Killing Innocent People Is Unconscionable

There is a new report out from the National Registry of Exonerations (NRE) a joint project of the University of Michigan and Northwestern University law schools -- and it's a rather frightening indictment of our justice system. According to the NRE, since 1989 there have been over 2,000 cases nationwide where a person has been exonerated (found to be innocent) after being convicted of a felony crime and sent to prison (which comes out to about 87 people a year -- that we know about). Many of these people had served many years in prison before being exonerated.

That in itself would be bad enough, but it gets much worse. At least 101 of those innocent people had been sentenced to death and spent their time on death row. That's right, in just the last 23 years this nation has sent a minimum of 101 people to death row to be executed (or about 4.4 people each and every year).

That's just the number that we know about, and have been released. How many innocent people are still on death row, waiting to be unjustly executed? And even worse, how many innocent people have already been executed? We'll probably never know that number, but we know it does happen. We have recently learned about two innocent people in Texas alone that were unjustly executed -- Cameron Todd Willingham and Carlos DeLuna.

I'm not saying everyone on death row should be released -- far from it. Many of them are vicious and dangerous people, and they should never be allowed to walk free again. But should we really be in the business of executing human beings, especially in light of the knowledge we have about the imperfections of our justice system? Wouldn't it be enough to keep them locked up? After all, an execution is the one thing in our justice system that can't be undone.

Sending innocent people to prison is very wrong. Killing them is unconscionable.

(NOTE -- The picture above was taken from the Facebook page of the Texas Moratorium Network.)

"Eyewitness" Bill Is Worthy Of Support

It has long been known that eyewitness testimony is not reliable, and yet many criminal cases depend on eyewitness testimony to get a conviction. Both police and prosecutors depend on eyewitness identification, especially when they don't have much other evidence. When this involves a person identifying someone they know and have met before, it is usually reliable. After all, we all are good at recognizing friends and acquaintances.

It is when a person must identify a stranger that problems arise. They may have only seen the person for a few seconds, but they are expected to pick this stranger out (even though there may be many people that look sort of like him/her). This is a problem, and many times the eyewitness may pick up clues (perhaps unintended) from a police officer ( and if asked to identify a single person they may assume this is the guilty party because they have been arrested and look somewhat like the person they hazily remember).

This can result in an erroneous identification, and the conviction of an innocent person. Here in Texas alone at least 44 people have been exonerated by DNA after being convicted of a crime. And 38 of those people had been convicted because of eyewitness testimony. We simply don't know how many innocent people are sitting in prison after being convicted on erroneous eyewitness testimony, but their case doesn't have DNA that can be tested. Obviously this is a problem that needs to be corrected.

I am not suggesting that eyewitness testimony is worthless and must never be used. That would be ridiculous because it is sometimes valuable -- especially in identifying people the eyewitness has known previously. But there must be some rules established for all police agencies to follow to minimize the number of faulty identifications. Currently each police agency is allowed to create and follow its own procedures for eyewitness identifications, and some of those are good while others are not.

State Senator Rodney Ellis (D-Houston) wants to fix this problem. Ellis (pictured) has introduced a bill that would give the Bill Blackwood Law Enforcement Management Institute at Sam Houston State University the authority to develop a policy and training materials on proper procedures for eyewitness testimony. The bill would mandate that all police agencies in Texas then be trained and required to use those procedures.

The bill is not a cure-all for the problem but it would reduce the number of erroneous identifications, and that would be a very good thing. So far the bill is proceeding nicely. It has been recommended out of both the Senate's Criminal Justice Committee and the House's Criminal Jurisprudence Committee. Now it goes to the floor of both chambers for debate and a vote. I hope it can avoid Austin's political game-playing and receive the approval of both chambers and be sent to the governor (where proponents have been assured the governor will sign it).

There have been a lot of silly bills introduced in the Texas legislature this session. This is not one of them. This is badly needed, and should pass. I hope it does.

Too Many Wrongful Convictions

Thirty years ago, Cornelius Dupree Jr. (pictured above) was convicted of rape and murder, and was sent to a Texas prison.   He was denied parole at least twice because he refused to admit his guilt.   On Tuesday, he was declared innocent by a Dallas judge after being exonerated by DNA evidence.  

