[coloradan]

Does Texas have the highest rate because they are trying to do the most justice (that is, with the greatest number of death penalties too) or is it because their justice system is the most defective, and therefore, there are the most provably innocent people behind bars?

[hinckley buzzard]

Texas, which leads the nation in freeing the wrongly convicted,

Texas might be advised to take a hard look at their prosecutors and judges over the last twenty years or more.

[Roklok]

$1.8 million is not nearly enough for 23 years of a man’s life. I don’t know that any amount of money can make up for losing your freedom, not to mention your reputation and respect and a third of your lifetime.

[AzaleaCity5691]

I would normally oppose this kind of government largesse, but considering what prison is and considering that when you go your life is pretty much ruined I do think this is an equitable solution. Especially this guy. He spent 23 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. There is no way that he will get that time back or his economic value back. Now I think that we should be executing a lot more people than we do but when they do make a mistake like this you know, there should be restitution.

[DB]

This is a stupid move.

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.

I didn't read the article so if there are protections against this the scratch my comments, but I don't know you would be able to prevent it.

[Paradox]

Its fair, I mean, there is NO WAY to repay a wrongfully accused man who has spent many years in prison for something he didn't do, but its better than nothing, alot better.

One thing they CAN'T repay is a life, thats why I usually oppose the death penalty.

[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.

[mysterio]

$80k a year isn’t enough.

[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?

[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.

[Tribune7]

It seems the conservative states are the ones most concerned with right and wrong.

[papasmurf]

Not enough, but well deserved, IMO.

[GeronL]

I don’t think taxpayers should be punished for the bad judges of the state.