Is judicial system part of the crime problem?

Published 12:02am Sunday, December 18, 2011

TV viewers sit riveted to crime dramas and often begin to believe the shows are based in reality. In most crime dramas, the good guys win in the end and the bad guys go to prison.

In reality, at least in Adams County, if you’re a bad guy you stand a good shot at never doing the time for your crime — a 4-in-5 chance, based on a recent three-month period.

A recent investigation of felony cases in Adams County shows only 20 percent resulted in defendants being locked up. If the low number seems astounding, it is.

Sure, making comparisons and analyses of criminal cases is difficult. Each case and the circumstances surrounding it are different.

But when patterns appear, the “viewers” — in this case law-abiding, tax-paying citizens — start furrowing their brows.

Regardless of how statistics may be twisted, it certainly seems as if crime is up in the area over the last few years.

The reason probably has many answers, but certainly the appearance of a judicial system that is not tough on criminals plays a huge factor.

Locking up the repeat offenders would go a long way toward deterring others and quite simply removing the criminals from society.

But that rarely happens.

In fact, most cases never see a trial and, apparently, few defendants ever see prison time.

In the minds of the citizen viewers of our own county’s reality show, the sheriff’s office, the DA and the judges should be working together to ensure criminals are caught, fairly tried and appropriately punished.

That doesn’t appear to be happening right now. Clearly our justice system, while well-intentioned, is not a cohesive system, pulling in the same direction.

Instead its myriad of parts appears to be working largely independently, if not outright against one another.

That must change and citizens must demand better.




  • Anonymous

    Excellent coverage.  Next assignment – how many one time tax increases in the past have been paid off and tax millage not reduced back to original levels?

  • Anonymous

    Natchez deserves better. The criminals are feasting on taxpayers like a FREE buffet. These statistics of injusdice are a pitiful statement on just how far our justice system has devolved in the face of runaway crime. 2014 can’t come soon enough. We need change now.

  • Anonymous

    Don’t hold your breath on the 2014 election…..the gerrymandering of court districts make it next to “impossible” to have a fair election.  Just like those who pay no taxes will keep voting in liberals who will promote social programs who feed and clothe them for free, liberal voters will keep electing judges who will not punish and deter crime.  I support the premise of “innocent until proven guilty”.  However, if you plead guilty or are found guilty by a jury made up of your neighbors, and especially if your a repeat offender; do the crime….do the time!!  But that won’t happen in 2014 unless a “hard as nails” attorney wins a judical slot.

  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous

    A black commanding and chief, what an ideal.  I often wonder what out of town bloggers think if they are reading your comments for the first time.  Surely they think it’s a big put on.  If I didn’t know better, I would…..or do I?

  • Anonymous

    obama is about as far from a black american as he could possibly be .As far as that goes he is about as far from a true american as he could be.WAKE UP AMERICA!

  • Anonymous

    I dont know for shure but i think your father would not have bin so stupid as to take part in electing him or to be fooled into thinking he was part of black America.

  • VictoryUSA

    I have just read the above article, “Is the Judicial System Part of the Crime Problem.” I would like to make some comments thereto. It is natural that law abiding people should become concerned about the crime. After all, they justifiably say, “I have to obey the laws, why should others get away with committing crimes.” When they see the judicial system not working in putting away these offenders, they conclude that we need more law to accomplish a remedy. But the error is in the public perception that laws result in remedies.

    The problem is really in an unaccountable judiciary, and more pointedly, the Doctrine of Judicial Immunity. Judicial Immunity teaches that judges can never be held accountable no matter what wrong they may do, and thus can never be sued. It was Lord Acton that said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

    Since no judge can be held liable for any wrong the may do, and can never be sued, why should they concern themselves with the law, as it is immaterial to the outcome any case. When the judge opens his mouth, the words that come out are the law, notwithstanding the legislature or law books. The public perceives the problem that we need more laws. This vicious circle continues until we have ten thousands of new laws, but less justice, and thus, a more frustrated public. This vicious cycle, although identified as thus, is touched upon by the above article, Is the Judicial System Part of the Crime Problem. The fact is, the Judicial System is the Crime Problem!

