DNA evidence overturns 30-year convictions in US case

[webfact]

DNA evidence overturns 30-year convictions in US case

(BBC) Two US men who spent three decades in prison for rape and murder, one of them on death row, have been released after DNA evidence proved their innocence.

Mentally disabled half brothers Henry McCollum, 50, and Leon Brown, 46, were convicted in 1984 of raping and killing an 11-year-old girl in North Carolina.

Recently analysed DNA evidence from the crime scene implicated another man, who is in prison for a similar crime.

A county judge ordered the immediate release of the brothers.

Tuesday's court judgement followed an investigation by the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission, which tested DNA evidence found at the scene.

The commission found that none could be traced to Mr McCollum or Mr Brown.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29039964


-- BBC 2014-09-03

[willyumiii]

O.K., now, what is the penalty for stealing 30 years of a man's life? Of two men's lives?

[apetley]

One reason I don't agree with the death penalty.

[Seastallion]

This will bolster the argument for the anti-capital punishment brigade, and for this I would agree with them.

Just so long as they don't argue against capital punishment when DNA evidence shows there is no doubt the criminal did the crime.

[borisloosebrain]

Thank god for DNA . Try it in Thailand. Cue mass exodus from the jails.

[featography]

Thank god for DNA . Try it in Thailand. Cue mass exodus from the jails.

Seastallion and Boris;

you both argue indirectly on behalf of the death penalty. DNA removes all doubt concerning guilt or innocence, hence the death penalty is justifiable.

[apetley]

Thank god for DNA . Try it in Thailand. Cue mass exodus from the jails.

Seastallion and Boris;

you both argue indirectly on behalf of the death penalty. DNA removes all doubt concerning guilt or innocence, hence the death penalty is justifiable.

How about when it is planted by a rogue cop?

Was it the Kirsty Jones case where a Thai cop tried to obtain semen to plant at the scene?

[Baerboxer]

One reason I don't agree with the death penalty.

Forced confession by mentally disabled teenagers, questioned alone for hours by police without legal representation. No physical evidence what so ever?

Something very wrong with a justice system that convicts on a process like this.

[booky]

Unfortunately there are cops too keen to clean up the case just to make themselves look like heroes.

[BlueSkyCowboy]

O.K., now, what is the penalty for stealing 30 years of a man's life? Of two men's lives?

Now that we know that they where freeloading LOL for 30 yrs we make them pay for room and board and all the security they received. Thank God for DNA

[BlueSkyCowboy]

Unfortunately there are cops too keen to clean up the case just to make themselves look like heroes.

Maybe more so the DA's to get promoted

[BlueSkyCowboy]

One reason I don't agree with the death penalty.

Hello OJ Simpson LOL.

[timmyp]

One reason I don't agree with the death penalty.

And one reason I don't agree with the judicial system.

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been deleted.

[Credo]

A miscarriage of justice is always unacceptable, but this was 30 years ago and the two of them will now be freed. I also note that the person for whom the DNA did match is already in jail for a similar crime. So the actual perpetrator is in jail.

DNA evidence, like a lot of evidence, can come from a lot of different sources. DNA alone doesn't always mean guilt. The absence of it doesn't always mean innocence.

[Traveler19491]

The problem with the death penalty is that, once it's done, it tends to be somewhat permanent. There have been multiple studies that have shown that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. Add to this the possibility of planted evidence, or an innocent person stumbling onto a crime scene and leaving DNA in the form of sweat, body oils, hair, whatever, and it becomes virtually impossible to know, beyond a doubt, that a person is guilty. Over 200 people have been released from death row in the US in the last ten years after being proven innocent. For many, life without the possibility of parole is far worse than death. Timothy McVey, the Oklahoma City bomber, wanted to be executed, because, as he stated, he did not want to live the rest of his life in prison. So the judicial system rewarded him by granting his wish. The death penalty is not justice, it is revenge, and does not deserve a place in a civilized society. Think about it. The condemned person experiences fear for a very brief moment during his/her execution, but that does nothing to bring back the victim, or to make society a better place. It just kills one more person. Many argue, "Why should the taxpayer be burdened with the care, housing, clothing, and feeding of the guilty?" Because that is one of the burdens of a civilized people...to do the unpleasant, in order to avoid the unthinkable, executing an innocent person.

[empireboy]

O.K., now, what is the penalty for stealing 30 years of a man's life? Of two men's lives?

Certainly insufficient....

[monk213]

The problem with the death penalty is that, once it's done, it tends to be somewhat permanent. There have been multiple studies that have shown that the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime. Add to this the possibility of planted evidence, or an innocent person stumbling onto a crime scene and leaving DNA in the form of sweat, body oils, hair, whatever, and it becomes virtually impossible to know, beyond a doubt, that a person is guilty. Over 200 people have been released from death row in the US in the last ten years after being proven innocent. For many, life without the possibility of parole is far worse than death. Timothy McVey, the Oklahoma City bomber, wanted to be executed, because, as he stated, he did not want to live the rest of his life in prison. So the judicial system rewarded him by granting his wish. The death penalty is not justice, it is revenge, and does not deserve a place in a civilized society. Think about it. The condemned person experiences fear for a very brief moment during his/her execution, but that does nothing to bring back the victim, or to make society a better place. It just kills one more person. Many argue, "Why should the taxpayer be burdened with the care, housing, clothing, and feeding of the guilty?" Because that is one of the burdens of a civilized people...to do the unpleasant, in order to avoid the unthinkable, executing an innocent person.

