1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Justice: Defendants never told of flawed evidence

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by MisterCreosote, Apr 17, 2012.

  1. MisterCreosote

    MisterCreosote Well-Known Member

    A review from the DOJ finds that the FBI was producing unreliable evidence in a lot of cases, and that only prosecutors were told of the flaws. This could've possibly led to many defendants being wrongfully convicted, or at least given them grounds for a retrial.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/convicted-defendants-left-uninformed-of-forensic-flaws-found-by-justice-dept/2012/04/16/gIQAWTcgMT_story.html

    Oops.
     
  2. qtlaw

    qtlaw Well-Known Member

    People died; oh well. At least everyone else executed was correct, right? Um no. That's why I am against the death penalty. It just gets the poor and uneducated disproportionally.
     
  3. Beaker

    Beaker Active Member

    Totally agree.
     
  4. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    There are empirical studies that pretty much show this uncontrovertibly, particularly when it comes to race, even when you adjust for certain factors.

    Noted civil liberties watchdog William Rehnquist, I believe, didn't much give a fuck when presented with this.
     
  5. deskslave

    deskslave Active Member

    Death penalty advocates: This is the price you have to accept is worth paying. There is no way, at all, to ensure that everyone executed is innocent.

    You HAVE to be OK with this to be OK with the death penalty.

    ETA: As noted below, that everyone executed is GUILTY.
     
  6. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    +100 on everything written.

    Aside from the fact that killing someone is barbaric and turns one potential wrong into two wrongs, the fact that innocent people have been executed should trouble the conscience of everyone.
     
  7. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    I recall reading something a few years ago that LOTS of evidence isn't as scientifically iron-clad as we think. Let's say you have a "match" ... we all tend to think there's no chance that anyone else could have left that fingerprint, but that's not apparently the case. How likely it is, of course, informs whether there's reasonable doubt or not.
     

  8. How about that everyone executed is guilty?
    And I'm Ok with that.
     
  9. dreunc1542

    dreunc1542 Active Member

    You're okay with innocent people being killed to slake your bloodlust?
     
  10. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Without getting too far afield, does anyone think the Texas defendant part of the article is either over- or under-played? Per the article, absent the flawed evidence Boyle would not have been eligible for the death penalty "according to a prosecutor's memo." That is a powerful implication -- this guy was wrongfully executed -- yet it's not mentioned again in the article. I wonder just how: A) important the evidence in question was in regards to whether or not he'd face the death penalty; and B) how convincing said prosecutor's memo really is.
     
  11. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Isn't that question on the order of "still beating your wife?"?
     
  12. LongTimeListener

    LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

    It's on the order of that for anyone who believes there has been no innocent person executed.

    Out here in the real world, though, it's a fair question.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page