WWTBAM Bored

The 17th prisoner wrongfully convicted in Dallas County, TX, has been exonerated and released. Dallas County holds the record for most thanks in part to DNA evidence. That is more than any other county in the entire country.

http://tinyurl.com/69fjal

Apparently, the fact that the deceased, a 21-year-old woman who was raped and strangled, had been with three other men near the time of her death. Two of these men were subsequently convicted of other sex offenses. This information was not revealed to the defense. Instead, her boyfriend was tried and convicted and given a life sentence.

Fortunately for those hard working Dallas DA's, not all defendants have the benefit of DNA evidence or the Innocence Project to help them get out of wrongful convictions so a lot of other convictions are going to stand, a tribute to the fact that at least in some parts of this country, the Constitution and basic legal integrity won't get in the way of putting undesirables in the slammer.

silverscreenselect wrote:The 17th prisoner wrongfully convicted in Dallas County, TX, has been exonerated and released. Dallas County holds the record for most thanks in part to DNA evidence. That is more than any other county in the entire country.

http://tinyurl.com/69fjal

Apparently, the fact that the deceased, a 21-year-old woman who was raped and strangled, had been with three other men near the time of her death. Two of these men were subsequently convicted of other sex offenses. This information was not revealed to the defense. Instead, her boyfriend was tried and convicted and given a life sentence.

Fortunately for those hard working Dallas DA's, not all defendants have the benefit of DNA evidence or the Innocence Project to help them get out of wrongful convictions so a lot of other convictions are going to stand, a tribute to the fact that at least in some parts of this country, the Constitution and basic legal integrity won't get in the way of putting undesirables in the slammer.

This is disturbing and troubling. I recently read The Innocent Man by John Grishm and am completely disgusted with what has happened to these men.

As many know I'm a serious law and order hang 'em high type, but those views only apply when the perps are truly guilty beyond a reasonable (with all evidence presented) doubt as our country's founders prescribed.

These prosecuters should be brought up on charges, tried and if found guilty of violating laws during their term, should have their pensions taken and transferred to those wrongfully convicted.

It should also be noted that the current Dallas D.A., who was voted in at the last election, established an office to review cases where there still exist evidence that can be reviewed and retested to determine if a verdict is justified. Also, the Dallas D.A.'s office goes far beyond what other prosecutors require as far as keeping evidence of this type.

I'm not trying to defend past D.A.s and their staffs. I'm just saying that the current D.A. put an emphasis on trying to verify verdicts in past trials were correct. And the special office that reviews these old cases has had the funding extended. And someone in that office knew how to preserve old samples and evidence for future reviews.

I was also implying that other metropolitan counties around the country would probably have about the same rate of wrongful imprisonments if the D.A.s for those areas put the effort into exonerating innocent people as the Dallas D.A. has.

What rarely gets trumpeted in these stories is that our Forensics lab held onto the evidence despite the fact that there was absolutely no legal obligation to do so. But for that, none of these exonerations could have happened.

I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

Also the fact that is never mentioned is that over 400 cases have been reviewed, and the other 383+ reviews have confirmed the convictions. I'm not happy with a 4.25% (actually lower but I don't know the exact number of cases that have been reviewed) incorrect conviction rate, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this vigorous review process has confirmed more than 95% of the challenged convictions.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:What rarely gets trumpeted in these stories is that our Forensics lab held onto the evidence despite the fact that there was absolutely no legal obligation to do so. But for that, none of these exonerations could have happened.

I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

Also the fact that is never mentioned is that over 400 cases have been reviewed, and the other 383+ reviews have confirmed the convictions. I'm not happy with a 4.25% (actually lower but I don't know the exact number of cases that have been reviewed) incorrect conviction rate, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this vigorous review process has confirmed more than 95% of the challenged convictions.

Yeah, Mr. Woodard should just be thankful that he had not been given the death penalty.

(How he managed to escape such a sentence in Texas amazes me.)

Now, if we just can get the State of Texas to comply with international, American, and state laws with regards to Mexican citizens currently imprisoned, it really will be taking a step in the right direction.

