alabama denies dna test to potentially innocent man

[Tanis]

Not really all that surprised that something like this is coming out of a state that prides itself on...um, and, erm...and Oh!
I know!
Yes I do!

OUR CARS AIN'T RUSTED ON UR FRONT LAWNS, like dem' utter foulks.

 

[BushMonstar]

Not saying the guys innocent, but COME ON. At least do the DNA test. That way people wouldn't be uncertain about whether the guy was actually innocent, and people are actually offering to pay for it. This just seems lazy on their part, since it seems that their tired of this never-ending case, and just want to put a close on it.

 

[Worgen]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Back on topic. Well first the DNA wouldn't cost the court nothing. Because regardless of the results, it would cost some sort of court time, extra jail time, etc. But that's not the point. And I doubt that money is why they are denying the DNA test. This person has had 30 years to reprove their innocence and has failed to do so. But now, suddenly they want a DNA test that would extend this case even longer. Why not sooner? Sounds like a last ditch effort to stall the execution. Which is pretty much what people are sick of, people on death row who are often guilty as sin, using every legal trick in the book to extend their life or to get released on some legal technicality.

Second. You specifically neglected to mention WHY he was denied this DNA test. That's like saying "a nun was arrested!" But neglecting to mention that said nun robbed a liquor store. All you mention is that the judges are conservative. A dirty and underhanded tactic. In an attempt to divide people on political lines and to say "they're conservative so CLEARLY they are denying him a DNA test for BS reasons because they just want to kill someone because they are EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLL"

You sir, are the one that is disgusting.

It worked in tx for the longest time, blame a black guy, get a cop to say it was the black guy, execute the black guy, then later on find out it was the wrong guy, shrug, move on to the next black guy.

 

[wintercoat]

Plain and simple, they're afraid he really is innocent and will have to pay recompense for 3 decades of false imprisonment, mental anguish, and several other things that will cost the state several million more. Not to mention the killing of the ruling judges' careers. And heaven forbid a judge who wrongfully gives the death penalty to a man gets disbarred! They're covering their asses so they don't have to deal with the backlash. At least this way they can sweep it under the rug.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

This sort of case is why the death penalty, which may be theoretically a good idea in some extreme cases, doesn't really work in practice. No justice system is perfect and in a system where death is an option, inevitably someone innocent will get executed. Is this guy innocent? Maybe, maybe not. I'd sure rather pay for his and a mostly despicable crowd of people to live on safely separated from society than risk a mistake that's can't be fixed.

I seem to be quoting with you to agree with you too often... <.<

Anyway this is why I would rather have the government spend my money to keep killers alive behind bars. No system is perfect and mistakes revolving around capital punishment make me feel very uneasy. I'm glad Canada doesn't have capital punishment.

I would like it if we could have consecutive life sentences though as a 'life' sentence here is 25 years and serial killers can get the same amount of jail time as a singular murderer. An innocent man sentenced to a stretch of jail time still has a chance that evidence will prove his innocence. The dead don't care if they are proven innocent after capital punishment.

 

[Yopaz]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Back on topic. Well first the DNA wouldn't cost the court nothing. Because regardless of the results, it would cost some sort of court time, extra jail time, etc. But that's not the point. And I doubt that money is why they are denying the DNA test. This person has had 30 years to reprove their innocence and has failed to do so. But now, suddenly they want a DNA test that would extend this case even longer. Why not sooner? Sounds like a last ditch effort to stall the execution. Which is pretty much what people are sick of, people on death row who are often guilty as sin, using every legal trick in the book to extend their life or to get released on some legal technicality.

Second. You specifically neglected to mention WHY he was denied this DNA test. That's like saying "a nun was arrested!" But neglecting to mention that said nun robbed a liquor store. All you mention is that the judges are conservative. A dirty and underhanded tactic. In an attempt to divide people on political lines and to say "they're conservative so CLEARLY they are denying him a DNA test for BS reasons because they just want to kill someone because they are EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLL"

You sir, are the one that is disgusting.

DNA tests are in theory expensive. Practically it doesn't really cost much. You want to know why they didn't do one 30 years ago? Do you really need to ask?
This happens all the time. DNA evidence and new technology (technology we didn't have 30 years ago) is used to give us conclusive evidence in cases like this. If this guy turns out to be innocent then it wouldn't be the first time. You are saying that the state is right in refusing to use evidence at hand. We're talking the death penalty here and they refuse to see possible evidence? If you don't see anything wrong with this I feel sorry for you.

 

[Harper0341]

DNA testing didn't just come out yesterday. Why wait until the last minute?

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Back on topic. Well first the DNA wouldn't cost the court nothing. Because regardless of the results, it would cost some sort of court time, extra jail time, etc. But that's not the point. And I doubt that money is why they are denying the DNA test. This person has had 30 years to reprove their innocence and has failed to do so. But now, suddenly they want a DNA test that would extend this case even longer. Why not sooner? Sounds like a last ditch effort to stall the execution. Which is pretty much what people are sick of, people on death row who are often guilty as sin, using every legal trick in the book to extend their life or to get released on some legal technicality.

Second. You specifically neglected to mention WHY he was denied this DNA test. That's like saying "a nun was arrested!" But neglecting to mention that said nun robbed a liquor store. All you mention is that the judges are conservative. A dirty and underhanded tactic. In an attempt to divide people on political lines and to say "they're conservative so CLEARLY they are denying him a DNA test for BS reasons because they just want to kill someone because they are EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLL"

You sir, are the one that is disgusting.