I pretty much said a summarized version of this and it got removed

[Seastallion]

Thank god for DNA . Try it in Thailand. Cue mass exodus from the jails.

Seastallion and Boris;

you both argue indirectly on behalf of the death penalty. DNA removes all doubt concerning guilt or innocence, hence the death penalty is justifiable.

That's what I said....sort of. "Justifiable" might be a different argument.

[Traveler19491]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Thank god for DNA . Try it in Thailand. Cue mass exodus from the jails.

Seastallion and Boris;

you both argue indirectly on behalf of the death penalty. DNA removes all doubt concerning guilt or innocence, hence the death penalty is justifiable.

That's what I said....sort of. "Justifiable" might be a different argument.

Sorry, but the argument that, "DNA removes all doubt concerning guilt or innocence, hence the death penalty is justifiable" is nonsensical. Here's a scenario for you...my girlfriend and I had sex an hour ago, so my DNA is all over her. We get into a huge argument (which the neighbors hear), and I leave. Fifteen minutes later, her ex-boyfriend shows up, and in a jealous rage, kills her. He explains his DNA to the police by stating that he came over to try to reconcile and found her body. I'm a farang, so who's going to get the benefit of the doubt? Or even if this were in a Western country, who are the police going to be more suspicious of? DNA removes all doubt? Not hardly. At best, it's presence points a finger. But it's absence can raise a reasonable doubt.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Traveler19491

[ThailandLOS]

A miscarriage of justice is always unacceptable, but this was 30 years ago and the two of them will now be freed. I also note that the person for whom the DNA did match is already in jail for a similar crime. So the actual perpetrator is in jail.

So with this all is well you mean? Given any thought to what 30 years in prison does to a human being?

[Jonmarleesco]

Now what? They can, should and - with lawyers eyeing the zeros - no doubt will, sue for millions. But that doesn't give them back their lives. Still, they are alive. Perhaps the dim and distant Thai starlets - or whatever - will bear that in mind when calling for the death penalty for rape.

[hawker9000]

One reason I don't agree with the death penalty.

Forced confession by mentally disabled teenagers, questioned alone for hours by police without legal representation. No physical evidence what so ever?

Something very wrong with a justice system that convicts on a process like this.

Yes, now here's a case that merits a genuine civil rights investigation. Police & prosecutors must be held accountable - criminally so - for their conduct, which is occasionally more about "collars", conviction rates and case closures than it is about justice. Eric Holder would do better to be spending his resources here than in deliberately trying to simply add to the racial frenzy, and "driving" justice toward a "wanted outcome" in places like Ferguson, MO.

[Scott]

I am not sure that a discussion of the death penalty is relevant here. No one was executed.

[USNret]

This will bolster the argument for the anti-capital punishment brigade, and for this I would agree with them.

Just so long as they don't argue against capital punishment when DNA evidence shows there is no doubt the criminal did the crime.

So you are in favor of capital punishment. You can't argue both sides at once.

See how foolproof DNA evidence truly is: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dna-testing-foolproof/

If this had been a death penalty case, the truth could have come to light too late for the one wrongfully imprisoned.

[coma]

Clearly shows that there must ALWAYS be conclusive DNA evidence directly linking an individual to a crime where the crime carries the death penalty.

[hawker9000]

Clearly shows that there must ALWAYS be conclusive DNA evidence directly linking an individual to a crime where the crime carries the death penalty.

A bit kneejerk I think. You mean you don't think it's possible for a knowledgeable & careful killer to simply make sure he leaves no DNA behind? DNA is more foolproof than, say, fingerprints, but there still has to actually be some! The severity of the punishment should have more to do with the heinousness of the crime than with the killer's attention to detail or luck in not leaving any bodily fluids or parts behind... Fingerprint technology became common knowledge, and the criminal element adapted to it. They'll adapt to DNA technology as well.

[coma]

Nothing kneejerk about it. I wasn't born yesterday. I clearly and fully understand that the punishment is weighed by the crime and not the amount of evidence against an accused. My single point is that if there is no DNA evidence to convict a criminal, they should hold back on the death penalty. Because DNA, not fingerprinting, has,is and will continue to be the tool that acquits the innocent, proves the innocence of the wrongly convicted and puts guilty people behind bars. In some cases many decades after the crime. Fingerprint has and still is a good tool but it has no weight when it comes up against DNA evidence. Actually very hard for a prosecutor to convict without DNA evidence.

When was the last 40 year old cold case solved by fingerprint evidence ? With DNA, many many criminals from 40 years ago are now looking over their shoulders waiting to get arrested like thousands of others who's crimes went cold.

[hawker9000]

Ridiculous. You think you've hit on some new panacea for solving crime and preventing miscarriages of justice. You're just giving killers a card to play that they can count on to keep them out of the death house, and even creating a method for framing someone. And setting up yet more new hoops for investigators to have to jump through. Killers get enough breaks from the judicial system as it is. Again, you're trying to make it about the evidence; it's about the crime.

[coma]

Ridiculous. You think you've hit on some new panacea for solving crime and preventing miscarriages of justice. You're just giving killers a card to play that they can count on to keep them out of the death house, and even creating a method for framing someone. And setting up yet more new hoops for investigators to have to jump through. Killers get enough breaks from the judicial system as it is. Again, you're trying to make it about the evidence; it's about the crime.

Go try and argue with somebody who cares.