Institutional Separation of Each Aspect of Criminal Enforcement Vote Pad:
IF Code: gW (Voting Pad Sponsored by: )
Link to internet URL vote statistics:  [add link from Short URL plus '.info']


Keep Voting:  We encourage you to back up your URL vote with a Pledge or Donation:

Description of Institutional Separation of Each Aspect of Criminal Enforcement: 
This next idea is the most complicated and hardest to explain, and the hardest for people to understand and feel that it is necessary, but if you do understand it, and see how it would completely elevate our societies trust in our governments and institutions, you will understand why this is SO important to implement as soon as possible.  The easiest way to summarize this idea, is that the police/enforcers of the law must be systematically and institutionally separate from post-crime investigators, which must be systematically and institutionally separate from pre-crime active investigations, which must be systematically and institutionally separate from prosecutions.  In other words, our executive government has a monopoly on the execution of how crime is enforced, investigated, and prosecuted, and this MUST be broken UP!!!!  If this is the first time you have herd this, you probably won't understand, and may even feel like it simply isn't possible, but if you really open your mind up to this idea, not only will you see the benefits, but you should understand that it is an essential component to a free and just society to have a much more institutionalized balance of power within our social systems of crime prevention.  
    Lets start with the example of Michael Brown being shot in Ferguson by Officer Darren Wilson.  If all violence was illegal, officer Daren wilson would immediately need to be processed and released on bale to ensure that he would be present in court when his case came up.  Yet violence in our current society is legal, and so instead the case was presented to a Grand Jury.  The problem regardless of weather the case would have gone directly to court or as it stands now where it goes to a Grand Jury is that the Prosecution that presents the case is biased under the current structure of our government institutions.  In this case the prosecutor was Robert McCulloch, who many people believed was not only biased but also had a previous history of corruption when it came to inequalities between white cops and black citizens dealing with police.  It is obvious from the evidence presented that Robert MuCulloch did not want to indite Officer Daren Wilson, but was forced to present some "version" of evidence because of the massive exposure of this case.  Based on our current system there is NO possible reason for a prosecutor to ever present unbiased evidence against a police officer.  The reason is simple, the prosecution is always reliant on police officers to gather facts and data to prosecute normal citizen criminals.  In other words police officers are a direct extension of prosecutorial employees. This is basic fact, and if you don't understand that then you need to do more research.  Here is an other way of looking at it.  
    Daren Willson (the police officer) and Robert MuCulloch (the prosecutor) are all part of the same executive branch of government, regardless of weather it is the city, county, or state level.  HUH? you ask?  Yes police officers and prosecutors of every city and county in the united states are part of the same higherarchy.  But it gets worse than this.  To expand we must enphesise that if a police officer is involved in a potential crime, the only people who are immediately  involved in gathering and documenting evidence against this particular accused police officer are other police officers.  Yes other police officers, and what do you think the probability that fellow police officers have any interest or intention of collecting evince against their own?  This is an inherent conflict of interest and to make it even worse, the prosecutor is 100% reliant on police officers to not only gather evidence against a fellow police officer when one potentially commits a crime, but the prosecutor is also 100% reliant on police officers to gated evidence for ALL other cases they bring against normal citizens, so it again is in the best interest of the prosecutor to not effectively prosecute police officers to ensure there is a good relationship, as they are all part of the same government team. Again this is a blatant conflict of interest at every level. Next we will apply this principle to both local and national governance/policing.  Some of this can all be explained in this article 
More information: [insert link(s) for more information if applicable]


Other Basic Info:
Vote & Disscuss Directly by Pad: (only if you are ok with your name and / or contact info being publicly supporing)
Simply   Write Your Name, Contact information, and how you want to vote (YES,   NO, Maybe, Score 1-9, Pledge Funds, Time, etc...) along with any other   comments by clicking here and going to the bottom of the pad:

List of People who Publicly support this Idea:
[feel free to disscuss here as well]