Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Innocent Man Free After 26 Years In Prison
cbsnews.com — A man locked away 26 years for murder was granted a new trial and freed on bond Friday with the help of two attorneys who came forward with a client's confession after he died in prison.
MississippiLife- 979 diggs
- digg it
- nahsrocketeer75, on 04/19/2008, -1/+81I just can't imagine having to wake up every morning to the realization that such an injustice has happened to you.
- Ledd, on 04/19/2008, -0/+48I can't imagine waking up every morning as the lawyer who knew he didn't do it and "not being able to" tell anyone.
- tj111, on 04/19/2008, -3/+17What a pussy. His job was worth more than this guys life apparantly.
- 1legend, on 04/19/2008, -0/+12It's not that. Its the fact that the court can't use evidence like that. Even if the lawyer had leaked the information it would not have helped and would have only led to him losing his job.
- rilus, on 04/19/2008, -2/+12I think it's such ***** that the law is more important than justice or truth. The laws we, as humans, as a culture, as a country, created, were made to provide us with justice and security. How can the laws get in the way of the very things they're supposed to be for?!
- kopaka649, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Sorry I dugg you down you by accident. I'll have to digg up your other comments now. In any case, I agree, it is ridiculous that the legal system can be abused to this extent.
- PeppermintPig, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1As they say, good men need no laws.
Too many people are afraid of coming under the hammer of the law that they dare not do the right thing. Men approaching lost children may be accused as pedophiles. Communities with a history of ethnic/racial hostility towards the state may decline to snitch on criminals to police. Innocent drug users fear reporting on theft or murder because of retribution by the state or violent individuals who may compromise their lifestyle.
We live in a world where certain.. shall we say puritans think nothing of creating crimes and touting 'hidden dangers' of terrorists, rapists, and drug dealers. The pursuit of justice is set aside in lieu of making an expedient buck for the state, so you see more drug busts as opposed to solving murders. - BrendanSheehan, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Holy ***** that's damn sad.
- Gir53457, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Here comes the story of the Hurricane...
- petrodollar, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1That's not necessarily true. The lawyer would have violated his duty of confidentiality to his client and would risk sanctions (although in this case that's unlikely, as there is typically an exemption to that duty where it would cause serious injury or death), but whether or not that would render his testimony inadmissible depends on the evidence laws of that state.
- rilus, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Replied to wrong comment
- ShmoeTheHo, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4how could that ever happen in such an intuitive comment system? :)
- 1legend, on 04/19/2008, -0/+12It's not that. Its the fact that the court can't use evidence like that. Even if the lawyer had leaked the information it would not have helped and would have only led to him losing his job.
- Cerebron, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3I'm not sure why the lawyers couldn't just confirm under oath they had evidence that exonerates the defendant but they cannot reveal? Surely there was something they could do to create reasonable doubt.
- Gir53457, on 04/20/2008, -1/+3***** = guilty.
- tj111, on 04/19/2008, -3/+17What a pussy. His job was worth more than this guys life apparantly.
- CrazedLeper, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4People try to tell you and you say they're "playing the race card". That's why it keeps happening; white people are unwilling to believe that racism has not ended. It will never end until the last black man on earth has been murdered at a traffic stop or dies in prison.
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2You are right, racism has not ended. However, it is not now, nor has it ever been confined to white people vs blacks people. It exists between all races, cultures, and ideologies. People tend to clump together with similar individuals and distrust those not like them.
Even if we were all the same race, racism would still exist in a way that people are infinitely capable of finding differences to separate each other.
I'm not justifying racism here at all, its deplorable, but I am taking offense at the notion that it is just the fault of "white" people.
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2You are right, racism has not ended. However, it is not now, nor has it ever been confined to white people vs blacks people. It exists between all races, cultures, and ideologies. People tend to clump together with similar individuals and distrust those not like them.
- xonahuia, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3http://www.freepeltier.org
http://www.myspace.com/freepeltier
http://www.myspace.com/leonardpeltier
http://www.myspace.com/free_leonard
http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.ind ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqcM5lVoteQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fj_nvrF6WiY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQooTsR0jLk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkVy32v3IJo
We, the members and supporters of the Leonard Peltier Defense Committee,
wish to express our grave concerns with regard to the denial of justice and
due process to Mr. Leonard Peltier, and his ongoing detention at Leavenworth
Penitentiary. Mr. Peltier has been incarcerated for twenty three years,
despite the clear indications of misconduct, including the falsification of
evidence, by various U.S. officials which lead to his conviction, as set
forth below. He is now fifty four years of age and his health is beginning
to deteriorate. We are therefore asking for your most urgent attention to
this situation
The facts of this case have long been the subject of intensive investigation
and documentation. We wish to set forth the following summary for your
convenience :
1. On February 27, 1973, members of the American Indian Movement , or AIM,
together with a number of local and traditional Native Americans began their
seventy two day occupation of Wounded Knee. Their goal was to protest
injustices against their tribes, violations of the many treaties, and
current abuses and repression against their people. The United States
government responded with a military style assault against the protesters.
In the end, various officials promised hearings on local conditions and
treaty violations. These hearings were never convened.
2. Throughout the next three years, long referred to by local Native
Americans as the "reign of Terror, the FBI carried out intensive local
surveillance, as well as the repeated arrests, harassment and bad faith
legal proceedings against AIM leaders and supporters. The FBI also closely
collaborated with and supported the local tribal chairperson, Dick Wilson,
and his selected vigilantes, the "Guardians of the Oglala nation, or quite
literally, the "GOONS. Mr. Wilson was notorious for his corruption and
abuse of power.
During this "reign of Terror, some sixty four local Native Americans were
murdered. (See attached list). Three hundred were harassed beaten or
otherwise abused. Virtually all of the victims were either affiliated with
AIM or their allies, the traditional tribe members. The FBI had jurisdiction
to investigate major crimes, and in fact the FBI to civilian ratio during
this time frame was extraordinarily high. Yet these deaths were never
adequately investigated and no prosecutions were brought.
Meanwhile, in the years after Wounded Knee, federal officials made 562
arrests of local residents, all AIM supporters or traditionals. Only 15 of
these ever lead to a conviction. Of those, five were against local
supporters who had brought food into Wounded Knee during the occupation.
3. After Wounded Knee, both Dennis Banks and Russell Means were brought to
trial. The prosecution presented the testimony of a Mr. Moves Camp. This
testimony was shown to be pure fabrication, with serious implications of FBI
misconduct. The judge dismissed the case, declaring that "the waters of
justice have been polluted. (383 F. Supp., pp.397-8). The jurors asked the
U.S. Attorney General not to appeal the case. (New York Times 26 Sept. 1974,
pg.55).
