Posted on 04/04/2013 3:51:50 PM PDT by Corporate Democrat
A "60 Minutes" investigation raised questions about the evidence that sent Louis Taylor to prison at age 16 for allegedly setting a Tucson hotel fire that killed 29 people. After four decades behind bars, Taylor was released Tuesday night in a deal that required him to plead no contest to the charges to avoid a retrial. One of the first things he did next was talk to CBS News.
"It's precious," said Louis Taylor. "Freedom is precious."
Taylor is savoring his first 24 hours of freedom. We sat down for a face-to-face interview with Taylor and his attorney Ed Novak. His freedom is new, his emotions are raw.
"I did 41 years of my life for something I didn't do," he said. "It was shameful, shameful what they did to me."
Of the life he missed while he was in prison, Taylor said: "Yeah, I don't even know how to drive a car. It ain't supposed to happen in America. We're supposed to have the best justice system in the world. How did I fall in the cracks for 42 years?"
He's free, he said, because the Arizona Justice Project and "60 Minutes" uncovered evidence of a shoddy investigation, suppression of evidence and racial bias.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
He should have said “No, thanks” to the no contest plea. I seriously doubt they’d retry him now, and even if they did, how are they going to get a conviction? I wonder if they did that in the hopes that it would mess up any lawsuit he might file against them.
After 42 years in prison I can’t blame him for taking a deal to get out. Now let’s see if Eric Holder does anything to help this man out.
Yeah, the DA said they would appeal the retrial all the way to the Supreme Court. Then, after all of those appeals, he would get retried. So another 4 or 5 years in prison.
Disgusting how sloppily the case was handled. He could have been out much sooner if he had made a plea, but by insisting he was innocent, it took this long.
What I’m saying is that I think he would have got out anyway, and I hope he didn’t compromise his chances to get compensated for what, if he’s innocent, is a gross injustice.
If he’s innocent...
What’s the evidence that he is innocent, and if he is how did they convict him?
Even the judge who tried the case felt the jury made a mistake and worked to free this man.
Another look from across the pond. As in many of these cases the prosecution still believes he is guilty but because much of the evidence has disappeared, witnesses have died they couldn't convict in a new trial.
I don’t understand how a 16 year old kid can be convicted of something like this without overwhelming evidence, this case just doesn’t make sense. Was Arizona a hotbed of racism in 1973 ??
Just remember this case when someone tells you
"What do you have to be afraid of... if you didn't do anything wrong".
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.