Hacker News Reader

Comment by RHSeeger | Hacker News Reader

Mr Rogers defines the pinnacle of "good human being" to me. There are so many stories of him doing really nice things (wearing the sweaters his mother made for him on his show, describing what he was doing on the show because a blind child wrote in, speaking to the funding of PBS; the list goes on and on). Add to that the impact he had on my life (and the impact the newer Danial Tiger show based off his work has on my daughter's)... I just can't say enough good things.

View on HN

I was pondering to myself recently that if Jesus had returned in secret, my best guess would be that he was Mr. Rogers. A bit of a joke but I sure wish people could say the same about me!

IANAL, but the thought once occurred to me that if Jesus lived today, he would be a public defender. The public defender tells his client: it doesn't matter who you are, where you come from, what you've done, or whether you're guilty or innocent; I'm here to help you.

It's too bad public defender programs are so often understaffed and underfunded, to the point where some have only minutes to spare per client [0]. This contributes to statistics like 90-95% of federal and state court cases being resolved through plea bargain in the US [1].

[0] https://www.nacdl.org/reports/misdemeanor/ page 21

[1] https://www.bja.gov/Publications/PleaBargainingResearchSumma... page 1

Well, most people arrested are guilty anyway, statistically. People get too many ideas about the legal system from TV shows, and then when reality doesn't match their TV shows they assume it's reality that's fucked.

> Well, most people arrested are guilty anyway, statistically.

But aren't those statistics based on a system that's incentivized for them to be guilty? That's like trusting an environmental study funded by an oil company.

A shitload of crimes are committed, and most criminals are pretty stupid.

I think it's only most criminals that get caught that are stupid.

That aside, you're assuming that because most criminals (that get caught) are stupid, that most people accused of crimes must be guilty. What if we consider an alternative theory - the police are stupid? Is that any less likely than criminals being stupid? Another possibility - the police don't care and just want to meet their numbers. And another possibility - people have underlying prejudices which they use to justify their actions.

In order to reach your conclusion you need to make a lot of assumptions, for which you provide no evidence.

It doesn't really matter whether the defendant is guilty. Even someone who 100% admits their own guilt and has been found guilty beyond a doubt still has rights and considerations of due process -- this is what we've all agreed to as a civilized society -- and the public defender exists to ensure that even if a defendant has no financial means or connections, SOMEBODY knowledgeable is working to ensure that those rights and considerations are respected.

It's a critically vital function in preserving the rule of law.

I think he'd be more like Russel Brand.

Russel Brand confounds me, some of his stuff is brilliant, but a lot is superficial and crazy.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who feels this way. He strikes me as a series of interesting ideas filtered through a particularly messy mind.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com