<p>Almost all cases on appeal have been based on some procedural error or violation of some constitutional right. But in 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that The District Court in the Troy Davis petition for habeas corpus should receive testimony and make findings of fact as to whether evidence that could not have been obtained at the time of trial clearly establishes Davis’s innocence.</p>
<p>As Justice Stevens wrote:</p>
<p>“But imagine a petitioner in Davis’s situation who possesses new evidence conclusively and definitively proving, beyond any scintilla of doubt, that he is an innocent man. The dissent’s reasoning would allow such a petitioner to be put to death nonetheless. The Court correctly refuses to endorse such reasoning.”</p>
<p>But what to do with someone who was wrongly convicted with OLD evidence? LP’s seems to be right in that that person is out of luck in appealing to the courts for relief. I suppose that is what a governor’s pardon could address.</p>
<p>Considering that eyewitness testimony is often flawed, and considering that 30 years ago current technology was not available, it doesn’t seem like such a stretch to assume that many people have been convicted of rape based solely on eyewitness testimony in all 50 states, not just Texas. It doesn’t seem like a big stretch to then conclude that there are probably people sitting in jails all across the country who were wrongly convicted by well meaning juries who relied on said flawed eyewitness testimony. </p>
<p>It could be that Texas just happens to be one of the states currently making an effort to take another look at some of these convictions and rectify the mistakes made if possible. Surely there is not the assumption that states who are not publicizing discoveries of errors are not currently incarcerating innocent men for whom DNA testing was not possible at the time of their convictions?</p>
<p>I saw a piece on TV a number of years ago about a man who was convicted of raping and murdering a woman in TX, although the circumstances made his involvement highly unlikely, to say the least. (He would have had to leave his work site, drive hell for leather to her location, rape and kill her in about 1 minute, and speed back to his work site. His boss didn’t think it was possible for him to do this. And he had no connection to her and no reason to know her location, IIRC.) When the Innocence project tested the DNA, it was found that this man was not the one who raped her. Logically, it meant that he also didn’t kill her. But the reaction of the DA/prosecutor/judge–can’t recall which–who had to okay a new trial was that the victim was promiscuous, and may have had sex with someone else shortly before dying. But wait, didn’t you convict this man of RAPE because there was physical evidence of RAPE?? I believe he was on death row. It was astonishing. (The female authority figure was one of those hard-bitten authoritarian blondes who would remind you of Ann Coulter, with a TX accent.)</p>
<p>Consolation, it’s happened before in Texas and, by God, sadly it will probably happen again. There’s something about prosecutors there that absolutely makes them unable to admit to a mistake. I’ve sung this song before: let’s ask Lenel Geter, the clean cut middle manager whose habit of enjoying the sun on a park bench made him a suspect in a crime many miles away, which most sane folks realized could not have been committed by him. Again, lousy witness I.D. and Texas prosecutors with no interest in scrutinizing the details nearly got this poor soul a lengthy prison sentence. Not everyone can rely on ‘60 Minutes’ to exhonorate them.</p>
<p>When I think about identifying someone on the basis of a “photo array”, it seems ridiculous. A person is likely to remember the coloring/race of the perp…so that is probably what they are looking for in the photographs. But photos don’t tell height, do they? You see a guy’s face, and it turns out he is 6’2" and the guy who attacked you was 5’? Or maybe he walked with a limp, or had a big tatoo on his ankle? I can see where with IDs you would at least need a live line up rather than just pictures. I admit that I am terrible with faces…and no, not just folks of a different race. We used to have all these summer clerks and one year every one of them was caucasian, male, short haired, medium height…I could never tell them apart.</p>
<p>I wonder if the conviction rate would go down and/or the unsolved cases would go up if these suggestions were put in place? District attorneys in Texas are elected.</p>
