Posted on 04/16/2008 7:28:06 PM PDT by Strategerist
After spending nearly 23 years in prison for a rape he did not commit, Thomas Clifford McGowan on Wednesday heard the words that set him free.
"Words cannot express how sorry I am for the last 23 years," said state District Judge Susan Hawk, moments after overturning his convictions. "I believe you can walk out of here a free man."
McGowan, 49, won his freedom after a DNA test this month proved what he had always professed: that he did not rape a Dallas-area woman in 1985 and then burglarize her apartment. He was convicted of both crimes in separate trials in 1985 and 1986 and sentenced to life each time. The primary evidence against him turned out to be misidentification by the rape victim.
"I've been living a life of a living hell and my nightmare is finally over with," McGowan said after the hearing. "This is the first day of my life. I'm going to go forward."
Hawk's ruling, which now must be affirmed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, makes McGowan the 17th Dallas man since 2001 to have his conviction cast aside because of DNA testing. That's the most of any county in the nation, according to the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal center that specializes in overturning wrongful convictions.
Overall, 31 people have been formally exonerated through DNA testing in Texas, also a national high. That does not include McGowan and at least two others whose exonerations will not become official until Gov. Rick Perry grants pardons or the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals issues its rulings.
The crowded courtroom included dozens of McGowan's relatives. Also attending were three Dallas County men who had been wrongly convicted and eventually exonerated by DNA testing. They greeted McGowan with handshakes and hugs, and one gave him a $100 bill to "get him started."
McGowan, wearing a button-down shirt and slacks, looked trim and relieved. He said he prayed frequently and was benefiting from some "powerful forces." While in prison, one of McGowan's sisters died, and he said he missed watching his sibling's children grow up.
"I know God forgives, so hey, I've got to forgive, too," McGowan said. "It's not going to benefit me to be harboring anger or resentment."
McGowan's wrongful imprisonment began in May 1985 when a Richardson woman returned home and came upon a burglar in her apartment. The man bound her hands with his belt, raped her at knifepoint and then loaded his car with several items stolen from her apartment, according to court documents.
Police eventually presented the woman with a photo array of seven men. She picked out McGowan's photo, saying she "thought" he was the attacker. But police told her she had to be certain and "couldn't just think it was him," she testified in court. It was then that she said McGowan was "definitely" the attacker, according to court documents.
Just a few words from a police officer can significantly influence whether a witness identifies the wrong person, Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck said.
"It's not that the police officer involved in this matter was intentionally doing anything wrong. He wasn't," Scheck said. "That kind of a forced choice response ... is very, very damaging."
More exonerations are expected in Dallas County, where District Attorney Craig Watkins has set up a program in which law students, supervised by the Innocence Project of Texas, are reviewing hundreds of cases in which convicts have requested DNA testing to prove their innocence. About 10 Dallas County cases are in various stages of investigations and DNA testing, and another exoneration is likely within the next few weeks, prosecutors said.
Watkins said he plans to lobby other prosecutors to put in place similar programs.
"This should not be a pilot program that lasts two or three years," Watkins said.
The DNA from McGowan's case yielded a full profile that is now being run through state and federal databases, assistant prosecutor Mike Ware said. If a match is found, it could identify the true rapist.
/johnny
If that's the ONLY evidence in a stranger rape, I'd never convict were I on a jury.
(I have been aon a jury and convicted someone of child molestation with no physical evidence and the testimony of the victim; perp was the boyfriend of the girl's grandmother. Turns out he had numerous priors for child molestation, and died of a heart attack two days after the conviction)
The basic problem here is eyewitness testimony is TERRIBLE, this has been proven again and again by psychological experiments; but the only knowledge people have of the legal system are movies and TV dramas - you NEVER see shows where an eyewitness makes a simple mistake.
You are absolutely right. This is not something new. People in law enforcement and even in civil law know well, and have known well for a long time, that eyewitness testimony is both the weakest from a reliability standpoint, but the strongest in influencing a jury.
It is a bit counterintuitive, but eyewitness testimony is not nearly as credible as most think. The courts, judges, and lawyers, including prosecutors, know it too. They also know that juries are heavily influenced by such testimony.
Why the deference to such inherently unreliable testimony?
Well, courts (i.e., government) make money out it, judges cravenly defer to the jury, criminal defense lawyers scream about it, but no one listens, and prosecutors use it to advance what are often political careers thereby violating their oath of office.
In cases like this in Florida, the state usually approves about $50K per year in prison payment to a wrongly convicted person. I have no problem with this at all, but I think whoever is responsible for delaying a DNA test should pick up the tab from the date they first declined to test the evidence.
What most people don’t think about when they complain about “defendant’s rights” (”What about victim’s rights?”, they say), is that when you convict the wrong person of the crime, you simultaneously let the guilty party go free.
DNA has convicted tens of thousands more than it’s freed.
That is correct. And it tends to turn the alleged perp's life into a great big $h!t sandwich. And he'll have to eat on it for the rest of his life. Even if exonerated.
/johnny
There is no such thing as an "innocent" man. He may not have been guilty of this crime, but we're all guilty of doing things or at least thinking things that are wrong.
Maybe he just wasn't punished for the right wrong, but it still might be right that he was punished. At least it wasn't wrong in that sense.
We at least this isn’t the UK. When they find someone innocent on DNA and release them after 15 years, they charge them room and board.
Wow. You know, probably 90% or more of all crimes have no DNA evidence. Using your requirements, there’s gonna be an awful lot of criminals running free.
Anything Barry Scheck is attached to has ten foot pole marks all over it..
You are insane. He was JAILED. He didn’t do it. Having impure thoughts of a girl he saw from a distance DOESN’T JUSTIFY SOCIETY LOCKING HIM UP FOR 23 YEARS!!!.
No offence meant to regular criminals....
/johnny
im glad DNA freed man instead of the other way around.
I think it's highly unlikely that this was the ONLY girl about which he had impure thoughts.
These things have a way of balancing out in the long run.
You're correct. I mean, he must be guilty of something. Speeding, leering at little boys, peering in the neighbor's pre-teen bedroom.
What if a woman meets a guy at a crowded party. They go back to her place and talk for eight hours. Then he rapes her. She then positively identifies the guy a week later. You’re saying that identification shouldn’t count if there is no DNA evidence?
For every criminal convicted in which DNA played a part, guilty or innocent, it's now a shot at getting out. DNA evidence lost or degraded so no positive match? Judge orders a new trial, witnesses are dead or have been threatened or don't want to testify, the prosecution has no case and they decline to prosecute. "Wrongly convicted inmate freed".
Remember the Central Park Rapists? They bragged about what they had done and confessed with parents and guardians present. When the only DNA that could be tested showed another rapist was also involved they claimed that they were just innocent choirboys.
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.