Wrongly convicted Texans become instant millionaires

AP via American Statesman ^ | Sept. 5, 2009 | Jeff Carlton

[Ditter]

I have a South African friends who gave up their South African citizenship and became US citizen so they could live in Texas and never go back to the hell hole that is South Africa.

[Wolfie]

I guess it would depend on how old I was when I got out, but I think I’d be inclined to find those respsonsible and give them a reason to put me back in prison.

[03A3]

Didnt know they raped children in Texas to cure Aids.

[CodeToad]

“who were later discovered and ejected from the force.
“

Well, let us know when they go to jail for their crimes.

[devere]

What do they do for the wrongly executed? Perhaps they will name a county after Cameron Willingham?

Anyway, it’s nice that Texas tries to make this intrinsically imperfect world a bit more perfect.

[wolfcreek]

Words of *wisdom* from the Mogadishu on the Mississippi.

Your about page says you've been to Texas. We're you asleep?

[tpmintx]

Texas has a very high rate of these exonerations because we are looking for them. These are being led by the Dallas county Prosecutor’s office. There is no better way to ensure that the justice system is in fact just, than to root out and publicize past injustice.

Name one other state where the PROSECUTOR’s office has taken the lead on this. We have a new tool available in DNA, and in those cases where the DNA evidence is still accessible, we compare it to the incarcerated individual. If it’s not a match, then we let the person out.

Dallas County DA Craig Watkins deserves international recognition for this effort, and it should be replicated around the country.

Like any human endeavor, the criminal justice system is imperfect. We are just trying to be less so.

Don’t be so smug if your state is not doing this. You also have innocent people in jail, but you are leaving it to their own resources for them to assert their innocence. Texas has brought STATE resources to this problem.

[aimhigh]

There needs to be some accountability that results in punishment of prosecutors who railroad the innocent. To many liberal attorneys become prosecutors because it allow them to run for office while pretending to be conservative.

[tpmintx]

There needs to be some accountability that results in punishment of prosecutors who railroad the innocent.

Hear Hear!!

[BlueAngel]

Your friend leaving Texas has improved it, by far.

[deport]

That may well be the dumbest post i have ever read here. Are you really suggesting that someone would voluntarily spend 20-plus years in prison in exchange for $80K a year plus a one time lump sum?

---

Especially since this law wasn’t even being considered 20+ years ago.

[catbertz]

I’m glad for these guys. I hope they stay out of trouble amd get to enjoy the rest of their lives.

[mysterio]

$80k a year isn’t enough.

[Eagle Eye]

That may well be the dumbest post i have ever read here.

I knew someone would beat me to it. Thanks.

[headsonpikes]

“That may well be the dumbest post i have ever read here.”

It made me think what DB might be an acronym for.

I came up with a very short list.

[deport]

$80k a year isn’t enough.

---

Agree that you can’t place a dollar value on one’s freedom and right to be free when wrongly convicted. At least this is an attempt to make some restitution. They do get other items but none repays the loss of that freedom.

[Dryman]

Interesting approach that attempts to right a wrong.

As a side note, I missed in this article how “supposed saints” are ever accused and convicted. Was this guy on his way to Choir practice after working his 8 hours with the needy then his 2 hours at the seminary when he was accosted by police (the man) and evidence planted for his conviction?

[Hardastarboard]

The case itself should be reviewed, as well as all of the cases that the prosecutor tried. Too many of these convictions are because the prosecutor is politically ambitious, and doesn’t care at all about the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Suitable punishments for the prosecutors should be devised if any wrong doing or over reaching is found.

[Ragnar54]

The number of convictions being overturned by DNA "proof" of innocence is suspect. It is not possible to "prove" innocence; this is why our legal system requires proof of guilt. When DNA was not used to convict in the first place, using DNA to overturn a conviction means throwing out some or all of the original evidence. Unfortunately, the reliability of DNA evidence is not guaranteed:

"There have been two main types of forensic DNA testing. They are often called, RFLP and PCR based testing, although these terms are not very descriptive. Generally, RFLP testing requires larger amounts of DNA and the DNA must be undegraded. Crime-scene evidence that is old or that is present in small amounts is often unsuitable for RFLP testing. Warm moist conditions may accelerate DNA degradation rendering it unsuitable for RFLP in a relatively short period of time.

PCR-based testing often requires less DNA than RFLP testing and the DNA may be partially degraded, more so than is the case with RFLP. However, PCR still has sample size and degradation limitations that sometimes may be under-appreciated. PCR-based tests are also extremely sensitive to contaminating DNA at the crime scene and within the test laboratory. During PCR, contaminants may be amplified up to a billion times their original concentration. Contamination can influence PCR results, particularly in the absence of proper handling techniques and proper controls for contamination.

PCR is less direct and somewhat more prone to error than RFLP. However, PCR has tended to replace RFLP in forensic testing primarily because PCR based tests are faster and more sensitive."

From: DNA Testing: An Introduction For Non-Scientists

The articles on these cases do not provide details of how the DNA evidence was processed. At the least, there should be assurances that the "exonerating" DNA evidence does not point to anyone who handled the evidence, and that proper controls were used to prevent contamination. There also should be solid grounds for dismissing the evidence and testimony that was originally judged sufficient to convict.

[UCANSEE2]

There's any number of ways to manufacture evidence to frame yourself along with hidden proof you didn't do it all in pursuit of $80k a year. A convict that can't get a job can set himself up to do prison time, later provide “suddenly discovered” proof he didn't do it and collect.

Which all SOUNDS good, except for the FORCED ANAL RAPE part.