apparently, the blood on his shirt was a big issue and DNA testing didn't prove it wasn't the victim back in 1996. Thin evidence. I thought we were innocent until proven guilty. The latest test proved the blood on his shirt wasn't hers. I wonder if there was some evidence other than that to convict him. Did they establish he knew her or was nearby? That's really no evidence for a conviction and I'll applaud the prosecutors on this as well for wanting the truth rather than trying to keep an innocent man in prison so their numbers look good. All to often, especially in Florida and Texas, all they want to do is stamp "case closed" and they really aren't interested in anything else once that is done.

In Florida and Texas the case would have been stamped closed with the man 6 feet under.

@ Larry367607

Don't know if they changed the headline since you looked at it but it says "convicted Colorado rapist, killer". The way I read it they are saying he was a convicted rapist and a convicted killer.

If I read the article correctly, it said that 'at the time of the murder trial, his DNA DID NOT MATCH what was found on the murder victim'. WTF? I can't imagine the HORROR this man has gone through, facing such charges if he is indeed innocent of this crime. Going through a trial, being mocked, ridiculed, hated and shamed and then being sentenced to life in prison for a crime he did not commit. I think the ones who prosecuted him KNOWING that the seamen was not his should be penalized some how, along with the judge who allowed this mis-carriage of justice.

I think those who are indeed guiltyof any crime, should be convicted and sentenced to what ever the law allows for their crime. HOWEVER, railroading an innocent person into being convicted and sentenced as a criminal, is a criminal act as far as I'm concerned. Those who prosecute should be interested in JUSTICE. They should be interested in finding the actual criminal.

It's amazing just how UN-JUST our justice system really is.

An extremely valid point you've raise here. The headline for stupid "shock effect"??? I too checked this article wonderring "what on earth..." How can DNA evidence exconerate him if he was the KILLER?

Friskie, Take your racsism some place else. Did you even read the article?? Did you look at the picture?? Oh No, there goes that arguement that it ONLY happnes to blacks..........!!! Good lord!!!

Renie, I am with you.

The headline for stupid "shock effect"???

More like revenue generating effect. More clicks = more $$$.

@Reni I agree there should be some fine imposed on those responsible for his wrongful conviction and he ( Dewey ) should be heavily compensated for his time in prison.

It wasn't conclusive the blood on his shirt was hers...it was conclusive that the semen found on her WASN'T his...and yet he was convicted anyway?

Another stupid jury pool.

dna testing can release but not convict anyone.if there will be a settlement for wrongful conviction then somebody including his lawyer should be punished not just the tax payer.

It certainly seems we have one of those "just convict anyone" cases for the crime. Evidence, as presented by this article seems to have been sufficient to exonerate the defendant but since the police couldn't come up with any other suspect, they figure, oh well, this guy will do. I'll bet this happens more times than we would care to think about.

As long as we maintain this shield of immunity for police and prosecutors for this type of conduct, this will continue to happen. They should be held civilly and criminally accountable

UGH MSN goes farther down hill every single day. I only clicked on it because it said DNA will let killer go free. I see that the title has been changed now. Seriously though. Really, MSN?

Anyway, this is terrifying, this shows how police will do anything to put someone in jail for a crime, even if things don't add up, just to satisfy and make the community "safe" again. I'm happy the man can go free, but I am sad for all of the time that he has spent in jail, innocently.

I wonder if the DNA shows who the killer really is?

I really should just change my work homepage from MSNBC because they continue to irritate me.

Here is a pdf with the media's newspaper coverage from the trial. It starts on page 4 of the pdf.

http://rlbpclaw.com/var/az/51894/1419724-531793-Binder1.pdf

People we need to look at what allows these things to happen. Its politics plane and simple. A Prosecutor is elected. And this starts with the investigation, that is where all the mistakes start. And the people. US are to blame also, because we all want someone to pay for something like this case. We want so badly to the person that did this was put away. The police need to close the case to look like they have done there job. And we have seen it time and time again, Some person that really can't fight back takes the fall. Everyone looks goods and moves up the political latter. All the time a killer is still on the street and the man that said he didn't do it sets in Jail. The one single thing that could fix thing kind of thing is to hold Prosecutors and the Police accountable for wrongful prosecution. There was just a case in Tx that was a textbook. Project Innocents took the case and got a new trial. When they showed the new Prosecutors the evidence, it was so clear that she dropped all charges and went after the man that prosecuted the man in the first place. The new Prosecutor was a real pit bull and she pushed to have the first team prosecuted for wrongdoings. The Feds had to step in. Tx didn't want to do the right thing.

The cops botched evidence with a bar of soap containing a fingerprint by mishandling it and losing the fingerprint. Who else put her engagement ring on her dead body after murdering her but this guy? The cops made sure that the soap is forever not evidence through incompetent handling of same!

Some dude, why are you brining up somehting that didn't have to do with this case? This guy was wrongly convicted of a crime, the damn dna didn't match and the judge is cool with this? This guy should get out immediately and sue the crap out of all involved. I am sick and tired of innocent folks going to jail due to the DA's stupidity and the eagerness to close a high profile case.

Here we have the main reason why Michigan outlawed the death penalty in the 19th century. If the state had killed him, there is no "oops" moment that can be rectified in any way.

I can't even begin to know how this man must feel! Now we don't know anything about his life before his conviction, was he in trouble with the law, what made him a suspect in the case, was he in the wrong place at the wrong time? Even that's all irrelevant though, He didn't do it. While he's be rotting away in Jail for 16 years I'm sure the Prosecutor, Judge and all the police investigators have carried on with their lives as normally as ever. Taking vacations, getting married, having kids, going to ball games, you know all the things you do WHEN YOU'RE NOT IN JAIL! I'm all for putting away Criminals but the problem is the people that do it are all fallible, they may even have agendas, like getting re-elected or appointed to a new court. And most importantly they are all just human, prone to mistakes. If there was some kind of penalty or consequences for them in a case like this, I really think we'd have a better chance getting things right the first time. Otherwise all a conviction is for them is another notch on the gun stalk, a gold star for their record.

And I think it's funny how people use the word Justice so loosely. There is no real guaranteed justice in the world we live in, all we have is a legal system, a system that in which there is a winner and a loser, and as we have seen many times those roles are not always correct. It comes down to who plays the game the best, who's the attorney who gives the best speeches, who can find the best expert witness, who's side the media is on, how prejudice are the jury members, and so much more that really has nothing to do with justice but has everything to do with a verdict.

Remeber what Paul Harvey once said "It's not the Justice System, It's the Legal System."

And what's legal may not be Just.

