|
||
|
Title: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Sean_C on Jan 13th, 2006, 7:17pm If only they could do this to all accused prior to trial, I think the world would be a safer place. http://www.innocenceproject.org/ Good reading, check it out. Sean..................................... |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Kevin_M on Jan 13th, 2006, 7:24pm Quote:
He's done lots of good it seems since the O.J. case. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by burnt-toast on Jan 13th, 2006, 7:39pm on 01/13/06 at 19:17:56, Sean_C wrote:
You mean if they would do this to the accused prior to trial. Why isn't every possible form of evidence and every witnesses used? Justice is about getting to the truth through facts and all avaliable evidence. Seems the truth isn't important any longer. Let em' go if they're innocent. Lock em' up or fry em' if guilty. But don't hold back evidence or there is little hope for consistent justice. Witholding evidence because of legal procedure or even political ambition is a real problem in our legal system. Let the jury see and know everything and let them decide. Tom |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Jonny on Jan 13th, 2006, 7:39pm DNA Test Confirms Guilt in 1992 Execution By ROBERT TANNER AP National Writer © 2006 The Associated Press — DNA has the power to cut short nightmares _ the horror of an innocent man behind bars for a crime someone else committed, the fear of a murderer walking free and looking to kill again. In the past 16 years, DNA testing has freed scores of prisoners found to be wrongfully convicted, resolved old mysteries including murders and rapes, and transformed the debate over the death penalty. It has shaken the foundations of the criminal justice system itself. DNA proved pivotal again Thursday, when an analysis confirmed that Roger Keith Coleman was indeed the man who raped, stabbed and nearly beheaded his sister-in-law, as a jury concluded. Coleman was executed in 1992, proclaiming his innocence as he went to the electric chair. The case was closely watched by both death penalty advocates and protesters because no executed convict in the United States has ever been exonerated by scientific testing. Despite the lack of an explosive result in the Coleman case, the power of DNA is unquestioned and is sure to come into play again. Advocates for reform remain convinced that there are other executions that need to be retested, sure that an innocent person somewhere along the way has been executed _ even as prosecutors and courts have been hesitant to go back and revisit cases that juries and courts have deemed closed. "There are many more like the Coleman case," said defense attorney Barry Scheck, co-founder of the New York-based Innocence Project, a legal clinic that seeks to exonerate inmates through DNA testing. "DNA has shown, whether it's the death penalty or not, there are flaws with eyewitness testimony, false confessions and crime labs. We know many more people have been wrongfully convicted than anyone thought." It took years of effort to get DNA evidence accepted by the courts, with the first exoneration _ of David Vasquez, convicted of second degree murder in Virginia _ coming in 1989. It began with a trickle, and then became a flood. The 100th exoneration came in late 2001. "There are all these cases. There's a crescendo of cases, of innocence," said Scheck. And the impact has hit everyone from police officers to judges. "It was a world-shattering event," said Geoff Alpert, a criminal justice professor at the University of South Carolina. "It's kind of like computers. That's how my kids think of it. The before and after differences are enormous." Scheck and others such as Centurion Ministries, a New Jersey organization that investigated Coleman's case and became convinced of his innocence, argue that with DNA tests exonerating 172 wrongfully convicted prisoners over the years, the technology raises bigger questions about the justice system itself. By proving flaws, DNA raises doubts about other cases in which genetic testing doesn't play a part. DNA only can help in cases where biological evidence ties the victim to the criminal, such as rape cases or murder cases where the criminal's blood or skin _ or maybe even a chewed-up piece of gum _ is left behind. But DNA evidence cuts both ways _ as in the Coleman case. Death-penalty supporters say DNA can help strengthen the case for capital punishment by determining with scientific certainty that those convicted are guilty. Such supporters say they're willing to support ways to curb flaws that lead to wrongful convictions _ from presenting photo lineups of suspects to victims to videotaping police interrogations that can lead to false confessions. But they dismiss allegations that DNA evidence proves the justice system is deeply flawed. "That's absolute hogwash," said Joshua Marquis, district attorney of Clatsop County, Ore. "Wrongful convictions are episodic, not epidemic. They're highly isolated, individual cases." He ticked off numbers _ 172 exonerations out of some 15 million felonies. To take those numbers and argue they prove widespread mistakes _ even while acknowledging they are only reflect a fraction of the flaws _ unfairly distorts the picture. "I have a broader faith in juries," he said. But there are a range of other doubts. New Jersey legislators just approved a moratorium on executions, which awaits the governor's signature. Moratoriums are being considered in North Carolina and California. That followed Illinois' startling move in 2000 to suspend the death penalty after revelations of several wrongful convictions. Questions driven by DNA reached the U.S. Supreme Court this week, as it weighed the desire to bring closure to criminal cases with concerns over how courts should treat newly discovered evidence of innocence years after a capital conviction. Last summer, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens said DNA evidence has shown "that a substantial number of death sentences have been imposed erroneously." Echoing advocates of reform, he told a gathering of lawyers: "It indicates that there must be serious flaws in our administration of criminal justice." On top of that, executions have fallen in the last few years, down to 59 in 2004 and 60 last year, from a high of 98 in 1998 and 85 in 2000. [flash=200,200][/flash] |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by chewy on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:00pm Quote:
