Posted on 08/01/2005 9:42:05 AM PDT by TheOtherOne
Excellent point. Throw in a small number of police who sometimes "finesse" the evidence - we had a number of state police investigators (I remember some of them testifying before grand juries I was part of) go to jail for manufacturing evidence in a large number of cases. At least there was a "negative feedback" loop in that case; prosecutorial misconduct seems to be harder to punish.
I'm not saying this particular man's release was based on a technicality.
But, yes, DNA could be a technicality. Please reread my first post where I gave an example of it as a technicality in a local case.
I wasn't specific. Just trying to post quickly.
Again, I'm not saying this man's release was a result of a technicality. I'm just wondering about ALL the cases lately with prisoners released. There seems to be so many of them.
The story to which I referred: The victim was a college student living in Philadelphia. She was jogging one night when she saw two men breaking into a vehicle. She confronted them (big mistake) and was knocked down and dragged into their van. The two men confessed that, while one was driving, the other raped her in the back of the van, but he couldn't "finish". Thus he didn't leave DNA evidence, if you get my drift. Apparently, she must've been with someone else that night, and HIS DNA evidence showed up. But the man never stepped forward.
I'll try to find the story online another time. It could be that, in the years since then, there was more info in the case... But the men arrested were released.
But, again, I'm not saying that was the case in this thread's story.
It would be nice if the prosecutor in this case did 18 years behind bars. That would certainly put other out-of-control prosecutors on notice.
You don't need DNA to convict. I still have no idea why these men were not convicted. You have not given any reason. If they confessed, why were they let out? There is something missing?
Did she lie and say she had not been with anyone else...because if she did, then yes, someone else's semem would seem to exonerate these men. If she admitted other sexual contact then it would not be exculpatory to find semen not of the accused.
I think that EVERYBODY on death row that can get a belated DNA test should be given one, and the innocent set free with a $2000 gift. Oh, and the proven guilty should be dragged into the street and hung. But that's just me.
however, sometimes I think we go overboard with this DNA .....
what convicted people before DNA?
I question why one singular test can "Free" a client while all other evidence is ignored....
why was this guy arrested and singled out in the first place?...
sure, that "R" business is grounds for eliminating that line-up, but still, there was the victims claims as well as the other witness.....
hope justice was truely served here...because frankly, I just don't know anymore....
for one, I have no trust in the "innocence" project because of its association with that Simpson lawyer, the same one who freed that evil little nanny from England after killing that two year old....remember that case?.....
you see, I think there are lawyers who don't think ANYBODY is guilty of ANYTHING....
Why don't we ever hear of all the cases where DNA proved the guilt of the convict? Must outnumber innocent convicts by 500 - 1.
Well .. I can see the use of the "R" if the person was previously convicted of rape - but if there is no conviction - then the "R" is possibly an abuse.
The "R" does not belong in a mug shot. His was the only mug shot that had it. If anything, it is an issue for trial, not for the identifying line up. There is no reason to put a finger on the scales of justice.
The woman was killed in the incident.
I'll try to find the story now... It happened several years ago...
I have made this point many times before. As an engineer, if I were to screw up as badly as this prosecutor did, at the VERY least, I would be fired. In some circumstances, if I screwed up that badly, I could end up facing criminal charges myself. I have NEVER heard that happen to a prosecutor. It should be done.
I'm not knocking you or anything...it is just hard to comment on a case or see what point is makes with only some facts.
As I mentioned in my earlier posts, I can see how her failing to admit to sex with someone else could have screwed the case. Other than that scenario, I fail to see how a lack of DNA would factor in the case you describe.
Very sad. There was a case similar to this in Oklahoma. A young father was jailed based on phony DNA evidence concoted by a crooked crime lab woman, who is still out on the street instead on the gallows pole, where she belongs.
If the courts weren't so quick to accept the word of the woman rather than match up hard evidence with the accusation, fewer wrong convictions would ensue.
Usually, in cases of this type, an overzealous prosecutor will be found.
The victims of these 'mistakes' go so far beyond the convicted. I can't imagine growing up without my father. While he sat in jail as a de facto rapist. I hope these kids had faith in their father and maintained some relationship. From one interview is sounds like they had a nice supportive family. Hard to overcome a hurdle like this.
Or police who want to close the case and move on.
It is possible for two DNA samples taken from the same individual not to match.
This happens in cases of people scientists term chimeras.
Science ASSUMES such cases are rare
And besides, it's convenient to ASSUME such cases are rares, else it might spoil their fun releasing prisoners.
Well, unless he raped here with another guy's ding-dong, the DNA of the sperm not matching his would prove that he didn't do it.
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.