"I say just let him rot anyway I mean the guy's nickname is Rider, he must be no good"

@ Bestia Infernale: Are you F*#%ing kidding me?! That opinion and kind of closed minded thinking is what landed this INNOCENT man in jail in the first damn place! You do not judge a book by its cover, or by its name for that damn matter! Maybe he rode motorcycles and that explains away the nick name...either way, your comment is by far, one of the most ignorant things I have ever read on here! I hope you are never on a jury...god help the defendant if you are. SMDH

I was thinking about the family of the young girl who's dignity and life were stolen. IF this man is not guilty then who did this and what have we done?? Has to be a renewed emotional roller coaster.

Of course the family of this man has certainly be waiting for justice 15 years. You can't get that back either!!!

The DNA from the seimen in the girl did not match this man!!! Oh my!!

Well said Reni. StateAtty also has good thoughts and observations. It seems that juries often don't like to just let a case go when there is no one left to blame. And juries, no doubt, like to find fault based on their own biases and prejudices. The court room is a very intense and emotionally charged place. Despite the apparently insignificant evidence, this guy was most likely convicted by the juror's emotions - led by the prosecution's egotistical charge.

As in any profession, many members are there merely because of their over-inflated ego. There for the bucks; for the thrill, for the win - not caring about the oath or truth. Best yet, prosecutors and judges operate with freedom of liability. What a great place to work for a person that hates. Watch out for those egotists and don't vote them into office.

Best way to keep things like this from happening is know who you are voting for; and, be aware of local executive appointments. Call your congressperson and urge a change in the laws protecting prosecutorial discretion and exemption from liability. Everyone would agree that some protection must be afforded to prosecutors and judges. But, allowing anything less than requiring a prosecutor to own his case and be certain of the state's evidence, and requiring judges to remain unbiased and neutral, would amount to encouraging malicious prosecution.

Is it not better that: ten guilty men go free, then one innocent man be convicted?

Okay I know this is not important,

BUT am I the only one that thinks this guy looks like the actor from Sons of Anarchy???

DNA is the best weapon ever to come along to battle redneck sheriffs etc who were more than happy to hang vicious crimes on those they deemed "unworthy" of living in their counties.....

Talk to any jury after a trial; they will almost all tell you, he did not prove to us he didn't do it; just look at this case; his semen did not match the semen on the victim, the blood on his shirt was similar, of course it is similar there are only 5 blood types; do not get the impression innocent until proved guilty, jury's almost never start a trial that way, if a jury stops looking a a defendant during a trial, he is almost always found guilty.

Larry-367607

Had to check this out from headline, "New DNA testing to free killer?". Just wondered how DNA testing would free him if he was a killer.

Good catch Larry. The title should be something like "New DNA testing to free man convicted of murder", or similar, as he is obviously not the killer.

Let's face the type of real FACTS that courts, attorneys, judges, and jurors are not bound by any law or code of ethic, nor statute, and therfore are not civily, legally, morally, or logstically obliged to answer for any mistake OR CRIME they commit.

As long as a system that only answers to itself continue to grant it's own impunity, there can be NO JUSTICE !

Check your own states, your own codices, your own statutes, your own codes and laws... find the one that says "if there is ever any question, the juror and judge are directed to side with the STATE".

Last but not least, is THIS case that of a crimeless victim? If I lock someone away for 16 years would I not be guilty of kidnapping? Why must a judicial system be completely devoid of countenance? Those who locked that man away ARE criminals !

Lobby for change... before YOU become the next victim.

Until we change the criteria for promoting police officers, judges, and district attorneys from how many people they arrest and or convict to a system based on the vote of the people(the way it should be in a dem. society) we will continue to have police,and dist.attys. and judges who are only interested in convicting someone and furthering their own careers. Not really caring about right or wrong, just about the size of the paycheck they collect.

WHY ARE SHERRIFFS THE ONLY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES THAT ARE ELECTED?

Power Corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

LEGALLIZE MARIJUANA!!!!

We pay them, they should be accountable to us, they are here to "PROTECT AND SERVE" us. Can you imagine how much the "MORE RIGHTEOUS THAN THOU" attitude would change if they had to be voted back into their job every two years? I'd be willing to bet there would be a lot fewer wrongful convictions if this were so!

LEGALIZE MARIJUANA!!

I did not sit during the trial. I did not hear or witness all the evidences or testimonies. DNA in itself is not proof beyond reasonable doubt. It's just as highly possible the victim had sex but not necessarily at the time of the death so the semen isn't proof in itself that a rape had occurred. Only assumed that it occurred. Blood on a shirt isn't proof in itself unless it may be a match up to the victim. I did not hear what other evidences were offered up during the trial. The judge did not find the defendant guilty, a jury did so hearing the judge gave a maximum sentence isn't unique nor does it infer that the judge themself did anything inappropriate. If it turns out that the blood on the shirt was a type matchup to the victim does not in itself mean that it came from the victim. It would take a much deeper testing that probably wasn't available to the DA at that time and the type match up may have been assumed in conjunction with other evidences that was not mentioned in this article.

I have strongly advocated for a long time for a "Prosecutorial Misconduct Proxy Law." If it can be proven that a lawyer, a judge, a prosecutor, a law enforcement officer, or any other sworn officer was involved in misconduct --- concealing exculpatory evidence for example --- that the protection of any existing shield laws would be abbrogated and that person or persons would stand trial for their misconduct as a felony. The only real new thing would be that the sentence would be a directed sentence and would be that of the person convicted with the same parole conditions.

There was apparently no real misconduct, just an incompetent judge and jury in this case. The judge should have known that the evidence was too thin and directed the jury to acquit instead of being pleased to send him away. But had their been prosecutorial misconduct the people involved, if found guilty, would be required in this case to be sentenced to life without parole.

It appears that about 15% of the prisoners on death row are innocent of the crime of which they are accused. It is higher if the prisoner is Black and lower if he is white. I oppose the death penalty, not because I don't think that society does not have a right to an eye for an eye, but because it cannot be undone if the person turns out to be found innocent after death.

I used to live in Roanoke, Virginia and had a neighbor who was wrongly accused and convicted of rape. He was sentenced to 40 years in prison and, I think, had served 11 years. It turned out the gal had sex with her boyfriend for the first time and became paranoid that she would be pregnant and made up the whole thing. DNA evidence freed him, but not until he had lost his home, his job, his wife had divorced him and his kids had become estranged. He got out and was given a very handsome settlement because there WAS misconduct in that exculpatory evidence was not given to his defense lawyer (who was basically incompetent anyway.) The man tried to resume his life, but had a huge amount of trouble re-adjusting to "life outside." For example, he was a foreman in a textile plant and was given his job back, but was unable to perform it because he would wait to be told to do even the smallest task just as had been beaten into him for 11 years. Sad. Very sad.

All the law enforcement personnel and prosecutors involved in the man's case were protected by "shield" laws and nothing could be done to them. The judge had committed suicide because he was embezzling money.