4. In May of 1975 the FBI began a sizable build up of its agents, mostly
SWAT members, on the reservation. In June 1974 SWAT teams from numerous
divisions were designated for special assignment at Pine Ridge. Yet the
politically related murder rate climbed. A June 1975 FBI memo referred to
the potential need for military assault forces to deal with AIM members.
Needless to say, tensions were running extremely high on all sides.
5. On June 26, 1975 two FBI agents, Mr. Jack Coler and Mr. Ron Williams,
entered the Jumping Bull Ranch, private property. They allegedly sought to
arrest a young Native American man they believed they had seen riding in a
red pick up truck. A large number of AIM supporters were camping on the
property at the time. A shoot out began, trapping a family with small
children in the cross fire. The more than thirty men, women and children
present were surrounded by over 150 FBI agents, SWAT team members, BIA
police and local posse members, and barely escaped through a hail of
bullets. When the gun fight ended, a Native American named Joe Stuntz lay
dead. His killing was never investigated. FBI agents Coler and Williams were
also dead. They had been wounded in the gun fight and then shot point blank
through the head by a still unidentified assailant.
6. Clearly the killings of Mr. Stuntz and the two agents under such
conditions represents a tragedy for all three the men and their families.
However, it is equally clear that an unfair trial and the 23 year
imprisonment of an innocent man is also a great tragedy. More critically,
such a situation endangers the most basic tenets of our system of justice.
Official vengeance can never be allowed to replace the due process of the
law.
7. As noted by Judge Heaney of the Court of Appeals of the Eighth Circuit,
in his 1991 letter to Senator Inouye, "The United States government
overreacted at Wounded Knee. Instead of carefully considering the legitimate
grievances of the Native Americans, the response was essentially a military
one which culminated in the deadly firefight on June 26, 1975....The United
States government must share responsibility with the Native Americans for
the...firefight...the government,s role can properly be considered a
mitigating circumstance. Judge Heaney, in this letter, (attached hereto),
recommended clemency/commutation of sentence for Mr. Peltier as part of the
healing process.
8. Mr. Leonard Peltier was one of several high level AIM leaders present
during the shoot out. Murder charges were brought against him, as well as
his two friends and colleagues, Dino Butler and Bob Robideau, who had been
present throughout the incident. Butler and Robideau stood trial separately
from Leonard Peltier, who had fled to Canada, convinced he would never
receive a fair trial in the United States. At the trial of Butler and
Robideau a key prosecution witness, Mr. Draper, admitted that he had been
threatened by the FBI and as a result had changed his testimony upon the
agents, instructions, so as to support the government,s position . There
were other strong indications of misconduct as well. The jury found both men
not guilty. They found that there was no evidence to link the defendants to
the fatal shots. Moreover, the exchange of gun fire from a distance was
deemed to have constituted an act of self defense.
9.Mr. Leonard Peltier was extradited from Canada on the basis of an
affidavit signed by a Myrtle Poor Bear, a local Native American woman known
to have serious mental problems. She claimed to have been Mr. Peltier,s girl
friend at the time, and to have been present during the shoot out, and to
have witnessed the murders. In fact she did not know Mr. Peltier, nor was
she present at the time of the shooting. She later confessed she had given
the false statement after being pressured and terrorized by FBI agents, one
of whom had also been involved in the falsification of Mr. Moves Camp,s
testimony earlier. Myrtle Poor Bear sought to testify in this regards at
Leonard Peltier,s trial. The judge barred her testimony on the grounds of
mental incompetence. Nothing was done with regards to the illegal
extradition. (Myrtle Poor Bear had also been forced to sign a similar
affidavit against yet another local Native American named Dick Marshall.
Again she claimed to have been his girl friend, and linked him to a separate
murder. This too she recanted. )
10. No known witnesses exist as to the actual shooting of the FBI agents
Coler and Williams. Three young men testified to seeing Peltier, Robideau
and Butler near the crime scene, after the agents, deaths. More importantly,
all three witnesses had been seriously threatened and intimidated by FBI
agents. Not surprisingly, their testimonies were often self contradictory.
11. Critical ballistic information was withheld from the defense team,
making a fair trial impossible. Portions of this information were later
obtained through the Freedom of Information Act litigation. Moreover, other
key information was improperly ruled inadmissible. Specifically, at the
trial, the FBI ballistic expert, Evan Hodge, testified that he had conducted
an extractor mark test, and compared Leonard Peltier,s AR-15 rifle with the
.223 bullet casing found near the agents, car, and found them to match.
Hodge based his testimony on a test performed in February 1976, some six
months after receiving the casing and over four months after receiving the
gun alleged to have been Mr. Peltier,s. However, an FBI ballistic report
showed that Mr. Hodge had tested the cartridges far earlier, in October
1975, and found that none of them matched the weapon alleged to be Mr.
Peltier,s. At trial, however, defense counsel was not permitted to tell the
jury that the test showing that the gun and the casing were incompatible was
performed first, and that the test "finding that the rifle and casing
matched, was in fact performed much later as the prosecution put
together its case.
More importantly, Mr. Hodge also testified at the trial that a firing pin
test is a highly conclusive test in comparison to the extractor test, which
is far less conclusive. He stated that due to fire damage to the rifle, the
more precise type of test could not be carried out. He also stated that
during the October testing, he had not yet examined the critical casing
found near the agents, car. Later, documents obtained through the Freedom of
Information Act showed that the October 1975 ballistic testing was in fact
based on the more precise firing pin test, and that the results had been
negative. However, the Freedom of Information Act files also included FBI
documents stressing the urgency for testing the key casing at once, thus
contradicting Mr. Hodge,s claim that he had simply not gotten around to
testing the key casing until six months after it was received. In short,
the fatal bullet did not come from Leonard Peltier,s weapon. The jury never
heard about any of these crucial issues.
12. Equally disturbing are the numerous discrepancies regarding the key
vehicle in the case. Agents Williams and Coler had radioed that they were
chasing a red pick up truck, which they believed was transporting a suspect.
The chase lead to the Jumping Bull Ranch and the fatal shoot out. At trial
however, the evidence had changed to described a red and white van, quite a
different vehicle, and which not coincidentally was more easily linked to
Mr. Peltier.
13. The Court, at Mr. Peltier,s murder trial, did not permit the jury to
learn of the FBI,s pattern and practice of using false affidavits and of
intimidating witnesses in related cases. The jury was thus unable to
properly evaluate the prosecution witnesses, testimony. In the trials of
other AIM leaders, such evidence had been admitted.
