DNA clears Fla. man after 35 years behind bars

[dadofthree]

Sh@t! They do that everyday. Every time a crime is done by a black male the only description is black male. No skin tone, clothes color, height, weight or nothing else mentioned.

Well, not exactly. In my experience a lot of times witnesses know the person, or video is available. Video cameras have really gotten good and they're everywhere.

Tracking dogs have helped a lot too.

Now a days criminals have it down to a science, not enough time to go into it here, but multi layer clothing, clothes stolen from clothes lines in yards, shoes stolen from back porches, cell phone pick ups, people letting people they don't even know into there house because they're running from the law, into there cars and driving them to the next town.................not to thread jack. 35 years is a life time, and this is in my mind a crime against this man. I wish him well.

I won't even go into the drug dealers that have taken countless lives in this country.......................

 

[dadofthree]

I have seen a couple posts and I don't think the system is broke. We have one of the world's best justice systems. It is bias and corrupt individuals that weaken the fabric of our justice system.

 

[dadofthree]

Well, then that means it's broken.

The system is only as strong & effective as those who administer it.

All too often young men end up taking time when they are innocent, simply for a lack of adequate respresentation.

No one can grant sufficient restituion to this man. I have great trespect for his spirit, though. How can he be so calm?

I'd be assaulting the Judge, all 12 jurors, the prosecutor, my attorney, etc. By the time I was done I would have EARNED another 35 .................................... to LIFE, that is!!

Well the judges job is to control the trial and the court room. Typically this is very slanted to the defendants best interest. The jurors are suppose to listen to the facts of the case and make a decision based on those facts. The truth of the matter from what I've witnessed; some make up their mind before they are sworn in as a juror. That's wrong in the case where they assume guilt and innocents.

What really needs to stop are people who make a determination who the guilty party is and then making the evidence point that direction instead of letting the evidence point to the guilty party.

 

[dadofthree]

What happened to Justice being blind, and the concept of speaking up for those who can't speak up for themselves?

Dayum, whatever happened to being your brother's keeper ............

Oh well, I could ponder on this shid forever, and still see no good answer.

It's sad, but most of this stuff is worked out before the case comes to trial between the defendant / their attorney and the state. You have a guilty plea in return for a sweet heart deal. It's the victims of crime that really pay, because our system has truly become a revolving door. One recent high profile incident was the gentlemen released from prison that killed without reason four law enforcement officers.

 

[afterhours]

The only reason OJ got aquitted was because he was rich.
I can not believe you equated that with Obama's election. Both happened in spite of their race, not because of it.
To say there is nothing wrong with the legal/justice system is ridiculous.

OJ was found "not guilty" because the jury was stupid.....

the prosecution spent 2 weeks trying to explain to them DNA....

of the 12 jurors:

1 was a high school dropout
9 were black
10 were women

the entire defense was predicated on race....and ignorance.

 

[Mr Brown]

OJ was found "not guilty" because the jury was stupid.....

the prosecution spent 2 weeks trying to explain to them DNA....

of the 12 jurors:

1 was a high school dropout
9 were black
10 were women

the entire defense was predicated on race....and ignorance.

OJ was found not guilty because a very good lawyer convinced the jury there was reasonable doubt. Had he not been wealthy he would not have had that lawyer. The state could not meet the legal burden of proof that it is required to. Believe me, if that had been a black man that could not have afforded the best legal representation, he would have been put UNDER the jail.
Are you asserting that high school dropouts, blacks and women are less intelligent than the average american? I think you will find that you are treading on dangerous ground if so.
You act as if you are certain of his guilt. Were you in the courtroom when evidence was presented? Or is there another factor that makes you think he did it?

 

[B00ST00]

Im a crim major and we discussed DNA exhoneration heavily this semester. Take a look at the website below. It is cleary biased but it does show many cases that were overturned with DNA evidence. Its a shame people like this have been wrongly accused but no system is 100% perfect. The Innocence Project - Home

 

[B00ST00]

OJ was found not guilty because a very good lawyer convinced the jury there was reasonable doubt. Had he not been wealthy he would not have had that lawyer. The state could not meet the legal burden of proof that it is required to. Believe me, if that had been a black man that could not have afforded the best legal representation, he would have been put UNDER the jail.
Are you asserting that high school dropouts, blacks and women are less intelligent than the average american? I think you will find that you are treading on dangerous ground if so.
You act as if you are certain of his guilt. Were you in the courtroom when evidence was presented? Or is there another factor that makes you think he did it?

The jury acted correctly in the OJ case. The evidence was not collected properly and some was lost during the process. Many key pieces of evidence were destroyed or tested incorrectly, including a bloody fingerprint. The police were to blame in that case not the jury or anyone else.