Wow- it took a long time to get here, but Amy-3288576, we think you should change your home page too!

We will miss you Amy.

That's the reason why I'm against the death penalty. It is just too common that innocent men are found guilty. I hope they catch the animal who did commit the crime. Thank God they were able to prove this innocent man innocent and let him out. There's no way to compensate a man for 16 lost years.

An interesting study and an interesting organization together prove that our justice system is far from infallible. Between 1989 and 2003 there were over 350 prisoners convicted of serious felony crimes including murder exonerated, more than half due to DNA testing. Another interesting finding is that there has been a sharp 300% increase in exoneration in the latter 4 years of the 2004 study.

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Prison-Exonerations-Gross19apr04.htm

Here is an organization which has so far helped over 100 juveniles convicted as adults of serious felony crime including murder clear their names. The majority of those young people were exonerated because the actual criminals were later found.

http://cwcy.org/exonereesView.aspx

Imagine being railroaded into an adult conviction and prison at the age of 14 or 15 and then spending another 10 or more years getting royally victimized in an adult prison then being exonerated???

Perhaps it would be better to not try kids as adults upon the accusation of serious crime if we can't do any better than falsely convicting over 100 kids of serious felony crime in the last 20 years?

Another detailed study about exoneration:

http://www.sunstar-solutions.com/ConvictedInnocents.htm

In 2010 Texas Governor Perry was forced to pardon a young man who died in prison after the real rapist was later caught and DNA testing proved that the young man's conviction was fraudulent.

http://www.statesman.com/news/texas/perry-grants-states-first-posthumous-pardon-307475.html

There must be a better way.

Once released, the wrongly convicted needs the help of 'the rapist' - uh, I mean 'therapist'

We had 2 exonnerated in Dallas after 30 years today. Both were convicted on the same rape as partners in crime. The DNA matched 2 other guys in prison on other convictions. In Texas, convicts have to submit to DNA testing. kit is catching up with quite a few. Now these two will be paid by the state for the false imprisonment, but it will never pay for the years they lost. And both men's mothers died while they were in prison and didn't live to see their sons freed.

@ "Bestia Infernale" clever.....Infernal Beast (Beast from Hell)....so you're the beast from Hell ?

You have time to comment on a blog ? Shouldn't you be taking over the world or something ? You suggest that this man is guilty because his nickname is "rider" ? Maybe he just rides a Harley ? Oh, but in your infinite wisdom you say he's guilty because of his nickname, oh that's heavy.

Maybe you're new handle should be Bestiality Eternal

@chuck2111043 . . . . You are right on! The greatest tag-team in history is the police & prosecuting attorney. And many times you can throw the judge in there to.

Todd, it's sometimes hard to see any changes when people are killed at random because of the color of their skin, or they are tied to the back of a pickup truck and dragged to their death because of the color of their skin.

Laws have changed, yes. But, the vile mentality of war on people because of the color of their skin has just gone underground. It pops up frequently, though, and your view of how things are NOW is a bit narrow.

Grand Dsyfunction Colorado! Enough said!

Please see the documentary "Slavery by any other name" then come back and tell everyone how it is over and they need to "move on".

Why do people not tell Jews that they need to "move one"

Just wondering?

TiredVoter-- People don't tell the Jews to move on because there are still Jewish people alive who are concentration camp survivors and there are still Jews alive who lost loved ones to the Holocaust.

Whatever you want to call it now doesn't matter. The simple fact is that there is no one alive now who was or owned a slave. We are several generations removed from that time. If you want to complain about things, complain about current events. When you start throwing history from over a century and a half ago into the mix it makes people shut their ears to everything you are saying. There is nothing anyone can do to change what happened then. There is no way to atone for it, and even if there was, our constitution forbids punishing descendents for the crimes of their ancestors. So drop it.

@TiredVoter: Clearly, you have not heard the average mainstream person whenever there's a new Holocaust memorial. It's kind of nauseating to be honest how people will roll their eyes and start condemning people who are still very alive and lost relatives in it just because it happened before their birth. It's why many rabbis made the clear moral choice and sided with African Americans during the Civil Rights Movement. Doctor King had it the right way around.

However, it's kind of a shame when an innocent convicted man becomes his skin color, and not the content of his character as we all would hope. White or black, the moral of this story here is that too many people in law enforcement jump to be the hangman; and we would all do better with caution.

@Doobie, your name says it all, you are stoned. I am of African and Seminole ancestry and your rant about the red not complaining is because your head is buried in the sand. He is constantly complaining( and justifiably so)their forced migration to now Oklahoma, the treaty of 1866,his intolerable living conditions in I.T and lack of governmental concern(help) for Native Americans. The 2011 White House Tribal Nations Conference was a attempt to quiet those complaints. Your response to blame African American is just a typical response of one the most grievous slave holding 5 Civilized Tribes

Amen

Doobie, you can't whine and complain. Your ancestors were slave-holders. But I will agree with you in one area: blacks generally did end up better off than Native Americans.

Who runs most African governments? Black Africans

Who runs most Caribbean governments? Afro-Caribbeans

What native American tribe is in charge of the country they live in? None.

@Doobie, what are you doing in your post if not whining? You certainly sound infantile. Also-you left off the main reason so many Native Americans perished at the hands of the White Man-lack of immunity to White Man diserases. So NO-your people weren't so strong as you claim-they mostly fell to a few germs.

Also-to all who keep hollering about how slavery has been over for more than 100+ years: what about the subsequent 100+ years of Jim Crow laws that kept blacks in the status of second class citizens, not able to live by the same laws that governed their white counterparts? What about the people who were kept from voting, who were lynched for just talking or looking the wrong way at a white person? What about the blacks denied the same educational and employment opportunities as their white counterparts, even though the constitution prohibted unequal treatment based on race? What of the blacks denied fair trials and forced to live in subpar segregated society, turned away from hospitals and medical treatment and all other types of places simply because their skin was the wrong color? And this is stuff that was going on as little as 50-60 years ago-more recently than the holocaust! There are plenty of African Americans who can still remember walking in constant fear of their lives and of having what little liberty they had stripped from them at the whim of some white man who saw no value in their lives other than to serve him!! There are still very many people alive who marched in the civil rights movement, who lived through Jim Crow, were hosed down while marching on Washington and who know all to well what the scary, unmasked face of racism looks like. Yes-official slavery in the US has been over for more than 100 years; but the long reaching arms of another 100+ years of laws and attitudes that served to try and keep the freed blacks in a new type of slavery, just ended little over 50 years ago, about 10-20 years AFTER the Holocaust. So please spare me the "the Holocaust just happened and slavery was so long ago" arguments as some type of rationale for why blacks should just "move on" and "get over it".