14. There was not witness testimony that Leonard Peltier actually shot the
two FBI agents. There is no witness testimony that placed Mr. Peltier near
the crime scene before the murders occurred. Those witnesses placing
Peltier, Robideau and Butler near the crime scene at any time were coerced
and intimidated by the FBI. There is no forensic evidence as to the exact
type of rifle used to commit the murders. Several different weapons present
in the area during the shoot out could have caused the fatal injuries. There
was more than one AR-15 in the area at the time of the shoot out. The AR-15
rifle claimed to be Mr. Peltier,s was found to be incompatible with the
bullet casing near the agents, car. Although other bullets were fired at the
crime scene, no other casings or evidence about them were offered by the
Prosecutor,s office. In short there is no reasonable evidence that Mr.
Peltier committed the murders. Instead there is very strong evidence of FBI
misconduct.
15. Some 6,000 FBI documents are still being withheld in their entirety from
Mr. Leonard Peltier, as are some 5,000 partial documents. There is clearly
no current reason to fear national security risks, or the disruption of
ongoing investigations. Moreover, based on the critical nature of those
documents which have been disclosed, such as the ballistic tests reports, it
is reasonable to conclude that the remaining files would contain evidence
that would help to establish Mr. Peltier,s innocence. This situation
violates his rights to access to the courts and to a fair trial.
16. At the Peltier trial the Prosecutor claimed in summation that....we
proved that he went down to the bodies and executed those two young men at
point blank range.... At the appellate hearing, the government attorney
conceded "We had a murder, we had numerous shooters, we do not know who
specifically fired what killing shots...we do not know, quote unquote, who
shot the agents.
17. At the murder trial the Prosecutor, referring to the murder weapon,
stated that "There is only one AR-15 in the group. There is no testimony
concerning any other AR-15 at Tent City or at the crime scene or anywhere
else in the area.... Mr. Peltier,s lawyers later filed a habeas cor - xonahuia, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Video footage of Robert Robideau speaking at a Free Leonard Peltier Rally in Tacoma 2007
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids. ... - xonahuia, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Leonard Peltier's Beat Goes On song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZsQzepS5MQ - xonahuia, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Watch the "Incident at Oglala - The Leonard Peltier Story (1992)" documentary to learn more about Leonard Peltier, who has been incarcerated in the U.S. since 1977 for murders he didn't commit
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Robert Redford is the executive producer (and narrator) of this fine, eye-opening documentary about the violent events that took place in 1975 on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. Indian activists ended up in an extended standoff with FBI agents, and the result was several deaths, including two federal men whose killing (according to many people) was never clearly attributed to a specific gunman. Nevertheless, the government laid blame for the tragedy on Leonard Peltier, a Sioux political leader who has long been a focus for supporters believing he took the fall, possibly heroically, for others. Peltier has spent many years in prison, and Apted's film, which is hardly ambiguous in its commitment toward Peltier's hoped-for freedom, is persuasive in both its detail and its case against brutal federal policies toward Indians. Whatever one's position on the Peltier question, this is a compelling piece of work. --Tom Keogh
From The New Yorker
Michael Apted's documentary is an investigative report on the case of Leonard Peltier, an American Indian Movement activist who was convicted of killing two F.B.I. agents in a 1975 shootout on the Pine Ridge reservation, in South Dakota. The movie contends that Peltier (who has been serving time for the murders since 1977) was railroaded by the F.B.I. The filmmakers don't require us to believe that Peltier is innocent (although they clearly think he is). They concentrate on demonstrating that he didn't get a fair trial: the movie is built on an accumulation of subtle discrepancies and nagging doubts, rather than on a sense of inexorable progress toward a smoking-gun solution. For the most part, Apted guides us through this tangle of ambiguous evidence and back-and-forth legal maneuvering with patient, unobtrusive skill, and the cool rationality of his manner makes the movie's arguments seem all the more irrefutable. The picture never tries to whip us into a frenzy of indignation, but its restrained, lawyerly laying out of a pattern of injustice is devastatingly effective. Narrated by Robert Redford (who is also the executive producer). -Terrence Rafferty
Copyright © 2006 The New Yorker
http://www.amazon.com/Incident-Oglala-Leonard-Pelt ...
- Ledd, on 04/19/2008, -0/+48I can't imagine waking up every morning as the lawyer who knew he didn't do it and "not being able to" tell anyone.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+22Unbelievable. I can't even begin to understand what it feels like to be behind bars for 26 years for something you didn't do. Frankly, I can't think of much worse with the exception of spending that time on death row.
- chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -2/+7Situations like this one show why the death penalty is wrong. This man served 26 years as an innocent man. How many innocent men have died? We don't know, but it's not like they can be released from the grave when it turns out that someone else did the crime.
- psid8, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0Come to Canada.
- chicofaraby, on 04/19/2008, -2/+7Situations like this one show why the death penalty is wrong. This man served 26 years as an innocent man. How many innocent men have died? We don't know, but it's not like they can be released from the grave when it turns out that someone else did the crime.
- omercyme33, on 04/19/2008, -1/+61The jury that convicted him must feel like ***** right now.
- RGSPro, on 04/19/2008, -9/+16I doubt they remember/recall the conviction and/or they were misinformed.
- omercyme33, on 04/19/2008, -0/+28You're probably right. I know convicting somebody of murder is something I probably wouldn't remember/recall either.
- slundal, on 04/19/2008, -3/+7Yeah, lets pity the jury. I'm sure they are having a really ruff time now.
- omercyme33, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Your sarcasm is misdirected, I think, toward a comment that was clearly facetious.
- CrazedLeper, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3I'm sure they remain blissfully unaware; that's what the MATRIX does for it's inhabitants.
- RGSPro, on 04/19/2008, -9/+16I doubt they remember/recall the conviction and/or they were misinformed.
- gm33, on 04/19/2008, -6/+65yet another reason against the death penalty
- Cerebron, on 04/19/2008, -21/+2Not really. If the juror's know that the death penalty is likely, they may be less likely to convict on flimsy evidence, and appeals may be taken more seriously. Not saying it would be, just that it's not a very good reason.
- MrErr, on 04/19/2008, -1/+7Knowing that murder trials can go wrong is not a good reason to be against death penalty? How?
- Jowsley, on 04/19/2008, -1/+19I get the feeling that if they'll put a man in prison for over 25 years on flimsy evidence, it's not too much of a leap to think they'd sentence a man to death on flimsy evidence.
- pak314, on 04/19/2008, -4/+2The lawyers who hid the evidence said that if this man was getting the death penalty they would have brought up the evidence immediately instead of waiting 26 years. So he would have been freed lot sooner.
- Nanobe, on 04/19/2008, -1/+13So you'd bet his life on a lawyer's integrity?
- elint6, on 04/19/2008, -1/+6The lawyers were under no legal obligation to de-seal this affidavit EVER.
- MaxD, on 04/20/2008, -0/+5This bloke was in the lucky (!?) situation where somebody had compelling evidence of his innocence. This would not always be the case for somebody who was wrongly convicted.
