http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php
Visit the Innocence Project web site and select one case. Briefly describe the facts of the case and discuss whether you agree or not with the exoneration (why? why not?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The case involves a mentally retarded man by the name of Jerry Frank Townsend. He was convicted of six murders and one rape. Indicted in 1973 and exonerated on 2001. In 1979 arrested for apparently raping a pregnant woman in Miami, Florida. Given his 8 year old like mind, the cop’s vicious interrogation practices forced a confession and a plea of guilty to other murders from him. In 1980 he was convicted of rape and in 1982 he also pleads guilty to two murders as well. His total was 7 life sentences by 1982. Eventually he was cleared by DNA evidence in 1998. The DNA put someone else at the scenes and though it casted doubt on the confession obtained by the police, the cases had to be thrown out without the legality of the confession.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the exoneration, because the cops force the confession out of him. His mental state can’t handle the pressure and thus just caved in to what the cops wanted. The state gave him compensation for the life he lost is not but that is not enough. The police department and its police officers who handled the case should also be punished.
Visit the Innocence Project web site and select one case. Briefly describe the facts of the case and discuss whether you agree or not with the exoneration (why? why not?)
ReplyDeleteCase involves a man by the name of Larry Youngblood who was wrongly convicted of child kidnapping, rape by sodomy and molestation.
October 1983, a boy, 10yrs old was abducted, molested and raped (sodomized) for over an hour by a middle aged man.
The child identified his attacker as a middleaged man with a disfiguered eye.
Youngblood was convicted of 10.5 years in prison.
During the trial no serological test were performed because the evidence was stored improperly and the lab was not able to perform forensic test on it.
Youngblood was convicted on the sole basis of identification by victim and not by physical or biological evidence.
Youngblood appealed to the decision to the courts and it was overturned due to the fact that the evidence was damaged prior to any test on the biological or physical evidence was performed.
1993, the decision was short lived and Youngblood was returned back to prison when the ruling was overturned once again.
In 1998, Youngblood was then released on parole but was reincarcerated when he violated the conditions of his release by not registrating his address as required by sexual offender.
In 2000, at the request of his attorney and new DNA technological advances the evidence was retested and it resulted in Youngblood not being a match to the semen found on the childs clothes or samples taken from a rape kit at the hospital.
In 2001, the police department received a hit back from the DNA evidence, it belonged to a man that was convicted on other charges and was being held in a Texas jail. The man was sentenced to 24 years in prison for the crime.
Upon reading this case and seeing how a man had 9 years of his life taken and to be convicted as a child sexual predator is totally unjust. To be able to convict a person with no evidence and only the word of an innocent child is totally unfair. I can see how a jury could have been totally persuaded to convict Larry Youngblood; if an innocent child told them that he had been sodomized for over an hour and the man had a disfiguered eye which fit Youngblood discription. Note that the other man latter convicted through DNA for the crime was blind in one eye as well.
ReplyDeleteIf you have no physical evidence, no biological evidence then you have no case. This case should never have gone to trial and that District attorney that tried the case should be fired.
Wilton Dedge
ReplyDeleteFacts of the Case-
On Dec 8, 1981, a woman was assaulted and raped. Right after a rape kit and the victim's clothes were collected. Four days after the crime, the victim saw a man in a convenience store and told her sister that he resembled her attacker, only that he was shorter. The victim's sister identified the man as "Walter Hedge". In January 1982, the victim told investigators about the man and the police arrested Wilton Dedge's brother, Walter. After seeing Walter's picture, the victim's sister told police it was Wilton, not Walter, that the victim had seen at the store. Wilton Dedge's picture was placed in a photographic array and the victim identified him. He was immediately arrested and charged. To complete the prosecutors case, they relied on the testimony of Clarence Zacke. Zacke, a jailhouse snitch, claimed that Dedge confessed to the crime while they were being transported in a prison van. To go with Zacke’s testimony, the prosecutors presented John Preston, who provided dog sniffing evidence. He was then convicted n 1982 of the crime and sentenced to two concurrent life sentences. In 1996, Dedge was one of the first Florida inmates to seek post conviction DNA testing, several years before the state passed its 2001 law providing for such testing. But the State, argued that he could not benefit from the new law, or get into court with new evidence of innocence. For three years, the State opposed Dedge's motions on procedural grounds. Further testing was ordered by the court on the semen evidence found on the anal swab recovered from the rape kit. Initial testing had yielded only two markers because the sample was degraded. Y chromosome STR testing was utilized in the final round of testing. The results excluded Dedge as the contributor of the spermatozoa, conclusively proving his innocence for a second time. He was finally exonerated in 2004 serving 22 years of jail time.
I do in fact agree with the exoneration of this case because the evidence originally used to convict Wilton Dedge of the crime was later proven to be invalid. The new DNA evidence which was not available at the time, overruled the faulty evidence that convicted him. Sadly, he had to serve, therefore losing, 22 years of life. Due to the wrongful incarceration, he was later compensated.
There is a case with Anthony Capozzi, a man who spent 20 years in prison for two rapes. He went to prison after the two victims pointed him out in court. Capozzi is a 220 pound man and the with a scar. These were not the features that the victims describedThe sperm collected from the victims body's was stored in a hospital storage unit for 20 years. After 20 years, Capozzi and his attorney asked that the evidence be retested. Upon the testing of the 20 year old sperm, DNA results come back negative for Capozzi an positive for a guy named Altemio Sanchez. Sanchez was convicted of 3 murders in 2007 and is now serving life in prison. Capozzi is now out of prison and has been exonerated.
ReplyDeleteI totally AGREE with the exoneration. I believe that Capozzi is a very strong willed individual. He proclaimed his innocence for 20 years before he got out. I believe that the young girls shoudl apoligize because it was their testimony that sent Capozzi to jail in teh first place. There are man other men who were sentenced to death and killed because they were wrongly accused. They have not had the chance to exonerate their name or taste freedom. This is a small victory for those in jail who claim innocence for 20, 30, even 40 years. I am glad that he was able to survive this long and make it out of the system.
