History Forum / General / British History / April 2008

"TMOliver" <tmoliverjrFIX@hot.rr.comFIX> wrote in message
news:4808c4b2$0$22304$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

Readers will note that the idiot "TMOliver" altered the question toward
cases in which people were executed, and THEN DNA proved them innocent.

In his mind, this is supposed to prove that the justice system is accurate
enough to avoid executing the wrong person.

This is a stupid, dishonest posing of the DNA exoneration question.

There are probably a very small number of pre DNA usage
historical cases, in which an execution has occurred, that might have hinged
on DNA, and for which DNA evidence remains available, and for which there
are capable people with funding interested in pursuing the matter, after
execution.

DNA evaluations are expensive, evidence is often lost or destroyed after a
conviction or execution (sometimes
purposely) , and people in the legal profession interested in defending what
are usually indigent defendants, tend to spend their time on live
defendants, versus already dead ones.

Nowadays, in well carried out investigations and trials, attempts to
evaluate any **available** DNA evidence pertinent to a capital crime,
are obviously going to be made either during investigation, during trial, or
on appeal - before an execution.

In other words, the justice system tactitly accepts that DNA can prove a
person not guilty, in a process that otherwise would have found him falsely
guilty.

There are a number of cases where the convicted have not been executed, and
DNA evidence was brought to bear, post conviction, and exonerated them.

Preumably, they would have been executed without the use of DNA evidence.

IT IS THESE CASES THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE WRONG
PEOPLE EVER GET EXECUTED IN CASES WHERE DNA DOESN'T COME TO BEAR, OR HAVE IN
THE PAST WHERE THE DNA ROUTE WASN'T USED.

As most people know, post conviction DNA evidence has overturned numbers of
convictions, both death penalty and non death penalty.

Following is a relevant treatment of DNA exonerations.

From: Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Yeshiva University 100 Fifth
Avenue, 3rd Floor . New York, NY 10011

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/351.php and
www.innocenceproject.org/docs/DNAExonerationFacts_WEB.pdf

Facts on Post-Conviction DNA Exonerations

There have been 215 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States.

. The first DNA exoneration took place in 1989. Exonerations have been won
in 32 states; since 2000, there have been 152 exonerations.

. 16 of the 215 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row.

. The average length of time served by exonerees is 12 years. The total
number of years served is approximately 2,640.

. The average age of exonerees at the time of their wrongful convictions was
26.

Races of the 215 exonerees:

131 African Americans
59 Caucasians
19 Latinos
1 Asian American
5 whose race is unknown

. The true suspects and/or perpetrators have been identified in 82 of the
DNA exoneration cases.

. Since 1989, there have been tens of thousands of cases where prime
suspects were identified and pursued-until DNA testing (prior to conviction)
proved that they were wrongly accused.

. In more than 25 percent of cases in a National Institute of Justice study,
suspects were excluded once DNA testing was conducted during the criminal
investigation (the study, conducted in 1995, included 10,060 cases where
testing was performed by FBI labs).

. 45 percent of exonerees have been financially compensated. 23 states, the
federal government, and the District of Columbia have passed laws to
compensate people who were wrongfully incarcerated. Awards under these
statutes vary from state to state.

. 33 percent of cases closed by the Innocence Project were closed because of
lost or missing evidence.

Leading Causes of Wrongful Convictions

These DNA exoneration cases have provided irrefutable proof that wrongful
convictions are not isolated or rare events, but arise from systemic defects
that can be precisely identified and addressed. For more than 14 years, the
Innocence Project has worked to pinpoint these trends.

Mistaken eyewitness identification testimony was a factor in 77 percent of
post-conviction DNA exoneration cases in the U.S., making it the leading
cause of these wrongful convictions. Of that 77 percent, 48 percent of cases
where race is known involved cross-racial eyewitness identification. Studies
have shown that people are less able to recognize faces of a different race
than their own. The Innocence Project has adopted a series of guidelines to
improve the reliability of eyewitness identifications. These suggested
reforms are practiced in the state of New Jersey, large cities like
Minneapolis and Seattle, and several smaller jurisdictions.

Lab error and junk science have played a role in 65 percent of wrongful
convictions.
In over half of DNA exonerations, the misapplication of forensic
disciplines-such as blood type testing, hair analysis, fingerprint analysis,
bite mark analysis, and more-has played a role in convicting the innocent.
In these cases, forensic scientists and prosecutors presented fraudulent,
exaggerated, or otherwise tainted evidence to the judge or jury which led to
the wrongful conviction. Three cases have even involved erroneous testimony
about DNA test results.

False confessions and incriminating statements lead to wrongful convictions
in 25 percent of cases. More than 350 jurisdictions now record
interrogations.

False confessions are another leading cause of wrongful convictions.
Twenty-five percent of cases involve a false confession or incriminating
statement made by the defendant. Of those cases, 35 percent were 18 or under
and/or developmentally disabled. The Innocence Project encourages police
departments to electronically record all custodial interrogations in their
entirety in order to prevent coercion and to provide an accurate record of
the proceedings. More than 350 jurisdictions have voluntarily adopted
policies to record interrogations. State supreme courts have taken action in
Alaska, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Wisconsin.
Illinois, Maine, New Mexico, and the District of Columbia require the taping
of interrogations in homicide cases.

Snitches contribute to wrongful convictions in 15 percent of cases.
Another principal factor in wrongful convictions is the use of snitches, or
jailhouse informants. Whenever snitch testimony is used, the Innocence
Project recommends that the judge instruct the jury that most snitch
testimony is unreliable as it may be offered in return for deals, special
treatment, or the dropping of charges. Prosecutors should also reveal any
incentive the snitch might receive, and all communication between
prosecutors and snitches should be recorded. Fifteen percent of wrongful
convictions that were later overturned by DNA testing were caused in part by
snitch testimony.

Bad lawyering, something which, based on his posts, TMO is probably quite
familiar with, though he may not know it....

A few examples of which are failure to investigate, failure to call
witnesses, and the inability to prepare for trial (due to caseload or
incompetence).