Innocence Project Pulls Photo of Avery from Web Site (Freed by DNA, Now On Trial for Murder)

JSOnline via AP ^ | March 3, 2006 | Ryan Foley

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"Or maybe being locked up all those years on bogus charges made him crazy. But we all know that's just a silly theory because prisons don't send people out worse than they went in....right? Right?"

Avery ended up in prison on the bogus rape charge because he had a long string of felonies prior to being falsely convicted of that first rape.

As soon as he was released from prison, he raped again. That woman lived but isn't pressing charges due to this murder trial coming up.

He also liked to set animals on fire...

He was crazy going in. Women & critters were safe from him for those 18 year, though that's cold comfort for Teresa's family.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"Her family should sue them, big time."

The Innocence Project? Good idea.

The family has filed a civil suit against Avery ala O.J. Simpson & Scott Pederson on the off-chance that he would not be convicted of killing Teresa.

[ExpandNATO]

That's what the court decided using DNA evidence. It's hard to argue against science.

What the DNA evidence says is that criminal #2 left whatever bodily fluid or tissue that was sampled. It is only definitive if there is no reasonable possibility of a second offender, because the victim's eyewitness identification says Avery.

Pure speculation follows.

Does the victim's account and other physical evidence leave open the possibility of a second perpetrator, either as accomplice or simply someone who stumbled on the victim? This could be either the victim blacking out for a long period or being assaulted in a position where the attacker's face cannot be seen.

[ExpandNATO]

As an added point of speculation, was all of the DNA evidence determined to be from a single individual? Has all of it been tested? For that matter was all of it collected?

[Jim_Curtis]

DNA evidence is only as good as the expert who analyzes it and the expert witness who testifies. You remember all the fraud out of the FBI crime lab a few years back?

I'll wager that these folks at the Wisconsin Innocence Project took evidence from the other guy and stuck it into this Avery's case file before doing the new tests. It would be extremely easy to do and not a darn thing you can do to challenge the results.

[VeritatisSplendor]

"I'll wager that these folks at the Wisconsin Innocence Project took evidence from the other guy and stuck it into this Avery's case file before doing the new tests. It would be extremely easy to do and not a darn thing you can do to challenge the results."

Surely that's only possible if they have physical access to the stored evidence - which should be well secured.

Mrs VS

[AnAmericanMother]

Now that so many prosecutors have an "open file policy", it wouldn't be difficult if the defense attorney were crooked and the prosecutor or crime lab employees weren't very vigilant. Another sample could be substituted while the attorney was "inspecting" the crime lab evidence.

The defense attorney attempted to do this with the ballistic evidence in the Sacco and Vanzetti case - in the courtroom. He was caught, but only because an alert bailiff saw him attempt the switch.

[JamesP81]

You remember all the fraud out of the FBI crime lab a few years back?

This is the problem. Our generally corrupt justice system will still send people to prison who didn't do anything based on crappy DNA evidence. It will also turn loose cold blooded psychopathic killers and rapists based, again, on crappy DNA evidence and fraud.

The bottom line is that the criminal justice system doesn't have any credibility. And that's bad news. You start mixing in personal ambition, fraud, and foster an atmosphere of witch-hunting among the public and it turns everything upside down: crooks are being set free, and the innocent are getting jailed.

[Jrabbit]

Does the guy who matches the DNA admit to the crime?

[Jim_Curtis]

Surely that's only possible if they have physical access to the stored evidence - which should be well secured.

Perhaps. But when the new DNA technology came out a few years ago and there was old DNA evidence in all of these case files, I think a lot of these lawyers and other criminal sympathizer types thought "Hmmm, how can I get to that old evidence and do some tampering and then request new tests..."

In a lot of your liberal communities, it is just those kind of criminal defense lawyers that get elected to office, D.A. and whatnot, and appoint like minded people to oversee these operations.

I wouldn't be too surprised if lawyers connected to the Wisconsin Innocence Project stood to make millions from the lawsuit that would have been expected on behalf of Mr. Avery's wrongful imprisonment. It might be where the motive comes in in some of these tampering cases...not to say that this is one of those tampering cases.