Thats because he hasn't had a good nights sleep since the OJ jury said "innocent. Prosecutions are expensive. Prosecuting the wrong guy when a DNA test would exclude him is an abomination and rape of a tax payers wallet. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Sean_C on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:27pm on 01/13/06 at 20:00:59, chewy wrote:
Its worse for the individual. How can you take back 25 years? If you were convicted at 25 years of age and then exonerated at age 50 you lost it all. Its gotta be hard to start fresh at 50, JMHO. Think back 25 years ago and what you were doing??................................... Now imagine being released today. Thats a loooooonnnggg time ago :-/ My guess trying to function in civilization with nothing and being institutionalized for such a long stretch will result with many ending up back inside where they feel safe. I won't have to worry about this happening to me or anyone of my offspring because I made a 300 dollar contribution to Tom Reilly's gubernatorial campaign just in case. Cheers [smiley=me&mb.gif] Sean....................................... |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Kevin_M on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:31pm Even when the DNA did match... DNA & O.J. The reliability of this evidence came to be called the "DNA Wars," and three different crime labs performed the analysis. All three determined that the DNA in the drops of blood at the scene matched Simpson's. It was a 1 in 170 million match, using one type of analysis known as RFLP, and 1 in 240 million match using the PCR test. Nevertheless, criminologist Dr. Henry Lee testified that there appeared to be something wrong with the way the blood was packaged, leading the defense to propose that the multiple samples had been switched. They also claimed that the blood had been severely degraded by being stored in a lab truck, but the prosecution's DNA expert, Harlan Levy, said that the degradation would not have been sufficient to prevent accurate DNA analysis. He also pointed out that control samples were used that would have shown any such contamination, but Scheck suggested that the control samples had been mishandled by the lab—all five of them. ...They then intimated that Detective Mark Fuhrman, who had been at O. J.'s home the night of the murder, was a racist and had planted evidence. They offered no proof of the latter statement, but allowed it to flow from the former, which they did manage to prove. The evidence was damning, but the defense team managed to refocus the jury's attention on the corruption in the Los Angeles Police Department. Then Simpson made a clear statement of his innocence, though he was not on the stand, and the defense attorneys disputed the good reputation of the forensics labs, proving that the evidence had been carelessly handled. Deliberating less than four hours, the jury bought all of this and freed Simpson with a Not Guilty verdict. They defended themselves in interviews after the fact by simply stating that the prosecution had not made its case. It may be that those attorneys made some serious errors, but the doubt by the defense about DNA was ludicrous and did some damage with the public to the credibility of this type of evidence. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Jonny on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:36pm on 01/13/06 at 20:27:31, Sean_C wrote:
Could be....with the $800,000.00 settlement they get. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Sean_C on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:38pm You don't have to convince me that he did it, I think he did. Its the lawyers that got OJ his freedom. The best lawyers can cast douht in most anything, and I guess in OJ's trial it worked. Sean.............................. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Kevin_M on Jan 13th, 2006, 8:43pm No doubt Sean. Just rehashing that for a minute displays how truly f*cked it all was. |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by sandie99 on Jan 14th, 2006, 2:47am That was very interesting. Thanks for sharing, Sean. :) Sanna |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Melissa on Jan 14th, 2006, 7:23am Perhaps all trials should be judged by science and not jurors.... If there is anything falliable on this planet, it's human beings. :-/ |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by Charlie on Jan 14th, 2006, 3:51pm The only reason for wars over DNA is, for some reason I'll never clearly understand, that many prosectors would rather some poor innocent schlep sit in the can rather than admit they were wrong. DNA: Good Charlie |
||
|
Title: Re: How important is DNA?? Have a look........... Post by maffumatt on Jan 14th, 2006, 4:37pm on 01/14/06 at 15:51:30, Charlie wrote:
very true |
||
|
Clusterheadaches.com Message Board » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.1! YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights Reserved. |