On May 31, 1991 an eleven-year-old girl was violently raped and sodomized by the pool of her Tulsa, Oklahoma residence. Two years later, Timothy Durham was wrongfully accused and convicted of the crime.
ReplyDeleteIn his 1993 trial, prosecutors presented unvalidated forensic evidence that allegedly pointed to Durham. An analyst testified that he had compared hairs from the crime scene with Durham's hair and found similar characteristics that he had seen in "less than 5 percent" of hair samples he had examined. There is not adequate empirical data on the frequency of various class characteristics in human hair. Consequently, it is invalid for an analyst to characterize whether consistency is a rare or common event.
Durham was convicted of multiple charges including first-degree rape, forcible sodomy, and attempted robbery. Despite the testimony of eleven witnesses who placed Durham at a skeet shooting competition in Dallas at the time of the rape, the prosecution was successful in convincing the jury of Durham's guilt. His total sentence: over 3,100 years.
I agree with the exoneration, after 5 years of prison Durham contacted the Innocence Project and requested that DNA testing be performed on the physical evidence that had been discovered at the crime scene; something I know his lawyer should have requested long before or right after trial. Testing revealed that the semen found on the victim's swimsuit could not have come from Durham. How can a judge convict someone despite the testimony of eleven witnesses who placed Durham at a skeet shooting competition in Dallas at the time of the rape. I don’t know what this judge was thinking, but I think there was some other factor that blinded the judge from seeing the truth.
I’ve read a couple of the cases, some I knew about others I didn’t. Knowing these information is what enable me for being against the death penalty.
Steven Phillips
ReplyDeleteIn this case, Mr. Phillips was identified as a rapist when indeed, he was not. It was a case of mistaken identity. After Phillips was paroled after serving about 14 yrs in prison for a crime he did not committ, he was sent back to prison for violating parole conditions. His innocense was not proved until after he was paroled again in 2007. The State of Texas did not have the "right man" and it turns out the real perp has an exstensive history of sexual assaults in many different states.
I agree with the exnoneration because his innocense was proved by DNA. He was not the man. So he served time for a crime he did not committ and lost an entire lifetime behind bars because of mistaken identity. I am sure that he was humiliated with the accusation alone. Now that they know who really did it, the victims must feel guilty for accusing the wrong person.
I agree with Christopher. Sadly, there are numerous of cases like the one he chose & mine, that will never be proven as a "mistake". People suffer in society as well as in prison with the labels. Child molestors and rapist are frowned upon every where. But it is hard to believe them when they say "i didnt do it" and theres evidence that says you did.
ReplyDeleteIn 1981, Willie N. Davidson was convicted of rape, sodomy and robbery. After Virginia Governor Mark Warner ordered testing of a random sampling of preserved evidence from a state lab analyst’s files, Davidson was proven innocent in 2005. I agree with the decision, I think that all inmates in the same or similar situation should be awarded the same privilege.
ReplyDeleteThis case about a man by the name of Willie Otis “Pete” Williams who was convicted of Rape, Kidnapping, Aggravated Sodomy and Aggravated Assault. Two women identified him in photo line ups and in court as their attacker. Williams was found guilty of the charges in was sentenced to 45 years in prison. Attorney Michael Schumacher represented Williams in court. After Williams was convicted, he learned that three similar crimes had occured. In those three cases, another man was arrested in which he plead guilty. Almost 22 years into his sentence, Williams was sent a letter from The Georgia Innocence Project. Williams wrote back confessing his innocence. A DNA test of one of the victim's rape kit was done and it did not match the DNA of Williams. The DNA matched the man who plead quilty of the other three rape cases. Williams was exoneration on February 13, 2007.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the exoneration because Williams was an innocent man. He lost almost 22 years because of his life because of eyewitness misidentification, unvalidated or improper Forensic. It's sad because no amount of money or apology could turn back the hands of time and give this man back the 21 1/2 years that he lost.
I believe that we can not take chances, that can leave our children in the way of great harm. Adults that are accused of molesting or predation of children deserve the stigma and wrath that comes along as consequences.
ReplyDeleteVisit the Innocence Project web site and select one case. Briefly describe the facts of the case and discuss whether you agree or not with the exoneration (why? why not?)
ReplyDeleteMarvin Mitchell - Charged and convicted with: Forcible Sexual Intercourse, Forcible Unnatural Sexual Intercourse to an 11 year old girl. The little girl reported and made a description of her attacker which never amounted to the description of Marvin Mitchell... Because the description was off when they took the young girl around the area they couldn't take Marvin in for that charge, so instead the police arrested him under charges for public drinking. The police officers took a polaroid picture of Mitchell upon his arrest, a procedure which is not typical for public drinking arrests. The photo was then shown to the victim, who then identified Mitchell as the perpetrator/attacker. Mitchell was incarcerated for seven years and three months for a charge that later come to find out he was not gulity for.
I agree with the exoneration (to free from blame) of Marvin Mitchell because all the procedues that were made were unreasonable. Marvin Mitchell was no where close to the description that was made on behalf of the 11 year old girl and even though he confessed to wearing pink shorts as the little girl mention in her testimoney, does that makes him gulity? No, Mitchell is an innocent man that lost and spent seven year and three months of his life in prison.
Case: Leo Waters were convicted of rape, sexual offense, and robbery with a dangerous weapon. 21years later he was exoneration on November 20, 2003, all charges were dismiss against him after DNA testing proved that he was not the suspect.
ReplyDeleteThe victim advertises a waterbed for sale in the newspaper. March 31, 1981 a male came over to take a look at the bed as she was showing him the bed; he suddenly pulled out a gun and threatens to kill her. The suspect tied her hands feet and taped her eyes shut and put her panty in her mouth. He began to vaginally rape her and when he was done he robbed the victim for her jewelry. In April the victim was giving pictures of possible suspects to choose from in those pictures she picked out Leo Waters. Spermatozoa were found on items of the victim and vaginal. The lab tested the blood, blood type is O and Leo blood type is O. in 1982 Leo was sentence to life in prison. In 2002 an attorney took over his case, 2003 he was granted a new trial and his DNA results did not match.
