Posted on 11/19/2014 12:57:22 PM PST by eyeamok
New DNA testing of crime scene evidence found material that came from a man who isn't Hanline or his alleged accomplice.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This epitomizes what is wrong with America and our Court System. Here there is ABSOLUTE Evidence that there never was a Case through the use of DNA, and the POS SCUMBAG PROSECUTOR still wants to "Investigate"??
In other words he wants to go back and COVER UP any CRIMES committed by the Police or Crimes by the Prosecution before he cleans their clock in court.
He should be Disbarred for even Attempting this in light of the Highly Coveted DNA Evidence. Especially since the Judge threw it out!
Sixty-nine years old and he has been imprisoned for a crime he apparently did not commit since he was 33.
How does the state give restitution for something like this?
By the way, it is standard practice for DAs to review such cases to determine whether there is enough evidence to retry the accused. There is not necessarily anything evil or nefarious going on. Particularly in this case, it is unlikely the DA is trying to cover for anybody because the majority of the original participants are probably retired or dead.
But here in TN some idiots let the guy who killed StringBean from Hee Haw out of prison 30 years early and he admitted guilt.
There is not necessarily anything evil or nefarious going on”
I understand your point, but having personally met a few prosecutors from this office, and understanding exactly how they operate in Ventura County Courts. If one of these clowns said the sun was shining I would have to look for myself before believing ANYTHING they had to say. I have seen way too many of them tell BOLD FACED LIES in COURT
“Here there is ABSOLUTE Evidence that there never was a Case through the use of DNA...”
Well...that sort of depends on where the DNA comes from. In the case of a rape, DNA can be pretty conclusive. But this case involves a man who was shot and dumped on the side of the road. So where did they find DNA?
This report doesn’t say. Just says from the crime scene. That could be from a cigarette butt left at the scene. If that’s the case, I’m surprised they didn’t find the DNA of a hundred people....
Admissions of guilt don't necessarily mean much. Cops will try to dupe prisoners into confessing by telling them that their ordeal will end if they confess. It's the oldest trick in the book, but prisoners who are sleep-deprived and not thinking straight will fall for it. Some cops, perhaps under pressure to close an investigation, will supply confidential case details (not divulged to the public) to suspects in order to make confessions more convincing. This is why every single interrogation session should be video-recorded from start to finish.
Was the evidence gathered in 1978 collected in a manner appropriate for DNA forensics? Was it stored in a manner that preserves DNA?
There may be other evidence other than the lack of the suspect’s DNA that implied guilt. Non-detection of DNA is not proof of innocence.
Were there fingerprints? Footprints? Witnesses? If I were the new prosecutor I’d want to take a look as well.
seems to me that the Judge determined that the evidence was flimsy in the first place and the DNA evidence just confirms it. Otherwise the Conviction would not have been overturned, a NEW Trial would have been ordered.
The prosecutors and judges care more about their convictions records than justice.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18624892
Here is a DNA forensics paper. They looked into whether you could use DNA to find the perp in a “manual strangulation” case, where the perp used his hands.
They found that there may not be detectable DNA from the perp, but there may be DNA from as many as six people on the victim’s throat, due to transfer from the victim’s hands, or from spittle from someone talking to the victim.
A DNA report from a lab must be fit into the whole picture if it is to be used as evidence.
Also consider if a bad guy steals your gloves, commits a crime, and leaves the gloves behind. The majority of the DNA inside the glove is yours and is most likely to be amplified in a PCR step, so that indicts you rather strongly. If the prosecutor pitches the case carefully to the Grand Jury, you will have a rough time ahead.
I had not heard that before. I just read the story on Wikipedia. I thought it was interesting that the bodies were found the next day by his neighbor - Grandpa Jones.
I have been involved in one Project Innocence (Virginia) case. At first it looked as if it might go the way you described in your post. The same Commonwealth's Attorney who had originally obtained a conviction against a young man for murder was grasping at straws trying to find sufficient cause to retry him after his conviction was overturned for prosecutorial misconduct.
In pretty short order, though, the "heat" from his misdeeds became too much to handle and the Commonwealth's Attorney resigned his office. His replacement found insufficient evidence for a retrial.
The prosecutor in that case had 1) coerced false statements from witnesses, and 2) told provable lies in court during the trial.
I was proud to have been be a major component of the "heat" that drove the guy to resign. The experience [partially] restored some of my faith in our justice system.
PS - Although I am still only about 95% sure that the young man did not commit the murder for which he was originally convicted; but I am certain he should not have been convicted based on the actual evidence collected by the police and the prosecutor.
Agree, but they will check out the case to see if a new trial is needed.
In order for a new trial to be held, the conviction from the first trial has to be overturned/vacated.
No, the prosecutor - if he had knowledge of exculpatory evidence - should sit in prioson for 36 years...
Me too.
I'd say a good rule of thumb would be 1 million dollars per year...
Personally, at no time will I EVER give the ‘Benefit of Doubt” to ANY PERSON that works in Government, I automatically assume they are the most Morally Bankrupt, Evil Lying people on the Planet, I am right 90% of the time. Sorry to the 10%
“...if he had knowledge of exculpatory evidence...”
What if the case involves a victim and an accused who are both members of an “outlaw” motorcycle gang which is notorious for violence....and the exculpatory evidence consists of statements by other gang members who might be killed if the gang knew they were cooperating with the police?
Would the Prosecuter be justified in trying to keep these statements secret?
You obviously know a lot more about this specific court than I do
On one occasion 25 years ago The Child Support Division in Ventura decided to sue me for “Back Child Support” I never owed in the amount of $17k. After confronting the DA with my lawyer and the evidence demonstrating in SPADES I owed NOTHING TO ANYBODY, the DA conferred with her Boss and offered to settle for $1700. I turned to my Lawyer and said “ Bill, how much to beat her in court?? he says $2500 more. I said Good let’s go to trial! The DA just about lost her mind that i was willing to spend MORE MONEY than she offered to settle for.
My lawyer immediately told the Judge the situation and we started Trial Right then, 1 hour later the Judge was so pissed off, after personally apologizing to me and dismissing my case with prejudice, he ordered the DA and Two Assistant DA’s to the table to scour the Law Books trying to find a way to award me attorney’s fees from the DA. The Judge had them sit there for an hour before apologizing once again and closing the case while admonishing and berating the DA in OPEN COURT.
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.