A Prison Question.

[Milkchan]

A person goes to prison for a crime they were committed of, but didn't do. 5 years later, that case was opened back up, the real culprit was found by newer technology and sent to jail, does the wrongly accused person gets reimbursement for being in jail for no reason?

[swampfox]

Sometimes they do. I remember reading about someone put in jail over 10 years earlier for child molestation, and they were released and given some money for compensation after the former kid said they were bullied into giving false testimony against the man by the police or something like that.

[edh]

The person should be able to sue for everything that happened. But it depends on the circumstances.

 

" Under a Malicious prosecution action you can sue for your actual injuries, which would include attorneys fees to defend the case in criminal court, the cost of your bond, lost wages, your embarrassment and humiliation, and any harm to your reputation, and you can also ask the court or jury to award punitive damages, to punish the person who wrongly forced you to defend you to defend yourself against false charges. "

[Homer]

Sometimes they do.

 

Recently, a case like this has happened in Florida, but on a much grander scale. A man was locked up in a prison for 20+ years because he was accused of raping a girl, but with newer technology, he was found to be not guilty. Because of his imprisonment, he never heard that his mother died and the new technology that has occurred the past 20 years (cellphones, internet, etc.). The state of Florida was going to give him a million dollar reimbursement, but was shot down at the last minute during budget planning.

 

Getting nothing in return for two decades of false imprisonment is injustice.

[Milkchan]

Getting nothing in return for two decades of false imprisonment is injustice.

 

That true!

[snuggles]

Although he can apply for compensation of up to 25k for each year he was in there. Thats 1/2 a million$ or so.

[alanjonesbath]

There was a case in the UK recently where a group of men were sent to prison, and then released years later as they were found to be not guilty. They were given compensation for the time they spent in prison, BUT they had to give about 25% of it back to pay the prison service for their rooms and food while they were there

 

See the news story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/6449495.stm

[rileybrands]

Okay, but in these cases, who exonerates and releases them? It's not the appellate courts, because they're only really supposed to determine the legality and accuracy in following court procedures, not the defendant's innocence (or lack thereof).

 

So, is it normally the governor who grants clemency or is it the state board of pardons and paroles? I know each state would have different policies, but I was just curious.

[ginzo]

hey were given compensation for the time they spent in prison, BUT they had to give about 25% of it back to pay the prison service for their rooms and food while they were there.

 

British prison food. The horror.