Sorry for this rant, but I get so tired of people who say it's ok for people to mourn Holocaust victims from overseas, but are so quick to yell about how Blacks should just be ok with things that happened right here in this country a few short years ago. All atrocities againstl human kind should be recognized and the victims mourned and some emapthy given to the plight of the survivors and their families, this includes the near extinction of the Native American, the horrendous mass genocide of the Jews in WWII Europe AND the institutions of BOTH slavery and subsequently and most recently, Jim Crow.

Todd nice job. couldn't have said it better myself.

True, and I wouldn't care if this person was black, white, blue purple, if he/she didn't commit the crime, it's terrible. Actually, I've been watching a lot of shows on tv lateley where dna has cleared a lot of white men who were convicted of crimes they didn't commit, but because they may have been in trouble for a minor crime, like possession of weed, they were convicted of major crimes.

Ok, let's try this. I'm of Slavic descent. We were called 'Slavic' because we were slaves of the Roman Empire. To add insult to injury, I'm a white woman. We make 78% for every dollar that a man makes. And let's not forget John Lennon's infamous quote: "women are the (n-word) of the world". I'm sorry this man was wrongfully convicted. But everyone please get off the 'woe is me' train. The way it really is, women as a whole get shafted every day, and just keep keeping on. Life is NOT fair.

Women, regardless of race didn't even have the right to vote until I believe 1920. So only 92 years of having that right and fighting from then on to continue to attempt to be treated equally!! Since the dawn of time women have been the most mistreated so you all quityerbitchin'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mcb-2773914

Todd, it's sometimes hard to see any changes when people are killed at random because of the color of their skin, or they are tied to the back of a pickup truck and dragged to their death because of the color of their skin.

Change doesn't even have a chance if people cannot help but bring racism into a story that has absolutely nothing to do with race. However when you cannot read the news without fervor that the press has been putting out there in an attempt to create tension without even reporting on the flip side of that coin then it is easy to understand why

Once again the rush to judgement has been proven WRONG. Just wondering why people cannot apply common sense every day of their lives. This would include the media who cannot wait to find new ways to 'stir the pot'.

Time to go old school with the media - tell the truth (not your opinion) and let the people draw their own conclusions AND - bonus points - if it is found the media either invented the story when none existed or lied, they get to pay a fine. All fines to begin at $1 million, said dollars to be paid to the US Treasury for the exclusive purpose of funding education that includes ethics classes. The media outlet that pays the most in fines shall have said program named after them.

Anyone thinking it will be the Fox News Ethics Program? Place your bets.

Most state laws prohibit a police officer, a prosecutor, a judge, or members of a jury from being held liable for a wrongful conviction. The standard is "as long as they did their jobs honestly in good faith." But in this case (and so many others), the prosecution was overzealous. The blood on the suspect's shirt could not be linked to the victim, and the semen from the victim was conclusively not the suspect's. Why did the prosecutor proceed with the case? Are prosecutors elected there? Was the press complaining that nobody was arrested yet?

There are many types of prosecutorial misconduct. They use jailhouse snitches, fail to turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense during discovery, shock the jury with gruesome color photos of the crime scene, and selectively use only those "experts" that favor the prosecution's theory. This is all designed to sway the jury, and unfortunately it works. That's why the innocent can be charged and even convicted.

A good read is "The Innocent Man" by John Grisham, a nonfiction work about prosecutors in Oklahoma.

Patrick, I respectfully say to you that I will NEVER "DROP IT" Got that??? You have NO idea what it is like to be a person of color in this country. I work and I work DAMNED hard. The only hand that I have out is the one that receives my paycheck every other Friday, and funny thing is I am the one handing those out.

Did I say anything about reparations? Did I??? No I did NOT. but you in your bigoted mind thought that was what you were reading. I said to go look up the documentary " Slavery by any other name". It will give a true picture of when slavery actually ended in this country and it wasn't over one hundred and fifty years ago. Look up peonage. You have no idea what blacks and even poor whites have gone through in this country. I as so sick of people like you that can't see two feet in front of them.

I do NOT WANT ANYTHING THAT YOU HAVE!!!! What I do want is to be able to achieve the things I want on my OWN!!! Please just go read a book or look at the documentaries that are out there to educate.

@Eileen,

The word "Slavic" was not even used until the 9th century and denotes the group of peoples who speak Slavic. It has nothing to do with the Romans or slavery. From wikipedia:

"The Slavic autonym Slověninъ is usually considered a derivation from slovo "word," originally denoting "people who speak/hear (the same language)," i.e. people who understand each other, in contrast to Slavic word denoting "foreign people" – němci, meaning "mumbling, murmuring people" (from Slavic němъ – "mumbling, mute"). The word in Latin is Sclaveni, which means "Slavs."

See, I just freed your people from your imagined chains. Cool.

Chris - it is often helpful to have a historian handy and Wikipedia

@Patrick,

I have to agree with @TiredVoter. It is like a bank robber saying, "I have not robbed a bank today, therefore I am not a bank robber, regardless of what happened in the past."

This country had a sad, sad history of slavery. Even the Founding Fathers tried to perpetuate it forever by building into the Constitution a "rule" that same that you counted slaves as 3/5 of a person when deciding apprtionment for House seats. This had the effect of giving the slave-holding states a vastly disproportinate voice in the House of Representatives. Even when slavery was abolished, it was immediately replaced by Jim Crow laws and debt laws that were in themselves a form of de facto slavery. There are millions of people that were alive during Jim Crow. When the Civil Rights Act was signed into law millions of mostly southern white males switched from being Democrats to being Republicans as the GOP drove the huge African-American GOP voting bloc (Eisenhower got over 70% of the Black vote) out of the Republican Part. I live in Alabama. One of my Senators never makes a speech without "mentioning" that his family owned 170 slaves. This is a nice codeword to let listeners know he is anti-Black. The other Senator touts his past membership in the KKK and avows support for Aryan supremist groups. You tell me when it all ended and everything became rosy and bright and wonderful. A lot of people haven't noticed.

Yes, opportunities are better for some people. But centuries of slavery left a whole race bereft of the ability of families to accumulate money or send their kids to decent schools. People still face massive discrimination. When I hear someone yell "Boy" around here, I know they are not talking to me. And I know I don't want to talk to them. And it's not just African-Americans. When I was stationed inhj North Dakota there were signs in bars that said, "Injun don't let the sun set on your ass in Minot." In Denver, there is huge discrimination against Orientals. It seems that everyone who feels inferior and lacks self-esteem wants to build himself up by looking down on someone still. Some things never change.

I am white. Roll Tide.

WTF are you all taking about, the man is WHITE! Idiots always make EVERYTHING a negative conversation about blacks.

Tired Voter brings up some valid points about how many former slaves were not given chances beyond working for their former owners after slavery "ended". They often worked on plantations paying rent and living in small shacks on the "Landlords" property, and most likely even buying food from the landowner never earning enough to save up. Nothing like working for the Landlord.

