RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence

RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/4/2012 6:40:47 AM)
I'm sorry, but if they did their job to the best of their ability, the fact that justice was miscarried isn't their issue. The prosecutor's job is to prosecute. He did the best he could with a weak case. The judge has not been accused of any wrongdoing. The jury might well have screwed up. It is the judges job to validate that there is enough evidence in the inditement to justify the trial...he clearly did not fullfill this function. It is the prosecutor's job to prosecute those cases in which there is sufficient evidence to seek an inditement. He clearly did not fullfill this function. That the accused was a "meth head" is relevant to a drug trial and not a murder trial.

xssve -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/4/2012 7:45:54 AM)
That would never happen in Texas where justice is always perfect. quote: Without DNA evidence to re-test, the truth would never have come out. But it appears today's prosecutors have learned that lesson and figured out a way to avoid that happening. On the DA's user forum, Williamson County DA John Bradley advised a fellow prosecutor that they should seek an agreement to destroy DNA evidence as part of a plea bargain (to life without parole in a capital murder case), so nobody can come along later and prove the defendant didn't do it. http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com/2007/02/destruction-of-dna-evidence-thwarts.html

xssve -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/4/2012 7:48:47 AM)
More: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Texas_Judge_Blocks_State_from_Destroying_Evidence_that_May_Show_Whether_Man_Was_Wrongfully_Executed.php The reputations of prosecutors must be protected? Didn't the Pope use the same argument to cover for child molesters? Is the reputation of the institution more important than whether it achieves the ostensibly desired results?

hlen5 -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/4/2012 10:50:19 AM)
Just when you thought things couldn't get any lower.... WTH difference should it make to save the evidence unless the prosecution was deliberately trying to wrongly convict?!

xssve -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/4/2012 8:44:49 PM)
It's good for the prosecutors stats. When DNA evidence first started being used to doublecheck death row inmates, Texas destroyed all it's DNA evidence in those cases.

kalikshama -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/5/2012 8:06:26 AM)
[image]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4VQHZOmC0lE/Se-T314IndI/AAAAAAAABUg/vTmY3T2pCZU/s400/mail.google.com.jpg[/image]

DarkSteven -> RE: wrongfully convicted despite original DNA proving innocence (5/6/2012 8:41:20 AM)
Follow-up article on Danyel Joffe. She worked on this case for 11 years (!).

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125