Yes, I agree with the exoneration, it’s sad he waited 21 years to be release. 21years is a long time he could have been successful or he could have been locked up for another charge, because he had previous charges before but minor, who know. I can just imagine what he went through in prison and I hope now that he’s out he can get his life back and not have that criminal mind. I also believe these prisoners that has been wrongfully accuse should be able to file a civil lawsuit against the victim and the department of justice, but it should only qualify first time offenders or misdemeanor offenders. Fortunately the state of North Carolina has a compensation law for these types of offender they are eligible for $50,000 for each year of wrongful incarceration with a maximum of $750,000. It also includes provision of job skills training and education tuition waivers. I hope he’s compensated. I think it’s wonderful to have a program out there to free innocent people. So it is true, some people are truly innocent.
On the evening of Sept. 18,1985,16 yearold Kimberly Smon left her home walking to meet a high school friend.The next day ,Police Officers found her body near the side of a dirt road.She had been rape and strangled to death.The accused Steven barnes was convected in up State New york of the murder.During the case barnes was tried by a jury in Utica on May 15,1989.A forensic analyst testified that the accused finger prints collected didnot match also Barnes truck tires did ntyielded any evidence.Sciencfic evidence also did not point to the accused.Thee forms of unvailidated forensic science were used against Barnes .However photographic overlay of fabric from the victims jeans and imprints on Barnestruck dertermined that the two patterns were similar.Testimony of ajailhouse inmate was introducedby the State.Informant Robert Stolo was in custody on forgey and larceny charges.He told the court that he talked with Barnes along with another inmates ,when Barnes repeated you mean the one that i killed.
ReplyDeleteIn his defence Barnes's attorney callrd several witnesses who testified that the accused was at the local bowling ally at the time of the crime was committed. he was convicted for rape ,murder and sentenced to 25years to life in prison.I agree with the exonneration because the State lack techical and sciencfic evidence. I beleive inmate Robert stolo was acting on his personal satisfaction concerning a lesser jail sentencing.Additionally, sciencfic practices/procedures had fail the state case.To this end ,thanks to the advanced technology that had not been previously available.
ReplyDeleteVisit the Innocence Project web site and select one case. Briefly describe the facts of the case and discuss whether you agree or not with the exoneration (why? why not?)
ReplyDeleteKeith Brown was charged and convicted of 2nd Degree Rape and 2nd Degree Sex Offense on a 32 year old woman and her 9 year old daughter in Wilson, North Carolina. This crime took place on April 22, 1991. Police officers interrogated Brown and said that he confessed to committing the crime. He pled guilty and was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Brown had served four years when biological samples collected from the crime scene in the incident were sent to Florida along with evidence from other unsolved North Carolina cases. It is unclear why evidence from Brown’s case was sent along with cold case evidence. The samples from Brown’s case were tested and the DNA results matched a Florida inmate, proving that Brown could not have been the perpetrator.
Keith Brown was released from prison on July 7, 1997 and received a pardon of innocence from North Carolina governor James B. Hunt on July 9, 1999.
The Florida inmate, Samuel Mosley, would eventually be convicted of committing the 1991 assaults.
Yes, I agree with the exoneration “to free from guilt” Keith Brown because even though he confessed of committing the crime when in fact he knew that he was not guilty but Brown was released based on the DNA evidence that matched a Florida inmate by the name of Samuel Mosley so Brown could not have been responsible for committing the crime.
Cody Davis
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 2/27/06
Jurisdiction: FL
Charge: Robbery
Conviction: Robbery
Sentence: 3 Years
Year of Conviction: 2006
Exoneration Date: 3/9/07
Sentence Served: 5 Months
Real perpetrator found? Yes
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification
Compensation? Not Yet
I picked the case that happened in Florida with Cody Davis who was allegedly convicted of robbery of mistaken identity due to invalid information from an eyewitness. The story takes place in West Palm Beach Florida in a bar where a Caucasian male robs a bartender at gunpoint forcing them to empty the cash register. During that the time, investigators were told that Cody Davis mentioned that he planned on committing crimes of that sort. The two witnesses identified Mr. Davis as the perpetrator in a photo lineup, while investigators were told by one of the witnesses that the perpetrator had a tattoo on hand; which Mr. Davis had none of. A ski mask was found outside the bar by investigators, but witnesses say the robber was not wearing a mask at the time. Meanwhile, the mask was taken into the lab for testing; Cody Davis goes to trial without his lawyer being informed on this mask that is being tested and is no where completed with results. Four months after his conviction (due to testimony of witnesses and the informant) test results come back from lab and it matches a profile of a man in the database with DNA who was awaiting his trial in jail on different charges. This gentlemen also had a tattoo on his hand in which one of the witnesses advised the investigator of and when questioned he admitted of the robbery that happened at the bar. Mr. Cody Davis was released from prison in early 2007. I want to say that I don’t agree with the exoneration because he was a victim of the system like many. He deserves to be compensated like the many who have been wrongly accused. I don’t know if he has a family but if so he wasn’t able to care of them, if he had a job he lost due to him being in prison, and being labeled as an offender when he’s not. As an upcoming addition in the criminal justice system, not to say that I am perfect but the investigators needed to be a little a bit more aware in collecting their data. First of all, he was arrested due to suspicion there wasn’t enough Probable Cause to take him. The tattoo he did not have and the results of the mask I believe was suppose to be confirmed first along with any other evidence found at the crime scene. Yes as a crime solver and fighter the detective job is to catch the offender and have them brought to justice for the victims’ sake, but we can’t be sure until we are sure that we have the correct offender in custody. Second, just because he said something out of his mouth does not necessarily mean he was going to do. The two witnesses’ story did not coincide with each other; not to say that it was not important but it should have been taken into consideration. Thirdly, Davis’ lawyer not being aware of the mask found during crime scene being tested is wrong. As his lawyer he should have been informed of all the things that were being done that pertains to his client. I know for a fact a lawyer has a duty to make sure their clients are proven innocent or maybe he should have found out all the steps the police had taken during the crime scene. All in all these victims on this website are clearly victims of the criminal justice system and just like certain victims seek restitution these inviduals who are mistakenly accused should receive compensation.
