Yes, I read about that yesterday. The amazing thing is the guy who was executed put forth the stance that he was innocent and when it was found out, there would be an ourcry against the death penalty.
I'm for the death penalty, honestly. But should an innocent man be convicted, it will cause me to think twice and thrice. ... I still think the better solution is to do all DNA testing before anyone is ever executed again.
I agree with you totally on the not for mental illness nor depression. Though i do thing it is (or ought to be) acceptable for people to take their own lives.
It's funny to me how people are mostly loathe to bring that essay up. :) I held that opinion before that, but that experience certainly reinforced, and entrenched, it.
I still think the better solution is to do all DNA testing before anyone is ever executed again.
Coleman's post-conviction appellate attorneys DID have Dr. Ed Blake test the evidence for DNA material. His conclusions in 1991 found that Coleman fit within two-tenths of one percent of the entire population that could have committed the murder.
Again, as below, you are factually correct. Though, again, i must point out that Virginia has a history of botched DNA analysis, so i believe retesting in this case, among others, is appropriate.
of course they didn't have the technology available now back then. I feel for the poor woman's husband though - having to go through all this, but am not sure why he's against this if he's SURE it'll prove the guy guilty. And then there's what happens if he's innocent? Sure it will do a lot to futher the anti-dealth penalty cause - but will they try to find out who really killed this woman?
anyway, I agree that the gov did the right thing. Questions need to be answered.
yeah.. well. Then he's not really as SURE as he says he is. Assuming the story is not something made for TV (i.e. the husband did it) I really feel bad for him having to go through this all again.
It's a matter of court jurisdiction over evidence. Third parties, such as Centurion Ministries, are not legal triers of fact and thus should not be granted the opportunity to seek and test evidence from cases.
This establishes a risky precedent. It would be like a private citizen, asserting a right to take the "magic bullet" from the JFK assassination and seeking to independently test it to see if their theory about the Grassy Knoll were true. Such openness of availability of evidence to private citizens whims would be a slippery slope towards the demise of the criminal justice system.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 07:46 am (UTC)I'm for the death penalty, honestly. But should an innocent man be convicted, it will cause me to think twice and thrice. ... I still think the better solution is to do all DNA testing before anyone is ever executed again.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 07:49 am (UTC)Yes, i think this is a good solution. However, i still think that death penality is wrong. On the other hand, i do believe that euthanasia is right.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:07 am (UTC)I... read about your dad's battle with ALS. I supported his choice.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:20 am (UTC)It's funny to me how people are mostly loathe to bring that essay up. :) I held that opinion before that, but that experience certainly reinforced, and entrenched, it.
DNA testing was performed in 1991.
Date: 2006-01-06 10:31 am (UTC)Coleman's post-conviction appellate attorneys DID have Dr. Ed Blake test the evidence for DNA material. His conclusions in 1991 found that Coleman fit within two-tenths of one percent of the entire population that could have committed the murder.
Re: DNA testing was performed in 1991.
Date: 2006-01-06 10:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:35 am (UTC)anyway, I agree that the gov did the right thing. Questions need to be answered.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:38 am (UTC)Perhaps out of fear that the death will be found to have been wrongful, and he would then feel guilty?
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:43 am (UTC)Slippery slope for courts.
Date: 2006-01-06 03:51 pm (UTC)This establishes a risky precedent. It would be like a private citizen, asserting a right to take the "magic bullet" from the JFK assassination and seeking to independently test it to see if their theory about the Grassy Knoll were true. Such openness of availability of evidence to private citizens whims would be a slippery slope towards the demise of the criminal justice system.