<p>Wow. I wonder if the jury got to hear that the boyfrien did not pick them out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Several attorneys I know in Dallas who worked for the DA’s office in the past 25 years inform me that the conviction rate/clear rate was KEY to advancement.</p>
<h2>“Consolation, it’s happened before in Texas and, by God, sadly it will probably happen again.”</h2>
<p>Lake Washington, it’s happened in almost every state and, sadly, it will happen again. It doesn’t help to grind a personal ax against one state.</p>
<p>I’ve never been to Texas, thus I’ve got no personal axe to grind. I find injustice anywhere deplorable. And the “look at them, they’re just as bad as me” excuse is just that, a lame and tragic rationalization in this circumstance.</p>
<p>IMO— Dallas DA Watkins and the Texas legislature (i.e., the Texas voters) are to be commended for (1) being willing to dig into old convictions and (2) provide real compensation ($80,000 per year of incarceration) where convictions were clearly wrong.</p>
<p>Does it disturb me that there are wrongful convictions? Yes, but that is not limited to any one state.</p>
<p>Should the most accurate means of photo and in person line-ups be initiated and pressure be bought to bear to avoid the “win” the case (rather than only convict those who committed the crime) institutional mentality? Sure. The legislature needs to require the former and the local voters need to penalize their DA for the latter through their votes.</p>
<p>“I’ve never been to Texas, thus I’ve got no personal axe to grind. I find injustice anywhere deplorable. And the “look at them, they’re just as bad as me” excuse is just that, a lame and tragic rationalization in this circumstance.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Come on … you are better than that LW. “Rationalization” is certainly not the point of my post. You were ignoring the fact that wrongful convictions are a national problem which needs attention. And you were ignoring the context surrounding the number of Texas cases of exoneration…that context including a larger population and more diligent effort to investigate these cases. Your reasons are your own, but doing so doesn’t seem to indicate a true concern for the problem at hand.</p>
<p>everal attorneys I know in Dallas who worked for the DA’s office in the past 25 years inform me that the conviction rate/clear rate was KEY to advancement.</p>
<p>Is that an * unusual* criteria in the DA office?</p>
<p>I am unwilling to speculate on whether a win at all cost mentality reinforced by connecting it to career advancement is wide spread in the offices of DA’s. If you are interested in the subject, an online search of “prosecutorial abuse” will get you to websites and reports on this in several different states and within the federal system.</p>
<p>The US Supreme Court has held:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>IMO-- SCOTUS does not usually write on a subject for which it has no present concern.</p>
<p>On a possibly related note–I just read that a California judge, after Howard K. Stern was convicted, has just granted him a new trial and has said that there was no evidence to support the conviction. </p>
<p>It may be interesting to see if the case that was presented against Stern contained tainted evidence.</p>
<p>It is a nearly unbelivable understatement that wrongful convictions occur in various states. I don’t see any other reason for defensively promoting that fact in this thread than to minimize and again, rationalize the events in Texas.</p>
<p>And yes, obviously the Dallas County Prosecutor whom has made a commitment to rectify wrongful convictions should be commended. Glad to see that he doesn’t rely on rationalization and excuses.</p>
<p>I compared the number of exonerations listed on The Innocence Project website to the state populations in Ill, NY and Texas.</p>
<p>Ill. has a 12 Million population and 30 exonerations. NY has 19 Million population and 27 exonerations. Texas has a 25 Million population and 41 exonerations. Hard to see a huge dispariety.</p>
<p>And, grossly tainted convictions occur even in Washington state as exemplified by a doozie in Wenatchee, Washington as reported in the Seattle paper. LW–isn’t Lake Washington in the Seattle area?</p>
<p>I didn’t direct my comments to you 07DAD, but to someone else whom clearly provided nothing but rationalizations and excuses for injustice. I don’t know how many times that I can say that injustice anywhere is abhorrent. By the way, the Wenatchee witch hunt was well covered by the large news organizations in Washington State years ago, so you’re a bit late to that event. Incidentally, Wenatchee and the Puget Sound (Seattle) region are worlds apart, in every way that you can imagine</p>