Cameron Todd Willingham case: Expert says fire for which father was executed was not arson

Chicago Tribune ^ | August 25, 2009 | Steve Mills

[First against the wall]

In a withering critique, a nationally known fire scientist has told a state commission on forensics that Texas fire investigators had no basis to rule a deadly house fire was an arson -- a finding that led to the murder conviction and execution of Cameron Todd Willingham.

[GeronL]

blah blah blah

[a fool in paradise]

it could lead to the first-ever declaration by an official state body that an inmate was wrongly executed.

But the opponents assure us this is so in every case.

Just like Oprah spun yarns of American mad-cows in the 1990s.

[stinkerpot65]

I don’t know. There have been innocent people on death row - Randall Dale Adams was clearly one of them. A lot of prosecutors are as corrupt as the criminals they prosecute.

[First against the wall]

Thanks for the reference, just wiki’d Adams and his quote on the stand is impressive:

“The man you see before you is here by the grace of God. The fact that it took 12 and a half years and a movie to prove my innocence should scare the hell out of everyone in this room and, if it doesn’t, then that scares the hell out of me.”

[stormer]

Apparently it doesn't bother you that an innocent person may have been wrongly convicted and executed. Remind me of that if and when you are arrested for something.

[stormer]

The story of Randal Adams is told in this documentary:

[GeronL]

I woul have to see where they did any investigation, were they there? I have a lot of questions.

I don’t think government should have the power to execute people, thats why I thought it was better when the SCOTUS gave that to the jury. In a perfect system government would not have such power at all.

[Tenacious 1]

Years ago I did my own study on cases where inmates on death row were exonerated as a result of “new” evidence. The new evidence was often times DNA. I do not recall many specifics. But I did conclude that to a man, none were completely innocent. Strong cases were made in several of the 15 cases I studied (I am not a pro) that suggested there was other evidence that would have affected the original trial. Additional DNA found, for instance could have implicated another person. But witnesses could not be located or had passed and the trials could not be “done over.”

In all cases, the folks convicted were “bad” people. Several were thrown out because new evidence could not be immediately refuted or proven to hold the conviction. When prosecutors are faced with a judge that orders a new trial but do not have the resources, witnesses or in 3 cases, the evidence to re-try the case, they drop the charges.

I do not know of a case, beyond stale confessions, where an alternate subject was found guilty of a capitol murder and a death row inmate was exonerated.

That being said, this guy seemed to fit the mold of a bad man that “could” have been convicted of the wrong crime. An insanity defense may have held up better to witness scrutiny as several testified that he and his wife were going through the wreckage the next day while laughing, listening to music and drinking beer. That he moved his car away from the house to prevent it from being damaged while his children were still inside in the middle of the night suggests he was thinking about the safety of his children.

[Lurker]

In Illinois Rolando Cruz was very nearly executed for a crime he didn't commit. 7 cops were indicted for lying about evidence although the Prosecutor (IMO) sleptwalk through the case in a deliberate attempt to let the cops involved walk.

I'm all for executing the guilty. I'm appalled at the repeated attempts to execute those who are not.

[GeronL]

Still my first reaction is to not believe whats in the press. Then not to believe liberal interest groups. If they can get passed those 2 barriers, I will hear them out.

[Lurker]

That’s a very wise policy. But after the Nicarico Case here in IL I tend to look at Prosecutors with a very jaundiced eye.

[First against the wall]

The Chicago Tribune is not a very liberal newspaper :)

Tenacious 1- Just because someone is a ‘bad’ person, and might have committed any number of other crimes, in no way rationalizes the death sentence. One, it puts a man innocent of that crime to death, and two, in the case of a murder having been committed (since, in this case, there’s no evidence of arson), it lets the guilty party get off scott free.

[exhaustguy]

Read the New Yorker write up. If it is factual, then it is damning of the judicial system in Texas.

We need a system in which cases that are too close to call do not result in executions. While Willingham might have been a wife beater, he should not have been executed for it.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all