[Strategerist]

Yet another victim misidentification - with the rise of routine DNA testing should hopefully run out of these but it's going to take decades.

I'm not in favor of the press hectoring the victims asking about it but I always wonder how they deal with the mistaken IDs mentally. Most, as in this case, are steered towards the ID by the police, so not like it's entirely their fault.

[hole_n_one]

From the Innocence Project website..........

The victim in McGowan’s case initially viewed a live lineup with three men who police thought might be suspects in the crime and three “fillers.” She did not identify any of the men as her attacker. Later, she was shown a photo array with seven photos – but there were effectively only three photos in the array, since two of them were photocopies of photographs, one was a black-and-white photo (all the others were in color), and one was marked “Garland Police Department” (while the remaining three were marked “Richardson Police Department,” which is where the crime took place). The victim said she “thought” the man in one of the three photos was her assailant, and the police officer administering the lineup told her “You have to be sure, yes or no.” When she testified in court, the victim recounted the officer’s instructions: “He said if I was going to say it was somebody, if I was going to say it was that picture, I had to be sure. He said I couldn’t think it was him. He said I had to make a positive ID. I had to say yes or no.” After hearing the officer’s instructions, the victim said the man in the photo – Thomas McGowan – was “definitely” the man who attacked her. The victim’s identification of McGowan was the central evidence against him.

And........

Before his arrest, McGowan graduated from Ryder High School in Wichita Falls, Texas. His photo was in the police system because of a minor traffic violation.

[poinq]

there is always someone who points out with certainty that that person, any person who is plausible, will pay for my pain. She did not care that someone would go to jail for 23 years even if he did not commit a crime. She needs to slaughter someone, anyone. And by doing so the real attacker goes free and an innocent man lives a nightmare.

[Marie2]

I think there should always be two or three witnesses, not just one. That’s what the Bible says. Just one witness is too likely to be mistaken or deliberately lying.

I’d consider physical evidence as a witness. For instance, if this guy was caught pawning her stuff or if his DNA was on her couch or whatever.

[cubreporter]

This man should receive a public apology and he should be $$$$ compensated as well. I wish him luck and according to what was said...he is a forgiving soul. I hope he walks out into the sunshine and blue skies and starts a new life for himself and for his family. God bless him. He has suffered enough.

[Drew68]

bump for later

[ccmay]

I don't think the word of one witness is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, for any crime.

-ccm

[gost2]

How many Nifong DAs you figure there are out there? One out of a hundred? I’d guess ten times that many. Anything to get ahead in this modern world.

How can we be pro death penalty when we know we are putting innocents in jail all the time?

[timm22]

BUMP