 years of a man's life isn't worth a law license or a term on the bench. It's not even fucking close. If you want prosecutors to stop fucking around with evidence and you want judges to stop taking bribes, their legal responsibilities need to have the same teeth as the ones they wield against others. You perpetrate a fraud on the court and it costs an innocent man 50 years--you go to jail for 50 years. Lex talionis.
And if that kind of standard means people don't want to be prosecutors? Well, people who want to be able to withhold evidence shouldn't be prosecutors!
load more comments
(5 replies)
With just $175k? Not likely.
Or just paying attention to the awful current state of policing in the US.
load more comments
(2 replies)
State takes your freedom for the majority of your life on a mistake, the reparation is not even enough to buy a fucking house, and it has to wait years for it. If they wanted to make fun of him one last time, they should have just given him a "Get Well Soon" card for his cancer, that would have been less cruel.
Let's treat imprisonment of the innocent as if it were their job while they were in prison.
Since they can't ever leave they're always engaged to wait so need to be paid 24/7, which comes out to 232 hours a week after the overtime bump. Take that money, throw it in the market with an average 5% return and run the numbers
At 7.25 (current minimum wage) it'd be around 8 million.
Take the hourly rate of the median individual income, and it's 80 million.
The state apparently values an innocent person's freedom at 17 cents an hour.
Bastards could have done him the favor of just killing him. A life of suffering. Shame.
One more reason capital punishment should not be allowed.
I have no words...
Edit: It always amazes me when small government advocates who believe government is fundamentally incompetent rant and rave about the necessity and righteousness of government being able to death penalty you (or the "right" people)...
“Woopsie! Our bad lol”
- Oklahoma
175k for that is really sad.
now imagine he was executed for it. you can free a man after 50 years, but you can't revive him.
Given how long he was in prison this is close to edging the death penalty in the slowest most painful way possible. Which is by keeping you incarcerated until the day you die...
I'd take the chair before spending 50 years in prison, especially if I didn't even do anything.
That sum is way too low, way too late and way too uncertain. What a fucking shame. He should spend the rest of his life in luxury with every wish fulfilled without even thinking about it. What a fucking shame!
Holy crap. In this situation i would just burn the courthouse down.
[The district attorney] in September said there is no longer physical evidence in the case against Simmons and announced she would not retry him, though she opposed declaring him actually innocent.
Was he found innocent based on the new evidence or was he found innocent by default after the D.A. declined to retry him?
Glynn Simmons, 71, who was released in July after prosecutors agreed that key evidence in his case was not turned over to his defense lawyers, was ruled innocent Tuesday.
I saw that, but I don't think it answers my question.
I'm wondering if the evidence that was not turned over was something that proved it couldn't have been him. If it's something that exonerated him, then I could see him being declared innocent. Usually the ruling is "not guilty" which I would take as "unable to prove it was him," but still leaves room that he could have done it.
To me this sounds like someone intentionally fucked the wrong man, hiding what would prove his innocence just to get the conviction.
Not at all. And the term would technically be "not guilty," as there is no such thing as "innocence" in our judgey-McJudgerson judicial system.