Sorry Dr. T my blog seems real long,, I just don't like the fact that justice has been served yet for Mr.Davis along with so many others.
ReplyDeleteI am also in agreement with this judgement and Quema's decision to exonerate Brown. Again we see how important D.N.A. evidence establishes the truth.
ReplyDeleteI chose the case Of Roy Brown, he solved his own case. On May 23, 1981 a social worker was found beaten, sstrangled and stabbed to death near her home in upstate New York. She had been bitten many times all over her body and her house had been set on fire.
ReplyDeleteMr. brown became a suspect because he had recently been released from jail beacuse he had been making a series of threatning phone calls to the social service agency where the victim worked, due to there was a case in that agency involving his daughter and the victim.
The prosecution used evidenced that oner analyst claimed were consisten with Brown but another expert from the proscution that was never disclosed, excluded Brown.
The evidence was analyzed with inclonclusive results.
Brown was found guilty and charged with Murder and sentenced to 25-Life.
ReplyDeleteBrown took it upon himself to try and find the victim's tru killer. Hefound documents that had not been disclosed to the defense that implicated another man.
In 2005 the Innocence Project took on Brown's case and discovered that there was more evidence that could be tested for DNA. The DNA testing proved that it did not match brown's DNA.
Brown was exonorrated on 3/5/07 after serving 15 years.
The contributing causes for this unjustice was government misconduct, informants and unvalidated Forensic Science.
I agree with the exoneration because this man was innocent. The government knew that there was too many inconsticies with the expert testimony, DNA testing and furthermore never disclosed that there was anothe man that was implicated by the evidence.
ReplyDeleteThis makes me sad because we rely and trust our Croiminal Justice System to work for us not against us.
The case of Larry Bostic, spent 18 years after pleading guilty to a Fort Lauderdale rape of 10/21/1988. Larry plead guitly to the rape as he was scared that he would be given life in prison if he took it to trail and lost. It is stated that his lawyer advised him that it would be best if he plead guilty. For Larry I understand why he took this route to listen to his lawyer as, his lawyer is his brain eyes, ears to the Crimianl Justice System. Legal Advised is advised to have doing a trail or court hearing so therefore,in his case his lawyer ummmm seemed to have lost his client Larry in the system by not being the brian,eyes,and ears for Larry. The victim in which pointed out Larry in a line up choose him based on seeing him around. When I read this it did not seem as muh questioning was done to the victim which took me for a loop. In my closing Larry Bostic has been Exoneratied as of 9/21/07 due evdience of DNA and the victim being questioned.Larry is an innocence man and was proven such because of evidence. After reading this case I felt sadden because of the Legal System due to the holes in the system to say but I also felt a form of relieve as to say All is Innocence unto Proven Guilty meaning the system works for all even if it takes time as you can see in this case.
ReplyDeleteDNA is an excellent tool available to Law Enforcement today. What is disappointing is that a 3rd party like The Innocent Project has had to step in review these cases.
ReplyDeleteThe point I am making is that legislation should be passed to review all cases in which DNA testable evidence is available on cases prior to DNA testing. As a society we are looking at a large number of people being let out of prison do to overcrowding. We can alleviate some of the overcrowding by releasing the innocent ones first.
I think the innocent project is a great organization, but it’s never going to make a significant impact because they don’t publish the statistics on the cases they review and confirm the person convicted is a perfect DNA match to the evidence recovered. Their one sided approach can only sever to close doors. I believe they would be significantly more successful if they took up a bipartisan approach and agreed to help both the accused and the victim.
I reviewed about a dozen cases, and I can’t see anyone disagreeing with the decision to release a wrongly accused person.
Five months after he was convicted of robbery, Cody Davis was exonerated by DNA testing. The evidence was sent to the crime lab at the time of the crime, but because it was not readily apparent that the evidence would be probative, it was not prioritized. Once Davis’ evidence worked its way through the crime laboratory testing backlog, it proved his innocence.
ReplyDeleteThe Crime
On February 27, 2006, a Caucasian man robbed Foster’s Too, a bar in West Palm Beach, Florida, at gunpoint, forcing the bartender to give him money from the bar’s cash register.
The Identification
During the investigation, police were told that Cody Davis had been bragging about committing robberies around the time of the crime. Two witnesses to the robbery subsequently identified Davis in a photo lineup. However, one witness remembered a tattoo on the robber’s hand, which Davis did not have.
The Biological Evidence
Police found a ski mask outside of the bar, but it was not considered evidence because none of the eyewitnesses reported the robber with a ski mask. The mask was still turned over to the sheriff’s laboratory for testing, but it was not given testing priority. Therefore, without the testing completed, Davis went to trial. His attorney, Sim Gershon, was never informed that the mask was undergoing testing. On October 16, 2006, a jury convicted Davis based on the testimony of the eyewitnesses and the informant.
Post-Conviction
Four months after Davis' conviction, the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office Crime Laboratory completed testing on the ski mask found in the bar, and found another man’s profile. The profile was compared to a DNA database, and the profile matched Jeremy Prichard, who was in jail awaiting trial on unrelated charges. Prichard has a distinctive tattoo on his hand, similar to the one that the eyewitness recalled. When investigators questioned Prichard, he confessed to the Foster’s Too robbery, as well as three other bar robberies. The District Attorney’s Office immediately moved to have Davis released, and he walked out of prison in early 2007.
Cody Davis
Incident Date: 2/27/06
Jurisdiction: FL
Charge: Robbery
Conviction: Robbery
Sentence: 3 Years
Year of Conviction: 2006
Exoneration Date: 3/9/07
Sentence Served: 5 Months
Real perpetrator found? Yes
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification
Compensation? Not Yet
I think police offices need to be more careful about the witnesses’ comments because many times they make them end up arrested the wrong person just like this case. When a police officer make an arrest and put someone in to jail for things that they did not do, that can turn that person’s life up side down. It is really hard to stay in to jail for 5 months and pay for something that you did not convict. Some witnesses just don’t care if they not sure about something to keep their mouth shut.
