Sentenced to death and executed - Later proven innocent?

[dudleysharp]

@Donnerwetter

Looks interesting. But AFAIK at least the case of Ruben Carter is still controversial, despite the Bob Dylan song and the Denzel Washington movie.

Great song by Dylan, as usual.

BS, though.

http://www.graphicwitness.com/carter/

[dudleysharp]

@Donnerwetter

Has there ever been a case in recent history in which a person was found guilty of a capital crime, tried, sentenced to death and executed and later was proven to be innocent? snip

thank you

[Donnerwetter]

@dudleysharp

thank you

Instead of “recent history” I probably should have written: reliable and extensive written documentation exists

[Peter_Morris]

So, Dudley, we meet again. Still trotting out the same old nonsense, I see.

[Loach]

@Capt_Kirk

Loach,
I guess NJ works a little different than here in the Death Penalty Capitol of the US(Harris County TX). There is significant pressure to solve/convict here and we have changed the laws about appeals to make it easier to execute, sadly I think it is only a matter of time before we have proof that an innocent has been executed. Cameron Todd Willingham may be the first provable case but we will see. Part of the problem is our Prosecutors are elected and any perceived weakness on the Death Penalty gets you booted out of office, I don’t think that anyone would do it intentionally anymore(like Brandley) but the pressure is enormous especially if the victim is White and Female

I didn’t say or mean to imply there is no pressure to solve a case where I work. There is no pressure to solve a case regardless of the truth. Its not like these things can’t come back and bite you in the ass if you get it wrong. I never said that it has never happened. in history or even in recent history. I objected to the characterization that the truth is rarely the motivation.

@Whack-a-Mole

I hope you are kidding.

There examples aplenty of police making up stories, prosecutors hiding evidence that could exonerate the accused, corrupt judges and so on. I am not saying they are all or even mostly corrupt but examples are not hard to come by either (and those are the ones who were caught, it is reasonable to assume many are not caught either).

Further, the vast majority of criminal cases do not go to trial (less than 5%). By far most are plea agreements and while you may say that those pleading out are only the guilty doing so because they know they are guilty to think so would be naive in the extreme.

No it is not naive. The vast majority are guilty. The vast majority of cases I see are far from ambiguous. The vast majority there is no doubt who is guilty. The vast majority are sent forward with over whelming evidence. The juicy mysteries are the only ones that get press. Prosecutors like plea deals because despite the evidence, you can never predict what a jury will do and it clears up the docket quicker. It is naive to think that every case is like Law and Order. Most that go forward for prosecution are simple and pretty much slam dunks. Every now and then you take what you have and take your best shot (Casey Anthony). But for the most part the prosecutor does not want to put a case he does not know he can win on an already full docket.

[UltraVires]

@Czarcasm

Apparently I missed reading the final paragraph of Peter Morris’ link:The Governor declared all that were executed to be innocent.

Since Massachusetts was part of the British Crown at the time, I wonder if the Governor has the power to exonerate those people. Her power derived from the United States Constitution and the Massachusetts State Constitution which was not in force in 1692. Perhaps Parliament needs to pass this resolution.

[Gray_Ghost]

I thought the following newspaper article would be of interest for this topic.

Cliff’s Notes version: Wanda Lopez was killed during a robbery in Corpus Christi, Texas in February 1983. Carlos DeLuna was executed for her murder in December 1989. The Columbia Human Rights Law Review is dedicating their Spring issue of this year to a 400 page article stating that Carlos DeLuna was not responsible for her murder, and that Carlos Hernandez did it.

From the cited newspaper story:

Hernandez reveled in his reputation as a thug, flaunting a buck knife and boasting of his exploits. He claimed to have strangled a young woman, knifing an X on her back as her child slept nearby. He was charged but never convicted of the crime. He spent time in prison for a string of convenience store robberies and for slicing a female friend’s belly from sternum to navel.

Along the way, he bragged of killing Lopez and laughed about DeLuna taking the fall. In 1996, Hernandez’s parole was revoked after he attacked a woman with a knife. He died in prison three years later at 45.

The journal article, “Los Tocayos Carlos: Anatomy of a Wrongful Execution,” grew out of a 2003 student project to examine Texas capital cases in which a single eyewitness account was key to conviction.

