Immunity in a nutshell, contradicts the Declaration of Independence. It arises from the discovery that the bill of rights was too powerful and challenged the common law of allowing despots and judges the right to tyranny which they enjoyed up until 1772, and stopping at the first ten amendments or the bill of rights. This “justice for all” ended in 1789, Chisolm v. Georgia shocked congress into realizing that they could no longer get away with corruption. 2 days after Chisolm, congress ratified the 11th amendment. This new amendment affectively ended the bill of rights. If abusers are immune, then what good is a right, if they can get away with corrupt acts? However, there are precedence that shows how the Supreme Court has abrogated 11th amendment legislative immunity, and qualified immunity for local municipalities. All in all, Immune officials have “… refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.” Direct quote for the Declaration written to King George. Now we have King Judge, and lots of them. Basically immunity is the cultivation of corruption. Get rid of it, and you have a bloodless revolution. Those who state that immunity is a necessity are officials or supporters of totalitarian government under a fallacy of moot democracy. Only despots and judicial tyranny of Britain under King George III enjoyed immunity in the colonies. The Declaration was a contract to recruit citizens to become traitors to the King under the promise that immunity would not be part of the Continental Congress which evolved unto the United States of America. The contract is breached, and immunity has created Kingdoms and Hamlets all across the country, wielding an iron fist to any voice of so called free speech in retaliation and violation of the Bill of Rights, but the 11th amendment made them null and void and selective if necessary. Chew on that for a bit!

-this is news??

several thoughts:

1) everyone has their price and the other side will always pay higher..

2) their is nothing more dangerous than an out of control ego in a position of authority..

2b) the danger increases exponentially when a “group” of these egos have been allowed to work together. (esp when disguised as “for the greater good”)

3) profit feeds the unchecked ego, -and this has nothing to do money or monetary gain.

-s

And it not just prosecutors that are protected. There have been various experts of forensics evidence, that testify for either side, depending on who pays them. Obviously, they can both be right, about the same case. So somebody is lying or making up the results. And yet, none of them EVER have a charge of perjury leveled against them, after the trial they testified on, is over. Apparently, it’s ok to lie in court, if you’ve got a degree in something that supposedly allow you to claim to be an expert. But there are scant standards for establishing the exactness of forensic science. Bite marks, tire marks, finger prints, handwriting, voice prints, gun ballistics, or even DNA. None of these have infallible accuracy to be used to put someone to death, because of. And yet, they have been.
http://tinyurl.com/yz74ckm

I’m fine with making prosecutors personally free from lawsuits but the State should be liable for the defendant’s legal fees in most cases.

In theory, presenting false information to the court is a violation of bar association rules of conduct. In Washington State, these rules rise to the level of State law. However, just try to get the bar association interested in proceeding against any public official (or any lawyer-bureaucrat, for that matter). Pissing up a rope is more likely to produce results.

It’s my opinion that, at least in those jurisdictions which elect their DA (which is most of them), we the voters should have the ability to sue the DA for breach of their duties, or petition the legislation for impeachment, or something at least.

“Prosecutorial Misconduct” is also the name of a book (on the aforementioned matter) which we sometimes joke is used as the DA’s office manual. (Disclaimer: the commenter works for a public defense agency.)

See Pottawattamie County v. McGhee — Supreme Court of the United States

http://law.nyu.edu/centers/adminofcriminallaw/litigation/index.htm

http://neworleanscitybusiness.com/viewStory.cfm?recID=19259

The only reason Nifong was criminally charged at all was because he picked the wrong kids to beat up on.

The Texas Board of Pardons is a mistake and travesty of justice.

Sarah Palin claimed a similar reason for resigning her Governorship. She couldn’t afford it. If local prosecutors and judges are paying for lawyers to defend them from every one who feels they got a raw deal no one would want to be a prosecutor or a judge.

Civil immunity yes, criminal immunity, never. What Nifong, the two Judges I mentioned earlier, the prosecutors in this story, and all the Chicago area prosecutors did went beyond discretion and into criminality.

I will agree with immunity against the truly honest mistake ONLY in principal. But who decides what is an honest mistake, the fox or the hens? How high and difficult of a bar must be cleared to say it wasn’t a honest mistake? What needs to be understood is why are so many prosecutors not honest and ethical?

In this age of the state office must win at any cost, no holds barred zealousness; too many times it has been shown exculpable evidence is withheld with the most inane reasoning (honest mistake if you like).

Case as example and one you pointed out above, the misconduct of Durham NC prosecutor Mike Nifong’s. The media eventually flipped and started reporting nothing positive about Nifong. When Meehan admitted he withheld evidence at the instruction of Nifong. Finally, the hoax was exposed clearly enough for the various dim bulbs to call it for what it was, deliberate, evil misconduct.

But very little in comparison to what would have happened against Nifong targets happened to him.

Also too you have Texas Governor Perry Totally Cool With Executing Innocent Man. Is that just an honest mistake?????

I hear you and you make some good points.

Look at this on the other hand. If a prosecutor makes an error, even though they utilized the best evidence available at the time, why should he be liable if later some contrary evidence appears that exonerates the person? An error to be sure, but an honest one. Even if there was some contrary evidence beforehand but it appeared shaky to the prosecutor so he discounts it.

Now please don’t confuse a deliberate attempt to secure a conviction by fraudulent means with an honest error or judgment call. Any time an innocent person is jailed is a travesty.

BTW, doctors are protected from making honest mistakes if it can be shown they used reasonable judgment expected of someone with his training. Negligence is another story and is the base for almost all physician / patient lawsuits.

IMO the high incarceration rate is the result of three related cultural issues in America. The first is America’s obsession with gun ownership, the second is the trend towards gangs for protection and criminal pursuits. But the most common factor is America’s insistence upon long, harsh sentences with no or very little rehabilitation.

I doubt there are many falsely convicted behind bars even though one is too many. How many? No one knows, I think everyone in prison claims they were set up.