On January 23, 2006, Alan Crotzer was freed from prison after post-conviction DNA testing proved his innocence of a 1981 rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Crotzer had spent 24 years in prison in Florida for this crime - more than half his life. Crotzer and two co-defendants, Douglas James and Corlenzo James, were convicted of these crimes in 1981.
ReplyDeleteI agree with his exoneration because during the trial he testifeid that he was with his girlfriend and their friends. How could he have been in two places at once. Plus DNA evidence found that he could not have possibly been the person that committed the crime. In 1981, DNA evidence wasn't available, however he had an alibi that could not have placed him at the scene of the crime. Also the biological evidence that the jury was not informed of, proved that anyone in the court room could have committed the crime.
In addition, Douglas James confirmed that he and his brother committed the crime with a childhood friend, not with Crotzer. James and Crotzer did not even know each other prior to the 1982 trial.
All of this proves that he wasn't guilty of this crime and that his exonertation was necessary because he clearly didnt commit the crime.
William Dillon was a man from Florida charged with first degree murder. James Dvorak was murdered near Canova Beach. A man was driving by and picked up a hitchiker near the beach. The hitchiker was wearing a bloody shirt and was very sweaty. The driver did not question the man instead he had sex with him. Days later he saw a news report saying that a man was murdered near the beach, therefore he called the police and told them about the hitchiker he had picked up but had took back to beach area. The police arrested the man and they found the bloody shirt that the hitchiker was wearing. The man denied the murder and denied having any connections with the murder. To make a long story short their was an eye witness identification saying that Dillon was at the crime scene, a tracking dog that linked the bloody shirt to Dillon, and the man who picked Dillon up identified Dillon as the hitchiker. Sadly to say truth came out 26 years later when Dillon was released. The former girlfriend who had testified against Dillon had been coerced by a police investigator to testified against Dillon, The tracking dog evidence was found to be inaccurate, the man who had picked Dillon up was blind in one eye and his description of Dillon was not correct. At the time of the trial there was no factual evidence against Dillon that linked him to the crime.I agree with the exoneration because there was no solid proof at the trial that showed Dillon was the murderer. The case was handled inproperly. There was no scienticfic certainty that he committed the crime. Dillon must have had a public defender, and a jury that based their decision on him being at the beach wearing a bloody shirt. Dillon was just at the wrong place at the wrong time in the mist of doing the wrong thing.As a result of that his freedom was taken.
ReplyDeleteWilliam Dillon
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 8/17/81
Jurisdiction: FL
Charge: First-Degree Murder
Conviction: First-Degree Murder
Sentence: Life
Year of Conviction: 1981
Exoneration Date: 12/10/08
Sentence Served: 26 Years
Real perpetrator found? Not Yet
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification, Informants/Snitches, Unvalidated or Improper Forensic Science
Compensation? Not Yet
The case I choose to read over was about a man named William Dillon. William Dillon was accused and charged for severally beating and killing James Dvorak.
The day James Dvorak was murdered (August 17, 1981) a truck driver had picked up a hitchhiker who had blood all over his clothing. The hitchhiker had left his shit in the truck drivers truck. The truck driver discarded the shirt in a near by grocery store where law enforcement had found it. The truck driver then contacted law enforcement and told the story about that night. Police then felt Dillon was knew something about the situation and then began to question. They then hired John Preston who was an expert in “handling scent-tracking dogs”. Preston performed to two test on Dillon with his dog and both test linked Dillon with the T-shit. Dillon was then arrested for murder.
During the trial Preston had testified against Dillon and told the court that the dog associated the shirt with Dillon. Also the truck driver who was blind in one eye told the jury that Dillon was the one who he gave a ride to and was wearing the bloody t-shirt. A “jail house snitch” also stated that Dillon had admitted to murdering James Dvorak.
Dillon was then charged with first degree murder and had a been sentenced with life.
Dillon continuously filed for appeals during the first five years however all of them were denied. In the year 1996 he began asking to access to biological evidence testing for DNA however it was until 2007 that a public defender helped him receive that test. It was on that test that Dillon was released on November 18, 2008 for his innocents. Dillon had severed twenty six years for a crime he did not do.
My opinion: I honestly believe that it was unfair for Dillon serve the 26 years for a crime he hasn’t done. However, at that time they felt they had good enough evidence to put him in prison for life (the jury had believe he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt). We have become so advanced in technology that we can truly prove if someone is guilty or not depending on the evidence. However, I am sure they felt confident about their evidence as well. We look back now and think how crazy it is how they handed their cases and what they based their evidence on. But, I thinking in the future we will be a lot more advance and think the way we do things now is not acceptable.
As I said before, I think it is horrible what he had went through and I hope courts accept more appeals to other individuals who was sentence during that time, to ensure the prisons are truly guilty.
I ment to say to ensure the prisoners are truly guilty.
ReplyDeleteThe case I selected was on deceased Timothy Cole. He was sentenced in 1986 for rape and died in jail. He passed away while serving his 13th year in prison. Through DNA testing they have found that he was not guilty of the rape crime. In February 2009 the real rapist Mr. Johnson confessed to the rape in court with Coles family & the victim. The victim even testified that she agreed with the compensation to the family of Mr. Cole & his exonerations.
ReplyDeleteThe court is still pending the approval of Governor of Texas to exonerate Cole and the compensation for the family.
I believe that this family should be compensated for their pain and suffering, as well as Cole's exoneration. Their child spent 13 years of his life in prison, died there and was not guilty. Who knows how much money these parents spent in legal defense, money to visit their child etc. The witness even testified that she believed that he should be exonerated & the parents should be compensated, after all he had been convicted based on her eyewitness identification.
I agree with Elaine, it is so sad to see someone take advise from someone who they believe will do what is to the clients best interest. He is so luck technology has advanced and he is free. No matter how much compensation he receives it will never make up for the lost time with him family and friends but like i said before at least now he is out and was not left to rot inside the prison.