It worked in tx for the longest time, blame a black guy, get a cop to say it was the black guy, execute the black guy, then later on find out it was the wrong guy, shrug, move on to the next black guy.

If you substitute "black guy" for "some random schmuck, most likely either black or mentally challenged," you've got the death penalty for the entire country in a nutshell. We probably execute more innocent people than guilty at this point; I honestly have never been as pissed off at anyone as I was during the Casey Anthony trial, because I was watching a bastard of a lawyer try to get a woman put to death, and getting cheered on. I have absolutely no respect for anyone who would sink so low as to commit a murder that cold blooded. And yes, the death penalty is cold blooded, pre-meditated murder. Murder in the first degree, if you will.

 

[Vykrel]

question: is Alabama required to pay reparations to wrongly-convicted criminals after their release?

if they are, then they could be saving themselves millions by killing the guy. this is the darkest explanation i can think of, but it makes sense to me.

 

[Paladin Anderson]

EDIT: Found this, so far.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-06-18/justice/rapist.dna_1_dna-testing-post-conviction-access-biological-evidence?_s=PM:CRIME

The article itself claims that the court said inmates cannot use a Federal Civil Rights Law to press for advanced DNA testing that was unavailable at the time of the crime.

So I guess, maybe, that the same thing applies/could be applied to, the man in Alabama. Bah, law and politics both get so unnecessarily convoluted.

Well... it might be that they didn't have the same procedures as they do now and articles could have been contaminated when officer Joey Joe Bob pranced around the police station in the wig for laughs because there was no such thing as DNA testing back then or some such.

It's the only thing I can think of other than "Well... we have to kill SOMEONE might as well be him."

 

[launchpadmcqwak]

FUCK POLITICIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...yea this is outrageous

 

[Monkeyman O'Brien]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Theres a perfectly valid reason for that. Fox "News" are not considered a credible news source. By anyone. Ever. In fact, Lois Griffin put it best.


On Topic: Its fucking Alabama... Can't expect justice in hill billy ass Alabama. They probably think a DNA test is some sorta voodoo curse.
So let this be a lesson to folks. If you want a real trial you have to get it done in a state where your own sister is not considered fair game.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

On Topic: Its fucking Alabama... Can't expect justice in hill billy ass Alabama. They probably think a DNA test is some sorta voodoo curse.
So let this be a lesson to folks. If you want a real trial you have to get it done in a state where your own sister is not considered fair game.

Try reading this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well]

OT: I disagree with the court's decision on this matter. Shame, really, with capital punishment.

 

[girzwald]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Fox "News" has bee proven over and over to do nothing but lie, and have openly admitted that all they care to do is mislead people. They brag about only parroting Republican talking points, and their focus is demeaning the President.

Yeah. When some other news organization so openly flaunts their assholicness and willingness to deliberately lie to people who stupidly trust them for profit, we'll start ragging on them like we do Fox. Until then....

No fox news has not been proven over and over that they lie. I've asked on this very board for examples of lies and I have never gotten one. Oh ya, people have tried, but never has a lie been presented. Would you like to take the challenge? Its still open and my hat is yet uneaten.

The challenge is provide a news story where fox news lied. A news story where fox INTENTIONALLY misrepresented facts.

Just so you know, things that are not lies. Typos, mistakes, being wrong, opinions, difference of opinion of what facts are between networks.

Have at it.

 

[girzwald]

This is OT but. So lemmie get this straight. If I linked a news story from fox news as a source. Id be laughed and shunned off these forums. But a link from "thinkprogress" is cool? /shrug

Back on topic. Well first the DNA wouldn't cost the court nothing. Because regardless of the results, it would cost some sort of court time, extra jail time, etc. But that's not the point. And I doubt that money is why they are denying the DNA test. This person has had 30 years to reprove their innocence and has failed to do so. But now, suddenly they want a DNA test that would extend this case even longer. Why not sooner? Sounds like a last ditch effort to stall the execution. Which is pretty much what people are sick of, people on death row who are often guilty as sin, using every legal trick in the book to extend their life or to get released on some legal technicality.

Second. You specifically neglected to mention WHY he was denied this DNA test. That's like saying "a nun was arrested!" But neglecting to mention that said nun robbed a liquor store. All you mention is that the judges are conservative. A dirty and underhanded tactic. In an attempt to divide people on political lines and to say "they're conservative so CLEARLY they are denying him a DNA test for BS reasons because they just want to kill someone because they are EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVVVVVVIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLL"

You sir, are the one that is disgusting.

DNA tests are in theory expensive. Practically it doesn't really cost much. You want to know why they didn't do one 30 years ago? Do you really need to ask?
This happens all the time. DNA evidence and new technology (technology we didn't have 30 years ago) is used to give us conclusive evidence in cases like this. If this guy turns out to be innocent then it wouldn't be the first time. You are saying that the state is right in refusing to use evidence at hand. We're talking the death penalty here and they refuse to see possible evidence? If you don't see anything wrong with this I feel sorry for you.

Do I really need to ask why they didn't do one 30 years ago? Thats a nice fallacious argument. Cause that's not why I said. I said, why didn't they ask to do one SOONER, as in ANY time been that 30 years ago. Why now with proverbial seconds left on the clock? Like I said, to delay the execution.