Skip to comments.
The Disappearing Blood Stain
Townhall.com ^
| March 31, 2010
| Jacob Sullum
Posted on 03/31/2010 6:24:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
To: Bubba Ho-Tep
It did, however, give information that was enough to support the new jury's verdict that someone else did it. Don't forget that, while disputing the damages award, the DA's office admits unethical and illegal denial of exculpatory evidence. But I suppose maybe the jury didn't care about the evidence that someone else committed the murder and the fact that the DA's office lied and covered up evidence and would have released him if he'd stood up in court and shouted "Yeah, I killed him" because they're only interesting in sticking it to the man. Because that's how those people are, right? Dude.
The "new evidence" actually described in the article (i.e. the clothing with blood of a different blood-type than the accused's) was evidence in the separate armed robbery case, not in the case where the victim was murdered. Two separate events, two separate sets of charges, two trials, one defendant.
Get it now?
As I stated plainly before, the article describes neither the evidence by which the defendant was initially convicted of murder, nor the evidence in the second murder trial that led to his acquittal for murder.
If you want to say stupid, ignorant things while underhandedly accusing others of racism you should go to a leftist board. We're supposed to be better than that here.
To: Puddleglum
Your logic is very good; and is definitely a reason to think hard about the death penalty.
It's a hard issue, as there are many cases when it looks to be a slam dunk and the case looks absolute.
There are many cases the deserve the death penalty when there is no certainty of guilt.
I would put rape in that category in many cases.
To: rogue yam
I can’t believe you read the article.
Now I am going to have to read it.
43
posted on
03/31/2010 12:40:42 PM PDT
by
Vendome
(Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
To: Kaslin
need more information...but it sounds like the blood sample was from the robberies, not the murder....what was the evidence used in the murder trial....
dna is not the whole story...
44
posted on
03/31/2010 12:41:32 PM PDT
by
cherry
To: rogue yam
Actually, I am not going to read the article.
The Defendants name is John Thompson and as we all know Jim Thompson sometimes goes by that alias.
GUILTY!
45
posted on
03/31/2010 12:41:35 PM PDT
by
Vendome
(Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
To: Vendome; Kaslin
Maybe the prosecutors never saw “MY COUSIN VINNY”.
46
posted on
03/31/2010 1:13:52 PM PDT
by
UCANSEE2
(The Last Boy Scout)
To: UCANSEE2
They were Yuteful in dehr erroruhs!
47
posted on
03/31/2010 1:31:17 PM PDT
by
Vendome
(Don't take life so seriously... You'll never live through it.)
To: ZULU
"HOW????" Easily: Join the FBI or any other part of the DOJ...
48
posted on
03/31/2010 2:49:57 PM PDT
by
TXnMA
(D'Aleo re Hansen's "GISS" temperature database: "Non Gradus Anus Rodentum!")
To: decimon
Inexcusable. That pretty well sums it up. I will admit to my shame that when I was a young Air Force prosecutor I kept a scorecard of “wins”. About 6 months after I became the Area Defense Counsel I stopped. I pray it’s because I grew up. I am, however, comfortable that I never withheld evidence.
Colonel, USAFR
49
posted on
03/31/2010 7:44:57 PM PDT
by
jagusafr
(Kill the red lizard, Lord! - nod to C.S. Lewis)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson