>>>>Meanwhile (as you noted), you've got scumbag nations like the govt of Iran ready to stone a woman to death for adultery (even though she might not have done it....and certainly shouldn't be a crime anyway!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/07/05/iran.stoning/index.html?hpt=C1
>>>
>>>
>>>What was this guy crime ?
>>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maher-arar/the-supreme-court-can-ign_b_628358.html
>>
>>You have hit on the primary weakness in our judicial system. Everyone can petition the courts all the way up to the supreme court after every conviction at a lower level. However, the Supreme has the authority to decide which cases it will hear....
>
>Actually, in order to appeal, you have to have grounds. You can't just say "I don't like the result." You have to show that something was done wrong in the original trial. Many, many appeals are turned down at all levels because there's no evidence of mistakes in the original case.
>
>>
>>That has always been a complaint of mine and I find it amazing that it hasn't been changed yet. I guess it is probably that not enough folks are petitioning the Supreme court to hear their case and getting denied for anything to change...


>I'd be very upset for the right of appeal to be limited beyond the way it already is. If the goal is justice, then we need the ability to look at court proceedings and fix errors.

Agreed.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/

>Tamar