Wrongful Conviction/ Injustice Community Group
For people and families who have tasted or advocate against the horrors of injustice
There have been discussions here on the possibility that the statute of limitations for sex crimes will possibly be greatly lengthened or even eliminated. Several states have laws in the works to make it much easier for the "victim" of a crime to accuse and have someone eventually arrested years----maybe decades----after the incident.
Here is a good example why this is a terrible idea if justice is the aim of our criminal justice system.
This guy was convicted in 2012 of a murder which took place in 1957. Fifty five years passed from the time of the murder and the date of his conviction.
Think about that----that was over a half century ago. How in the hell does anyone think that any conviction after that length of time could be reliable??
In looking at the case, all the evidence was so old----and some had been lost and some missing----that nobody really knows what happened. How could they??
Props go to the DA who, unlike most DAs, took steps to see that justice was finally achieved for this unlucky 75 year old man.
" The prosecutor also filed a lengthy report with the court, saying it was his ethical duty to take another look at the case, which was prosecuted by his predecessor, Clay Campbell."
And we have this from the article-----"" Cold cases are particularly difficult to prosecute because evidence is often lost or destroyed, memories fade and witnesses die. And so doubt has lingered over the evidence used to convict McCullough -- and whether it was strong enough. No physical evidence ties him to the crime.""
No physical evidence----not one speck of physical evidence---- yet a man is convicted of a crime which happened over a half a century ago. This case should be a "poster child" for why we need a reasonable statute of limitations on crimes.
Truth, justice, and the American way.
Here is the link---
http://tinyurl.com/hxzc8mw
rewdiazepam
Here is a good example why this is a terrible idea if justice is the aim of our criminal justice system.
This guy was convicted in 2012 of a murder which took place in 1957. Fifty five years passed from the time of the murder and the date of his conviction.
Think about that----that was over a half century ago. How in the hell does anyone think that any conviction after that length of time could be reliable??
In looking at the case, all the evidence was so old----and some had been lost and some missing----that nobody really knows what happened. How could they??
Props go to the DA who, unlike most DAs, took steps to see that justice was finally achieved for this unlucky 75 year old man.
" The prosecutor also filed a lengthy report with the court, saying it was his ethical duty to take another look at the case, which was prosecuted by his predecessor, Clay Campbell."
And we have this from the article-----"" Cold cases are particularly difficult to prosecute because evidence is often lost or destroyed, memories fade and witnesses die. And so doubt has lingered over the evidence used to convict McCullough -- and whether it was strong enough. No physical evidence ties him to the crime.""
No physical evidence----not one speck of physical evidence---- yet a man is convicted of a crime which happened over a half a century ago. This case should be a "poster child" for why we need a reasonable statute of limitations on crimes.
Truth, justice, and the American way.
Here is the link---
http://tinyurl.com/hxzc8mw
rewdiazepam
-
Which explains the mysterious fevers and my extra fatigue. I'm so glad I pushed for answers.
-
Due to my increased paranoia, anxiety, and a panic attack over the weekend, my psychiatrist has put me back in a full dose of Zyprexa until further notice. Every time I think I'm getting ahead something happens and it's back to square one. I knew he was gonna do this but I can't help feeling disappointed. It is what it is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mlwm0tEwRGo
Malicious prosecution or misconduct with policing even "IF" they think they're right...
If you read or know any cases of wrongful conviction it's seldom just one thing... It ends up being a whole bloody conspiracy usually taking in a lot of people willing to turn a blind eye if they aren't actually involved in watching government do the wrong thing in order to convict the person they want.
Once someone is found to be wrongfully convicted the civil suits run into the millions as they should but for that reason the prosecution will go to great lengths not to be found wrong
The song and dance people have to go through just to be allowed to have DNA tested legally once convicted is insane... "Everyone" involved should want it done if there could possibly be any doubt however it's not the way it goes..... Once found guilty people have to jump through hoops to have it overturned or receive any help to work on their defence
By the same token the majority of people in prison are there because of what they did wrong and will lie if there's a chance of turning it around... AIDWYC has wasted a lot of time on the guilty trying to get a leg up unfortunately and it wastes time that they would be spending on a wrongful conviction
The case that I've been involved with is about 35 years old now that this is what they're running into... There are many people who believe in his innocence... AIDWYC endorsed his case however it isn't a Canadian case... The Innocence Project investigated it and the investigator is convinced that Robert is innocent but like this case it's finding new evidence at this point... They were hoping that conscience would kick in for the person who they believe is guilty but it hasn't happened unfortunately...
The justice system has little to do with justice quite often unfortunately ... Good lawyering alone can make or break a case
This sympathy corrupts the process.
In my case, my attorney did a good job and there was no physical evidence. Only the word of the child, but I was convicted. A couple of years later my sister confronted one of the jurors and the juror said, "Well, there was really no evidence either way, but we just felt so sorry for the little girl---who was bawling most of the tiem--- and we did not want to take the chance of letting a child molester go free."
When you have jurors with this kind of mindset, you can expect nothing BUT injustices.
rewdiazepam
However, in cases where the only evidence is witness testimony or circumstantial then it makes sense for there to be a statute of limitations since the evidence becomes increasingly unreliable as time goes by.
Hair travels...a lot. My daughter has this thing about dropping hair on the floor. It catches in the pajamas of everyone in the family. Trust me, my daughter's head hair has no business in my pj bottoms (or tops), but I've taken to pulling it out every time I get them out of the wash. (I think it's the fabric type that catches them. Public hairs travel too.
I used to think pubic hairs were such great evidence. Now I think it's worthless within a family or anyone that spends the night.
You might ask, "What about any DNA in a hair sample. Could they not extract DNA from a hair sample?"
DNA can be extracted from a hair, since the tissue at the base of the hair contains DNA. In order to be used for DNA analysis, the hair must have been pulled from the body -- hairs that have been broken off do not contain DNA.
The problem is that yeasr ago, a forensic chemist would testify that a hair sample was "consistent" with that of the defendant. The problem is that this same hair sample was most likely consistent with many other men. Some prosecutions were garnering convictions on the basis of hair evidence alone with no other corroborating evidence.
DNA can, though, be extracted from semen samples.
Bad evidence leads to false convictions.
rewdiazepam
If the accused lives with the victim and/or their laundry is done/stored/transported together then that's a plausible explanation that could create reasonable doubt. But if the accused is a total stranger to the victim (and their family) and their laundry has never been together or done in the same place then there is absolutely no reason that the accused's semen covered pubic hair should be anywhere on the victim.
I do agree bad evidence leads to false convictions.
I don't know that there will ever be a safe method to determine "length of conviction".
I have seen so many times where the little one has lied straight faced and did admit to lying in private when they were given the option of choosing what they wanted to happen be part of the solution. Turned out that it was mama's boyfriend was the abuser and daddy's girlfriend was also being mean. Kid ended up living with grandparents and the case was tabled. The fact that the accusation was made was enough to create a nightmare for everyone.
In the case where a parent was convicted, the sentence is not being timed out earlier than the original sentence because the divorced spouse asked specifically to wait until the children's children were grown before end of sentence.