Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was also an article about this in the NYT today. From reading the articles, it sounds as if the evidence was weak, and circumstantial, and that the confession was coerced, and did not show evidence of any knowledge of the crime. I think they're going to find that his DNA was not on her clothing. This could be the first incontrovertible evidence that an innocent man was executed for a crime he didn't commit, in post Jim Crow America.
Were this to be found to be the case, it would be a very powerful argument against the death penalty in the US.
Status:
"This too shall pass. But possibly, like a kidney stone."
(set 5 days ago)
35,931 posts, read 18,229,733 times
Reputation: 51001
I never understand why DNA isn't tested on request. I'm guessing this group signing the petition would be MORE than happy to pay the couple hundred dollars it would likely take to run the test.
It must be so frustrating to work with the Innocence Project and have courts deny testing when they have intact DNA evidence. Makes me crazy.
I never understand why DNA isn't tested on request. I'm guessing this group signing the petition would be MORE than happy to pay the couple hundred dollars it would likely take to run the test.
It must be so frustrating to work with the Innocence Project and have courts deny testing when they have intact DNA evidence. Makes me crazy.
Expense. It's a couple hundred bucks NOW.. In 2006 and before.. Much more.
Things won't change until someone is proven innocent based on DNA. I'm not familiar with this case.. Reading briefly on it (I stress, briefly).. 2 marines stating it was his car based on the sound of the broken exhaust.. That.. Would have been very solid evidence back in the day.
My question here.. What are the pieces of evidence to be tested? They mention red underwear, but.. That could have been at the site.. I see no mention or evidence of rape, just the use of the tree limb.. So, why would he have taken his underwear off?
If you read the articles, his wife was on base, he had every reason to be in the area, the fighting that was overheard could well have been him and his wife, a perpetrator was described as being 8 inches different in height from him, when he confessed under duress, he gave details of the crime that were totally incorrect, police said that he took them to the scene of the crime when in fact it was the other way around.
It kind of doesn't matter what a DNA test would have cost back then - it was a man's life, and it sounds as if the state executed an innocent man. Now, of course the state doesn't want to do the test. If it shows that he was executed for a crime he had nothing to do with, the state could be held liable (damages to his surviving relatives), and more than that, it really would make a very strong case for the elimination of the death penalty in the US.
I never understand why DNA isn't tested on request. I'm guessing this group signing the petition would be MORE than happy to pay the couple hundred dollars it would likely take to run the test.
It must be so frustrating to work with the Innocence Project and have courts deny testing when they have intact DNA evidence. Makes me crazy.
I don't understand how the courts could get away with denying that. How is that possible? It's withholding evidence, basically.
If you read the articles, his wife was on base, he had every reason to be in the area, the fighting that was overheard could well have been him and his wife, a perpetrator was described as being 8 inches different in height from him, when he confessed under duress, he gave details of the crime that were totally incorrect, police said that he took them to the scene of the crime when in fact it was the other way around.
It kind of doesn't matter what a DNA test would have cost back then - it was a man's life, and it sounds as if the state executed an innocent man. Now, of course the state doesn't want to do the test. If it shows that he was executed for a crime he had nothing to do with, the state could be held liable (damages to his surviving relatives), and more than that, it really would make a very strong case for the elimination of the death penalty in the US.
First of all, let's get something straight here--he was a convicted murderer, so I'm sick and tired of hearing that "there's never been a fair hearing." And his confession wasn't under duress, either--it was voluntarily given, and this murderer only changed his tune years later. Even at his trial, he blamed it on PTSD.
As far as the details go, between his being drunk as a skunk, and claiming that his victim "fell on" a tool, and that he hit her with his car, instead of admitting that he bashed her skull in, that's not exactly a new story. Many who confess try to mitigate the circumstances while admitting guilt.
"The fighting could well have been him and his wife?" You're giving THAT credence, yet you dismiss two witnesses who identified his car speeding from the scene?...his car that reportedly had a distinct sound? I see.
And you forgot something--he DID lead investigators to the tree from which he ripped a 3-foot limb, which he used to rape his victim with such brutality that it ravaged her internal organs. But don't look fot that, or even a picture of the victim in that link.
The only injustice here is that it took over 20 years of appeals and multiple stays of execution before this homo sapien was finally put to death for abducting, torturing, and brutally murdering a 19-year-old kid who was just out jogging.