[SauronOfMordor]

Avery was convicted of a 1985 rape, then exonerated by DNA evidence.

And in THIS rape and murder, the girl was also raped by another guy.

I wonder if he DID commit the original crime, DID rape and murder the girl he was convicted of, and the reason why someone else's DNA was found was because he had help on that rape/murder as well

[okie01]

I wonder if he DID commit the original crime, DID rape and murder the girl he was convicted of, and the reason why someone else's DNA was found was because he had help on that rape/murder as well

A not unlikely scenario.

At any rate, nobody should be taking "credit" for getting this scumbag off on the first charge.

[AnAmericanMother]

I disagree, profoundly.

It's like the news media - in fact, it IS the news media. A few spectacular cases get all the publicity, which gives the general public the idea that the system is corrupt beyond repair.

It's not. You have some corrupt police officials and some corrupt judges, but they get rooted out.

Aside from the fact that most judges and attorneys and police officers are decent people who want to see justice done (there are better ways to get rich) . . . nobody wants a crooked system. It doesn't work. So it takes awhile, but the bad ones get taken care of.

The former mayor of Atlanta, who thought he was untouchable and corrupted everything he touched, is now on trial in federal court. He may or may not go down, but he will never hold a position of power again.

[JamesP81]

It's not. You have some corrupt police officials and some corrupt judges, but they get rooted out.

I could not possible disagree with you terms any stronger. My uncle was a cop. And now he's a lawyer. The first hand accounts I got from him, both as a cop and an attorney, of the under handed dog crap that judges, DAs, police chiefs, and politicians routinely engage in is appalling. If one-tenth of it is true, then it's a travesty.

The system is seriously screwed up. It has no credibility, nor should it considering the people that make it up.

[AnAmericanMother]

I've been practicing law (mostly civil but some criminal) since 1980. I don't know what it's like in your area, but around here everybody knows who the bad apples are. They aren't taken care of as fast as people would like, but the wheels of justice grind exceeding fine. The Supreme Court reporter has plenty of cases in which lawyers who stepped over the line were fined, suspended, or disbarred. There are even a couple of cases of judges that were pulled from the bench (I knew one of them - and it was time for him to go. I don't think he was corrupt - just moon-barking crazy was his problem.)

Sounds like you have fallen in with a bunch of thieves.

[festus]

Every state of the union should have CC.

I'm not taking issue with your statement in particular just the general notion that we should need cc laws. The constitution should not need a law to enable the bill of rights to be practiced.

[Diana in Wisconsin]

"Does the guy who matches the DNA admit to the crime?"

Yes, he did. He was a FRIEND of Avery and let Avery take the fall for it. (shows you that Avery can't pick his friends.) The guy that committed the rape that Avery was charged with was already in prison for 60 years on other felony charges.

[JamesP81]

Maybe you're area is fairly honest; I don't know. I can tell you that the town I live in now is very honest. We have good cops and good judges for the most part.

In my old hometown, hoever, two incidents stick out in my mind. One was when an officer pulled over a 17-year old kid for speeding. The kid tried to outrun the officer, but couldn't. The officer got out of his car, took out his nightstick, and beat the kid until he died. Another notable incident is one where a judge ordered a man to pay child support to his girlfriend, after the paternity test conclusively proved he was not the father.

My uncle tells me that when he's in court the DA in his town is always asking for extensions of the trial so that they can try to run the defendant out of money due to attorney's fees.

I think where you live, and where I live, are the exceptions, and not the rules. The justice system has severe problems. It goes all the way from the local DAs and judges all the way up the SCOTUS.

[JamesP81]

I'm not taking issue with your statement in particular just the general notion that we should need cc laws. The constitution should not need a law to enable the bill of rights to be practiced.

I agree 100%. My friends get wide eyed when I explain that to them. And if that's bad, their heads explode when I start explaining the implications of the 9th and 10th amendments.

[tubebender]

Maybe he had a accomplice in that crime also.