Freed prisoner wants compensation: 18 years for a crime he didn't do

St. Louis Post-Dispatch ^ | 8.1.02 | Tim Bryant

[rface]

On his first full day of freedom in 18 years, Larry Johnson said he wanted money from the state for imprisoning him for a rape that new DNA evidence shows he did not commit.

Johnson, 48, said he could not depend indefinitely on the help of relatives, who welcomed him upon his release from prison Tuesday after a judge ruled he had been wrongfully imprisoned.

[rface]

...he said "Sometimes, you have to be evil even though you don't want to be. That's how prison is."

A great injustice - I hope he can get his life on-track

Ashland, Missouri

[Clara Lou]

I can't blame him-- 18 years gone.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Why?

[cardinal4]

Johnson is a former Marine who was paroled in 1982 after serving about half of a 15-year sentence in the rape, robbery and assault of the wife of a Marine staff sergeant while stationed in Japan.

???

[tcostell]

"If I'm to be a man, let me live as one."

I'm sorry the guy was jailed, and I'm pleased he was finally released, but this quote reminds me of a teenager.

They always complain the loudest about not being treated like an adult, when that's exactly how their being treated.

[general_re]

I'm torn about this. Yes, what happened to him was an awful injustice, but I can't see compensating him unless there was real wrongdoing on the part of someone in the system - the police, the prosecutor, the judge, or maybe the jury. If everyone did their job the way they were supposed to, and nobody made any egregiously stupid mistakes or intentionally framed him, I have to file this one under the heading of "tough luck". I know that sounds sh*tty, but where do you draw the line? Sometimes bad things happen and it's nobody's fault - that's life.

If, on the other hand, it turns out that he really was framed, or someone did something so obscenely stupid as to be culpable for his conviction, then I say more power to him - I hope he collects a boatload of money for the time he lost. But otherwise, them's the breaks...

[Red Jones]

he apparently committed a previous crime that was very terrible. That may have caused the police to focus in on him for the 2'nd crime.

[Diverdogz]

When two samples are compared - there is no doubt that the science approaches exactness in determining whether they came from the same individual or not.

...but errors in collecting, managing and interpreting the meaning behind the results could be fraught with error.

Imagine if Elizabeth Smart's DNA were found in Ricci's car. They would know for sure it was Elizabeth Smart's blood, but how it got there would be another question - was it there when Ed owned the car or......

[blau993]

The prior rape conviction gives me pause.

I wonder what the statistical probability is that of all the people in St. Louis who did not commit the 1984 rape (which presumably would be the 1984 post-pubescent male population of St. Louis minus one), the man who would be wrongly arrested and convicted would be a man who had a previous conviction for rape. I have a hunch that probability is very low. And, since I am not a great believer in coincidence, this gives me pause.

[Diverdogz]

Well, it did take 7 years from the time the prosecutor was asked for a DNA test to the time when the test was conducted and he was released. There is no doubt that the prosecutor stonewalled. He should be at least compensated for that last 7 years.

The guy has spent a loooong time in prison for a crime he didn't commit. He probably didn't learn many job skills or people skills in prison. (asbestos suit now on) Society owes it to him to help him get some education and get back on his feet. It is the right and compassionate thing to do.

[PeterPrinciple]

Wouln't you think that DNA not properly stored would break down over time? And of course it wouldn't be a match. anyone have info on this???

[Area51]

What would be poetic Justice is that he receives a huge payout from the State for his wrongful conviction.

Then His Victim of the Rape he committed back in the 70's sues his sorry ass for everything he gets from the State and a couple of Million more, just in case he sells his story to a Made for TV special.

Now that would be justice.

[old school]

"Johnson is a former Marine who was paroled in 1982 after serving about half of a 15-year sentence in the rape, robbery and assault of the wife of a Marine staff sergeant while stationed in Japan."

Have you ever seen a media report where the "poor innocent's" prior felony convictions are revealed? Of course, not! These people are always as pure as the driven snow, to hear the media tell it! The emphasis is always on how unjust and oppressive the "system" is!

[Dimensio]

I wonder what the statistical probability is that of all the people in St. Louis who did not commit the 1984 rape (which presumably would be the 1984 post-pubescent male population of St. Louis minus one), the man who would be wrongly arrested and convicted would be a man who had a previous conviction for rape

Consider that a prior rape conviction might have increased the odds for the arrest and conviction.

[cardinal4]

It gives me pause for a different reason; once a sex offender,always a sex offender. There is no rehab, no finding of God, no stricken conscience,or chemical change that will sway a sex offender from his urges. IMHO someone who forces himself on someone else sexually, is an animal and no longer is allowed basic human rights and freedoms, kind of like the states of Kansas and Washington.

I abhor sex crimes and believe that sex offenders should be locked up for life. If he didnt rape the college student,then he was being punished for raping the sergeants wife.

As I post,there are two missing girls in CA,boldly kidnapped last night, my heart is sick at the thought of what will happen. Im sorry,Im just not sympathetic for Johnson, my Missouri tax dollars will allow a known sex offender to live a good life. Just my opinion.

[cardinal4]

No offence intended , Diver, but see my post 17.

[general_re]

Well, it did take 7 years from the time the prosecutor was asked for a DNA test to the time when the test was conducted and he was released. There is no doubt that the prosecutor stonewalled. He should be at least compensated for that last 7 years.

I'm not sure it's that cut-and-dried. If it's because they had a million DNA requests and were just swamped, then I wouldn't consider that stonewalling. If they got a request and just round-filed it without even considering it, then I'd think that constitutes stonewalling, sure. And I'm not sure about the timeline in any case - it says he contacted Scheck seven years ago, not made a DNA testing request to the prosecutor. I'm sure Barry Scheck takes some time to decide whether or not he's going to take the case or not, so we don't really know how long the prosector has been aware of this.

The other thing is that he doesn't necessarily have to rely on the prosecutor to exonerate him. DNA testing isn't all that expensive anymore, and he could certainly have arranged to have testing done at his own expense, I'm sure.

I just don't know. It's a tough case all around....

[Between the Lines]

Well, it did take 7 years from the time the prosecutor was asked for a DNA test to the time when the test was conducted and he was released. There is no doubt that the prosecutor stonewalled. He should be at least compensated for that last 7 years.

Missouri enacted a law last year lets convicted rapists seek new DNA tests if the technology was not available when they were tried. Mr. Johnson is the second person to be tested under this new law.