- Nanobe, on 04/19/2008, -1/+13So you'd bet his life on a lawyer's integrity?
- Cerebron, on 04/19/2008, -21/+2Not really. If the juror's know that the death penalty is likely, they may be less likely to convict on flimsy evidence, and appeals may be taken more seriously. Not saying it would be, just that it's not a very good reason.
- MasterThief117, on 04/19/2008, -6/+39Our justice system is broken. For those who say otherwise, then why was this man in prison for 26 years if he was innocent?
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -4/+17Mistakes are going to be made, and this mistake was 26 years old. I'm not saying the American justice system is perfect or even good, just that having an innocent man behind bars is going to happen in almost every type of justice system.
- Acewrap, on 04/19/2008, -0/+23"better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
-William Blackstone- Persian5Life, on 04/19/2008, -0/+9agreed very much.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+10I agree, but that doesn't change the fact that innocent people are going to rot in jail in any effective justice system available to the world at this time.
- MrErr, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3When innocent people rot in jail, how is that an effective system?
- acetv, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Fine. There are no effective justice systems. Happy now? It's not like the world isn't trying its best to stop this kind of thing. What's your model of justice that is 100% consistent?
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1@Tom - That assumes jail is the most, if not only, effective way to deter people from committing crime or punishing them for it
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2I'm sure the victims of those 10 guilty people will take solace in the knowledge that those criminals who wronged them are free because mistakes might happen in other unrelated cases.
- smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Tell that to the friends and family members of the unjustly executed who abandoned him in the time of his most dire need because they assumed the justice system is infallible. Or the innocent men who spend the rest of their lives in jail with nothing to live for due to the same abandonment for the same reasons.
In reality, this ***** happens a lot more often with lesser offenses that are less rigorously investigated and defended (when the impoverished are involved). The result is incarceration for a few years knowing there is a chance the same thing will happen again (and therefore justification not to bother obeying the rules when they get out)
- smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Tell that to the friends and family members of the unjustly executed who abandoned him in the time of his most dire need because they assumed the justice system is infallible. Or the innocent men who spend the rest of their lives in jail with nothing to live for due to the same abandonment for the same reasons.
- Acewrap, on 04/19/2008, -0/+23"better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
- 955701, on 04/19/2008, -1/+7Go sit in a court room some time. It's not that the system is broke, it's overburdened by the legislative system. You can't claim the mail system is broke when a handful of mail gets lost - you can however blame bulk mailers for abusing the system.
It's not the courts, man, it's the capital!- bitterbug, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I've sat in on court proceedings here in Canada, and it's an absolute joke. I used to think the legal system was a great thing until I saw it in action. Basically some guy who may or may not be in a bad mood that day sits at the front of the room, and the lawyers perform this silly ritual of nodding, bowing, standing, whatever. If anyone does it wrong, then that guy may get pissy. He can arbitrarily ignore all testimony and recommendations, and just pull an answer out of his ass.
I watched people get up in front of the judge and recommend that a person who committed a serious crime needed to be incarcerated and given additional psychological testing because his actions during his crime and in the time after indicated he was an extremely high risk offender with no remorse.
The judge's response? It's his first time in the system. Let's give him probation.
That same judge later yelled at me for reading a book in the courtroom during another case.
Yay for judges.- 955701, on 04/30/2008, -0/+1sounds like a real jerk! Do you remember who the judge was?
- bitterbug, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I've sat in on court proceedings here in Canada, and it's an absolute joke. I used to think the legal system was a great thing until I saw it in action. Basically some guy who may or may not be in a bad mood that day sits at the front of the room, and the lawyers perform this silly ritual of nodding, bowing, standing, whatever. If anyone does it wrong, then that guy may get pissy. He can arbitrarily ignore all testimony and recommendations, and just pull an answer out of his ass.
- legendxx, on 04/19/2008, -3/+4Because mistakes happen? If you want a justice system that is always 100% correct.. then you're a damned fool.
- MrErr, on 04/19/2008, -0/+7Actually I do want a justice system that is 100% correct. I will take what i get, but that does not mean I do not desire the system to be 100% accurate.
- MasterThief117, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Going back to what I said, I also think it is the jurors faults as well. Jurors are people. People are usually ***** retarded. Some cases the jurors never even listen to the logical arguments but only the emotional ones. An example of this is the Scottsboro Boys' trial in Alabama, where the jury was a bunch of ***** racists and asshats (complete understatements) only because the courts specifically chose them. A huge example of the broken system.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -4/+17Mistakes are going to be made, and this mistake was 26 years old. I'm not saying the American justice system is perfect or even good, just that having an innocent man behind bars is going to happen in almost every type of justice system.
- Jovensdesciple, on 04/19/2008, -29/+3He's just gonna go right back in, why even bother letting him out? He has to be the angriest man on Earth... (except for rosie odonell)
- Satanael, on 04/19/2008, -1/+11RTFA, dick.
- Acewrap, on 04/19/2008, -1/+5Please don't feed the trolls.
- Satanael, on 04/19/2008, -1/+11RTFA, dick.
- hayzeus, on 04/19/2008, -11/+3NOW who says lawyers suck?
- Acewrap, on 04/19/2008, -2/+14Me. That lawyer should have done something a LOT earlier, even if it got him disbarred.
- Lionhart, on 04/19/2008, -0/+9Well it took a lawyer to convict him.
- antonio97b, on 04/19/2008, -3/+1It took a jury to convict him.
- 955701, on 04/19/2008, -0/+7You're suggesting that these two lawyers couldn't get some piece of evidence from their client that would exonerate the man without incriminating the other guy and pass it on anonymously? How long were the lawyers aware of the problem?
- orion846, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4you read the part about how they knowingly allowed him to rot in jail for 26 years when he was innocent?
- hayzeus, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Irony, people -- settle down.
- Satanael, on 04/19/2008, -1/+38I'm not even 26 years old yet, it's impossible for me to fathom the ***** this guy's been through just as a result of some accident. That's a good 1/3 of your entire life gone, and over half of your adult life. I hope this guy lives the rest to the fullest.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+10Well he should have a nice check coming his way eventually but I don't think any amount of money can make up for 26 years behind bars.
- jordwest, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4Who knows, some people live our their entire lives working, eating, sleeping, thinking they will be happy when they get a bigger house, new car, promotion, etc. To me that is prison.
Yet this man may now live out the rest of his life with more fulfillment than many people feel throughout their entire lifetime.
Appreciate every day for what it is now.
- jordwest, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4Who knows, some people live our their entire lives working, eating, sleeping, thinking they will be happy when they get a bigger house, new car, promotion, etc. To me that is prison.
- slundal, on 04/19/2008, -3/+5I would start by killing off every single member on the jury that convicted me.
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2And you dont think the police would be able to connect the dots? The jury in the resulting case would have little sympathy.
