|
Post by Big Al on Apr 2, 2008 19:31:12 GMT -6
RALEIGH, N.C. — Glen Edward Chapman, sentenced to death for two murders in 1992, walked out of prison a free man Wednesday. "The day is finally here. The day is finally here. It felt good. I’m still shocked, but I feel good,” Chapman said. Catawba County District Attorney James Gaither Jr. dismissed the charges against Chapman Wednesday. Chapman was convicted in 1994 of the murders of Betty Jean Ramseur and Tenene Yvette Conley in Hickory. In November, he was granted a new trial when Superior Court Judge Robert C. Ervin learned detectives in the case withheld and covered up evidence that pointed to Chapman's innocence. Detective Dennis Rhoney had also perjured himself at Chapman’s original trial, Ervin said. "I don't think it gets much worse than perjury by a sworn officer of the law to put a man on death row when you know he doesn't belong there,” Chapman’s attorney Frank Goldsmith said. Ervin also noted that a forensic pathologist could not even prove that Conley's death was a homicide. Chapman said he was not angry about the time he spent in prison. "I’m tired, but not angry. I see no need for it. I mean, it's not like you can't go back and give somebody 15 or 16 years back. I did my crying the first couple of years I was there,” he said. The Hickory Police Department issued a statement Wednesday saying investigations into Ramseur's and Conley's deaths have been reopened. Ervin also found fault with Chapman’s trial defense attorneys, Robert Adams and Thomas Portwood. The North Carolina State Bar disciplined Adams, and Portwood was removed from another death penalty case and entered treatment for alcohol abuse. www.wral.com/news/local/story/2669008/Looks like the system worked, again, to keep an innocent from getting executed.
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Apr 2, 2008 19:38:35 GMT -6
Did anything happen to the officers who lied?
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Apr 2, 2008 20:05:02 GMT -6
Did anything happen to the officers who lied? I know they have both left the police department. Is there a statute of limtations on perjury? Ray
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Apr 2, 2008 20:47:15 GMT -6
Did anything happen to the officers who lied? I know they have both left the police department. Is there a statute of limtations on perjury? Ray Sure is. They're off the hook.
|
|
|
Post by HANGMAN1981 on Apr 2, 2008 23:15:50 GMT -6
So is this a COMPLETELY innocent man?
|
|
|
Post by rayozz on Apr 3, 2008 2:05:37 GMT -6
So is this a COMPLETELY innocent man? He has a prior for burglarly, but that's it. I read somewhere that their deaths may have been suicide. Ray
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 3, 2008 2:52:29 GMT -6
RALEIGH, N.C. — Glen Edward Chapman, sentenced to death for two murders in 1992, walked out of prison a free man Wednesday. "The day is finally here. The day is finally here. It felt good. I’m still shocked, but I feel good,” Chapman said. Catawba County District Attorney James Gaither Jr. dismissed the charges against Chapman Wednesday. Chapman was convicted in 1994 of the murders of Betty Jean Ramseur and Tenene Yvette Conley in Hickory. In November, he was granted a new trial when Superior Court Judge Robert C. Ervin learned detectives in the case withheld and covered up evidence that pointed to Chapman's innocence. Detective Dennis Rhoney had also perjured himself at Chapman’s original trial, Ervin said. "I don't think it gets much worse than perjury by a sworn officer of the law to put a man on death row when you know he doesn't belong there,” Chapman’s attorney Frank Goldsmith said. Ervin also noted that a forensic pathologist could not even prove that Conley's death was a homicide. Chapman said he was not angry about the time he spent in prison. "I’m tired, but not angry. I see no need for it. I mean, it's not like you can't go back and give somebody 15 or 16 years back. I did my crying the first couple of years I was there,” he said. The Hickory Police Department issued a statement Wednesday saying investigations into Ramseur's and Conley's deaths have been reopened. Ervin also found fault with Chapman’s trial defense attorneys, Robert Adams and Thomas Portwood. The North Carolina State Bar disciplined Adams, and Portwood was removed from another death penalty case and entered treatment for alcohol abuse. www.wral.com/news/local/story/2669008/Looks like the system worked, again, to keep an innocent from getting executed. That is one helluva an effort to put a positive spin on this one Big Al. The bottom line is that this man HAD been sentenced to death, and he was very very lucky to have had the truth discovered. It also illustrates that those precise people that pro's neccessarily have to trust in the system, have demonstrably on this occasion shown they will and do lie even in cases of this gravity. I see no evidence to support any reasonable beleif that this has not happened elsewhere and simply has not come to light. If I were a pro this case would shake my viewpoint to its very foundations. And I dont believe there should be a statute of limitations for the officers concerned.