ReplyDeleteThere where not many reliable facts in this cases. I truly feel that this cases was based on suspicion. The facts where: The crime occured on Feb. 27, 2006, a bartender was rob at gun point, the subjects description was that of a caucasian male, a ski mask was found near the bar, and the DNA on the mask did not match Davis.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the fact that there was not a rush order placed on the testing of the ski mask. Trial should not have taken place until the results from the DNA testing was back. I agree that Davis should have been exonerated. Davis like many others in the criminal justice system have been wrongly accused. The attonery should not have keep important deatils, such as the mask being tested, from other parties involved in the case. Davis as will as others should be compensated for time spent in jail but how would we decide on an amount? Who knows what Davis loss during the time he was incarinated!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like DNA has helped plenty of non-guilty people free. They must be thanking God that technology has advanced, imagine all the people who have died in jail and where not guilty of the crimes they had been charged with.
ReplyDeleteSorry Dr. I forgot to write whether or not I agree or disagree with the exoneration...
ReplyDeleteI agree with the exoneration because
#1.The evidence was weak.
#2. Most importantly he was proven innocent based of biological evidence (DNA)
I only wish this would of happened sooner
I reviewed the case of Frank Lee Smith.
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 4/15/85
Jurisdiction: FL
Charge: Murder, Rape
Conviction: Murder, Rape
Sentence: Death
Year of Conviction: 1986
Exoneration Date: 12/15/00
Sentence Served: 14 Years
Real perpetrator found? Yes
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification
This case is about an eight year old girl that was killed at home due to injuries caused by a burglar. The autopsy report concluded that the victim had been repeatedly hit with a rock, raped, and sodomized before the perpetrator left the house.
Mr. Smith was arrested based on eyewitness identification of the victims mother and his past criminal history.
Mr. Smith ended up dying of cancer in prison after having served 14 years of his sentence. Only after his death was when blood was withdrawn from Smith and compared to the D.N.A. found at the crime scene.
Mr. Smith was exonerated eleven months after his death.
On July 8, 1981 three subjects force their way in a home armed with a shot gun. five victims inside the home was rob. Two females of the five victims were forced inside the truck of a car and driven to a wooded area, where they were raped. The two female victims were tied to a tree before the subjects managed to get away, they ran to a nearby house and was taken to a hospital. The other victims met the two female victims at the hospital. One of the victims got a possible tag number of the vehicle involved. The tag number was ran by the police. The victim was given pictures to see of the possible subjects but could not id the subjects.
ReplyDeleteI very much agree that Davis should have been be exonerated. The involved party should have advised the jury of the fact that 100% of the male population could be included and that no one can be excluded. I feel that the testing of the spermatoza slides in all cases should be immediately tested at least twice to get that second opinion by a different lab. For Crotzer to have spend 24 years in prison is really a shame. How could Crotzer make up for this time loss? He can't!
I search different cases but one caught my eye and was Luis Diaz.
ReplyDeleteIncident Year: 1977
Jurisdiction: FL
Charge:Kidnapping, Sexual Battery, Aggravated Assault
Conviction: Kidnapping, Sexual Battery, Aggravated Assault.
Sentence: Life +
Year of Conviction: 1980
Exoneration Date: 8/3/05
Sentence Served: 25 Years
Real perpetrator found? Not Yet
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification, Unvalidated or Improper Forensic Science
Compensation? Not Yet
This was a famous case. It deals with the "Bird Road Rapist". It was during the 1977 and 1979 that over 25 female victims were raped. This individual will flash his headlights and make the victims pull over and with a gun and force the victims to enter his care. Once in he will force the victims to perform oral sex on him while driving and then pull over an rape them.
The victims describe the rapist as 200 pounds, 6'0 feet, spoke English and lating dessent. Now when Luis Diaz is spotted by a victime but the police officers did not have evidence, they let him go but since the crimes continued he was still kept in mind. After him being pick from a numerous of line ups in which he was not picked in all of them, he was sentenced 7 out of 8 counts.
In June 2005, the prosecutor agreed for a DNA testing of the rape kit and to our suprise the DNA match same unknown male how did the rape but it was not Luis Diaz.
I do agree with the exoneration because noneof the victims describe at any point matched Luis Diaz and the line up was not even some to go by because some victims were not even able to pick him. He still spend 25 yr in prison and he will never recover that time for an an investigation that could of been done way different
The case I chose involved a Mr. Herman Atkins who was convicted of robbery, rape, forcible oral copulation, and for using a handgun in the commission of these crimes. The victim was raped in a shoe store in Lake Elsinore, California, in 1986. Atkins was sentenced to over forty-five years in prison. Allegedly in April of 1986 a shoe store clerk was raped and robbed at gunpoint at approximately midday. The man apparently ejaculated and wiped his semen on her sweater. The police were called and evidence collected. She was asked to look at pictures from yearbooks from the local high school but was unable to find her assailant. She was taken to the police briefing room where a wanted poster of Atkins was on the wall for an unrelated crime. She identified him as her attacker and later picked him out of a photo lineup. Atkins was also identified by a clerk in the store next to the shoe store as having been in her store earlier that same day.
ReplyDeleteAtkins's defense was mistaken eyewitness identification; he had an alibi witness and testified on his own behalf. The testimony from the criminalist placed him in a population of approximately 4.4% who could have committed the rape. The prosecutor’s argument was that the evidence could not say it was exactly the defendant but that he was in the very small percentage of possibilities. He was found guilty. His case was accepted by the Innocence Project in 1993, and it was not until 1999 after filing a motion were they able to get the evidence to do their own testing. Based on the test results the DNA on the sweater was not from Atkins. He was released in February 2000, after 12 years in prison.
I fully agree with the decision to exonerate. It is unfortunate that because someone falls into a small percentage of possibilities that nobody felt it necessary to make a more definitive match, especially in light of the fact that he was facing a 45 year sentence. I don’t know what his prior record was, but I guess since he had a poster up in the police station that he was not a law-abiding man. Maybe it was due to this fact that he was not given the benefit of the doubt and a little bit more effort on the prosecutor’s part. Nonetheless he served 12 years and I agree that he deserved the compensation he received, although nothing can fully compensate for the freedom they took from him.
