Posted on 07/06/2007 7:36:10 PM PDT by Coleus
More than 19 years after he was convicted for the rape and murder of two children, Byron Halsey walked out of the Union County Jail this afternoon after a DNA test prompted a judge to overturn his verdict. Halsey, who was convicted in 1988, was released on $55,000 bail pending a decision by prosecutors whether to retry him or drop the charges. In a brief press conference with lawyers for the Innocence Project who worked for his release, Halsey was somber and appeared uncomfortable as he faced a cheering crowd, dozens of television cameras and reporters. He said the years in prison were hard on him.
"What was done to me was criminal at best," he said. Asked how he got through his ordeal, he replied, "I wasn't going to let nobody take my life from me." Wearing a white shirt, dark jeans and work boots, the 46-year-old emerged through a green side door of the Union County jail at 2:35 p.m.. He hugged his mother and brother in the afternoon sunshine, hours after Superior Court Judge Stuart L. Peim had granted him new trail. "More nice people around me now than have been around me for a long time," Halsey said softly as he embraced his relatives.
After going back into the courthouse to finish processing for his release -- and changing into fresh clothes -- he took part in a news conference on the courthouse steps. "My grandmother told me if you're innocent, then fight them and the truth will come out," he remarked. Thanking his lawyers, Halsey would not say what his immediate plans were. "I just want to be thankful and pray. I want to go to church and get my Jesus on," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.nj.com ...
Good thing he didn’t live in Texas — he’d been executed by now.
Just saying....
This is why I can’t support the death penalty any longer. It’s a statistical certainty that we’ve been executing innocent people.
There’s people on FreeRepublic that think innocent persons executed is acceptable collateral damage. Except when its themselves or their spouse whose the innocent person being executed.
I think that's a stretch. Given the very long waits on Death Row, the endless rounds of appeals, it seems to me that those who are convicted and sentenced to death have every chance to prove their innocence.
Many people on Death Row have been released after being improperly convicted. That's great. But I am not aware of anyone being determined Innocent after their execution.
Lastly, there is no doubt that people who have escaped the Death Penalty have killed someone later on. The number of dead in those cases is very real. Squeamishness about the Death Penalty and what injustice "could occur" should be balanced (IMO) with the very real tragedies which are known to have occurred because Death was not given.
DNA evidence is clearing old cases. It would be convicting them now. DNA linking someone to a murder should get them the death penalty.
Think about the American South between 1900 and 1950 and then reconsider your assertion.
I do not wallow in mistakes made in the past. I use reason to decide reasonable approaches to solving problems in the present.
“This is why I can’t support the death penalty any longer. It’s a statistical certainty that we’ve been executing innocent people.”
I understand the impulse to burn someone at the stake... or skin them alive... or simply kill them... but it never undoes the crime, never brings back the dead, doesn’t deter many criminals or save any money.... and as we’ve seen in recent months, sometimes the system gets it wrong.
I still support the death penalty.
People let out because DNA technology now exonerates them is fine, but new cases will now have the benefit of DNA that would have been unavailable years ago. The people convicted now have a much higher probability of being the perpetrator. I never realized how little DNA it took until a recent local case pointed the finger at a suspect based on a dried drop of sweat presented with the DNA evidence the culprit confessed. At the same time a man convicted 20 years earlier was exonerated and freed. He’d been convicted of the crime the other SOB did.
How does a DNA test prove he is innocent?
I saw one Texas case which to me at least was pretty far from cut and dry i.e. that of Susan Wright. Two things would have prevented me from convicting this woman of anything:
No way that woman gets convincted of anything at all if I'm on the jury.
And if it DID prove him innocent, why did he have to set bail? That’s odd.
Maybe there's more to the story that didn't fit the reporters agenda?
Well, I was thinking more in terms of the victim using a public laundromat.
I have always thought that the standard for the death penalty should be “Guilty Beyond any doubt”. “Reasonable doubt” does not cut it.
“How does a DNA test prove he is innocent?”
Innocent until proven guilty. DNA evidence showed he wasn’t guilty, thus he is innocent. Proving innocence is a moot point here. because there is assumption of innocence.
I’m 100% supporter of the death penalty, btw. Most murderous criminals do deserve to die. But, only those who are clear cut guilty should be put to death. DNA print coming negative casts enough doubt to make the defendant innocent of the charges.
I would rather have all criminals serve life sentence than have one innocent face the ultimate punishment. How would you feel if you are one of those innocents who is being put to death for the crime you didn’t commit?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.