As compared to the "precedent" that Officers of the Court can abrogate the accused's right to a fair trial and consign an innocent man to life in prison?
BTW your 1st and 2nd links offer a somewhat different view--as does your 3td.
So we are now quibbling over my use of the term "false imprisonment?"
What else pray-tell would you call it when an innocent man is falsely accused, denied IMO a fair trail, wrongly convicted and did 26 years for a crime he did not commit?
I'm sure that the techniqual term would be more accurate....but it would not change what happend or the fact that he was wrongfully, falsely accused and falsely imprisoned for a crime commited by another man.
(BTW--if memory serves--you argued rather strongly that scooping up suspected terrorist and sticking them in Gitmo was somehow illegal and most certainly wrong---since by the links the posted what the goverment did is not "false imprisonment"---what "crime" are they commiting?
Perhaps that is what the State also did to Alton?
We have Officers of the Court that knew that fact, had evidence of that fact, were in a postion to know what was happening to him and did nothing
(as per the article) except a lot of navel gazing, handwringing and post hoc rationalizing, about it.
As a citizen I expect more....and so should you.