Miguel Roman
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 1/3/88
Jurisdiction: CT
Charge: Murder
Conviction: Murder
Sentence: 60 Years
Year of Conviction: 1990
Exoneration Date: 4/2/09
Sentence Served: 18.5 Years
Real perpetrator found? Yes
Contributing Causes: Informants/Snitches
Compensation? Not Yet
In the case of Miguel Roman he was convicted on murder charges stemming from the January 1988 murder of his ex-girlfriend. Police and the prosecution both asserted, before and during the trial, that the victim was pregnant with Roman’s child. Roman was brought to trial after a witness reported seeing a car, resembling Roman’s, at the victim’s apartment the night of the murder. Another witness claimed that Roman had asked her to lie about his alibi so that he could not be placed anywhere near the crime scene.
During the trial the prosecution once again stated its theory that Roman was upset with the victim because she would not have an abortion. The FBI asked that a paternity test be conducted but neither the prosecution or defense conducted one. Semen was also found on the victim and, unlike the paternity test, it was tested prior to trial. The DNA results indicated that Roman was not a match. Prosecutors dismissed the results saying that someone else may have had sex with the victim but she was murdered by Roman.
The final nail in the coffin for Roman was his inability to effectively communicate in English. The police read Roman his rights in Spanish prior to questioning. His interrogation, however, was conducted only in English. Because of his inability to effectively communicate in English, the police and prosecutors, pointed to the many different stories he gave. It was these conflicting stories and witness testimony that led to his conviction and sentence to 60 years in prison.
Later, the Connecticut Innocence Project was able to get access to the DNA evidence along with DNA later recovered from the various items used to murder the victim. After testing the DNA that was recovered they were able to prove that Miguel Roman was actually innocent, as he’d proclaimed throughout the investigation and trial.
I definitely agree with the exoneration of Miguel Roman. This case highlights the short-sidedness of law enforcement in pursuing leads and verifying facts. They just willingly accepted statements from witnesses as fact. They did not conduct the investigation with professionalism and despite glaring deficiencies in their evidence and the defense did not effectively dispute it.
This case is about James Waller who was convicted of forcing a 12 year old boy to orally copulate him, and anally raped him on November 2, 1982. After James Waller was released on parole in 1993, he still wanted to prove his innocence. He and his family saved up money for DNA testing, and pursued DNA testing on three separate occasions before results were finally obtained and he was proven innocent in 2006. On December 19, 2006, 23 years after his conviction, Waller’s conviction was finally vacated. He was officially pardoned by Governor Rick Perry on March 9, 2007. I agree with the exoneration. It is an outrage this man had to lose so many years of his life for a crime he did not commit.
ReplyDeleteIn March 1985, a Baltimore County judge ordered the execution of Kirk Bloodsworth following his conviction for the brutal rape, beating, and strangling death of a nine year old girl, who was found dead in July 1984. Bloodsworth was arrested based on an anonymous call telling police that he was seen with the victim that day and an identification made by a witness from a police sketch that was based on the recollections of five eyewitnesses. At trial, all five witnesses testified that they had seen Bloodsworth with the victim.
ReplyDeleteAlso presented at trial was testimony that Bloodsworth had said that he had done something terrible that day that would affect his relationship with his wife. Additionally, he mentioned a bloody rock during the investigation. A shoe impression was found near the victim but a forensic analyst testified that he did not find any identifying features in the print.
This evidence was challenged in Bloodsworth's appeals, which asserted that the bloody rock was mentioned because the police showed him a rock during the interrogation. The incident he mentioned regarding his wife amounted to his failure to buy the food she had requested. Moreover, the police failed to inform the defense that there may have been another suspect.
Bloodsworth asked his attorney to have DNA expert analyze semen stains that had been found on the victim’s underwear. DNA testing on the panties undertaken independently by a private company excluded Bloodsworth. Replicate testing performed by the FBI yielded the same results. Bloodsworth was released from prison in June 1993 and pardoned in December 1993. He had spent over eight years in prison, two of those years facing execution.
I strongly agree with Bloodsworth’s exoneration. I choose this case because I knew about it. Bloodsworth was the first person in the United States cleared by DNA testing. Kirk Bloodsworth spent over 8 years on death row for a crime he did not commit. How is it possible that innocent people can be convicted—and even sentenced to die—under our system of justice?
How is it possible that only the testimony of eyewitnesses, who saw the suspect with the victim, but not the crime, could sentence a person to die without more substantial evidence?
DNA testing is now a major factor in changing the criminal justice system. It provides scientific proof that our system convicts and sentences innocent people—and that wrongful convictions are not isolated or rare case.
Although Bloodsworth received compensation, nothing will make him recover the years spent [and wasted] behind bars. His reentry into free society has been difficult and painful. Who can forget the nightmare of being incarcerated, especially when one is innocent?
Thanks to everyone, especially to Dr. Telesco for making this class very interesting.
ReplyDeleteHave a great summer!!
Case About: Arthur Johnson
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 7/9/1992
Jurisdiction: Mississippi
Charge: Burglary and Rape
Conviction: Burglary and Rape
Sentence: 55 years
Year of Conviction: 1993
Exoneration Date: 10/1/08
Sentence served: 15.5 years
Real Perpetrator Found: Yes
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification
Compensation: Not Yet
Mr. Arthur Johnson in October 1, 2008 all charges were dropped against him. Arthur Johnson had no prior criminal history when he was arrested for rape and burglary in 1992 based on just the victim’s identification of him, convicted in Sunflower County in 1993, at age 34, of burglary and rape in a (two) 2 –day trial and sentence to 35 years in prison. No physical evidence linked Mr. Johnson to the crime. Several alibi witnesses testified that Mr. Johnson was at their house at the time of crime. Mr. Johnson appealed this case to the Mississippi Court of Appeals, where it was affirmed without an opinion in June of 1995.