|
|
|
Post by rosebud on Apr 3, 2008 3:02:17 GMT -6
RALEIGH, N.C. — Glen Edward Chapman, sentenced to death for two murders in 1992, walked out of prison a free man Wednesday. "The day is finally here. The day is finally here. It felt good. I’m still shocked, but I feel good,” Chapman said. Catawba County District Attorney James Gaither Jr. dismissed the charges against Chapman Wednesday. Chapman was convicted in 1994 of the murders of Betty Jean Ramseur and Tenene Yvette Conley in Hickory. In November, he was granted a new trial when Superior Court Judge Robert C. Ervin learned detectives in the case withheld and covered up evidence that pointed to Chapman's innocence. Detective Dennis Rhoney had also perjured himself at Chapman’s original trial, Ervin said. "I don't think it gets much worse than perjury by a sworn officer of the law to put a man on death row when you know he doesn't belong there,” Chapman’s attorney Frank Goldsmith said. Ervin also noted that a forensic pathologist could not even prove that Conley's death was a homicide. Chapman said he was not angry about the time he spent in prison. "I’m tired, but not angry. I see no need for it. I mean, it's not like you can't go back and give somebody 15 or 16 years back. I did my crying the first couple of years I was there,” he said. The Hickory Police Department issued a statement Wednesday saying investigations into Ramseur's and Conley's deaths have been reopened. Ervin also found fault with Chapman’s trial defense attorneys, Robert Adams and Thomas Portwood. The North Carolina State Bar disciplined Adams, and Portwood was removed from another death penalty case and entered treatment for alcohol abuse. www.wral.com/news/local/story/2669008/Looks like the system worked, again, to keep an innocent from getting executed. That is one helluva an effort to put a positive spin on this one Big Al. The bottom line is that this man HAD been sentenced to death, and he was very very lucky to have had the truth discovered. It also illustrates that those precise people that pro's neccessarily have to trust in the system, have demonstrably on this occasion shown they will and do lie even in cases of this gravity. I see no evidence to support any reasonable beleif that this has not happened elsewhere and simply has not come to light. If I were a pro this case would shake my viewpoint to its very foundations. And I dont believe there should be a statute of limitations for the officers concerned. 1 out of a hundreds of people on DR, doesn't shake my foundations
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 3, 2008 3:17:50 GMT -6
That is one helluva an effort to put a positive spin on this one Big Al. The bottom line is that this man HAD been sentenced to death, and he was very very lucky to have had the truth discovered. It also illustrates that those precise people that pro's neccessarily have to trust in the system, have demonstrably on this occasion shown they will and do lie even in cases of this gravity. I see no evidence to support any reasonable beleif that this has not happened elsewhere and simply has not come to light. If I were a pro this case would shake my viewpoint to its very foundations. And I dont believe there should be a statute of limitations for the officers concerned. 1 out of a hundreds of people on DR, doesn't shake my foundations Yes, its one current clear case of an innocent man who was sentenced to death, my problem is that you assume because other possible cases have not come to light, that they dont exist. For years anti's have suspected such cases do exist, and the pro's have taunted "show us just one". Well here it is and now you odnt accept there just might be some more. Thjat leaop of faith is wholly unjustified, but to be honest it does not worry me too much because behind the scenes the majority or fair minded Americans are already having the same doubts about the system I have long had. This case will only add hard evidence to reinforce those already existing doubts and that will kill the DP all on its own with little help being needed from us! You see Claire, you assume that everyone is as honest and fair as you are but they are not. You likely assume that where an innocent mans life is on the line, officials will eb even more fair and careful than normal, well they cannopt be relied to be. You have incompetent and lying DNA experts, lying law officials and officers. Your faith in the system is wholly unjustified by the facts.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 3, 2008 7:18:05 GMT -6