Appa23 wrote:

TheCalvinator24 wrote:What rarely gets trumpeted in these stories is that our Forensics lab held onto the evidence despite the fact that there was absolutely no legal obligation to do so. But for that, none of these exonerations could have happened.

I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

Also the fact that is never mentioned is that over 400 cases have been reviewed, and the other 383+ reviews have confirmed the convictions. I'm not happy with a 4.25% (actually lower but I don't know the exact number of cases that have been reviewed) incorrect conviction rate, but we should not lose sight of the fact that this vigorous review process has confirmed more than 95% of the challenged convictions.

Yeah, Mr. Woodard should just be thankful that he had not been given the death penalty.

(How he managed to escape such a sentence in Texas amazes me.)

Now, if we just can get the State of Texas to comply with international, American, and state laws with regards to Mexican citizens currently imprisoned, it really will be taking a step in the right direction.

Even if he had been given the Death Penalty, it would be likely that he still would not have been executed.

Obviously, according to prisoners, everyone serving time in any jail is innocent. The reason these 17 convictions were overturned was that there was DNA evidence that either exculpated them or cast some severe doubts on their guilt, usually by suggesting the presence of other individuals at the scene of the crime. We've gotten spoiled watching CSI and other shows in which they get DNA results "routinely" within minutes, but not that long ago, there was no way other than the crudest of blood typing, to match physical evidence such as blood or semen to an alleged perpetrator.

Overly aggressive or downright dishonest prosecutorial tactics are not limited to cases in which DNA evidence is available to confirm or deny a defendant's guilt. There's no way to know how many other cases from this era occurred in which prosecutors used similar tactics resulting in wrongful convictions but that either the defendant isn't around anymore to contest the result or hasn't been able to satisfy the legal requirements to get a conviction vacated or overturned because the physical evidence just isn't there.

What really upsets me is the tendency in death penalty cases for courts to look for ways to cut off legitimate avenues of appeal, all in the name of "upholding the finality of convictions." In a civil case, if I sue you and collect or don't collect, there obviously has to be an end at some point to the litigation and a final judgment has to be final. But when a person's life is at stake, any error that may be made should be made on the side of caution, not seeking to make prosecutors and police and judges look good.

TheCalvinator24 wrote: I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

That may be, but they are then trying to also be judge and jury by withholding evidence to secure a conviction based on a single person's thought on the guilt or innocence.

Even when allowing a jury to view the evidence and reach a decision we have 12 people, not one.

BackInTex wrote:

TheCalvinator24 wrote: I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

That may be, but they are then trying to also be judge and jury by withholding evidence to secure a conviction based on a single person's thought on the guilt or innocence.

Even when allowing a jury to view the evidence and reach a decision we have 12 people, not one.

In most of these cases, the jury did get to hear all the evidence that was available. They relied on the DNA evidence that was possible at the time and usually an eyewitness. I believe that only 2 of the cases have shown actual improper withholding of evidence by the prosecutors.

Also, these overturned convictions all occurred either 2 or 3 D.A.s ago.

Of the 17 exonerations, 13 of the reviews were commenced under the current D.A.'s predecessor.

So really, those 13 don't count in the percentage of the reviewed cases. The 400+ number I quoted before is the umber that have been reviewed under the new division created by my current boss. That means that out of more than 400 cases, 4 have been proved to have been incorrectly convicted. That's less than 1%.

I agree that even 1 is 1 too many, but let's not make it sound like Dallas County was just wrongfully convicting people willy-nilly.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

TheCalvinator24 wrote: I do not believe that any former prosecutor intentionally sought convictions against someone he or she believed to be innocent.

That may be, but they are then trying to also be judge and jury by withholding evidence to secure a conviction based on a single person's thought on the guilt or innocence.

Even when allowing a jury to view the evidence and reach a decision we have 12 people, not one.

In most of these cases, the jury did get to hear all the evidence that was available. They relied on the DNA evidence that was possible at the time and usually an eyewitness. I believe that only 2 of the cases have shown actual improper withholding of evidence by the prosecutors.

Also, these overturned convictions all occurred either 2 or 3 D.A.s ago.

