digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Convicted Killer Freed on DNA Evidence

breitbart.com — A man who was convicted in 1990 of raping and murdering a high school classmate when he was 16 was freed from prison Wednesday after DNA evidence implicated another man. Jeffrey Deskovic, 33, hugged his attorney after a judge threw out the conviction, then was greeted by relatives after he was released.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • captinherb, on 10/12/2007, -5/+38This just in from Texas...
    "No we don't see in any way how this has anything to do with the death penalty"
    • Clearz, on 10/12/2007, -10/+1If I where him Id think of this as a career move. Most people finish school at 18 and spend the next 10 years building their career and if they are one of the lucky ones that worked hard they become millionaires in their 30's.

      This guy just skipped all the ***** and sat on his ass for 17 years only to end up in the same place anyway. Lucky bastard :P
  • ScottJG, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32What do you say to a guy like this after you let him go after serving 17 years for a crime you didnt commit?

    "Whoops, sorry about that. Well, cya later."
    • oOLiquidNightOo, on 10/12/2007, -24/+1i'd say: look, i was never accused, much less charged, with a crime.
    • Silencer7, on 10/12/2007, -3/+21As mentioned above, at least you CAN still let him free.
      It's the people wrongfully executed that you can't do that for, and it's a certainty that many have been killed for crimes they didn't commit.
      Numerous studies have shown that the death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent, is disproportionately levied against minorities for the same crimes as whites, and cannot be taken back when the legal system makes its inevitable human mistakes.
      Is the right of the state to kill people worth more than the life of even one wrongfully executed person?
    • Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7they usually dont need to say much...the time spent apologizing is better spent adding zeros to that massive check he is about to receive...

      and some states try to limit false improsonment claims to a certain amount per year... those laws fail. tooo many people to sue
    • Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Could you provide cites for this (people suing because of false imprisonment) - I mean, who do they sue, the jury that convicted them?
    • multimed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Well if he's like Steven Avery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery) in my home state, I'd push him in front of a bus. The Innocence Project is a great cause - but the boneheads who picked Avery should be kicked out - he was a multiple, violent offender. Wrongly convicted & served 18 years, got a $400,000 settlement and a law named after him as politicians were tripping over themselves to take credit for freeing the guy - http://playgroundpolitics.blogspot.com/2005/11/stand-by-your-man.html Oh did I mention we was only out a very short time before he brutally tortured, raped & murdered a woman just for kicks. Did I mention that in all their glowing reviews of how great it was that he was freed of something someone else did, the media never once mentioned his other offenses & convictions. (Like burglary, dumping gasoline on a cat & starting it on fire & watching it die, forcing a woman off the road at gunpoint) Yeay, way to go fourth estate way to self-sensor yourself and withold the truth from the public.

      All this is to say, while I find the cause of The Innocence Project admirable - in fact the first person exonerated through the Wisconsin Inocence Project recently graduated from law school - I'm very cautious to believe what I read in these cases or that the public is getting the full truth. The 18 years Steven Avery was in prison for something someone else did, society was safer.
    • SageofLightning, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Obvioustroll: They sue the government/state/county/city that imprisoned them. In criminal cases its always 'some level of government' vs. 'person' so if you are falsly imprisoned you jus sue that level of government.
  • spikedtuba, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I always wondered what happens to people like this. They obviously can't get the time back but are they compensated in some other way? Are they even allowed to sue the state for wrongful conviction? I just couldn't imagine this happening to someone.
    • ZeroQuest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I've wondered the same thing.
    • Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I have also wondered this. There should be some significant compensation for essentially ruining someone's life.
    • Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0They get extremely wealthy...
      i mean like winning the lotto rich


    • pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5not only is it a big chunk of one's life lost, but i'm sure it wasn't a pleasant time either. not to mention the effect it will have on your mind. hopefully he can write a book or something and make some money that way. maybe take all the money earned by the actual felon during those 16 years and give it to him. "sorry, we ruined your life" just doesn't cut it.
    • JustinCase18, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can't speak for all states, but I've read stories where they do receive some compensation for their time served. It's not an "ungodly" sum if you think about what they've lost. I don't recall million dollar settlements, more in the area of $15,000 per year served, which really isn't a lot.

      I'm not sure if you can sue the jury, if you could, then you need to sue the parole boards who release killers early and then they kill again. Or you could sue attorneys who get killers off on technicalities. It's a slippery slope for sure.
  • henrierose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12senate.mo.gov/00info/bills/SB567.htm

    SCS/SB 567 - This act creates a right of compensation for wrongful imprisonment. An innocent person who is mistakenly convicted and imprisoned may sue the state for damages within 2 years after his or her release or pardon, or within 2 years of the effective date of the act if he or she was released or pardoned in the past 5 years. The claimant is not eligible to receive damages if he or she in any way contributed to the claimant's conviction or if the claimant was concurrently or is, at the time of filing, serving a sentence for any other crime.