If you read the articles, his wife was on base, he had every reason to be in the area, the fighting that was overheard could well have been him and his wife, a perpetrator was described as being 8 inches different in height from him, when he confessed under duress, he gave details of the crime that were totally incorrect, police said that he took them to the scene of the crime when in fact it was the other way around.
It kind of doesn't matter what a DNA test would have cost back then - it was a man's life, and it sounds as if the state executed an innocent man. Now, of course the state doesn't want to do the test. If it shows that he was executed for a crime he had nothing to do with, the state could be held liable (damages to his surviving relatives), and more than that, it really would make a very strong case for the elimination of the death penalty in the US.
I really don't think that proving that one person was executed wrongly would change anything about the death penalty. There are more than enough people on death row who absolutely deserve to be there. The problem isn't the death penalty it is that we are not allowing all possible testing to prove guilt/innocence. But that's because of money, as others mentioned. Not the cost of the test but the COST of the test if it proves the government wrong.
There was a case on one of those true crime shows where a guy was able to get his DNA tested and turns out it was him. It can go both ways.
First of all, let's get something straight here--he was a convicted murderer, so I'm sick and tired of hearing that "there's never been a fair hearing." And his confession wasn't under duress, either--it was voluntarily given, and this murderer only changed his tune years later. Even at his trial, he blamed it on PTSD.
As far as the details go, between his being drunk as a skunk, and claiming that his victim "fell on" a tool, and that he hit her with his car, instead of admitting that he bashed her skull in, that's not exactly a new story. Many who confess try to mitigate the circumstances while admitting guilt.
"The fighting could well have been him and his wife?" You're giving THAT credence, yet you dismiss two witnesses who identified his car speeding from the scene?...his car that reportedly had a distinct sound? I see.
And you forgot something--he DID lead investigators to the tree from which he ripped a 3-foot limb, which he used to rape his victim with such brutality that it ravaged her internal organs. But don't look fot that, or even a picture of the victim in that link.
The only injustice here is that it took over 20 years of appeals and multiple stays of execution before this homo sapien was finally put to death for abducting, torturing, and brutally murdering a 19-year-old kid who was just out jogging.
Give me a break.
I watch a ton of true crime shows and and you really do need to know all the details. Even the shows don't tell everything so I go look stuff up and find out what exactly the story was in the end.
It is not enough to just say oh, they're all innocent. Folks seem to forget about the victims. It's bizarre.
Expense. It's a couple hundred bucks NOW.. In 2006 and before.. Much more.
Things won't change until someone is proven innocent based on DNA. I'm not familiar with this case.. Reading briefly on it (I stress, briefly).. 2 marines stating it was his car based on the sound of the broken exhaust.. That.. Would have been very solid evidence back in the day.
My question here.. What are the pieces of evidence to be tested? They mention red underwear, but.. That could have been at the site.. I see no mention or evidence of rape, just the use of the tree limb.. So, why would he have taken his underwear off?
Maybe you misstated this, but many people have been proven innocent due to DNA< meaning they were put in prison and proven innocent after the fact. Read through the Innocence Project for some good stories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delahanty
First of all, let's get something straight here--he was a convicted murderer, so I'm sick and tired of hearing that "there's never been a fair hearing." And his confession wasn't under duress, either--it was voluntarily given, and this murderer only changed his tune years later. Even at his trial, he blamed it on PTSD.
As far as the details go, between his being drunk as a skunk, and claiming that his victim "fell on" a tool, and that he hit her with his car, instead of admitting that he bashed her skull in, that's not exactly a new story. Many who confess try to mitigate the circumstances while admitting guilt.
"The fighting could well have been him and his wife?" You're giving THAT credence, yet you dismiss two witnesses who identified his car speeding from the scene?...his car that reportedly had a distinct sound? I see.
And you forgot something--he DID lead investigators to the tree from which he ripped a 3-foot limb, which he used to rape his victim with such brutality that it ravaged her internal organs. But don't look fot that, or even a picture of the victim in that link.
The only injustice here is that it took over 20 years of appeals and multiple stays of execution before this homo sapien was finally put to death for abducting, torturing, and brutally murdering a 19-year-old kid who was just out jogging.
Give me a break.
I know nothing about this case, but there have been convicted murderers exonerated due to DNA testing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