Our terminology of racial definition is out dated. These phrases only limit intellectual thought, "black" "white" "person of color". So who is "black" ? No one, not one person you ever met is "black", nor have you ever met a "white" person. These are limiting antiquated phrases, just like "person of color". We all have color, and to suggest that only some of us are "people of color" is another kind of elitist segregation.

There were "white" slaves and debtor prisons, in fact slavery had/has no color. In the Middle East slavery goes back before the days of the Roman Empire/s. Most African slaves were purchased from Africans who conquered other Africans.

In most cultures when a tribe or army was conquered, the women were captured and made into wives/slaves as were the children, this tradition knows no single culture or race.

There are still vast abuses of rights in our own society. When an employer pressures you to work overtime even if you are too tired, that's an abuse of power. When a company or bank CEO is awarded a bonus after the company or bank files bankruptcy, that too is an abuse of power. It's interesting that big oil companies continue to post record profits, while the average American hasn't seen a pay raise in 10, 20 years ? Currently we have a man running for president who has 3 million dollars in a Swiss bank account, is building a California mansion with a car elevator, and follows a religion based on the claims of joseph Smith, a polygamist.

So who are the slaves now ?

Well to be technical about it, sexual assault does not necessarily involve ejaculation of semen, but I agree with you given the very minimal information given about the conviction. With The Innocence Project, we have seen the dangers of the death penalty as some of those whose convictions have been shown to be in error were on death row.

What seems critical to me is that, in light of the increasingly scientific and technical nature of many trials, we need to review how the jury system works and how juries are constructed. In cases dependent upon science or in highly technical financial, tax or regulatory cases, the lack of expertise is a real problem. The average person can not be made expert in genetic science or financial regulatory systems in the course of a trial lasting a few weeks or even months. The answer is not to dumb down the trial process (the world is not going to get simpler again,) but may be to identify jurors competent to hear a particular case.

Some of the real problems are that Juries what to think that the police and Prosecutors wouldn't with hold evidence from them and wouldn't lie to them. So they many times just take what there told as the truth.

I hope this guy gets MILLIONS!

He would not be the first.

Fort Collins Settles Tim Masters Lawsuit For $5.9M
Larimer County Previously Settled For $4.1M

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/23834432/detail.html

The Peggy Hettrick Murder Case concerns the unsolved 1987 death of Peggy Hettrick in Fort Collins, Colorado. Timothy Lee "Tim" Masters (born June 25, 1971) served in the Navy for eight years following high school. He was an aircraft mechanic and worked for Learjet as a mechanic when he was arrested in 1997.[1] He was charged and convicted of the crime in 1999, and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. His sentence was vacated in 2008. Masters became the first convict in Colorado to be exonerated due to DNA evidence on June 29, 2011, although it was actually the absence of his DNA evidence on the body.....During 2007 hearings, the defense alleged police and prosecutorial misconduct in the investigation and trial. The defense argued that Jim Broderick perjured himself during the 1999 trial concerning his involvement in the case,[14] and that prosecutors allegedly withheld evidence about links to Dr. Richard Hammond, a potential suspect in the murder

I don't know. whatcha thinking yourself? It makes a great case for your argument when you start out calling someone a loser. Maybe you could ask why someone supports the death penalty before you start calling names.

Besides, this is pointless. The guy wasn't sentenced to death. Even if he was, Colorado has executed one man since 1977, and that was in 1997. A lot of states that have the death penalty don't actually carry them out. So why don't you save your asinine comments for actual death penalty cases. Loser.

Death penalty only justified with DNA evidence.

Sorry to see such contempt in your post Reba. But many people think that the death penalty is justified for "some crimes".

BTW, this guy was not on "Death Row". So your rant isn't justified in this case.

In cases like this a life without parole was correct, but, in "smoking gun" cases like Richard Wade Farley in Ca. and other recent "smoking gun" murders the death penalty is still needed. In Richards case he was caught at the scene and at least 100 people saw him murder one of the 7 people he murdered and the 3 or 4 people he wounded.

The blood wasn't proved to be a match to the victim. Still doesn't prove he wasn't there and an accomplice. Just that he didn't rape her. Maybe he didn't murder her like he said, but, maybe he was there. Today the blood on his shirt would have shown if it was hers.

I think I heard on TV last night that the person who's semen DNA matched, is already in prison for another murder.

Our prisons are filled with people to evil to be allowed to live and they are recruiting and training more while they are in prison.

I am still a firm believer in the death penalty, dont think it is used enough as a matter of fact. Some people's crimes are so awful that nothing other that death is a suitable punishment. You dont have to like it, but it is what it is. Besides, this case has nothing to do with the dealth penalty, so before you go casting those stones, make sure your arguement is at least relative to the topic at hand...loser.

And maybe you are an idiot. Maybe means nothing. You don't convict people on maybe. People should not be convicted without solid evidence of guilt. In this case there was evidence that he was not guilty but he was convicted anyway.

I would agree - the article states that at least 290 people have been cleared, which means 290 people have been convicted of crimes they haven't committed. Imagine being one of those 290 being wrongfully accused and being sentenced to the death penalty or even life in prison for something you didn't do. How can you be in favor of that? I would only be in favor or a death sentence for people who are pure evil and no rehabilitation is possible and the crime can be proven without any doubts. Even then...do two wrongs make a right? If you kill as a form of punishment, you're still a murderer.

This doesn't quite pertain to the article as a whole, but to the comments about the death penalty.

I am a true lover and always make it a point to be kind to EVERYONE, even those who don't always deserve it. And I will say, I don't really like the death penalty but if it keeps people from killing others then why not? A man murdered my uncle by shooting him in the head and has been convicted and will be killed himself. I have no remorse for him. His reasons were so ridiculous that even his own family testified against him even. The man that hurt my family is where he is supposed to be waiting his turn for his actions. Even though killing is wrong, I do believe in the golden rule: "Treat others as you would like to be treated" So in this case of murder, I do believe that death is a reasonable punishment.

Been in your shoes, however they never did catch the person who murdered my father-in-law. My husband's initial instinct was to hunt the guy down and kill him, but then he realized that if he did that he was no better than the person who shot his father. However, here is where you and I and the rest of my husband's family differ. They did not believe that the murderer should be executed, but should spend the rest of his life in prison, because his murder did nothing to bring back my father-in-law.

@Reba

First, there is no need for name-calling. Second, the death penalty is the proper punishment in the case of murder, but only in cases where there is no doubt (such as confession). Be careful also who you call loser. You may end up one day finding out that the only losers are people who refer to others as losers.

i think they are cowards. i would have said no. the evidence does not compute with what he is said to have done. i hope they say who the jurors are so we now who not to breed with.