Of the 17 exonerations, 13 of the reviews were commenced under the current D.A.'s predecessor.

So really, those 13 don't count in the percentage of the reviewed cases. The 400+ number I quoted before is the umber that have been reviewed under the new division created by my current boss. That means that out of more than 400 cases, 4 have been proved to have been incorrectly convicted. That's less than 1%.

I agree that even 1 is 1 too many, but let's not make it sound like Dallas County was just wrongfully convicting people willy-nilly.

This sort of highlights the irony that 'no good deed goes unpunished.' Dallas County (well, the last couple regimes of prosecutors) has made extraordinary efforts to make certain that everything is on the up-and-up, and then has taken appropriate action to fix (as best it can) all situations that it uncovers when something was not, apparently, entirely correct the first time around, and then gets castigated in some quarters because it has the highest number of convicted prisoners who were subsequently exonerated. Solely because they went far beyond what ANYONE else does to ensure fairness and propriety, they get criticized

I suspect that those who criticize Dallas County for all these improper convictions must be full of praise for such jurisdictions as, oh, I don't know, Saudi Arabia or China or all those other spots where NO ONE has EVER been improperly convicted (at least, that would seem to be the case, given that Saudi Arabia and China and many other places have NEVER had to exonerate anyone post-conviction)?

wintergreen48 wrote:

TheCalvinator24 wrote:

BackInTex wrote: That may be, but they are then trying to also be judge and jury by withholding evidence to secure a conviction based on a single person's thought on the guilt or innocence.

Even when allowing a jury to view the evidence and reach a decision we have 12 people, not one.

In most of these cases, the jury did get to hear all the evidence that was available. They relied on the DNA evidence that was possible at the time and usually an eyewitness. I believe that only 2 of the cases have shown actual improper withholding of evidence by the prosecutors.

Also, these overturned convictions all occurred either 2 or 3 D.A.s ago.

Of the 17 exonerations, 13 of the reviews were commenced under the current D.A.'s predecessor.

So really, those 13 don't count in the percentage of the reviewed cases. The 400+ number I quoted before is the umber that have been reviewed under the new division created by my current boss. That means that out of more than 400 cases, 4 have been proved to have been incorrectly convicted. That's less than 1%.

I agree that even 1 is 1 too many, but let's not make it sound like Dallas County was just wrongfully convicting people willy-nilly.

This sort of highlights the irony that 'no good deed goes unpunished.' Dallas County (well, the last couple regimes of prosecutors) has made extraordinary efforts to make certain that everything is on the up-and-up, and then has taken appropriate action to fix (as best it can) all situations that it uncovers when something was not, apparently, entirely correct the first time around, and then gets castigated in some quarters because it has the highest number of convicted prisoners who were subsequently exonerated. Solely because they went far beyond what ANYONE else does to ensure fairness and propriety, they get criticized

I suspect that those who criticize Dallas County for all these improper convictions must be full of praise for such jurisdictions as, oh, I don't know, Saudi Arabia or China or all those other spots where NO ONE has EVER been improperly convicted (at least, that would seem to be the case, given that Saudi Arabia and China and many other places have NEVER had to exonerate anyone post-conviction)?

Well, lets not make it sound like Dallas County initiated the process out of the goodness of the District Attorneys' hearts. The Innocence Project has caused such actions, but you are correct that Dallas County has done a good job, via Southwest Labs, of retaining samples after appeal rights have been exhausted.

I did note today that there still is a push in Texas to have an "Innocence Panel" created via legislation to deal with some of the cases where justice apparently was not done, but courts have declared that their hands are tied to resolve.

(A common thread in many of these cases appears to be a defense counsel that had no clue what he was doing, and who tried just to get through the process and collect his fee from the state.)

TheCalvinator24 wrote:In most of these cases, the jury did get to hear all the evidence that was available. They relied on the DNA evidence that was possible at the time and usually an eyewitness. I believe that only 2 of the cases have shown actual improper withholding of evidence by the prosecutors.

I suspect that eyewitness testimony is a huge factor in false convictions, in any jurisdiction. I think most people grossly overestimate their ability to recognize someone they saw only briefly in a moment of extreme stress.