It does nothing to shake my beliefe in the system, just the opposite in fact. It appears that the system works and he is now free. Of course it would shake yours since you do not believe in it to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 3, 2008 8:26:00 GMT -6
It does nothing to shake my beliefe in the system, just the opposite in fact. It appears that the system works and he is now free. Of course it would shake yours since you do not believe in it to begin with. But its more than that with me DEE, this case illustrates that with human kind, even the ones who are in authority, we have to keep in mind the nature of human beings. Precisely because the person will be killed, this in itself can give impetus to crooked lawmen to perjure themselves as the victim wont be around to keep working on ways to bring their innocence to public light. Knowing what I do about the nature of humankind, I would'nt trust any system or group of people to administer the ultimate penalty in an impartial and truly fair and objective way.
|
|
|
Post by Big Al on Apr 3, 2008 8:50:21 GMT -6
RALEIGH, N.C. — Glen Edward Chapman, sentenced to death for two murders in 1992, walked out of prison a free man Wednesday. "The day is finally here. The day is finally here. It felt good. I’m still shocked, but I feel good,” Chapman said. Catawba County District Attorney James Gaither Jr. dismissed the charges against Chapman Wednesday. Chapman was convicted in 1994 of the murders of Betty Jean Ramseur and Tenene Yvette Conley in Hickory. In November, he was granted a new trial when Superior Court Judge Robert C. Ervin learned detectives in the case withheld and covered up evidence that pointed to Chapman's innocence. Detective Dennis Rhoney had also perjured himself at Chapman’s original trial, Ervin said. "I don't think it gets much worse than perjury by a sworn officer of the law to put a man on death row when you know he doesn't belong there,” Chapman’s attorney Frank Goldsmith said. Ervin also noted that a forensic pathologist could not even prove that Conley's death was a homicide. Chapman said he was not angry about the time he spent in prison. "I’m tired, but not angry. I see no need for it. I mean, it's not like you can't go back and give somebody 15 or 16 years back. I did my crying the first couple of years I was there,” he said. The Hickory Police Department issued a statement Wednesday saying investigations into Ramseur's and Conley's deaths have been reopened. Ervin also found fault with Chapman’s trial defense attorneys, Robert Adams and Thomas Portwood. The North Carolina State Bar disciplined Adams, and Portwood was removed from another death penalty case and entered treatment for alcohol abuse. www.wral.com/news/local/story/2669008/Looks like the system worked, again, to keep an innocent from getting executed. That is one helluva an effort to put a positive spin on this one Big Al. The bottom line is that this man HAD been sentenced to death, and he was very very lucky to have had the truth discovered. It also illustrates that those precise people that pro's neccessarily have to trust in the system, have demonstrably on this occasion shown they will and do lie even in cases of this gravity. I see no evidence to support any reasonable beleif that this has not happened elsewhere and simply has not come to light. If I were a pro this case would shake my viewpoint to its very foundations. And I dont believe there should be a statute of limitations for the officers concerned. This does not shake my viewpoint to the foundation. It merely confirms the faith I have in the OVERALL system. The statute of limitations on such crimes should be lengthened. It's utterly absurd that these people will just get away with it. Although they might lose a civil lawsuit. I wouldn't mind at all if lying cops and prosecutors had to spend the same amount of time as the innocent victim did and in the same conditions. Of course they would know they are not going to die so it would be different no matter what. But to spend 15 years in jail under DR conditions. I absolutely hate people that are supposed to protect the population and stoop down to this level.