@myspellcheckerisbroken,

Aww did I hurt your feelings?

Second, the death penalty is the proper punishment in the case of murder, but only in cases where there is no doubt (such as confession).

Even a confession is not sufficient. Innocent people can and do confess to crimes that they didn't commit.

We are making a lot of assumptions about the original trial and jury without much information. There is no information in this article about other evidence which may have contributed to the charges, prosecution and conviction. While the blood evidence was inconclusive and semen does not necessarily exist in a sexual assault case, there is nothing here about any relationship between the victim and the man convicted, witnesses who may have seen him in suspicious circumstances at or near the crime scene, other forensic evidence which may have pointed to him etc. I highly doubt that a prosecutor charged, a jury convicted and a judge sentenced solely on the basis of a "maybe" blood sample. If that was all it took, he should sue his lawyers for sleeping through his trial.

Remember that Timothy Masters was convicted of murder based primarily on the testimony of a psychologist whose opinion was that drawings Masters had done as a teenager indicated that he was the murderer. There was no actual physical evidence at all in that case.

And Tim did get a settlement from the government after more than 10 years of incarceration. Currently the investigating police officer is being tried for perjury. People can be convicted on the flimsiest evidence.

@Santa Clara...love your screen name. Used to live there in San Jose. How are things these days? I'm guessing not any better...

@ Hakon Montag .... Stay away. The whole county DA and judges are not any better than those in the story above and innocent men are in jail because of them.

santa clara county is truly corrupt. i know, i still live here in san jose. people the just-us system is truly broken. i was going to san jose state university and raising my daughter. i was going to school during the day and working at a bar at night washing glasses and mopping floors. i got off work one saturday night. i drove my car down mathilda st in sunnyvale. while i was drivng home i saw these asian guys standing in the shell gas station lot. i decided to pull into the denny's and get some buffalo wings. they took to long to serve me and i decided to just leave. i got into my car, the next thing i knew i was surrounded by police cars. i was ordered out of my car. a young officer got in my face yelling "you might as well admit it "! i didn't even know what they were talking about. then i found out that i had been accused of felony hit and run which is considered a violent crime, and can be used as violent crime in the three strikes law (all you need to have is one violent crime, the other two crimes can be marijuana possession or shoplifting and you get life in prison). i spent the whole of my college senior year going to court and worrying that i would be convicted for a crime i didn't even see. and they made me have to travel all the way to palo alto even though there was a courthouse just down the street from where i was charged. everytime i got to court i was turned away and told that my case was continued. all i had to do was miss one court date and i was toast. the court was about twenty miles away from my home and i had no car at the time. they tried to wear me down and have me cop to a plea. "you won't go to jail, you'll get probation"! i would not cop to something i didn't do. finally they dropped eleven charges against me just three weeks before i graduated from san jose state. i am glad that i did not cop a plea. in california i could not have gotten my real estate license and teaching credential with a felony conviction in california. the law enforcement/justice system would have effectively have neutralized my degree. having a paralegal degree i wanted to make objections (i was acting in the capacity of my own attorney) was not allowed during the first court to make a motion to dismiss as their was no reason for me to come to court with them having no evidence against me. the judge unlawfully disallowed my motion, but i did get my attempt on the court record (very important, you can't appeal anything not on the original trial record, remember that).

for the choctaw person and the other "get over it" people. slavery ended one hundred thirty six years ago. the last person born into slavery died in 1968. after slavery there was post bellum apprenticeship. the ex slave master could take the child of the exslave and keep the child until the age of 21. that would extend slavery until 1886. the practice was not abolished until around 1916. after the tilden/hayes compromise black people had to under go the period of the "black codes" which historians say was even worse than slaver because black people had even less protection than in slavery. the kkk was able to take over the south and a viciously enforced racial caste system was instituted which lasts even today. then in 1928 there was the great flood of 1928. calvin cooledge allowed the south to reconstitute slavery from 1928 to 1929. herbert hoover told the black leaders of the day, principally robert russa moton the head of tuskegee institute after the death of booker t washington if they did not make an international stink that he would make things right when he became president. when he became president the black leaders came to the whitehouse to get him to keep his word. he wouldn't come out of the oval office. robert russa moton urged black people to vote democratic. they did. (people who survived that round of slavery are still alive) franklin roosevelt got elected. after wwII black people came home from europe and were not going to be treated like animals. german prisoners of war were treated better than black american servicemen and women in the south. black service people who had a taste of being treated much better in europe refused to kowtow to the "southern way of life" were killed. he struggle began. it is not even close to finished. black men are still being targeted for random death like the james byrd and trayvon martin. employment discrimination is still a viable negative force in america.it sin't about 40, 50, or so years ago with the turning of the clock back represented by the explosive rise in white supremacist groups like the council of conservative citizens, militias, skinheads, kkk and the rest the struggle continues. same with the political posturings of dr. ron paul with his desire to return the country to the precivil rights days is another.

so choctaw we cannot and will not "whining" as you put it.

That's not true, actually. People do get found not guilty. I'm not saying it happens all the time, but criminal defense lawyers do win trials. And I know this for a fact because I work at a criminal defense firm. We don't bank on winning, but it is untrue to say that NO ONE is found not guilty once charged unless the trial is televised. There is a huge bias against defendants though, which is wrong. But there is also a lot of prosecutorial discretion. Once finding out that the semen didn't match and the blood was questionable, the prosecutor in this case really should not have gone forward.

It's well known and even documented the amount of "testilying" that takes place in the court rooms today, just so they can chalk up another in the "win" column. It's sad that truth and justice have taken a back seat to "winning".

Typical arrogant judge.

I was on a jury where they started to forget "reasonable doubt". The alleged perpetrator was a minority and most of us on the jury were not...those potential jurors seemed to get out of it during the jury selection (which I guess is allowed).

IT was a robbery case with little physical evidence only eye witness yet the public defender did not even bring up the unreliablity of eye witness testimony. The witnesses were of a different race than the suspect. I've done some reading so knew it's been shown that eye witness testimony is remarkably unreliable for identifying people not of your race that you don't know.

it was a horrible feeling to be on the jury and feel the inescapable undertow toward conviction from everyone. People want to trust cops and prosecuters and what they say, feels like the average person doesnt' question enough.

We came to the right decision. Reasonable doubt is important. And some public defenders suck. I felt horrible on this jury, it was totally upsetting and stressful to be against everyone for a good while. Probably if they knew I had a science background they would have bumped me off from the getgo as well...they asked what I do for work now, not what I did do ;)

one innocent man now not in jail!

@myspellcheckerisbroken,

What about an innocent man in prison? Should nobody care about him? The victim's family should worry about a rapist still out there. That judge should apologize for what he said because that was uncalled for and extremely unprofessional. He also should be considered for fines and other penalties.

