Another innocent man freed

[Rudey]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/21/national/21free.html

"PASADENA, Calif., June 20 - Over the many long years in prison, Thomas Lee Goldstein's sense of disbelief, his bitterness at the judicial system, even his revenge fantasies slowly faded, leaving only a feeling of numbness and a grim patience.

He screamed his innocence to an unhearing world until finally one judge, then another, then another - five federal judges in all - agreed that he had been wrongly convicted of murder in 1980 and ordered him set free late last year. Even then, local authorities kept him locked up for four more months before turning him loose on April 2, more than 24 years after he was first picked up for a murder that it now seems clear he did not commit."

The rest of the article is in the link above.

Look how the pigs screwed over another innocent American.

-Rudey
--This is why I refuse to believe in any death penalty

[AGDee]

It's an unusual day when I agree with Rudey on something, but this is also one of the reasons why I'm against the death penalty.

Dee

[Senusret I]

Tritto.

No death penalty for me, thanks.

[Coramoor]

I still support the death penalty.

In fact I would say that my support has gotten stronger because it is increasingly difficult to send an innocent to the chair. We have an extrordinary amount of checks in the system. The fact that these innocents have been released shows that the road to the death penalty could have it's advantages. If these people were never sentenced to death they would not have had the appeals and re-tries that eventually found them innocent, and perhaps spent a much longer time in jail.

[James]

IS there is a history in the USA of awarding compensation to the falsely imprisoned?

[PhiPsiRuss]

This is the one, and only reason why I oppose the death penalty.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by James
IS there is a history in the USA of awarding compensation to the falsely imprisoned?

Not the USA, but Oklahoma passed a law that allows wrongly convicted people to sue the government for a certain amount of compensation. It's not as much as it probably should be, but at least it's something.

I still support the death penalty though. Especially with today's technology. That's how we're finding people of yesteryear that were wrongly convicted.

If you have DNA evidence, eyewitness evidence, etc... yeah, the death penalty should definitely come into play.

The best thing in a long time that has made me question the death penalty is that Terry Nichols (OKC Bombing) didn't get the needle -- so how many people do you need to kill before the death penalty applies to you?

[James]

If the person who gets the death penalty is found to be innocent the prosecuting attourney should be likewise executed.

Just to keep everyone honest.

[Tom Earp]

Why ktsnake, I dont think you are a Liberal.

For those that feel That Terry Nichols should have gone free because ofa hung jury, then, I feel sorry for you who did not have family Killed there, Adults and little kids.

I dont want to get in a pissing contest, but all of you suck when a person is found guilty and it may be right. It usually is.

Granted, there are things wrong with our justice system, we now have better ways to prove the truth.

When that happens so much the better. But try going through a Maximum Security Prison like I have and wonder Who Did What!

Being a Law Enforcement Officer and seeing in real life.

If you have not been there dont try to be the BMOC, you are not!

You are in the real so called world whether you beleive it or not.

I want to see how you react if something really happens to you and see how you cry!


Oh, He Cried out His innocence and finally was found so! That is good for him. Glad He was released, and He should have compinsation for life lost.

That is the New Evidence finding of Labs=CSI, TV makes it look easy!

But, there is more at hand for Law Enforcement to Prove + or -

[Kevin]

Tombstone... I have no idea what the hell you just said. It sounded great though I think... You said I wasn't a liberal.. you were mostly dead on. Other than that, I just don't know.

As for the OKC bombing... I fealt the bomb blast at school. My father was in court that morning about 4 blocks away in a trial. There would have been some casualties in that courtroom if the curtains hadn't been made of thick enough material to catch the shards of glass.

I'm of the mind that if we don't give the needle to Nichols, how can we give it to anyone else?

I realize that law enforcement is not all CSI, etc.. However, I have faith in our criminal justice system. I know a few of you have seen it in action. For one, not a whole lot of stuff goes to trial. When it does, it's serious stuff. When it's murder and there's a death penalty involved, we're talking proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm saying technology these days makes it very much more possible to have an iron-clad case against someone.

I think the chances of executing an innocent person today are miniscule compared to 10 or even 5 years ago. Forensics have changed A LOT.

[valkyrie]

Blah. That's only part of the reason why I want to be a public defender again. There aren't enough kick ass criminal defense attorneys.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by valkyrie
Blah. That's only part of the reason why I want to be a public defender again. There aren't enough kick ass criminal defense attorneys.

When at the courthouse, my favorite people watching is on the criminal floor. Those criminal defense lawyers have to be the worst dressed folks in existance.

Most of the male attornies have long hair, suits that look like they were bought at a thrift shop.. heck, some even wear sneakers with their "suits". I haven't seen too many female criminal defense attornies.

The thing about criminal law around here is that it's about 99% negotiation and only very, very rarely does it involve an actual trial (let alone a jury trial).

Usually your murder jury trials bring out a better breed of attorney. Those long-haired gremlin folks usually bail when they hear they're actually going to have to take it to trial.