    The person must prove his innocence by clear and convincing evidence. Damages are limited to either twice the claimant's income in the year prior to imprisonment or $20,000, whichever is greater, for each year of imprisonment. The claimant shall also be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees.
    JOAN GUMMELS
    • Qtip42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Well then he should have enough money to be on his merry way. What a ***** way to live though. The prime of your life in a cell......sad.
    • nukethewhales, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8So basically, he would be ineligible to recieve compensation because he confessed, even though it seems like it was a false confession that may have been coerced out of him.
    • fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11The state / country makes a habit of coercing "confessions" and "guilty pleas" from falsely accused victims of the system by offering lighter sentences, smaller fines, dropping other charges and so forth.

      The legal system is more a racket than it is a mechanism for dispensing justice, if justice involves the state / country being on the losing side.

      Courts absolutely demand respect they have not earned and will jail you for arguing that the mechanism is flawed. If you attempt to so argue in legal proceedings designed specifically for that purpose, then (a) you'd better have a LOT of money, and (b) you're going to lose anyway.

    • jeffiek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's Missouri. All the state's are different, and he still has to sue and win.

      Let's not forget the wonderful system that put him there in the first place. It was the effort of The Innocence Project, not the government, that won his release.
    • Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Anyone ever wonder why eye witness testimony is factually the worst most unreliable evidence possible...
      anyone claiming they have an eyewitness as their main bit of evidence, is probably wrong.

      all the games, mental and physical cops play for a confession, that is why confessions are worthless in court, so easy to recant and beat because of the mindgames.



  • nukethewhales, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I think the guy should now be allowed to smoke all the pot he wants and if he gets caught he pulls out some kind of prison time debit card and can say just take it out of this.
    • rutterj2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i could not agree more. imagine how you would feel if that was you. having to watch your ass (literally) for the last umpteen years, and all the respect you have lost and all the fallout just from having been a convict...man you cant put a price on that. This man deserves a 'get outta jail free' card the size of rhode island. if I was him, id be hitting louisville slugger size blunts on the daily and drinking like a saior. it would be time to celebrate, fo sho!!!!
  • OneAMCoffee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+317 years, that is 17/19 of my life... I couldn't even imagine that. At least he is free now and will hopefully have large sum's of money coming towards him...
    • MrFlibble1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Money is hardly any compensation though. You can't buy those years back. I mean jeebus, this guy missed so much!

      And when you think about it, when you are going to work, you are trading your time (life) for money. I hope he gets a hell of a large sum, although a previous poster put it at a maximum of $20,000/year, which is only $340,000. And that is not worth 17 years imprisonment.
    • LethalGeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2MrFlibble1:

      As I read it (whichever is greater) ment that $20,000 is the lowest amount. If they were making $25,000 then they would be elegable to get $50K for each year.
  • yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14And this, my American friends, is one of the best reasons why capital punishment should be banned along with the rest of the world (except Japan, China and most third world nations).

    Vengence killing is a barbaric relic from civilizations past.
    • Promantarius, on 10/12/2007, -8/+3On the flipside of that argument, if you didn't off the prisoners and had to support them for the next twenty to sixty years or so of their lives, it'd be a significant drain on the economy - particularly with a country as large as America (aren't your jails almost full anyway?).

      I'd only be for the idea of capital punishment if it was obvious beyond any shred of doubt that they did it (video footage, mass murderers, etc).
    • ronaldst, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Yup. And your people should take america's criminals into your society. Problem solved.
    • Silencer7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Little-known fact: capital punishment actually costs more than life imprisonment, owing to the necessary due process (appeals, court costs, etc) that it entails.
    • yukevster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12There is an alternative to capital punishment, albeit an imperfect one - it's called, prison.

      You have to take serious criminals out of society, accepted. But nobody has the right to kill another, period.
    • armyturtle, on 10/12/2007, -11/+2@ yukevster
      We'll see how you feel about that when you have a personal tragedy happen to you - ex: someone rapes your wife and leaves her bloody lifeless body for dead in the street somewhere. It's a sick world where as far as we know we only have 1 life. To have it all taken away by some ***** who really couldn't give a ***** less about how precious being alive is, is completely unimaginable until it happens to someone you're very close to in your life. Until that happens to you & you still choose to have this attitude despite the tragedy, you're just talking out of your ass.
      I personally feel people should be left alive to suffer knowing what they did; but it also turns my stomach to think we spend MILLIONS & MILLIONS of dollars taking care of people who will never see the light of day again on the other side of prison walls... especially when there are many more deserving people in society who those MILLIONS of dollars could be much better spent on helping.
    • rutterj2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I think yukevster said it very well. a life is not for you to take, no matter what. period.
    • daize, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@armyturtle

      Yes, I'd be sad if someone did that to my wife, but that doesn't give me the right to take the killer's life. What good does that do anyone? You say it costs millions to keep these people alive, but the appeals process of the death penalty costs even more. At least if the person is alive, they have a chance to redeem themselves somehow. A dead person does nothing for society.