- CrazedLeper, on 04/19/2008, -5/+3It wasn't an accident. The entire "justice" system has been covertly weighted to work against black men. Of course, since it doesn't treat you that way, you are unwilling to believe it no matter how many stories like this you find on www.innocenceproject.org --for example.
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2I'm sorry to see that you are so jaded. The justice system is only as good as the people who participate in the system. If a person commits a crime, I hope he/she ends up in jail for it. Your kind of thinking, dividing it up by race is just as damaging as a white supremacist or neo-nazi doing the equivalent. Should the jury just let off a suspected criminal because he/she is black, hispanic, native american, asian, etc?
Mistakes do happen, and people are prejudiced, but most are willing to look at the facts presented to them in a trial. Would you still be crying racism if the jury that convicted this man was all black or equally mixed? Would it really make a difference?- smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1I'm sorry to see you are so gullible. The jury cannot perform their jobs because they are do not have objective/accurate input to work with in many cases.
It is similar to the problem with the media and politics. The average citizen is flooded with skewed/inaccurate information and relevant details are intentionally omitted.
The situation is similar between police and defense/jurors. It is the job of the police to gather most of the evidence and if they are fairly certain they have the right man they will intentionally try to keep the defense from finding info that might indicate otherwise. Their only choice is to find it themselves which does not happen when defendants cannot afford an adequate defense
- smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1I'm sorry to see you are so gullible. The jury cannot perform their jobs because they are do not have objective/accurate input to work with in many cases.
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2I'm sorry to see that you are so jaded. The justice system is only as good as the people who participate in the system. If a person commits a crime, I hope he/she ends up in jail for it. Your kind of thinking, dividing it up by race is just as damaging as a white supremacist or neo-nazi doing the equivalent. Should the jury just let off a suspected criminal because he/she is black, hispanic, native american, asian, etc?
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+10Well he should have a nice check coming his way eventually but I don't think any amount of money can make up for 26 years behind bars.
- krsone2424, on 04/19/2008, -7/+7Free Mumia
- Five28, on 04/20/2008, -2/+0What a stupid, ignorant comment. This post is about an innocent man being locked up for most of his life. Your boy Mumia should have fried in the electric chair long ago, cause there's no doubt that he is a cop killer. Burn Mumia, burn!!
- killbert24, on 04/19/2008, -15/+7The justice system in this country isn't perfect and never will be perfect. There is no way to make 100% sure that the person convicted is innocent. If you know of a country that does this let me know. If anything we should be happy the U.S. system kept him alive for 26 years so that he COULD be freed. In China they execute thousands of people a year.
The system can be perfected through constitutional amendments and new laws. It just requires people who care to actually do something about whatever injustices/wrongs we have in the judiciary wing.- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+12They execute people in America too...
- killbert24, on 04/19/2008, -9/+2Like 50 people a year.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -2/+8Does the number even really matter? They're still murdering potentially innocent people.
- Cerebron, on 04/19/2008, -7/+2Technically, it isn't murder.
- MrErr, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4Morally it is murder.
- jameskong15, on 04/20/2008, -2/+1According to your morals maybe Err.
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1By legal standards perhaps but not moral. One does not imply the other
- killbert24, on 04/19/2008, -9/+2Like 50 people a year.
- rald84, on 04/19/2008, -2/+8"better to release ten guilty men than jail a single innocent man."
- joot2112, on 04/19/2008, -5/+2Tell that to the parents of the additional murder victims of the ten guilty men.
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -1/+6Tell that to the friends and family members of the unjustly executed who abandoned him in the time of his most dire need because they assumed the justice system is infallible. Or the innocent men who spend the rest of their lives in jail with nothing to live for due to the same abandonment for the same reasons.
In reality, this ***** happens a lot more often with lesser offenses that are less rigorously investigated and defended (when the impoverished are involved). The result is incarceration for a few years knowing there is a chance the same thing will happen again (and therefore justification not to bother obeying the rules when they get out) - doubledmateo, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1smotpoker, that's a horrible situation and I'm not arguing that, but what is the alternative? Are you suggesting anarchy?
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -1/+6Tell that to the friends and family members of the unjustly executed who abandoned him in the time of his most dire need because they assumed the justice system is infallible. Or the innocent men who spend the rest of their lives in jail with nothing to live for due to the same abandonment for the same reasons.
- joot2112, on 04/19/2008, -5/+2Tell that to the parents of the additional murder victims of the ten guilty men.
- kindrobot, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3"There is no way to make 100% sure that the person convicted is innocent."
Point missed. It's not the way to make sure a person is 100% innocent that's important, it's the process by which we make sure someone is 100% guilty. We CAN make that work. But people are so scared that a guilty person will go free, they forget that by not making sure of the guilt of an individual, the side effect is that we jail innocents. Not a fair trade. It's a sickening compromise, and it has to stop. - doubledmateo, on 04/20/2008, -1/+0Seriously folks, if you have a better solution to the issue than submit it, but don't keep moaning about how horribly unjust the current set up is when you don't have a solution to the issue. Should we just stop putting people in jail all together? That would assure that nobody is falsely accused. Is that a world you want to live in?
- smotpoker, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1There are potential solutions but, just like criminal activity in general, problems with the justice system are multifaceted. This means that solutions require support from a majority of the public, the government and law enforcement officials before serious/necessary reforms are made.
I think one of the biggest problems is assumption that everyone who ever breaks the law is likely a criminal who has done it many times before or will only continue/get worse. As a result people demand stiffer penalties that are often too harsh for the crimes. Another problem is inadequate defense/disproportionate spending - much more is spent on public law enforcement and prosecution than public defense, both of which make it much more likely that the impoverished are convicted despite whether or not they are guilty. The perception of injustice/hopelessness and the criminal skills acquired in jail emphasize the likelihood of repeat/subsequent offenses. Lack of educational or vocational programs and materials in most jails (at least in small towns) are another problem which is related to that.
The biggest problem is general cynicism and overzealous police who are rarely if ever held accountable, IMO. Not only is their word taken as fully credible in most cases, they are rarely punished or held accountable in any way when caught perjuring or engaging in other misconduct. In general, the public, other officers and court officials assume "best intentions" with the cop and/or that the suspect "probably deserved it anyways"
According to Human Rights Watch, about 20% of cops account for 80-90% of complaints and many counts of misconduct go unreported due to intimidation or lack of credibility on the part of the victim. Not only this, but in some precincts they do not even have complaint forms and often there is no telling who will get them. The simple fact of the matter is, the less credible a suspect appears (whether due to his person or his past offenses) the more likely he is to be verbally or physically abused and the less likely his complaint is to be taken seriously.