    Allow me to give a fine example of this. Unfortunately, I will refer to just one of my own many legal trips to the United States Court of Appeals over the years, which years date back to 1981. This example is the latest and a current litigation now ongoing. In 2009 I was cited for a simple traffic violation. Knowing the law and the Constitution, the traffic court was not adjusted in dealing with the procedural violation raised by myself. To avoid dealing with the likes of me, they engineered some ingenuous maneuvers. They created a false and fraudulent Minute Order that stated that I was present at an arraignment on Nov. 24, 2009 on criminal charges at which I appeared and plead “Not Guilty,” and was represented by counsel. As an alleged result, I was supposedly convicted and served time in jail. The only thing honest about this, was that I indeed was thrown in jail. During the appeal, I discovered this Minute Order alleging I was arraigned upon criminal charges, I began to pursue acquiring the transcript of this “arraignment,” and was hastily informed by the Official Court Reporter named in the Minute Order that no such event happened. In so informed the Appellate Court in an effort to impeach the record.

    The Appellate Court stated that my testimony was not borne out by the record. Obviously, the impeachment of the record contradicts the record. Since they did not accept what I told them the court reporter had said, I had the court reporter make a sworn declaration that no arraignment of criminal charges happened in the case. They, nonetheless, affirmed the “conviction.”

    I brought suit, and the case wound up in the federal district court wherein four federal judges recused themselves, passing the case on to the next federal judge. Finally, the fifth federal judge just unilaterally threw the case out without dealing with the fraud. I paid the $455 and appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, following the form provided in the Rules of Fed. Proc. Immediately I received back an Order to Show Cause why the Notice of Appeal and the Appeal should not be dismissed. I Immediately opposed this Order and showed how this was a documented case of major manufactured fraud and cover-up of no notice, no Probable Cause, no criminal charges, refusal to allow impeachment of the false and fraudulent record in violation of Calf. Code of Civil Procedure 1916, and no criminal conviction.

    A few days later I received notice that the Appeal had been dismissed. I am now on my way to the U.S. Supreme Court over the question of whether I am entitled an Appeal in light of Rule 3, Rules of Appellate Procedure (c)(1)(B)(4), “An appeal must not be dismissed for informality of form or title of the Notice of Appeal…” So, what do we need? Another law that says, “The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals shall not disobey the law in denying a right of appeal?”

    Laws do not produce righteousness, enforcement does. So what is the public to do when the laws they pass are not obeyed by the judiciary? Pass more laws that may be ignored by the judiciary? I suggest everyone reading this go on their search engine and look up “Judicial Accountability Initiative Law!”

    Ron Branson

  • Anonymous

    Johnson & Sanders; what a pair.  The both of them should be disbarred just for stupidity.

  • khakirat

    You should be ashame of calling the Preident Obama not a true American for it sound like you are the one that not a true American!! You should have respect for the office of President whether you like the person are not! This president has done more for good than any president that I’ve seen that wants to get out in front of the people in town hall meeting to see what the people feel and not just hanging in the White House as others.

  • Anonymous

    With thirty years in the military under several presidents i think i qualify  to be a citizen. I respect the office of president yes but have no respect for the imposter who is in it now . And by the way let us hear what he had done good for this country. Pray tell us all please.

  • Anonymous

    you can only be a yellow dog democrat.           (one who would vote for a yellow dog if he ran as a democrar)                 WAKE UP AMERICA!

  • Anonymous

    Sure wish it could have bin colen powell him i would have crossed over and voted for. But not the ass thats there now.Wake Up America!

  • khakirat

    Your too for gone to make sense with so why try??!! Merry Christmas & Happy New Year

    In a message dated 12/21/2011 6:35:41 P.M. Central Standard Time, writes:


    sickem wrote, in response to khakirat:
    With thirty years in the military under several presidents i think i qualify to be a citizen. I respect the office of president yes but have no respect for the imposter who is in it now . And by the way let us hear what he had done good for this country. Pray tell us all please.

    _Link to comment_ (

  • Anonymous

    Didnt think you could.