Kid guilty of dressing in black to be freed after 8 years in prison

A 15 year old kid at the time of the killing was convicted with no, zero, physical evidence based mostly on the testimony of experts who weren’t supplied with exculpatory evidence by the Fort Collins Police Dept. He’s been in prison for eight years for a murder that he never should have been convicted of ever.

This was a case of hysteria, much like the sexual assault convictions of the 1980’s, only this was a goth kid who had some violent drawings in his room and happened to live near the victim. New DNA evidence points to an early suspect who was the boyfriend of the victim.

The real issue here is that the police witheld evidence that clearly cast reasonable doubt on the guilt of the kid. This kind of thing makes me sick, and I know there is at least one other case similar to this (West Memphis Three) although I admit that I know little about that case.

This case is going to be covered on CNN at 10:00 eastern time in the US.

Denver Post Coverage

Could you be more specific? There were surely many thousands of sexual assault convictions in the 1980s, just like in every other decade.

I assume the OP is referring to the McMartin preschool case.

Yes, the McMartin case was what I was thinking of, as well as the rash of “repressed memory” convictions as well. There were hundreds of them.

Where does it say he was jailed for being “Guilty of dressing in black”?

He was jailed for nothing at all. There was no physical evidence nor any eyewitness testimony tieing him to the crime. His conviction was based on the fact that he found the body (not surprising since he lived right there) plus that he was a “wierdo” and had violent drawings in his room.

I lived in Ft. Collins at the time of the murder and saw firsthand the pile on this kid. He was an outsider and a convienient target, and now it seems quite clear that he was an innocent man. There is a Ft. Collins police officer by the name of Jim Broderick who now appears (and was at the time widely believed to have) lied at the stand about the case.

So was there no evidence, or falsified evidence?

No incriminating evidence, and exculpitory evidence was witheld.

So what exactly was the cop supposed to be lying about?

Have you actually read the trial transcript and interviewed the jury Members? :dubious: Or just a few newspaper articles?

What is your fucking problem? Did you miss the part where he is being released?

Certainly, he is being released due to new DNA evidence, not becuase the original trial was fataly flawed.

So, again, have you actually read the trial transcript and interviewed the jury Members? Or just a few newspaper articles?

that may be considered to be a 'fatal flaw" of the original trial.

That doesn’t prove that that the kid was convicted because “he dressed in black”.

In fact, it doesn’t go at all into what evidence did convict the kid, just that some exculpatory evidence was possibly withheld.

Before the OP can go throwing around statements like “kid guilty (only) of dressing in black” he needs to see exactly what evidence was presented to the jury and what of that evidence conviced the jury. Otherwise, he’s guilty of convicting the jury and legal system on even scantier evidence.

He’s being released because of DNA evidence, which has bugger all to do with his conviction in the first place. I suggest you read a little about the case yourself, maybe it will help you understand why a special prosecutor was appointed to review the conviction and test the DNA in the first place. It is not standard procedure to test DNA on all rape and murder cases where conviction took place before testing was available.

The jurors, while I think they shouldn’t have convicted Masters, didn’t have access to the witheld evidence either.

Thats why we need the death penalty. We can’t have these guys being released and getting money from the state.

It seems to me that Lamar Mundane has offerred pretty fair supporting evidence for the notion that the kid was railroaded into jail on the basis of flimsy evidence, and that the DAs and the cops are guilty of some nefarious conduct in doing so. All Dr. Deth has done is insist on yet more evidence, without offering any evidence or even any counter-arguments for his position. Mr. Mundane wins up to this point.

No shit – if he were executed, nobody would’ve bothered testing for false DNA, history would record this kid as a deranged murderer, and all the right-wing red-staters will go to bed happy and satisfied that justice has been and will continue to be served.

“It doesn’t matter who does the crime, as long as somebody does the time.” – Sheriff John Bunnell, COPS.

Well, I guess you have not actually read the trial transcript and interviewed the jury Members. All you did was read a few biased newspaper articles, right? So, you know nothing about the case, either, do you? :rolleyes:

What exactly are you trying to prove here?