That isn’t the way it works. All the defense needs to do is show reasonable doubt. If there is a reasonable doubt that someone is guilty, he should not be in prison and he sure as hell should not be executed.
Disregards, BLD
It’s my understanding the courts are reluctant to revisit findings of fact in cases where an execution has already been carried out. That’s why I was a little surprised to learn that this case had been reopened. If the case of Cameron Todd Willingham ever receives similar treatment, you will have your fucking cite.
Well, golly, why is that? Could it be that, absent DNA evidence, incontrovertible proof or a confession, it might be possible for an innocent person to get the death penalty?
So that’s two second-hand reports of confession, but none to any law enforcement, and none that were actually recorded or documented and signed by Willingham, right?
But I can show you multiple cases in which a convicted person purportedly confessed his crime to multiple people…and then years later DNA evidence showed his innocence.
There’s no question that the strong majority of people that are sentenced to death are guilty. But equally true is the fact that a small fraction have not been guilty, and this fact was later incontrovertibly shown by DNA evidence. The Innocence Project is replete with examples.
So answer me this, Smapti: if we agree that the foregoing shows it’s possible for an innocent person to be sentenced to death, then what mechanism might save such a person from being executed if DNA wasn’t collected or preserved for later testing?
This reasoning suggests that it’s very possible that at least one innocent person has been wrongly executed.
To insist that it’s never happened seems blind.
Nope.
That’s true prior to a trial. Once a jury has found guilt, the presumption of innocence is gone. The burden then shifts to the convicted petitioner to establish that the verdict is untrustworthy.
Here’s more about the Willingham case:
http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Myths_and_Facts_about_the_Willingham_Case.php
It appears that the only people who claim that Willingham confessed to them are one convict, whose testimony is now suspect, and his ex-wife, who’s been inconsistent in what she said that Willingham told her.
What you’re doing, Smapti, is demanding absolute proof that a person who was executed (in this century) is actually innocent. Of course we can’t provide such an example. If the evidence had been that utterly, completely, absolutely clear, even a heavily biased judge, prosecutor, jury, and governor wouldn’t have allowed such a person to be executed. The Willingham case shows that even if the evidence for a person being guilty is very weak, the justice system will allow the conviction and execution to go ahead, despite thirteen years of repeatedly being shown how weak the evidence for the crime is.
What you’re doing is what happens in many death penalty cases where a person is eventually shown to be innocent. The death penalty is so important to the defenders of the death penalty that they will ignore any evidence that a person who was sentenced to be executed is innocent because it would hurt their worldview too much. The notion that our justice system can make big mistakes in big cases is just too troubling to them. Look, I wouldn’t have even bothered to post into this thread if all you were saying was that the death penalty is justified, even though there is some evidence that perhaps innocent people have been executed recently. What you’re trying to assert though is that there is no good evidence for innocent people being executed recently. That’s what I disagree with.
True enough in a court of law. But Shodan was saying that we have to “know for a fact” that an innocent man was executed in order to lose faith in the system. We’re not in court here, all I need is reasonable doubt in order for me to think innocents are being executed.
Isn’t it also true that The Innocence Project (and other organisations like it, if there are any) simply cannot handle all the cases they might want to, even if DNA evidence was collected?
Absolutely. Of course, the reality is that this cuts both ways: the Innocence Project has taken on many cases of people that demand their DNA get tested, and they spend months and money and motions forcing the state to do it…and it matches. Because people in prison have lots of time on their hands and very little downside to asking for the test – how will it hurt them?
Still, because that cascade of requests clogs the project, which is not exactly rolling in dough to begin with, and that means that potentially meritorious claims may be lost for lack of resources to address them.
From what I’ve read, the OP is incorrect in asserting that the guy was found to be innocent. The guilty verdict was overturned, which is not the same thing.
The evidence that he was guilty is apparently sorely lacking, but the evidence that he was innocent is not all that strong either. I don’t think it can be conclusively said that the kid was innocent (though I wouldn’t be surprised if he was).
No, Frylock claimed that there were numerous and very recent cases in which we know that innocent people were executed. So far, cites as to the underlined are lacking.
Regards,
Shodan
The problem with the death penalty has always been the lack of common sense. A black man is convicted of the rape/murder of a white woman because he was in the same county at the time or a defendant is given the death penalty despite his attorney sleeping through the trial. Yes these things happen. There are a ton of cases in which there are all sorts of fucked-up shit going on. Prejudicial judges, prosecuter dishonesty, jury decisions that come from WTFland.
I support the death penalty but what I don’t support is in these questionable cases, everyone at the the court of appeals or Governor’s Office or wherever look at it and say, “Meh, looks good to me.” Isn’t there some mechanism in place on a DP where someone can look at this and say “Wait a minute.” And if there is, can it actually be implemented properly as opposed to “Let’s pass this through. I’m sure they knew what they were doing.”
But under that criteria, no one can be found “innocent”, rendering any such requests moot. Shodan, is the fact that courts do not actually find people “innocent” a point you plan on bringing up?
I don’t have to; you’re making the point for me. You assert as a fact that the courts do not actually find people “innocent”. Therefore the title of your OP is demonstrably false.
Regards,
Shodan
But useful in common parlance. It is often said when someone is found not guilty or that their conviction was overturned (except for obvious procedural reasons) that they are “found innocent.” This isn’t a legal thread but a thread about the problems inherent in having a death penalty, so the lack of legal precision in the title isn’t really a problem.
Perhaps, but there could be overwhelming evidence of actual innocence. In this case the evidence seems to consist of the alibi testimony of his sister, stacked up against 3 cops testifying that he confessed to the crime. Seems pretty indeterminate to me, and I don’t see any basis for declaring that he was found to be innocent.
Bolding mine. This does still happen today. In fact, we just had a CLE about Batson and you would be amazed how much prosecutors get away with in Southern courtrooms, excusing jurors of color. The statistics are actually really really sad. I’ll dig 'em up if you want.
So…any and all research done and posted here concerning innocent people being executed would have been dismissed by you because of that particular point.
That is nice to know now-you’ve just saved us several pages of wasted posts.
Well, yes, if you can’t come up with evidence or even stick to a reasonable standard of proof, then you are wasting everyone’s time.
If you are going to assert something as fact, don’t complain when you aren’t believed without proof.
Regards,
Shodan
Is there a standard of proof of innocence that you would find acceptable: Yes, or no?