Skip to comments.
Exonerated Death Row Inmate Awarded $2.25 Million
http://articles.news.aol.com/ ^
| 5 5 06
| ZINIE CHEN SAMPSON
Posted on 05/06/2006 2:49:09 AM PDT by freepatriot32
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
Exonerated death row inmate Earl Washington Jr. calls his wife Friday after a federal jury awarded him $2.25 million. "I feel great," he said after the verdict.
Comment #2 Removed by Moderator
To: freepatriot32
A federal jury on Friday awarded $2.25 million to a Virginia man... How much does he get to keep after taxes and Attorney fees? :0)
3
posted on
05/06/2006 3:20:35 AM PDT
by
Cowboy Bob
(Liberalism in a parasite that ALWAYS kills its host.)
To: diallo
Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime. How fair was it with fabricated evidence?
Washington shouldn't get a dime.
You art right there, he should get $25 million, instead of the 2.5 that he got. How much would 18 years of your life stolen from you be worth?
4
posted on
05/06/2006 3:21:36 AM PDT
by
Graybeard58
(Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
To: diallo
Mistake? The lead investigator fabricated evidence by coercing a mentally deficient man into confessing.
5
posted on
05/06/2006 3:23:49 AM PDT
by
kenth
To: diallo
What a moron you are. Have 18 years of YOUR LIFE taken away from YOU because a rogue cop fabricated evidence to get a conviction and death sentence and THEN come back and tell us the constitution ONLY guarentees a "fair" trial.
$2.5 million is not enough. I only wish the cop were still around to do the time for HIS CRIME.
6
posted on
05/06/2006 3:29:53 AM PDT
by
Neville72
(uist)
To: diallo
"The Constitution guareentees you a fair trial not a perfect one. While it is ashamed that the gentleman was unjustly convicted, mistakes happen. Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime. It seems that the jury was voting with their hearts and not their heads."
He did not sue the state for a bad trial. He sued the estate of an individual for doing something that, if true, is one of the most evil things anyone can do.
7
posted on
05/06/2006 3:30:32 AM PDT
by
Montfort
(Check out the 200+ page free preview of The Figurehead by Thomas Larus at lulu.com/larus)
To: diallo
The trial was not fair. The police had to have lied to put someone innocent on death row.
To: Graybeard58
I agree wholeheartedly. I usually cringe at these large awards, but in this case I feel that not only was justice served it could have been served in a bigger portion.
Eighteen years gone. I can't even begin to imagine.
To: diallo
The Constitution guareentees you a fair trial not a perfect one.
And in accordance, the Wilmore estate got a day in court.
It seems that the jury was voting with their hearts and not
their heads.
Sounds like the jury heard the evidence and rendered their verdict.
Just doing their part to render a fair, if not perfect trial.
But, in honesty, I feel the guvmint should have some better mechanism
for at least trying to make wrongly convicted defendents "whole".
Or at least help them get back on track in their life.
I think one of Bill Curtiss' shows on A&E tracked some of the absolved
fellows like Mr. Washington. And showed that the legal system does
basically nothing to help them get back to living a normal life
after release from prison.
Thus virtually assuring lawsuits like the one mentioned in this article.
10
posted on
05/06/2006 3:41:31 AM PDT
by
VOA
To: diallo
The Constitution guareentees you a fair trial not a perfect one. While it is ashamed that the gentleman was unjustly convicted, mistakes happen. terribly sorry about the 3000+ days stolen from your life and the 60,000 volts, chap - do stay for tea
Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime. It seems that the jury was voting with their hearts and not their heads.
the original trial jury based thier judgment on erroneous information
....and we try and justify a death penalty while railroading challenged minds ?
assinine
11
posted on
05/06/2006 3:52:04 AM PDT
by
Revelation 911
(God is love, Love endures forever, Love God, Love your neighbor,)
To: diallo
When someone intentionally harms another person unjustly, the victim has every right to seek an damage award.
In this case it doesn't matter an iota that the criminal jury convicted him. They convicted him based on false evidence. The jury was not the party that fabricated the confession. Mr. Washington did not sue the court. He sued the estate of the police investigator that fabricated the report.
To: Graybeard58
"Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime.
How fair was it with fabricated evidence?
Washington shouldn't get a dime.
You art right there, he should get $25 million, instead of the 2.5 that he got. How much would 18 years of your life stolen from you be worth?"
I agree completely ... cases like this will bring a call for new trials for people who are about to get the hot seat if their original convictions were in the pre-DNA era.
13
posted on
05/06/2006 4:02:13 AM PDT
by
MaDeuce
(Do it to them, before they do it to you! (MaDuce = M2HB .50 BMG))
To: diallo
The Constitution guareentees you a fair trial not a perfect one. While it is ashamed that the gentleman was unjustly convicted, mistakes happen. Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime. It seems that the jury was voting with their hearts and not their heads. My father always said that he was in favor of capital punishment as long as those judges who make fatal mistakes are being executed too. This is also my point of view, since only then we can be sure that only those who are really guilty would go to the gallows. Hard imprisonment can be ended and -like in this case- compensation can be payed. This is not possible if the sentence of death is executed.
In dubio pro reo
To: diallo
When a cop falsifies evidence it can not ever be a fair trail.
15
posted on
05/06/2006 4:08:24 AM PDT
by
TXBSAFH
(Proud Dad of Twins, What Does Not Kill You Makes You Stronger!!!!!!)
To: diallo
"The Constitution guareentees you a fair trial not a perfect one. While it is ashamed that the gentleman was unjustly convicted, mistakes happen. Aslong as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime. It seems that the jury was voting with their hearts and not their heads."If, even with fair effort, I screw up my taxes, I am still assessed a fine. When the government screws up they should pay. So long as they get to decide who gets arrested, who gets indicted, what is admissable evidence and what a sentence should be, the government owns the process and owns the error
16
posted on
05/06/2006 4:09:07 AM PDT
by
muir_redwoods
(Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
To: diallo
you would do well in iran or 1930s germany.
17
posted on
05/06/2006 4:12:08 AM PDT
by
jabotinsky
("I die with Jabotinsky's name on my lips" - Shlomo b.Yosef, moments before his hanging by Brits)
To: Graybeard58
don't forget the mental anguish from coming within 9 days f execution knowing that your innocent.
What isn't fair is that for all this guy has been through, he's getting less money than the woman who spilled hot coffee on her lap at the McDonalds drive thru.
To: Graybeard58
I have mixed feelings about this result.
First, I do think the wrongly convicted person should be rewarded for the loss of 18 years of his life. The cop that manufactured the confession was an agent of the state. That makes the state have some responsibility for this. In addition the state should have required that any confession be video taped so that it is clear the suspect wasn't lead.
Suing the estate of the bad cop doesn't punish the bad cop - he's dead. It punishes the innocent family of the bad cop. Well after the fact. If he does have a family then I have mixed feelings about that.
19
posted on
05/06/2006 4:14:36 AM PDT
by
DB
(©)
To: diallo
As long as the trial was fair Mr. Washington shouldn't get a dime.
You spend 18 years in prison including time on death row waiting for Mr. Needle, then check back with us and let us know how you feel about that, eh?
20
posted on
05/06/2006 4:23:46 AM PDT
by
mkjessup
(The Shah doesn't look so bad now, eh? But nooo, Jimmah said the Ayatollah was a 'godly' man.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next 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