Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Refusing Justice

In 2014 according to a news report, 125 people were exonerated after being falsely convicted of crimes. The year before that, the record was 91. Exoneration's are sky rocketing, and courts all over the nation are refusing to acknowledge the mistakes.

Our justice department is constantly evolving. As new technology and methods are introduced we expect our system to become closer to flawless. However, it is not, and some of the main factors come down to the court and its officials. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI have admitted that a lot of convictions based on forensic evidence is faulty; for instance hair analysis. Unlike the famous CSI TV series, scientific studies are more complex than matching hair samples into a speedy fast machine. Or another mistakenly assumption that fire arms can be exactly compared to a unique bullet mark. Forensic evidence is advancing, but it gives no right to cheat out cases. And it certainly shouldn't allow the courts and its officials to ignore past and present questionable cases.

The DOJ not only refuses to take responsibility for convicting the innocent, but make it extremely hard for them to prove their innocence. For instance, in Alabama, a defendant has to be able to prove there is no evidence connecting he/she to the crime. Even if the suspect is innocent, but evidence proves some connection, they have no opportunity to even suggest their case to be re-looked at. So instead of having hope in the justice system, many wrongfully accused are depending on outside organizations such as the Innocence Project to gain their case an attention.

With newly exoneration's such as former death row inmate, Beniah Dandridge, we are looking for a call to fix the DOJ before its too late. Not only evaluating forensic evidence, but also overlooking our courts decisions and processes for making sure we put the right criminals in jail. After all, it is our nations job to protect the people and serve justice.

Wednesday, October 14, 2015

Jon Green Against Ted Cruz

Jon Green from AMERICAblog specializes in political science and political cognition and has experience as a regional field director for President Obama's reelection campaign and 2012. From past posts such as 'Paul Ryan isn't conservative enough to be Speaker' and 'Ben Carson Kaylee has no gay rights' Green emphasizes on more Democratic views.  

He recently issued an article today titled: Ted Cruz: black lives matter "embracing and celebrating the murder of police". As he opens up the article with "well I guess someone wasn't getting enough attention", we assume Green's primary audience are those who support Black Lives Matter and or either disapprove of Ted Cruz's plans as President.


Jon Green includes ThinkProgress reporter Kira Lerner, and statements from Black Lives Matter to imply Ted Cruz's idea of 'anti-death movement is actually encouraging murder' are absurd. Even though John Green has provided multiple statements it is disappointing that he couldn't or didn't choose to find more statistical or concrete evidence. Green quoted Lerner's statement on how Cruz uses a popular conservative rhetoric to support that "crime rates of spiked across the 10 country because police officers are afraid of protesters". However he didn't include evidence that this 'popular conservative rhetoric' is false, which leaves the audience thinking if this point is true or not and if Green's credibility is legitimate. I have been informed with evidence that crime rates have rather declined but to those who read this and are not prior informed, Jon Green's use of Leonard statement is not so credible. So the readers are now just hanging off of Greens mere statements rather than true evidence. Which can be argued that today's audience prefer a more patho or ethological argument rather than meaningless numbers spurting.

After presenting ThinkProgress's interview, Green grows on his argument that 'Cruz has positioned himself to be the "Trump but with an actual campaign infant structure" candidate in the race. Again with very little evidence but plenty of personal statements Green quickly closes his article with the idea that Cruise is "going to have to start peeling off the racist vote from the fields to front runners. And what better way to start that bind plying then the city anti-death movement is actually encouraging murder?" 

Green brings up a controversial point about Cruz's opinion on Black Lives Matter. Using his strong but minimal evidence the general uninformed public may start believing Green's opinion on Cruz. However his article lacks the concrete evidence for those who want to be more informed with concrete evidence rather than simple speculations. 

Friday, October 2, 2015

New News!


Question of the Day: Should the public be concerned that tradition news is disappearing, or is this new age of information guiding America on the right path? 

Putin is Not Bluffing


The Economist issued an article today titled: Putin dares, Obama dithers, today after hearing news of Russia's leader, Vladimir Putin, interfering in Syria on what Obama thought was a bluff. On September 30th, the first day of bombing from Russia in Syria, the world is beginning to see a; "leader of a new global war on terrorism."

A leader that is making Obama rethink his poker skills, Putin is at the end of his bluffing. We thought Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine, but now they are all over the Middle East, even in our domain. So we come to question, is Obama going to be like George Bush in Iraq and intervene, or is he going to hide behind his white picket fence in fear that he will cause more trouble? Either way, America is in a tough situation that is causing our people to feel not 'so great' anymore.

I have been satisfied with Obama's decisions on our homeland, but when it comes to foreign affairs his premature withdraws are causing more deaths, and chaos. Obama is a very smart individual who I understand his thought process of being cautious and wary on America's intervention. However, now is not time to sit and wait when we clearly have been out bluffed by rising leader Vladimir Putin. Soon our absence in this new global war will cause extremism to, "fester and force the superpower to intervene."

Hopefully with Putin's end to his bluffing, Obama will realize he needs to have a, "bit more of Mr Putin’s taste for daring. With little time Obama has in office, I hope he takes action. If not, Russia will be the new super power of the world on terrorism.

Original Article