The first step in resolving problems in the justice system is changing the public perception. This means acknowledging the problem rather than dismissing it as a "necessary evil" and holding everyone equally accountable to the law and the standards that are already established but consistently dismissed by judges, prosecutors and jurors alike.
- smotpoker, on 04/20/2008, -1/+1There are potential solutions but, just like criminal activity in general, problems with the justice system are multifaceted. This means that solutions require support from a majority of the public, the government and law enforcement officials before serious/necessary reforms are made.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+12They execute people in America too...
- anarchyinthekr, on 04/19/2008, -1/+9why did the mcdonald's have a security guard?
- 955701, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4Because the justice system is broke. Haven't you been paying attention?
- Jaesauce, on 04/19/2008, -0/+25because they had a tip off about the hamburglar
- Cint, on 04/20/2008, -0/+3I logged in to digg your comment
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -38/+3Another criminal free because of liberal lawyers I hope he gets hit by a bus.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+13Did you not read the story? He is innocent. But hey, I expect that out of somebody like you who takes every opportunity to bash "dirty liberals".
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -18/+1BS the guy is guilty as Bush and Dick.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+6And how did you come to this conclusion?
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -18/+1BS the guy is guilty as Bush and Dick.
- kevdude421, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5Read the story, you stupid douchebag.
- Acewrap, on 04/19/2008, -0/+10Please don't feed the trolls.
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -14/+2the guy is guilty as Bush and Dick
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -0/+13Did you not read the story? He is innocent. But hey, I expect that out of somebody like you who takes every opportunity to bash "dirty liberals".
- petebert, on 04/19/2008, -3/+2any more details on this case? best I can tell from the story this guy took part in a mcdonalds robbery but was not the actual shooter?
- Spartycus, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2I didnt gather that he was involved in the robbery, but like you, I would like to know more about how he came to be the primary suspect and eventual convict. Theres more to this story than is present in this article.
- petebert, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1its this one statement that made me think he wasnt a random person plucked off the street and sent to prison
"unseal an affidavit stating that Logan was not responsible for the fatal shooting "
so how was he involved? - smotpoker, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1Because Chicago PD are mad corrupt. There are plenty of documented cases of them torturing confessions from suspects, intimidating people into giving false testimonies, lying on reports and beating suspects and other citizens they never took in
- zerox2, on 04/19/2008, -2/+20And why does he have to pay $1,000.00 bond to get out of jail !?!?
- luke16, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1More importantly, did he find Andy Dufresne ?
- XenoSNK, on 04/19/2008, -2/+14I can't imagine 26 years of my normal life, let alone 26 years of prison.
At least he got to skip the majority of 80s though. - shyboy2008, on 04/19/2008, -22/+2it doesnt matter, the real life starts when you die. God will reward this black guy for man's mistake.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+15Why not kill yourself then?
- shyboy2008, on 04/19/2008, -14/+2what a stupid statement.
- harrv, on 04/19/2008, -1/+9It makes perfect sense, if what you say is true.
And it was a question, not a statement. Why didn't you answer it rather than call it stupid?
- harrv, on 04/19/2008, -1/+9It makes perfect sense, if what you say is true.
- shyboy2008, on 04/19/2008, -14/+2what a stupid statement.
- bagboyrebel, on 04/20/2008, -0/+4sorry, but I thought everyone knew that only Mormons made it to heaven.
- TomK88, on 04/19/2008, -1/+15Why not kill yourself then?
- blugill, on 04/19/2008, -0/+9This is a terrible injustice.
He should sue everyone he can for that lost time even though he'll never get it back. - Po0py, on 04/19/2008, -2/+4That is ***** the hell up.
- BrendanSheehan, on 04/19/2008, -12/+5Just about to read and watch this, I noticed he's black? God bless ***** racism. Quite ***** up indeed.
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -3/+5So you fight racism with bigotry it has nothing to do with racism many whites have been falsely imprisoned.
- BrendanSheehan, on 04/19/2008, -3/+4Indeed they have, but the % of blacks is "way" higher. I'm white by the way.
- sphigel, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3You must be one of those people that look for racism everywhere. Who's to say the jury wouldn't have convicted a white guy with the same evidence?
- BrendanSheehan, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3I don't go round looking for it, but to say it doesn't exist is a lie.
- bagboyrebel, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1nobody is saying that there isn't racism, but the fact that the man was black doesn't automatically mean that the jury was racist.
- smotpoker, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Not necessarily the jury so much as the police. Juries rely on the police and evidence they provide and poor people (who are statistically more likely to be black) do not typically get an adequate defense (mind you, law enforcement does most of the work for prosecutors and prosecutors are paid more than public defenders).
The jury does not have to be racist for racism to be a determining factor. Police have years of experience working in the legal system and know what evidence will stick and sometimes, because of their experiences, sometimes assume certain evidence that doesn't *should* and take actions to compensate.
Sometimes some form of discrimination plays a role in that assumption or the accuracy of their testimony. (With even slightly questionable suspects, police testimony is as good as solid evidence to many jurors)
- smotpoker, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Not necessarily the jury so much as the police. Juries rely on the police and evidence they provide and poor people (who are statistically more likely to be black) do not typically get an adequate defense (mind you, law enforcement does most of the work for prosecutors and prosecutors are paid more than public defenders).
- bagboyrebel, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1nobody is saying that there isn't racism, but the fact that the man was black doesn't automatically mean that the jury was racist.
- BrendanSheehan, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3I don't go round looking for it, but to say it doesn't exist is a lie.
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2He is completely justified in assuming race is a factor, especially in Chicago:
http://www.hrw.org/reports98/police/uspo53.htm (documented incidents of police torture-tactics in Chicago)
http://www.hrw.org/reports98/police/uspo54.htm (documented incidents of police brutality/corruption in Chicago) - iamsamed, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Indeed.
I noticed that in ALL of these cases, the defendant is Black. Whenever a convicted criminal is exonerated by DNA evidence, it's always a black person that was wrongfully convicted - so far.
I thought justice was supposed to be blind.- beoir, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1There are 8 times as many black men in jail as white men, so maybe there are 8 times as many innocent black men in jail as white men? speculation (although i agree its probably higher due to racism)
- IAmLegend24, on 04/19/2008, -3/+5So you fight racism with bigotry it has nothing to do with racism many whites have been falsely imprisoned.
- Georgy, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Did he get any kind of settlement, there was no mention of it in the article.
I'm guessing undisclosed?- harrv, on 04/19/2008, -3/+0Settlement from who? This is a travesty, but where does the money come from to make such a thing right?
- ICSU, on 04/19/2008, -0/+6The ***** entity that imprisoned him AKA the state?
- TheSpook, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1He probably won't be able to sue until he is found innocent.
- Jowsley, on 04/19/2008, -0/+6He got bonded out pending a retrial. He needs to be acquitted before he can start looking for a settlement.
