This woman may very well be guilty but because the courts deem one of the investigators a crook, she is walking.
I’m sure the prosecutor in question will be severely punished.
This kind of thing happens so often that many states, if not all, have passed laws, severely limiting how much compensation they will pay those wrongly convicted, no matter the circumstances.
“This case demonstrates the necessity of integrity on the side of law enforcement.”
What is Truth?
You’re OK, I’m OK. It’s all relative.
Based on what I’m reading here, I’m not so sure she’s getting away with anything. It’s pretty obvious there was no confession. She denies making a confession, and the crooked cop refuses to stand by his own testimony in court.
The two men convicted in the killing refuse to testify against her. Aside from the fact that her ex-husband believes she’s guilty, what evidence do they have?
This article doesn’t even tell what her involvement was alleged to have been. Did she pay the men? Did she arrange the killing? Was she present at the crime scene? Did she go to the police afterwards, or go on the run?
Maybe a FReeper who’s been following this can provide some basic facts. From what I’m reading here, it looks like she’s innocent.
This case was rotten from the get-go. The detective involved, who allegedly heard her confession, is so corrupt that most of the other cases he was involved in have to be reopened, just to see if they can possibly get a conviction without *any* evidence that “has his fingerprints” on it.
The prosecutors in this country are more corrupt than the criminals.
This kind of shit is why I no longer support the death penalty unless there is DNA evidence to go with other strong evidence of guilt.
There is also gross negligence by her defense attorneys.
She was convicted on only three pieces of evidence:
1. She took out a $5000 life insurance policy on the child.
2. One of the killers said she wanted this done, but refused to testify about this in court
3. The word of the detective
Item #1 is hardly excessive and would barely cover burial costs. This is not an unusual thing to have. By itself, this is not enough for a conviction.
Item #2 clearly raises questions about the claim by the killer.
Item #3 - the defense attorneys should have explored the credibility of the detective. This was a huge mistake by the defense.
Bad Guys are always Bad, It’s the good guys you have to watch out for. With that being said, Life in Prison and 100% Civil Asset Forfeiture for the Prosecutor and Detective.
She could very well be innocent also. What read of the case hinged on the credibility of the defendant and the investigator. As the [b][u]only[/b][/u] evidence against Ms. Milke was an alleged confession heard only by the investigator, this throws the conviction into doubt because of the investigator’s long history of false statements and manufactured evidence - information which was withheld by prosecutors.