Because of the 30 years the state forced him to spend in prison, Texas now owes him (according to a recently passed law) $80,000 for each of those years.   He will get a lump sum payment of $2.4 million dollars plus an annuity for life.   That may seem like a lot of money to many of us, but it's really small compensation for stealing thirty years of a man's life.

The scary part of this whole story is that Dupree's wrongful conviction is not all that rare an occurrence.   Since 2001, Dallas county has found 21 convicted prisoners to be innocent -- statewide there have been 41 prisoners exonerated.   Dallas has the majority of cases because they have an excellent District Attorney who is willing to examine past cases, and their county crime lab maintains biological evidence for decades after a conviction (and many other counties don't).

This is far too many cases of wrongful convictions -- 41 in just the last ten years.   It makes me wonder how many other innocent people are in prison because their evidence has not been fully examined yet (or has been disposed of by the committing county).   It just goes to show that our system of justice, while better than that of many other countries, still leaves a lot to be desired.

Now a smart person would probably wonder why the state continues to execute prisoners (and Texas leads the nation in executions) when it's justice system is so prone to error.   It would make sense to believe that Texas has executed one or more innocent people in the past and may well do so again in the future.   This is a horrifying thought.   It's bad enough to rob an innocent person of years out of their life, but executing an innocent person is inexcusable.   After looking at these statistics, it would be smart (and prudent) to do away with the death penalty.

But then this is Texas, and the state leadership (composed primarily of Republicans) is not nearly that smart.   I seriously doubt they will even consider doing away with the death penalty, since that would anger the death-lovers in their base.   Far too many Texans are fine with executing a few innocent people as long as they can satisfy their own bloodlust and desire for revenge by continuing to carry out the death penalty.

This doesn't make any sense, but then that's been a hallmark of Texas government in recent years.

Bush Knowingly Imprisoned Innocents

Many of us on the left have been calling for Bush, Cheney and others in that administration to be held accountable for the crimes they committed. They started and waged an illegal war with a country that posed us no danger, resulting in the deaths of millions of people. They trashed the Constitution by spying on American citizens and others without a search warrant. And they made a mockery of the rule of law by keeping people in prison for years without charges or a trial.

Now we learn of another crime they committed -- putting people in prison and keeping them there for years even though they knew those people were innocent. This is inexcusable behavior for any government, and what makes it worse is that they did it for political reasons. Justifying their own atrocious behavior was more important than the lives of hundreds of innocent people.

This is not just my view. It is the view and sworn testimony of a high-ranking official in the Bush administration -- Lawrence Wilkerson. Colonel Wilkerson, a 31 year U.S. Army veteran, was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell during the Bush presidency. His accusations were made in a signed and sworn declaration in support of an innocent former Guantanamo detainee.

Wilkerson said hundreds of prisoners were turned over to U.S. officials by Afghans and Pakistanis for cash payments of up to $5000, and there was little or no evidence that these men (and children as young as 12) were terrorists or ever had any kind of connection to terrorism. In other words, they were innocent victims. But that did not stop the Bush administration from sending them to Guantanamo, torturing them and using them as public relations pawns to justify the Iraqi invasion and occupation.

Wilkerson said Cheney and Rumsfeld refused to release the detainees known to be innocent because "the detention efforts would be revealed as the incredibly confused operation that they were", and that was "not acceptable to the Administration and would have been severely detrimental to the leadership at DoD."

He went on to say that Cheney "had absolutely no concern that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees were innocent. . .if hundreds of innocent individuals had to suffer in order to detain a handful of hardcore terrorists, so be it."

Wilkerson said that according to Cheney and Rumsfeld "innocent people languishing in Guantanamo for years was justified by the broader War on Terror and the small number of terrorists who were responsible for the September 11 attacks."

But it gets even worse. Wilkerson said, "I discussed the issue of the Guantanamo detainees with Secretary Powell. I learnt that it was his view that it was not just Vice-President Cheney and Secretary Rumsfeld, but also President Bush who was involved in all of the Guantanamo decision making."

This is deplorable behavior for a government official of any rank. There is no justification, and never will be any justification for putting an innocent person in prison, or keeping a person in prison after determining the person's innocence. This goes against not only the rule of law, but the very foundations of a free country.

Isn't it time we gave Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld a fair trial and some prison jumpsuits? Isn't it time for these guilty men to experience what they put hundreds of innocent persons through?