- harrv, on 04/19/2008, -3/+0Settlement from who? This is a travesty, but where does the money come from to make such a thing right?
- SebHughes, on 04/19/2008, -0/+17Just imagine how many other innocent people are currently sitting in prison for a crime they didn't commit.
- Oramified, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5and all the pot smokers...
- Emnsta, on 04/19/2008, -1/+2OVER 9000!!
- ICSU, on 04/19/2008, -2/+2or how many criminals are not.
- Oramified, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Philosophical Ethics Debate of the Year... I call arguing Kant's position!
- ascendingPig, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Do you think making an obscure allusion and failing to explain it for those who don't read Kant makes you sound smarter? Or are you trying to build a "pretentious douche" persona here? Because you have failed to contribute anything to discussion, since Kant phrased your argument much more eloquently than you could already.
- faskippy, on 04/19/2008, -0/+5Let's get this straight. Guy gets sent to prison for murder, another guy cops to the deed while already in prison, waiting to die, but won't let his attorneys come forward till after he dies. First of all, if it's true that he DID do it, then what a ***** scumbag. Not just for the murder, but for letting someone else be robbed of their freedom cause you're too ***** to speak up. Secondly, I hope he gave such details that all doubt is removed about him being the perp, because if not, this proves nothing. It's just one convicts word, and the DA could attempt to reprosecute. You never know what a jury will do. They may see it as one bad guy trying to give another a free ride to the outside. I hope he gets out if he's innocent. I can't imagine how you could ever repay someone for wrongfully taking 26 years away...
- battlerex99, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Wrong. That guy was in jail for life. If it were found out that he committed another murder, then he would possibly be put to death. Makes no sense from his perspective to come forward.
- cloudcity, on 04/19/2008, -4/+10If you are the lawyers, how can you NOT come forward with this information, then if necessary, resign from the bar for an "ethical infraction".
I would sacrifice my career to set a innocent man free from prison, and I have a kid on the way, mortgage, etc...
I don't understand people that can turn off that part of your mind/heart. It's like the cultural anthropologists or photographer that would watch a 2 year die die of a disease while they had antibiotics in their pack for fear of being unethical and "contaminating" their subjects.- kenplaysviola, on 04/19/2008, -1/+8That is exactly the reason why you, I, and others on here, are not lawyers. :-/
- SouthsideIrish, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Because it is better to have good lawyers than bad ones. Do you want the good ones resigning?
- Five28, on 04/20/2008, -1/+2Agree completely. I have to wonder how these scumbag lawyers were able to sleep each night after finding out that an innocent man was in prison. Then again, they are lawyers. They have no conscience.
- spatulacity, on 04/20/2008, -1/+0Scumbag lawyers?
You mean the people who if they had come forward would have accomplished nothing but throwing their careers away, and possibly being imprisoned themselves.
Evidence that violates the attorney-client privilege would be inadmissible in court, thereby making saying something useless. The only exception that applies in that state is to prevent the loss of life. If the innocent man had been sentenced to death, they could have come forward. But since he wasn't, they could do nothing but watch.
In a way, they were in a prison of their own, knowing that and being unable to act. He at least knew he was innocent, and had that solace, little though it was.
- spatulacity, on 04/20/2008, -1/+0Scumbag lawyers?
- rsky, on 04/20/2008, -2/+4It's easy to say that if you're just commentating on digg, but I find it hard to believe that you would be willing to throw your entire career away in the interest of a stranger.
Yes, allowing an innocent man to suffer when you have the potential to help is morally incorrect, but if you've endured years of law school, suffered tuition debts, and worked hard to establish a high standing reputation in the law community, it's going to be hard to throw it all away and deal with unemployment, ESPECIALLY if you plan on raising a child in the near future. You can't seriously come on here and tell me that you would put someone else in front of your own family? If that's the case, you are a sickening individual and I feel sorry your future child. The safety and well-being of my family always comes first, but that's just who I am.
What these lawyers did from a moral standpoint couldn't possibly be anymore dreadful, but from a realistic standpoint, they did the best they could.- cloudcity, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1"You can't seriously come on here and tell me that you would put someone else in front of your own family? If that's the case, you are a sickening individual"
I would put the well-being of an innocent man that I had knowledge of over the immediate comfort and financial security of my family, yes I would.
I didn't say I was a lawyer, I don't have any college debt (paid it off as I went). I live in the mid-west, have a reasonable mortgage, and both my cars are a few years old, but paid for.
People build such unsustainable lives (credit cards, huge houses, new cars, etc) that they are forced to be slaves to their careers, it's pretty sad.
I live a modest life so that I don't have to sacrifice my ideals or my values at the alter of any career. And yes, I WOULD throw away my career to save an innocent man, and I'd be proud to tell my son that later.
- cloudcity, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1"You can't seriously come on here and tell me that you would put someone else in front of your own family? If that's the case, you are a sickening individual"
- hotpurple5, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4I saw this when it was on 60 Minutes. It was really stupid that those 2 attorneys sat there and said they have known all these years that an innocent man was wasting away in a cell, while they knew their client was guilty. They even said their client had joked about the fact that he knew, by law, they could not reveal to the court that he had actually committed the murder. Those attorneys could have "hypothetically" told a colleague or something!! At least they had the decency to come forward now. I hope he sues the hell out of the state and everyone involved. The evidence clearly did not support convicting this innocent man. I have a BS in Criminal Justice, but it doesn't take a 4 yr college degree to figure this one out!
- Lurline, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4From what I've read about the situation they did do that. I guess that they went to ethics boards and etc and the consensus was that there wasn't anything they really could do about it.
- cptnawesome, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4If he hadn't known the law he would never have confessed. So either we have the attorney-client privilege and the lawyers are screwed into staying silent, or we don't have it and that guy doesn't confess.
Of course, it's still horrible that it happened, but attorney-client privilege means that people will tell attorneys things they never would otherwise. That's important for a lot of reasons.
If you want to argue they should have quit, then that's a better argument. But it could systematically undermine the entire attorney-client privilege basis; if people know an attorney may quit on them, they may not reveal. Granted, that might only happen in really extreme cases, so that may not be a problem.
- LordVoldemort, on 04/19/2008, -0/+14"I thought about it maybe 250 times a year; I thought about it regularly" -Lawyer
*****.- princessM, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Indeed!
- Jalh, on 04/19/2008, -4/+1amazing story but, buried as duplicated , this hit the front page around a month ago.
- RedSepher, on 04/19/2008, -3/+0My name is Andrew Wilson. Im afraid
- thepxc, on 04/19/2008, -6/+1Why the ***** is this on Digg several times a week!?
- smotpoker, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3Never heard of an update?
- pnut408, on 04/19/2008, -2/+3The attorneys should have come forward sooner. Screw their careers. An innocent man in behind bars.