This is certainly not an official exoneration. In fact, authorities are confident they executed the right guy. From the cited news story, the lead prosecutor for the case, Steve Schiwetz, was quoted as “dismiss[ing] DeLuna’s original court defense and has rebuttals for several of the assertions the authors make in the journal article. For one, he said, DeLuna confessed his guilt to a sheriff’s deputy, a claim the researchers dispute.”

[Mosier]

Yahoo news is reporting the same thing here.

[Quartz]

@DrDeth

Not that i can see. Got a cite or a wiki link or even a name?

I now have the book to hand. It was William Shaw who was convicted and executed.

[Peter_Morris]

Can you tell us more? Location, date, etc? Do you mean the case from 1721, or is there a more recent example?

A case nearly 300 years old is not helpful to an OP who asked for example from “recent history”

[Ludovic]

@Loach

No it is not naive. The vast majority are guilty. The vast majority of cases I see are far from ambiguous. The vast majority there is no doubt who is guilty.

It is naive to think that every case is like Law and Order.

But it’s also naive to think that murderers are not sociopathic enough to show fake contrition during the sentencing phase in order to statistically lower the chances of getting the death penalty. Whereas those truly not guilty don’t really have a reason to show remorse, because they’re not guilty, plus, they are not sociopathic enough to attempt to lie about something they didn’t do.

Which means that it very well could be that a greater than average percentage of death row inmates are wrongly convicted than the percentage for other crimes.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

This article in the Atlantic goes into great detail on the Carlos De Luna execution. From the article, a list of 10 problems with the case:

1. There was no DNA or blood evidence on DeLuna despite bloody murder scene. There were no fingerprints. There was only one eyewitness and he was sketchy about what he had seen.

2. Police/prosecutors knew the whereabouts of another, more likely, suspect. But they didn’t tell the defense this before or after the trial.

3. When the defendant identified the likely killer shortly before trial, the police and prosecutors did not reasonably follow up even though they knew that the man identified was capable of committing the crime.

4. Based upon early witness reports, the police at first sought another suspect. They did not share this information with the defense even though the two men (the two Carloses) looked eerily like one another.

5. The police officer collecting witness accounts relayed inaccurate and incomplete descriptions of suspects to the police dispatcher, who radioed them to officers in manhunt.

6. Police investigators botched the crime scene by turning it back to the store manager just two hours after the murder to be washed down and reopened immediately.

7. Evidence from the initial investigation was checked out by a prosecutor the day after the trial and was never returned. Any usuable DNA thus was lost.

8. The trial judge appointed a solo civil practitioner without any criminal trial experience much less any capital trial experience. The defense did not call a single “mitigating” witness in the sentencing phase of trial.

9. Police investigators did not measure a bloody footprint they photographed at the scene of the crime or test a cigarette butt they found on the floor of the store where the victim died.

10. A 9-11 dispatcher failed to quickly dispatch police to the scene of the crime, despite the fact that the victim had called for help. Later, the “manhunt tape” made by dispatchers was taped over and not turned over to the defense by the police.

And this list doesn’t include such factors as the fact that Carlos Hernandez bragged to multiple people about how Carlos De Luna had gone to prison for the crime he’d committed, or how the two Carloses look very similar.

Granted I’m no trained attorney, but the folks at the Columbia Law Review are; and it looks to this layperson that they’ve put forth a very persuasive case for De Luna’s innocence.

[md2000]

@Ludovic

But it’s also naive to think that murderers are not sociopathic enough to show fake contrition during the sentencing phase in order to statistically lower the chances of getting the death penalty. Whereas those truly not guilty don’t really have a reason to show remorse, because they’re not guilty, plus, they are not sociopathic enough to attempt to lie about something they didn’t do.

Which means that it very well could be that a greater than average percentage of death row inmates are wrongly convicted than the percentage for other crimes.

Stephen Truscott for example (and several other wrongly convicted Canadians) were regularly denied parole because a condition of parole was to admit your crime and express remorse and contrition. Easy if you are guilty and just need to make up sorry-sounding crap to tell the parole monkeys.

The system is loaded against the wrongly convicted in so many ways.