Massive Demand to
Lock Up the Innocent
in a Democracy
Florida Supreme Court
The Myth That
Burns Our Cities
Mock Trials and the
New York Police
and Justice Reforms
William Barr is a
Debating with the
Letters to my
Justice without Fraud
Challenge to Republicans
Running for Office
Voters Give Police
A Mandate To Lie
Republican Cop Cult
Disconnects from Reality
Worse than Immigration
Timeline of Destruction
of the Republican Party
Quick History of
In Defense of Perjury
Is A Vice
Common Cause of
Embarrassed Cop Setup
John Alberto Torres
Juries With Politicians
Sheriff Wayne Ivey's
To Convict One
Jailhouse Witnesses Release Two To Convict One
I already knew the essence of jailhouse witnesses, is to let dangerous felons out of prison, to convict the innocent, and create a facade of solving violent crime. The witnesses they released to convict my friend of a crime that didn't happen, included a crack addict who did incessant home burglaries, an armed fentanyl dealer repeat offender who sold fentanyl in the county jail and set up an aggravated home invasion battery, and a carjacker who did repeat batteries, took a victim across the state, and ended in a high-speed stop-stick chase.
But after talking to girls in prison, I realized jailhouse witnesses are even worse than that. They prevent the ordinary plea bargain system from functioning, by making it impossible for people who actually want to tell the truth about what really happened, to convict the guilty.
Every girl in prison knows you can get out of prison, by finding out details of another girl's case, embellishing it, and swearing she confessed to the crime. When my friend was in Orange County Jail, Ishnar Lopez-Ramos, the infamous mommy killer, claimed my friend confessed to a crime involving two guns. Police believed there was only one gun. But girls in jail know the prosecution wants two guns, to make sure everyone has a gun in their hand and cannot plead innocence.
The most ridiculous thing, is the credibility of jailhouse witnesses is supposed to be based on whether their claimed story is corroborated by other evidence. In other words, the closer the claimed confession is to the story in the newspaper or police report, the more credible the jailhouse witness is supposed to be.
Corroboration is like I say I graduated from Harvard. You say there is a place called Harvard, people do graduate from there... This checks out! This is true!
The way actual jailhouses witnesses work in the real world, is they adjust one fact. Suppose I say "My girlfriend used to file her nails on the sofa, I always hated that." The jailhouse witness will adjust it to "He said he hated his girlfriend and he always wanted to kill her. He said he started wanting to kill her when she filed her nails on the sofa."
But the best jailhouse witnesses are the ones that completely ignore anything the suspect actually says, and recite straight from the newspaper. In the real world, jailhouse witnesses who recite anything the suspect actually said, get more things wrong, and are less useful in court. It is best to say the narrative the prosecution is promoting, rather than whatever random things someone actually rants about in prison, which are often jokes, lies, and bravado.
The idea that talking about "corroborating" details of your case in jail will put you at risk of jailhouse witnesses, is therefore false. In my experience, the things suspects actually say in jail, have no bearing on the things jailhouse witnesses say to juries that result in conviction. The two are not as connected as people think. And you cannot stop jailhouse witnesses, simply by not talking about your case. Even if you actually admit guilt to a fellow inmate, what you admit will usually not line up with the story the prosecution is promoting. It will disagree with other evidence and witnesses. Ranting out loud in jail actually muddies the waters, as often as not.
A jailhouse witness who ignores or never even meets the suspect, and instead recites what is in the papers and on TV, is better corroborated.
In reality, there is literally no way for a judge or anyone else to know if a jailhouse witness is telling the truth. And given there are 1,000 girls wanting to get out of prison, for every one criminal who actually confesses, there is literally no reason to believe any jailhouse witness is telling the truth. And nor is this just a mathematical theory. When DNA came out and they took another look at old convictions, they proved what anyone can guess, the jailhouse witnesses were lying.
The only reason the jury doesn't guess it, is they can't imagine judges and lawyers and the legislature would put a liar in front of them to convict the innocent. And you are not allowed to tell them. Jurors aren't really weighing the credibility of the jailhouse witness, they are weighing the credibility of the prosecutor who lets the witness out of prison, and of the voter who votes for that prosecutor.
Even in states where the judge is allowed to block a jailhouse witness, it is supposed to be based on whether the story fits with other evidence. Meaning whether the liar read the newspaper. And with the victim's parents crying outside the courthouse, no judge can politically afford to throw out the jailhouse witness anyway. The local circuit court judge is captive to the same political incentives as the police and prosecutors. Judges everywhere are always able to acquit the defendant if they think the jailhouse witness is unreliable. And they never do. Even though they know exactly what is going on.
So all a jailhouse witness has to do, is figure out a few details of the case, and embellish the rest. Like it was 3:00 PM, they drove down Main Street, and the suspect confessed she got out and shot the victim. Now let's look at how this releases the additional person who actually committed the crime, on top of releasing a career felon victimizer who is already in prison.
Suppose someone kills the President. And police have an idea who did it, but they have no idea how they did it. So they go to the house where a group of roommates live, and find a gun that matches the bullet that killed the President. So they arrest the guy who lives in the room where the gun was found, and his girlfriend. But the case is pretty thin.
The girlfriend is angry as can be at her boyfriend. She had nothing to do with it. So she starts telling everyone "My psycho boyfriend did it. He went up in a hot air balloon and shot the President from a mile away. I saw where he hid the balloon." So every girl in jail hears that, and they immediately run to the prosecutor "The girl confessed. She said she shot the President from a hot air balloon. She told me where she hid it."
Suddenly, the girl is no longer able to take a plea bargain to testify against her boyfriend. Because if she goes up on the stand and tells the story that really happened with the hot air balloon, she will be corroborating the detail the other girls claim she confessed to, that there was a hot air balloon. So suddenly the actual witness is unable to take a plea bargain and testify. And the real witness who tried to do what people supposedly want, which is to testify against the actual perpetrator, gets life in prison. And the actual perpetrator walks. And the dangerous felons who claim she confessed walk.
If shooting the President from a hot air balloon is too crazy, consider something more normal. A girlfriend is cheating on her boyfriend, and her boyfriend comes in the back door and shoots at both of them. The girl tells everyone exactly what happened. The jailhouse witness then takes the corroborating details and change it just a little bit: The girl told her boyfriend to come shoot the guy, and let him in the back door.
Not only does this prevent police from getting what they supposedly want, which is the girlfriend to testify against the boyfriend, it creates total silence from the start, omerta. The girlfriend walks into the police interview and says nothing. Even though her boyfriend just tried to kill her.
When prosecutors let dangerous felons out of prison for lying, the innocent go to prison, and the most aggressive victimizers of the innocent walk. And the paper says wow, we got the bad guy, great work. Because papers can print anything police say to them, with total immunity. And then people march in the streets and burn down stores and people wonder why, because their own government victimizes innocents for votes.