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Apr 3, 2008 10:18:27 GMT -6
Well here it is and now you odnt accept there just might be some more. Thjat leaop of faith is wholly unjustified, but to be honest it does not worry me too much because behind the scenes the majority or fair minded Americans are already having the same doubts about the system I have long had. Felix, what is unjustified is your use of this one case as being somehow emblematic of systematic efforts to convict and execute innocent people. It's simply not happening. On the contrary, Felix; my faith is reinforced. The system worked (apparently, as I am admittedly taking the case referenced in this post as bona fide, not having researched it myself). Chapman has been exonerated, and the question of possible compensation from the state for his ordeal is presumably being discussed.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Apr 3, 2008 10:29:54 GMT -6
It does nothing to shake my beliefe in the system, just the opposite in fact. It appears that the system works and he is now free. Of course it would shake yours since you do not believe in it to begin with. So, would you feel that 15 years should be at least the minimum time for a inmate to spent on DR, just to allow the "system" to work?
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 3, 2008 11:17:14 GMT -6
It does nothing to shake my beliefe in the system, just the opposite in fact. It appears that the system works and he is now free. Of course it would shake yours since you do not believe in it to begin with. But its more than that with me DEE, this case illustrates that with human kind, even the ones who are in authority, we have to keep in mind the nature of human beings. Precisely because the person will be killed, this in itself can give impetus to crooked lawmen to perjure themselves as the victim wont be around to keep working on ways to bring their innocence to public light. Knowing what I do about the nature of humankind, I would'nt trust any system or group of people to administer the ultimate penalty in an impartial and truly fair and objective way. If it was just one person doing the deciding I would agree with you, however there are many layers to protect the person. In fact it is designed to protect a criminal who is guilty as sin, but has the good fortune to have a lawyer find some small technicallity to ensure he is released. This is what I know about human nature criminals will always be criminals and will find and use any loop hole to escape justice. People like you will say that is the way it should be, and in some respects I agree, however when those criminals do walk you are always willing to say they were innocent and the system works but is faulty or they would not have been locked up at all. When the 1 in 1000 person who is innocent is sent to DR and released you then say it shows how the system is broken. You will always have law officers who are disgusted with the system of letting criminals go free that are willing to take the chance to get the guilty person locked up, it is however the exception rather than the rule. The system works when the facts come to light as they did in this case. Tell me what is the difference if a man is sentenced to lwop and dies in prison, or is sentenced to death and dies in prison? personally I see little difference except in one we keep them around so they can enjoy life for a lot longer.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 3, 2008 11:19:48 GMT -6
It does nothing to shake my beliefe in the system, just the opposite in fact. It appears that the system works and he is now free. Of course it would shake yours since you do not believe in it to begin with. So, would you feel that 15 years should be at least the minimum time for a inmate to spent on DR, just to allow the "system" to work? No I do not, I do however believe in the appeals system, but see no reason it can not be done much faster. In this case it would have meant he was released sooner and the officers in question may have faced charges for their part in it.
|
|
|
Post by Moonbeam on Apr 3, 2008 11:43:50 GMT -6
So, would you feel that 15 years should be at least the minimum time for a inmate to spent on DR, just to allow the "system" to work? No I do not, I do however believe in the appeals system, but see no reason it can not be done much faster. In this case it would have meant he was released sooner and the officers in question may have faced charges for their part in it. or ........... he could have been executed sooner, and the officers in question not found out (just playing devils advocate). I do think this is cause for concern and I'd be furious to have lost 15 years of my life due to no fault of my own, it's way too late to just say oh well the system worked. I don't think any one of us would blithely walk away simply glad to be free again. I haven't looked more into this case either so I'm just making comment on what is posted in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Apr 3, 2008 12:31:51 GMT -6
So, would you feel that 15 years should be at least the minimum time for a inmate to spent on DR, just to allow the "system" to work? No I do not, I do however believe in the appeals system, but see no reason it can not be done much faster. In this case it would have meant he was released sooner and the officers in question may have faced charges for their part in it. It's easy to say that the appeals take too long, especially if you are not in the loop within the judicial system. Obviously there is a reason why it takes as long as it does. Why do you say there is no reason for it? How would you speed things up without compromising the levels of the appeals all the way to SCOTUS (up to 3 times)?
