DNA Evidence Clears Texas Man Who Spent 30 Years In Prison

Quote from da-net:

biased judge + prosecutor only interested in convictions = guilty verdict

from the story;

"Under Texas compensation laws for the wrongly imprisoned, Dupree is eligible for $80,000 for each year he was behind bars, plus a lifetime annuity. He could receive $2.4 million in a lump sum that is not subject to federal income tax.

The compensation law, the nation's most generous, was passed in 2009 by the Texas Legislature after dozens of wrongly convicted men were released from prison. Texas has freed 41 wrongly convicted inmates through DNA since 2001 -- more than any other state."

It would probably be a good deterrent if the Texas law had a provision that the judge & prosecutor shared some of the costs to Texas for wrongful convictions Mr Dupree was robbed of his life by the judge & prosecutor!
More...

I'm betting 2.4 million is more than he would've made in his lifetime if he hadnt gone to jail. Dont feel too sorry for him...sure he lived in a box for 30 years, but dont many of live in a box too? We live in a house shaped like a box, drive to work in a box, go into our box building and sit at our cubicle shaped like a box, working on our computer box, then we drive back home in our box and what do we do? We go to our refrigerator box, get a TV dinner that comes in a box, heat it in a microwaves shaped like a box, and sit in front of the tv box.

Only difference is this guy has more money than you now.
 
Quote from peilthetraveler:

I'm betting 2.4 million is more than he would've made in his lifetime if he hadnt gone to jail. Dont feel too sorry for him...sure he lived in a box for 30 years, but dont many of live in a box too? We live in a house shaped like a box, drive to work in a box, go into our box building and sit at our cubicle shaped like a box, working on our computer box, then we drive back home in our box and what do we do? We go to our refrigerator box, get a TV dinner that comes in a box, heat it in a microwaves shaped like a box, and sit in front of the tv box.

Only difference is this guy has more money than you now.
More...

^Warped thinking.^
 
You're right, number probably closer to 99% :D

Quote from jem:

sadly, I agree. very good comments.

1. The idea of "beyond reasonable doubt is hardly ever followed at trials in my opinion." I do not think the defense argues it enough. I think typical prosecutor arguments about the definition of byrd - should be banned as prejudicial and erroneous.

2. I was friends with probably 10 to 20 prosecutors.
I would not put the number at 95%, but I would say far too many young deputy D.A.s were over zealous. I heard comments that sent off alarm bells in my head more than once.

I also knew some exceptional prosecutors who did the right thing all the time.

( i did work in a prosecutors office during law school)
More...
 
And of course, the leftist pedophile supporter is the first one to come in and start race baiting. Yep, it's just cause he's black!! This NEVER happens to white people...

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

A black man found guilty on circumstancial evidence in Texas...and evidence overturns the conviction.

Shocking that a black man did not get a "fair" trial...in Texas.
More...
 
According to the article referenced in the OP, the following is true:

"Nationally, only two others who have been exonerated by DNA evidence spent more time in prison, according to the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal center representing Dupree that specializes in wrongful conviction cases. James Bain was wrongly imprisoned for 35 years in Florida, and Lawrence McKinney spent more than 31 years in a Tennessee prison."

Including the Texas man just found innocent due to DNA, of the three referenced for spending more than 30 years wrongly convicted...all three were black, and convicted in Redneck States...

Sure, it is just a coincidence...nothing racial...

...of course not.

My guess is all were convicted on the basis of eye witness testimony...you know, they all look alike...
 
DNA is not always reliable. There was a woman who had 2 different sets of DNA and she lost her children because DNA said the kids were not hers. With the birth of her 3rd child, the judge ordered a witness to watch the birth, they immediately took samples and the DNA said she was not the mother of that child she had just given birth to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Fairchild

Nobody knows how many people there are that have 2 different sets of DNA. These guys might have actually been guilty.
 
Wrong, they now have tests for that phenomenon, known as Chimerism. They do know roughly how common it is as well, it's well into the 1 hundredths of a percent at most.

Funny, the guy who is arguing against releasing exonerated detainees is the same guy who is arguing against evolution, and arguing for the prosecution of adultery or pre marital sex.

LOL!! Trying to say that DNA isn't as reliable as eye witness testimony... ROFL!

Quote from peilthetraveler:

DNA is not always reliable. There was a woman who had 2 different sets of DNA and she lost her children because DNA said the kids were not hers. With the birth of her 3rd child, the judge ordered a witness to watch the birth, they immediately took samples and the DNA said she was not the mother of that child she had just given birth to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Fairchild

Nobody knows how many people there are that have 2 different sets of DNA. These guys might have actually been guilty.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top