Perry Should Step Up And Pardon Cole

Like the proverbial broken clock that is right twice a day, it looks like the Republican Texas Attorney General, Greg Abbott, has finally rendered a decision in the best interests of Texas and its citizens.

Timothy Cole (pictured) was a Fort Worth resident who was unjustly convicted of rape and sent to prison. He died in prison before it was proven that he did not commit the crime. Since then, his family has been working to clear his good name. They wanted the governor to grant him a posthumous pardon.

That seems to be the least that Texas can do for Mr. Cole and his family. The grave injustice done to him cannot be undone due to his death, but at least his family should be given the gift of clearing his good name. But until now, Governor Perry has claimed he could not do that because of Texas law, saying that law does not allow for a posthumous pardon to be done.

That is no longer true. AG Abbott has issued a new legal opinion saying, "Given this shift in Supreme Court precedent and the Legislature's apparent recognition of this shift, we believe a Texas court would likely conclude that the Governor may grant a posthumous pardon under current Texas law, so long as all other constitutional requirements are met. We believe a court would likely conclude that the Board of Pardons and Paroles is authorized to recommend that the Governor grant a posthumous pardon."

Governor Perry, the ball is now in your court. For once, do the right thing. Grant this pardon.

Innocence Project Attorney is Sued

I have been familiar with the Innocence Project for a while, and I've admired the good work that they do. They take on cases of convicted inmates who they believe may be innocent. Many innocent prisoners have been freed due to their work.

I had always assumed they were sort of a charity and did their work for free. That looks now like it may not be the case. Consider the case of Steven Phillips (pictured above). Mr. Phillips spent 25 years in a Texas prison for a sexual assault and burglary that he did not do.

The Innocence Project took on Phillips' case and referred it to Lubbock attorney Kevin Glasheen. Phillips was eventually exonerated and freed from prison. Due to a new Texas law, he is now scheduled to receive a large settlement (about $4 million) from the state of Texas.

Sounds like a great story doesn't it? It was until Phillips received a bill from attorney Glasheen. The bill was for $1 million. To me, that sounds like a massive insult added to a huge injury. And it turns out that Glasheen is also representing 13 other exonerees -- all of whom are due to receive large compensations from the state. It looks like Glasheen is trying to get rich off these exonerees who were tragically wronged.

Phillips is refusing to pay the outrageous attorney fee. He has sued Glasheen. He has also added to his suit an Innocence Project attorney, Jeff Blackburn -- the attorney who referred his case to Glasheen. Phillips suspects Blackburn may be getting a kickback from Glasheen's abnormally large fees.

Frankly, I find this whole thing disgusting. The compensation paid by the state was to help make up for a huge injustice done to these exonerees. It was not meant to make attorneys rich.

I have no problem with the attorney getting a reasonable fee, but this looks like pure naked ugly greed.

Texas To Compensate The Innocent

In the last few years, the state of Texas has freed 39 prisoners who were proven to be innocent by DNA testing. These men had their lives destroyed by being charged with and convicted of crimes they did not commit. The state cannot give these men the years back that they spent in prison, but they are going to finally give them some compensation to help them get a new start.

Yesterday, the Texas House agreed to the Senate version of a compensation bill with a 132 to 13 vote. The governor is expected to sign the bill into law. The bill is known as the Tim Cole bill. Cole was an inmate who died in 1999 after serving years in prison for a rape he did not commit. He was cleared by DNA tests after his death.

Cole's brother, Cory Sessions, said, "Almost 25 years ago, the only thing people knew about Tim Cole's name was he was a convicted rapist. Now they know his name stands for a lot more."

Once signed into law, the bill will give Texas the most generous compensation package in the nation. To qualify for the compensation, a prisoner must be found to be innocent -- those released on a legal technicality will not qualify. Also, any exonerated person who is later convicted of a felony will be disqualified.

Texas will pay $80,000 for each year a person was in prison. They will also pay $25,000 for each year a person was on parole or had to register as a sex offender. Each person exonerated will also get 120 hours of tuition paid at a public college or training center. The original House version of the bill also provided health insurance, but the Senate removed that provision.

The Texas Legislature has been known to do some dumb things, so it's good to see them overwhelmingly pass a bill like this. I think both Democrats and Republicans realize this is the right thing to do.