      There are tons of other arguments against the death penalty by the way. One off the top of my head would be it is not an effective deterrent.
    • ElFredo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@armyturtle,

      Justice != vengeance

      Death penalty is the society committing vengeance in the name of the victims. Life imprisonment is justice.

      Since France abolished death penalty in 1981 (we celebrated the 25th anniversary 3 days ago), the number of homicides DECREASED by about 20% while the population increased by about the same rate. We have an homicide rate of about 0.7/100,000, compared to 6.2/100,000 in the USA.
    • JustinCase18, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Of course the counter argument is that "Life without Parole" is rarely that. Once a prisoner enters the penal system, the rules change. A new political philosophy or a liberal judge can let a killer go.

      Look at all the recent cases of child rapists in Ohio and Vermont where the man who admitted or was caught in the act was put on months of probation because he needed "counseling" instead of prison time. These were men who had committed these crimes of several occasions with multiple kids.
    • Oracle95, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Back in the 80's, when I still lived in New Jersey, the police arrested a man while he was cutting the throat of a child that he had abducted. The horror of the situation was that the man was on parole for murdering several children where he was given a life sentence without parole. The reason that he was given "life without parole" for that crime was that he violated a previous parole from a murder conviction in the 60's. (Yes, I know that sounds confusing, but it's even more baffling that it happened. You'd have to seriously dig deep in the Newark Star Ledger to find the story seeing as its almost 20 years old.)

      Overcrowded prisons and political pressures let these monsters go. Before we can eliminate the death penalty, we need to make judges and parole boards liable when these men get released and commit violent crimes.
  • pritch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4How do you get back into the real world after something like this? If he went inside at a fairly young age, he's probably never been used to doing a whole load of everyday activities for himself.

    Sure, they can (and should) compensate him for this, but he's missed some very important years of his life there.
  • pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6i'm amazed to read supporters of the death penalty in this thread. i don't care how much money u think is wasted keeping someone in prison for life (despite it being cheaper than putting them to death) a case like this clearly shows why we shouldn't be doing it. we do not have a perfect legal system. the murder of even one innocent person is not acceptable.
  • P5ycHo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is the axact reason why the death penalty should be banned.
    • rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You know I have been for the death penalty, but this sucks. I might have to re-think my opinion. There are too many people in prison, which should be reviewed. There are just too many "crimes" which the state says are crimes, but really should be regulated by the people. drug possession (or for that matter possession of several banned items), copyright violations for possession, and other things.
  • MichaelEEE, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The death penalty is insanely expensive, 2 to 3 million dollars in many cases, because prisoners on death row are gauranteed three appeals. This process can take 15 years or more, during which time we are paying to support the person AND paying for endless legal fees.

    "121 innocent people have been freed from a sentence of death.... cases are 70 percent more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases."
    http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=title&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

    Also, a black man who kills a white man is significantly more likely to get the death penalty than is a white man who kills a black man. Racism is still very real, and there is no way to write a law that gets rid of it.
    • boohoo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1boo hoo for the murderers, black or white. oh boo hoo.
  • chall2001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did anyone figure out why this guy confessed to the murder? His statement was chilling and certainly led the jury to find him guilty. I feel bad for the guy but it sounds like he caused a great deal of his own pain---can't fault the jury on that.
    That said, now that DNA testing has reached a high state of reliability we really need to streamline the death penalty process.
  • spira, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't know of any case in which someone who has been sentenced to life without any possibility of parole has been released on parole. Yes, in the past, many criminals received life sentences and did not serve life, but those sentences always allowed for the possibility of release. That's why we need "truth in sentencing" laws. But "life without parole" is exactly what it says it is. And those sentenced to that do not get let out by judges when there are overcrowded judges or anything else.
  • kubigjay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Michael Evans spent 27 years in Illinois prisons, was found innoncent and set free. He received $162,000 - which comes to $6000 a year. 29 states don't even have any rules about what the compensation would entail.

    You wouldn't sue the jury. You sue the government for prosecuting the case. But many states and the federal government have legal limits on what lawsuits you can bring against the government.

    On an interesting side note - the 5th Amendment says the government can't take your property without paying you what it is worth. Hence you get paid for you house if they build a highway over it. Shouldn't you at least get paid the fair market value of the labor you could have performed during the years in prison?

    Watch "The Hurricane" with Denzel Washington - a good movie about a real man falsely imprisoned.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.