No I have not been falsely convicted of a crime. My interest is academic and sociological, regarding how best to honestly do civilization. Law is unintentionally dishonest and dishonorable via its false claim to be determinative of human conduct. When I came to understand J.P. Sartre's accurate theory of the mode of origin of a human act and, thus recognized the mistaken presupposition entertained by jurisprudence, that language of law per se is determinative, I saw a chance to do original theoretical work in theory of civilization.
It is not the language of law which curbs behavior, it is the attendant barbaric punishment and theft of life which constitutes that punishment, which is the only tool legality has going for itself, whereby jurisprudence kills murderers, wherein there is no substantial difference between the two, not that I favor murder.
Your observation that jurisprudents do not take law seriously in both very interesting and amazing. I think that what ticks me off is the nauseating self-righteousness prosecutor/policeman/magistrate exhibit, as if they have absolutely the very last word on what is proper human conduct, and, it is sick that they deem themselves to be paradigm examples of ongoing right conduct, while, all the while, their notion of themselves as doing justice via law is, from my perspective, wholly absurd, for, they are an ilk of criminal themselves, by shitting on other human beings for a living when, actually, law is not an ontologically honest approach to managing human misconduct. I have written regarding an alternative approach wherein civilization is based upon our ontological structure as human beings, instead of constantly going against that structure via law. To take our human ontological structure as a pattern for doing civilization is what I am suggesting, and, law is not actually efficient for doing an ontologically oriented civilization, (which is what the Bill of Rights originally set-forward), because, law is a given state of affairs, and, the future does not arise on the basis of what already is (law), rather, the future arises of that basis of what is not. Human freedom is the fact that all determination is negation, and, via law, we cannot ultimately either understand or do freedom.