In August 2005, Mr. Johnson Lawyer from Innocence Project New Orleans, Emily Maw, sought DNA testing fro The Sunflower County Circuit Court with the agreement of the District Attorney’s Offices; Circuit Judge Ashley Hines ordered the evidence in the rape kit to be tested by Relia Gene Technologies in New Orleans. On November 30, 2007, the results of the tests were published and they completely excluded Mr. Johnson as the source of the seminal fluid collected from the underwear worn by the victim when she was raped. In February, the Sunflower County Circuit Court vacated Mr. Johnson‘s conviction on the basis of the new DNA test results and ordered at new trial.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe Sunflower County District Attorneys’ Office planned to re-try Mr. Johnson in spite of the DNA test excluding him, claiming that the eyewitness identification was accurate. Attorneys for Mr. Johnson requested that, before he was re-tried, the unknown DNA profile generated from the victim’s underwear to be run through the state and federal databases of convicted offender profiles.
ReplyDeleteAfter much delay, the unknown profile was run through the state databases to and on Friday it was revealed that it matched a man who was convicted of burglary and sexual assault In Sunflower County in 1992, the same year the crime occurred for which Mr. Johnson was convicted. This man went to prison, released in 2002 and went on to commit a sexual assault out of state, for which he is currently incarcerated. The Sunflower County District Attorney subsequently dropped the charges against him. Mr. Johnson is asking the Sunflower County District Court for a brief court appearance at which he can be publicly exonerated in open court.
My opinion is I totally agree on his exoneration thank goodness the Clerk of Courts saved the evidence (DNA) if not Mr. Johnson probably will still be in prison. Mr. Johnson missed his family growing up and his freedom just because he was mistaken for the perpetrator; luckily he survived all this time and was able to be freed. Nothing truly will be a compensation for the years he lost in prison. It is a good thing at least he will be compensated; I hope that he is compensated very well soon and that his name will be clear of all stigmas society had applied to him. The State of Mississippi needs to update their laws for other innocent prisoners to be freed. I think the organization of Innocence Project is excellent to help to society to see that before DNA testing, innocent people have gone to prison.
I also want to Thank Everyone and Dr. Telesco , Enjoy your summer!
ReplyDeleteThe facts of the case are that Dennis Brown was charged with burglary rape and crimes of nature in Louisiana at the time he was 17 yrs old he was picked out of a lineup by the victim even though the victim had told police that the man who raped her was wearing a bandana from his eyes down. Brown later confessed to the crime. At trial Brown testified that he had been forced to confess by the police at knife point. The evidence also was made to be in favor of the victim by saying the that blood results could only be traced to about 60% of African American males which should have include 100%. It was later discovered in 2004 with DNA evidence that Brown didn’t commit the crime and was released from prison after serving 19 yrs in jail
ReplyDeleteI personal think it sucks for Mr. Brown but when it comes down to he had a trial that might have misled people into thinking he was guilty. I know the court system is not 100% accurate and you will have cases like these. Are only hope is that we can avoid this.
The case of Luis Diaz, supposed "Bird Road" rapist was truly an injustice. It all started in the years of 1977-1979 where 25 women were attacked in the area of bird road in Coral Gables. The perpetrator would stop the vehicles and with a gun forced the victims in his car and rape them. He was described as a latin male about 6 ft. tall 200 pounds who spoke english. Luis Diaz fit none of these categories, with the exception of being a latin male. After bad line-ups and bad ids by several victims, the state was able to charge Diaz with 8 cases of rape. He was convicted in 1980.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the exoneration. After bad investigation techniques by the police and no physical evidence found, this man should not hae been convicted. There was no DNA matches, no blood found in his vehicle, etc. Luis Diaz had 25 yrs of his life taken away and there will be no compensation that will make up for that.
Richard Alexander
ReplyDeleteIncident Date: 8/1/96
Jurisdiction: IN
Charge: Rape, Att. Rape (2 cts.), Robbery (2 cts.), Crim. Dev. Conduct (2 cts.), Confinement (2 cts.), Att. Robbery, Burglary, Auto Theft
Conviction: Att. Rape, Burglary, Auto Theft, Crim. Dev. Conduct, Robbery
Year of Conviction: 1998
Exoneration Date: 12/12/01
Sentence Served: 5.5 Years
Real perpetrator found? Yes
Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification
Richard Alexander was arrested in connection with a stream os sexual assauts that took place over the summer in indiana. Mr. Alexander was arrested in connection with four sexual assaults. In court he was tried for three of the attacks and convicted for 2. He was sentenced to 70 yrs. After his conviction the sexual attacked continued to happen. He served over 5 years in prison awhen DNA tesing excluded him as the suspect so he was released from prison. Later another man stepped foward and admitted guilt in one of the attacks.
I totally agree with the exoneration. DNA is the most powerful form of evidence. The fact that the DNA did not match completely excluded Mr. Richard from commiting those crime that he was charged with. The DNA instead matched another man who later confessed to his involvement in one of the attckes. Also his arrest did not stop the sexual attcks from happening, so that was a clear sign from the begining that they had the wrong guy.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate that this had to happen to Mr. Alexander and he was very lucky that evidence was recovered to proved him innocent.
I also agree with exoneration in regards to DNA Evidence. In the Case of Mr.Richard through the justice system he should have been release because his DNA was not a match to the DNA evidence. My question is what if someone rapes someone and their DNA is not left at the crime scene or on the Victim.
ReplyDeleteOK, this is my final comment on this topic. Larry Bosnic accused of raping a woman in Florida in the late 80's. The woman admitted that she chose Bosnic because she had saw him in the neighborhood earlier in the week, so therefore he had to be the one who rape her. can he press charges against her, in criminal court, and the proceed to civil court? He totally deserves restitution for his years spent in prison.
ReplyDeleteThe case I selected involves a man by the name of Jerry F. Townsend.
ReplyDelete-A mentally retarded men, with the mentally capacity of an eight year old.Convicted of 6 murders and one rape and sentenced to seven concurrent life sentence.
-Arrested for raping a pregnant woman and later confessed to other murders. His confessions was a consequence of wanting to please authority.
-Later on he was cleared by DNA evidence, that cleared him for tow of the six murders.
-He was cleared of all charges and released, he had remain in prison for 22 years.
YES, I agree with the exoneration, this man was innocent and they knew he was mentally retarded. The police officers should be punished for what they did! Townsend had several years of his life taken away and I think that for so many years there will never e a compensation.