- iamsamed, on 04/19/2008, -1/+0How do they know that guy was telling the truth?
What if he was just saying that ***** to pin the deal on another?
it's a tuff, tuff, situation, and most lawyers are not a bunch of ambulance chasing assholes who want to cash in on some ***** who wants to be an EEOC or an ADA blackmailer.
Don't forget, when some ***** Homeland Security ***** wants to send you to prison because you actually looked up to see how to make a binary explosive in order to see if Kip Hawley is the exagerator that he is; it's the legal profession that'll keep you out of jail - hopefully.
- iamsamed, on 04/19/2008, -1/+0How do they know that guy was telling the truth?
- Davram, on 04/19/2008, -4/+3Those lawyers should have to serve his sentence. Fcking cowards.
- Five28, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Spot on!
- whoreable, on 04/19/2008, -1/+3Now there is a guy who has the right to be "bitter".
- unicornpaco, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3"I'm going to turn him on to life," Eugene Logan said. "That's what we're going to do. We're going to live it together."
Dugg for his brother's attitude.
and i'm glad this was on the front page again, i had never seen it.
sometimes it's okay to have a page make the rounds. We don't all have the luxury of being on digg 24/7, thepxc. - beankitty, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2You know, it's things like these that make me question my position on the death penalty. Why does it seem like the criminal justice system is ***** UP? The heinous criminals are free, and the innocents are suffering. well, such is this ***** world we are in.
- crleft, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Wonder how the lawyers slept at night knowing an innocent man was in prison, the system sucks, thats for sure if they couldn't tell anyone. Bet their reputation isn't so hot now.
- monroylobo, on 04/19/2008, -2/+1Innocent man free after 26 years, now gay sexual consultant.
- iamsamed, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4I thought, if you do nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about?
- malademental, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1French slogan :
Rock by rock, Wall by wall, we have to destroy, all the prisons!
- Pierre par pierre, mur par mur, détruisons, toute les prisons! -- Five28, on 04/20/2008, -1/+0If you were ever inside a state penitentiary, you would realize that we actually need more of them. It is a sad truth. You have no idea what kind of animals are locked up these days. And with society the way it is, it is only going to get worse before it gets better.
- Shaman760, on 04/19/2008, -1/+4I sincerely hope these lawyer's children end up in a similar predicament. Not the lawyers, but their kids. Something that will twist within them to the end of their days.
I ***** hate lawyers. Yes, You. ***** you. AND ***** THE RIAA - displaced1, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Before I clicked on the article, I thought, I hope this is not an other on from Cook County/Chicago....I was right.
- saln1, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0Poor man, i just finished watching the shawshank redemption, very similer stories, except we can see it really happens off the screen. The fact that he can't get those 26 years back is the worst, God bless this man!
- petrodollar, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2The article doesn't make it clear, but it's NOT necessarily true that these lawyers couldn't have spoken out. Yes, a lawyer owes a duty of confidentiality, but that duty is generally waived where remaining silent would reasonably be expected to cause serious injury to another person. And getting thrown in the slammer for 26 years almost certainly counts as "serious injury."
And no, they would NOT have faced criminal charges for revealing the info. At best they would be liable for malpractice or some ***** toward their client. And in either case, it doesn't matter, because no lawyer should let some poor ***** rot in prison for two and half decades because he's afraid of getting disbarred. Even if he WERE disbarred, it would likely be for only 5 years or so. That's nothing compared to what this innocent guy had to go through. - petrodollar, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1The admissibility of the affidavit is discussed here: http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2008 ...
In short, it looks like these lawyers COULD have revealed this info but chose not to. Oddly enough, money wasn't their motivation, as they were both public defenders!
Furthermore, 30 states have amended their evidence rules to expressly allow this kind of information to come in. Illinois is just behind the times.
C'mon Illinois, get your ***** ***** together already! - RickyBarnes1960, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Law or no law, for the lawyers to remain silent knowing full well an innocent man was continually losing his liberty was a gross violation of morality. If our laws do not favor the liberties of the innocent without fail, then we must fail our laws in the interest of the same. I would have sacrificed career and liberty myself to have corrected this error the moment I knew to be such. The "right thing" isn't a game to be played because the system of justice happens to be imperfect. It is imperfect because human beings are imperfect and regularly hide behind technicalities to avoid looking imperfect. Unfortunately, that hiding causes harm to others and it must stop. We must do the right thing the moment we recognize it as the right thing. Laws, government, established rules be damned. The "right thing" takes precedence always or we are all a fraud in our claims to be a just people. Cease hiding behind bits of paper. Be a decent human being or remove yourself from decent human beings.
- FTroop09, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0Don't get me wrong. It is a horrible injustice that this man has been put through. However, it is not simply an issue of the lawyers getting disbarred or losing their careers. If that were the only consequence I have confidence that most lawyers would reveal the information in a second. The issue for these lawyers was upholding one of the most important standards that we are lucky enough to have in America. Lawyer client confidentiality is one of the MAJOR backbones of the criminal justice system. Once the precedent has been set that a lawyer can just break this agreement because he deems it fit the criminal justice system falls apart. At the point where you don't have confidentiality you have situations where a client isn't receiving adequate defense or the lawyer is demanding too much money and the client is afraid to drop him and find a new attorney for fear that the lawyer might turn him in for the crimes that he thought were divulged in confidence. So while what happened to this man is definitely horrible, the lawyers have a ethical responsibility to their clients to uphold the standards that their clients expect of them. Whether the client is innocent or guilty does not matter.
- vikinglander, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Below is a link where I just saw the interview full screen. A bit of stuffing around to get to view it full screen but worth it for the content.
http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251 ...- vikinglander, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3920205n
Okay lets hope this works. www then the above.
- vikinglander, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3920205n
- z28com, on 04/20/2008, -2/+2This guy should be compensated for $100 million for this. This is a terrible injustice. The legal dept that put them there should go to prison for life.
- Vigacmoe, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2Black, again.
I'm not American, but even I had read about ***** cases like this several times, all happen in the US, all happen on blacks.
Americans, stop making this kind of front page news!- DemsFTW, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Are you saying that this shouldn't be front page news because he's Black or are you telling America to stop systematically screwing over the Black man?
- Vigacmoe, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Stop systematically screwing over the Black men, and also stop shooting innocent black women carrying babies
- DemsFTW, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Are you saying that this shouldn't be front page news because he's Black or are you telling America to stop systematically screwing over the Black man?
- salazarmark, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2The jury system is broken. America is worthless for letting these things happen to the minorities.
- czeman, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1I find it difficult to believe that these lawyers couldn't find a way to come forward sooner without jeapordizing their careers. I find it absolutely stupid that he had to be bailed out and go through another trial after the information came out.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by