Reba...not paying attention again. No one is saying this innocent man should not be free. No one is saying that this innocent man has no one to care about him or his situation. In fact, this article is all about this innocent man and someone who cared enough about him to look at the "evidence" again and work to get this innocent man released.

Chill girl...

Reba...not paying attention again. No one is saying this innocent man should not be free. No is saying that this innocent man has no one to care about him or his situation. In fact, this article is all about this innocent man and someone who cared enough about him to look at the "evidence" again and work to get this innocent man released.

Chill girl...

What gets me are the people who say, "Well things have gotten better since 19XX so people don't get wrongfully convicted anymore." Technology has always gotten better and there are still cases where physical evidence doesn't make one bit of difference. Mistakes are still being made and we can't impose any penalty we can't reverse while still trying to claim to be a moral society.

@Reba

Read my post again. That is who I am referring to. As to your earlier post, no, you did not hurt my feelings. I do not know you, and if I did, I still don't believe that you could do so. I just think that if people have a point to make, they can do it without name-calling. Do you agree? Perhaps you can't do it without name calling and insults, in which case, I would be wrong.

The system is not flawed it is the criminials that are running the system that is flawed that only want a conviction even when they know that the defendant is innocent,this is not going to stop until people demand that those that send innocent people to prison start doing time for railroading people.

Those that sent this innocent man to prison knowing that he was innocent should have to do as much time as he has done.

Janine, I agree with you. I feel the death penalty is a ok form of punishment but ONLY if there is absolutely no doubt that the convicted felon is guilty. I believe DNA testing should be mandatory for death sentence hearings. If there isn't 100% proof that said felon is guilty, no death penalty.

Janine,

If this guy had been on death row you would have been screaming fry him. Now we learn he didn't do it. The point is that the system is so flawed it is pathetic. Nobody should be subject to the death penalty, ever!

If there isn't 100% proof that said felon is guilty, no death penalty.

But if it's a rapist or bank robber, it's ok to send them to prison ? How about someone accused of ANY crime not being wrongly convicted?

Do not make the mistake of believing that just because we didn't murder the "convict" that it is all fine and dandy 20 or 30 years later. By then, they have been destroyed by the horror of their experience. Do you know of even ONE person being freed after all that time who is having a successful, fulfilled life today?

Wrongful conviction is rape of a different kind. It is also irreversible, no matter what is said, done or paid by the state; That person's life is ruined forever. And worst of all, justice was failed, which is a disgrace to the victim and their loved ones.

No, the death sentence is only the most extreme example of injustice at the hands of government.

@Reba - Wow...

If this guy had been on death row you would have been screaming fry him. (That's your projected opinion and mostly false. Most people who aren't directly connected to a case such as this don't "scream fry him". Nice touch on your part though. You are making a fine case for yourself.)

The point is that the system is so flawed it is pathetic. (Yes it is flawed. Our legal justice system has become one of "win at all costs". This won't be fized by rants such as yours against other citizens. Take your disputes to places where it may do some good. Otherwise, be "nice" to your fellow humans. That is what you want others to do isn't it?)

Nobody should be subject to the death penalty, ever! (Your opinion, is fine for you. But what if someone were to kidnap you, your child, rape molest and torture, you or your child, murder your child...I think you might have a change of opinion. Maybe not. But anything is possible.)

SK nitro, I wasn't talking about any felon convictions except for the subject at hand. We are discussing this particular person and the death penalty. Also, I do agree with that persons life being ruined, however, he will likely come out of this with millions of dollars so my guess is he will be succesful, more than the typical person considering most people measure success with dollar signs.

He could have very easily been on death row. In fact if he was black he probably would have been. Instead of people cheering his release, there would have been people claiming that he probably did something that warranted being executed anyway.

Hakon, maybe you haven't been paying attention to other threads, but when someone is accused of something heinous (like a rape/murder) there are many demands for the death penality.

There is a difference in a convicted rapist and killer and a guilty rapist and killer,there are plenty of people in prison that have been convicted of a crime that are not guilty of the crime,some have even been killed.

And what doubt is reasonable? Who decides what the jury is told and what they are allowed to see? Who says what the juror is allowed to consider when they decide whether they have any doubts? Who ensures that every juror actually understands what the law says and means?

When weeks or months can be blown, arguing over what evidence is ok and what evidence should be barred from the trial (Remember the OJ Simpson trial), there is only a reasonable doubt that our justice system is even capable of ever getting it right with absolute confidence. I thank God or whatever is big enough to care, every day that my state does not have capital punishment. But that is little comfort when they can still completely destroy a person's life and future even without it.

If you are familiar with court jargon, you will have your answer. Stop attacking me simply because you don't understand how the court system works although I agree it's messed up.

I'm a white guy, but have to respond: Total US Population (US Census 2010): White - 72.4%; Black - 12.6%

One would expect that the percentage of whites in 1976 was even higher than 2010.

Source:

Sad to say but "crime" doesn't follow along racial or ethnic lines or population percentages. That is simply a "statisticians" tool for making or breaking any given argument. "Crime" has more to do with living conditions and opportunity than anything else. Living conditions being the realm of lower income crime, and opportunity being the realm of higher income (white collar) crime.

Then of course you have to throw in such things as greed, hate, passion, etc.

Crime simply doesn't follow racial, ethnic, or "percentage" trends.

Arizona, I can't say I don't agree with you on that. People who want to fry those on death row without 100% proof are wrong. I agree with the deatyh penalty, BUT, like I said before, only if there is no doubt at all of that persons guilt. But, wouldn't life in prison be a better punishment? I think it would be worse for the felon to rot in prison for life, don't you?

Life in prison is far worse than death. Therefore we have no reason to have a death penalty.

Death penalty laws are NOT punishment, but ARE, hate and revenge.

Arizona, I agree with you. I can't imagine what it must be like to be sentenced to life in prison, and I often think those who believe it is some sort of pampered enviornment simply never think about the reality of it.

As for death penalty sentences, they are barbarous and do not serve a society that is claimed to be civilized.

Did you notice that no one here is yelling "kill 'em"? That's because that is not what this story is about, is it? So all of the rants by Reba and now you are misguided and out of place.

That is the issue.

You are out of place Hakon. This one place where we can point out why the death penalty should be abolished.

I know you would rather wait until a child is killed, so the folks will be riled up.

Reba, I wholeheartedly agree with you on that. I also believe we need to fine tune the death penalty laws. I can only imagine how many convicts have been put to death and then found out they were actually innocent. I wonder just how many times that has happened.

On that we can agree.

