Innocent Man Executed?

[CBL4]

Jimmie Ray Slaughter was executed today. I do not know if he is innocent. I do know that evidence at his trial was false and unreliable.

http://www.demaction.org/dia/organizations/ncadp/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=413

During the trial, the prosecution argued that a hair found at the crime scene belonged to Vicki Mosley. However, DNA testing of the hair conducted by Mitotyping Techonologies, an independent lab hired by the defense, has shown it did not belong to her. The state appeals court did not allow this new DNA evidence to be added to Slaughter’s latest appeal because the deadline had passed.

Similarly, the technology used to establish that the bullets located at the crime scene came from the same batch found in Slaughter’s possession is now unreliable. The state used a process known as Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis to determine the origin of the bullet.

For more on CBLA:

However, in what should have been a red flag for CBLA practice advocates, Gulf Atomic and FBI researchers coincidentally encountered bullets likely from unrelated sources of similar composition in every study conducted.

In the most meaningful effort (Koons and Grant, 2002), an error rate of 25-33 percent was observed.

Koons and Grant are FBI researchers.
http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/eae800fde1b2e5c985256ef400675bd7?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,forensic

CBL

 

[KelvinG]

Well, I suppose whether he's guilty or innocent is now irrelevant. I guess that's one way of saving the costs of appeals and new investigation. Just kill the defendent.

If he is innocent, isn't this murder?

 

[crimresearch]

The whole notion of a 'deadline' for evidence of innocence is greatly troubling to me, but apparently not to the courts.

On the other hand, in this case, they aren't bolstering their claims by including this:

"Slaughter’s attorneys are arguing that a new science called “brain fingerprinting “ proves Slaughter is innocent.
This technology, while still in an experimental phase, shows Slaughter has no memory of vital information the person responsible for the murders would know. "

 

[CBL4]

Slaughter’s attorneys are arguing that a new science called “brain fingerprinting “ proves Slaughter is innocent.

I left that part out because I was actually trying to make a case for innocence not quackery.

CBL

 

[Grammatron]

Well, I suppose whether he's guilty or innocent is now irrelevant. I guess that's one way of saving the costs of appeals and new investigation. Just kill the defendent.

If he is innocent, isn't this murder?

Not any more than holding an innocent person in jail is kidnapping.

 

[crimresearch]

I guess they are zealously exploring any avenue.

Virginia had that 'no new evidence law', and the courts upheld it because theoretically, the Governor's pardon was the safety net....any idea why the OK Gov. passed?

 

[KelvinG]

Not any more than holding an innocent person in jail is kidnapping.

I'd much rather an innocent person be held in jail, where at least a chance exists that they could be vindicated and set free.
It's pretty tough to reverse a death sentence.

Granted, holding an innocent person in jail ain't a pretty proposition either. But it's a lot better than the alternative of putting them to death, only to find out later "Oops, wrong guy! Boy is my face red!"

 

[aerocontrols]

Not any more than holding an innocent person in jail is kidnapping.

Executing an innocent man : Murder ::
Sentencing an innocent man to prison : Kidnapping
(post-trial)

Shooting an innocent man after/during an arrest : Murder ::
Holding an innocent person in jail : Kidnapping
(pre-trial)


/stickler

 

[aerocontrols]

I'd much rather an innocent person be held in jail, where at least a chance exists that they could be vindicated and set free.
It's pretty tough to reverse a death sentence.

It's pretty tough to reverse a prison sentence, too, in the way that you mean.

 

[Grammatron]

I'd much rather an innocent person be held in jail, where at least a chance exists that they could be vindicated and set free.
It's pretty tough to reverse a death sentence.

Granted, holding an innocent person in jail ain't a pretty proposition either. But it's a lot better than the alternative of putting them to death, only to find out later "Oops, wrong guy! Boy is my face red!"

Wouldn't sound any better after someone wrongly spent 20 years in prison, IMHO.

 

[crimresearch]

Executing an innocent man : Murder ::
Sentencing an innocent man to prison : Kidnapping
(post-trial)

Shooting an innocent man after/during an arrest : Murder ::
Holding an innocent person in jail : Kidnapping
(pre-trial)


/stickler

The difference is that murder is properly reserved for wrongful killings, and the state gets to define what is wrongful.

If a DA and the cops and a judge conspired to frame an innocent man for a capital crime, then that would be a murder.

Sending the same person to death row thorugh mistakes, or even incompetence falls short of an actual murder.

 

[aerocontrols]

The difference is that murder is properly reserved for wrongful killings, and the state gets to define what is wrongful.

If a DA and the cops and a judge conspired to frame an innocent man for a capital crime, then that would be a murder.

Sending the same person to death row thorugh mistakes, or even incompetence falls short of an actual murder.

We appear to be in agreement. Wouldn't you also say that the difference between kidnapping and being imprisoned is a similar decision made by the state?

 

[CBL4]

If a DA and the cops and a judge conspired to frame an innocent man for a capital crime, then that would be a murder.

Sending the same person to death row thorugh mistakes, or even incompetence falls short of an actual murder.

There are different degrees of murder. Deliberate framing should be first degree murder while reckless incompetence would be a lesser degree or manslaughter.

CBL

 

[Bjorn]

Wouldn't sound any better after someone wrongly spent 20 years in prison, IMHO.

But what about TPHO - the prisoner's honest opinion?

 

[CBL4]

The whole notion of a 'deadline' for evidence of innocence is greatly troubling to me, but apparently not to the courts.

Can you imagine seeing evidence for someone's innocence and saying "Nevermind, that should have been filed last week. Let him die."

It is amazing the lack of conscience that people have that will allow them to abet the death of innocent man for political expendiency or whatever other reason.

CBL

 

[BPSCG]

Virginia had that 'no new evidence law', and the courts upheld it because theoretically, the Governor's pardon was the safety net

Killed that law an election or two ago through a state referendum. It was called the "Proof of Actual Innocence" referendum or somesuch, allowed for appeals based on exonerating evidence at any time (i.e., DNA and such, not technicalities). Passed overwhelmingly, something approaching 80% approval, IIRC.

Since we're on the subject, has anyone ever been proven to have been innocent after having been executed? I don't mean simply that there was evidence turned up afterwards that raised questions about his guilt, but rather, evidence turned up that conclusively proved someone else was guilty.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Since we're on the subject, has anyone ever been proven to have been innocent after having been executed? I don't mean simply that there was evidence turned up afterwards that raised questions about his guilt, but rather, evidence turned up that conclusively proved someone else was guilty.

Well, since there were no further outbreaks of witchcraft in Salem, I think it's fair to say they got 'em all. Whether all of 'em they got were witches is another question.

 

[CBL4]

Since we're on the subject, has anyone ever been proven to have been innocent after having been executed?

In 1987, the Stanford Law Review published the most significant document in the nearly 100 years the prevalence of wrongful convictions has been written about in this country. Written by Hugo Adam Bedau and Michael L. Radelet, Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases documented 350 20th- century cases of a wrongful conviction in a potentially capital case. The article's 158 pages included 23 cases involving the execution of an innocent person.

http://www.justicedenied.org/jdhistory.html
I looked but I could not find names or dates of execution of the 23 people.

According to a report by Equal Justice

In each of the 16 cases profiled in this report, there exists compelling evidence that the defendant was convicted of the crime he did not, in fact, commit.

The names are:
James Adams, Brian Baldwin, Odell Barnes, Roger Coleman, Willie Darden, Girvies Davis, Robert Drew, Shaka Sankofa, Larry Griffin, Richard Jones, Robert McFarland, Roy Roberts, Cornelius Singleton, Jesse Tafero, Thomas Thompson, Freddie Wright
http://www.quixote.org/ej/grip/reasonabledoubt/report.html
CBL

 

[Darat]

Well, I suppose whether he's guilty or innocent is now irrelevant. I guess that's one way of saving the costs of appeals and new investigation. Just kill the defendent.

If he is innocent, isn't this murder?

In the UK when this used to happen it wasn't considered murder since it was still a "legal killing".

 

[Darat]

K
...snip...

Since we're on the subject, has anyone ever been proven to have been innocent after having been executed? I don't mean simply that there was evidence turned up afterwards that raised questions about his guilt, but rather, evidence turned up that conclusively proved someone else was guilty.

In the UK certainly. This was a very famous case: http://www.stephen-stratford.co.uk/evans_christie.htm