Reba, your right. I didn't even think about that. There wouldn't have been a conviction if it wasn't for the jury, in most cases anyways. Although, I do believe the judge can overturn the juries descision, right? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't know if all state allow it, but Judges can set aside a Jury verdict. Which, IMO, is completely wrong to do. Because a jury could acquit someone and the Judge could put that aside and go ahead and convict him/her spouting off some legal justification to do so...like "I want to thank the jury for doing their duty, but their verdict is misguided, so I am going to set it aside and go with..."

But, in a nutshell...our legal system in many cases is anything but legal...

Hakon,

I dont believe that a judge can set aside a jury's aquittal, ever... but he can set aside a guilty verdict or a sentencing recommendation...An aquittal by a jury is irrevocable...

Calling a "death penalty" murder is nothing but over zealous reaction to a legal system.

If the Death Penalty is Murder does this also by Tumbleweed's standards mean that God is also a Murderer?

ring master: Are you talking about the same god, that's murdering millions of babies, by starvation?

Thumbs up to you. sir.

I do not agree with the death penalty.

However, if you think our justice system sucks, which other country's justice system would you prefer imposing? Personally, as imperfect as ours may be, I'd rather have ours than anyone else's justice system (especially those where you are guilty until proven innocent).

Second, "make sure an innocent person is never convicted." The US Constitution tries to provide protections to that end, however, most citizens SCREAM BLOODY MURDER when a anyone guilty goes free. You can't have it both ways. There is no absolutely perfect system that will prevent all innocents from going free, yet guarantee all the guilty will be convicted. Something has to give. Our Forefathers tried to set up a Constitution that protected rights of the accused (innocent & guilty) in the hopes that it would prevent innocent people from being convicted. They believed Blackstone's ratio: "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." But today's society would rather see some innocent be convicted if it ensures that we're preventing anyone guilty from going free.

By definition if someone innocent is convicted of a crime they didn't commit then someone who was actually guilty of that crime went free.

Enough,

That's what this man told the Judge when he was sentenced! The killer is still out there! But they do think the real killer is in prison now.

Not holding my breath: We've had this system for hundreds of years! We've had colleges where these Judges and D.A.'s are educated at and police that know that tampering with evidence is illegal and the fact of the Constitution states we're suppose to have a FAIR trial!

So with all these educated people that knows it's not right to lie, cheat or steal, that everyone deserves a fair trial, that there are NO excuses! That's why I stated that the judges, police and D.A.'s should serve the sentence if they've done anything to wrongfully convict a person!

There's too many excuses that people make to get by with what their actions are! Especially when their so called educated and know better........

Some D.A.'s just go after a conviction and don't care if someone is innocent! Judges impose the harshest sentence to make everyone think they're tough! Not what is right nor fair.

I'm sure that there are other Societies and countries that have a better system and aren't out to be celebrities and count all they put in prison. So that they can walk around with their chest puffed out with an ego problem.......

Agreed. Throw out, or seriously question, eye witness testimony. I saw a minor car accident once and was amazed how many different versions were told about what happened at the scene.

Then how can you in good conscience support the death penalty when you know that there are more than a few people in the justice system who will skew the evidence, even if it results in the execution of an innocent person? How can you support a system you know will inevitably result in the deaths of innocents? The ends justifies the means? BARF.

And personally? I'd rather be dead than spend the rest of my life in prison, so the death penalty wouldn't be all that much of a deterrent to me if I was actually driven to murder.

The headline is not inaccurate. Yes DNA proves he's innocent. But he was a CONVICTED rapist & killer, even if wrongly convicted.

I coudn't sleep at night knowing there was a possiblity that I may have convicted the wrong person for murder and knowing I took years away from that persons life while heorshe sits in jail for a crime they didn't commit. How do we as a sociiiety pay them back for taking the freedom from the innocent?

The headline should read...DNA could free a man who was convicted of rape, murder.

But then, who would care about "journalists" actually being accurate with what they write?

how can you still "support the DP" and admit that there is corrupt or overzealous prosecutors so innocents are condemned to die?

many of us would support the DP in some cases in the ideal world where guilt could absolutely be determined. We've concluded that that is rarely the case and the risk of innocents dying is far to high to risk it.

Being realists, the death penalty cannot be applied fairly right now. So it should not be applied at all until the unlikely day that is possible. Perhaps with DNA evidence of guilt as a minimal requirement. Because eye witness testimony is often wrong more than people know, and some police and prosecutors are corrupt or make mistakes and try to cover them up.

"Crime" does not follow population percentage lines. Never has, never will. That is simply "statisticians" mumbo jumbo to try to "sway" arguments one way or the other.

Then shouldn't 12% of people with cancer be black?

Then shouldn't 12% of pedofiles be black?

Then shouldn't 12% of NASCAR drivers be black?

Then shouldn't 12% of "everything" be black?

Percentages is simply a numbers game and have no real relevance to anything, except RACIAL arguments.

Race is not a factor in convictions and executions...CRIME is.

I don't have the link to statistics nor I admit the time to dig it up

yes black men do commit disproportionate percentage of crime, true.

I have read however in many legitimate mainstream respected sources that it is A FACT that Black people either tried or convicted of murder disproportionally either get convicted, get the death penalty and/or end up dying.

I do know it is at least that a disproportionate number of Black convicted murders die. From ACLU website:

In January 2003, researchers at the University of Maryland concluded in a study commissioned by the Maryland Governor that defendants are much more likely to be sentenced to death if they have killed a white person.

not quite the same thing. But along those lines. There is racism in the death penalty application in the US....that's one peice of data that shows it, there is more out there.

here's one

also ACLUI website

"n 1997, David Baldus and statistician George Woodworth examined the death penalty rates among all death eligible defendants in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania between the years of 1983 and 1993. The results of their study proved that the odds of receiving the death penalty in Philadelphia increased by 38% when the accused was black"

don't forget that the word "odds" takes into account the proportion of crime done by Blacks or Whites. So it just says if you are a Black convicted killer, you are more likely to die.

HEre's the page. Alot of it but not all is about when Blacks are convicted in killing whites...so color of victim matters. In one study a prosecutor sought death penatly for 70% of cases where Black killed White but only 17% of when White killed Black.

13directors.......You have made a statement that sterotypes southerners as the only people capable of being racists. Do you want to do a little reading on the racists attacks in Chicago or Philadelphia or numerous other northern cities and states? Northeners tend to be much more racist than most southerners. You then think you are superior to people in the south when it has been very well documented that geography has nothing to do with racist attitudes. In Chicago a black man was killed while swimming and he just happened to drift into the white beach. The whites began throwing rocks at the poor man and was killed. The police were called and guess who was arrested......his black friends. The murderer was never even charged. In the south we have grown up around blacks, gone to school with them, worked with them. You in the north have not had the experience and when a black family moves to your neighborhood or drifts into you white beaches you northerners go completely insane. So, take care of your own problems with blacks and leave southerners alone. You do not have a clue of what you are talking about.