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 3, 2008 12:48:07 GMT -6
No I do not, I do however believe in the appeals system, but see no reason it can not be done much faster. In this case it would have meant he was released sooner and the officers in question may have faced charges for their part in it. It's easy to say that the appeals take too long, especially if you are not in the loop within the judicial system. Obviously there is a reason why it takes as long as it does. Why do you say there is no reason for it? How would you speed things up without compromising the levels of the appeals all the way to SCOTUS (up to 3 times)? there is zero reasons for it to take as many years as it does period. How would I do it? I would require the courts to look at it sooner than they do on DP cases, they wait saying their docket is too big, if that is so then a court should be set aside just for these cases. Why should someone have 15+ years in a slam dunk case, that is one where the evidence is above repoach, witness are good, and the person says they did it? Now I understand this is not the case all the time yet it is very common for it to happen and it does slow down the system.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 3, 2008 12:49:23 GMT -6
No I do not, I do however believe in the appeals system, but see no reason it can not be done much faster. In this case it would have meant he was released sooner and the officers in question may have faced charges for their part in it. or ........... he could have been executed sooner, and the officers in question not found out (just playing devils advocate). I do think this is cause for concern and I'd be furious to have lost 15 years of my life due to no fault of my own, it's way too late to just say oh well the system worked. I don't think any one of us would blithely walk away simply glad to be free again. I haven't looked more into this case either so I'm just making comment on what is posted in this thread. You could also say that 50 years is not enough which of course is what the Antis do say.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 4, 2008 2:01:26 GMT -6
Well here it is and now you odnt accept there just might be some more. Thjat leaop of faith is wholly unjustified, but to be honest it does not worry me too much because behind the scenes the majority or fair minded Americans are already having the same doubts about the system I have long had. Felix, what is unjustified is your use of this one case as being somehow emblematic of systematic efforts to convict and execute innocent people. It's simply not happening. On the contrary, Felix; my faith is reinforced. The system worked (apparently, as I am admittedly taking the case referenced in this post as bona fide, not having researched it myself). Chapman has been exonerated, and the question of possible compensation from the state for his ordeal is presumably being discussed. I guess the reason I mention this case is because it shows that it is possible to be on DR and be innocent. If it can happen once it CAN happen and its a leap of faith to hope and pray that this one we know about does not mean there are others that we dont know about. Bear in mind, in instances when law officials would be fitting up an innocent, by definition those actions will be hidden from the public gaze by individuals quite capable and familiar with the ways in which that is more likely to be successful. I cant remember the details but was'nt there also a case of two Ohio men who in Florida came within and hour of execution only later to be released. In that case there was no suggestion they were being fitted up, but apparently some sheriff somewhere submitted information he had previously thought unimportant that made i9t clear they were innocent. I dont remember their names or other details though.
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 4, 2008 2:03:38 GMT -6
But its more than that with me DEE, this case illustrates that with human kind, even the ones who are in authority, we have to keep in mind the nature of human beings. Precisely because the person will be killed, this in itself can give impetus to crooked lawmen to perjure themselves as the victim wont be around to keep working on ways to bring their innocence to public light. Knowing what I do about the nature of humankind, I would'nt trust any system or group of people to administer the ultimate penalty in an impartial and truly fair and objective way. If it was just one person doing the deciding I would agree with you, however there are many layers to protect the person. In fact it is designed to protect a criminal who is guilty as sin, but has the good fortune to have a lawyer find some small technicallity to ensure he is released. This is what I know about human nature criminals will always be criminals and will find and use any loop hole to escape justice. People like you will say that is the way it should be, and in some respects I agree, however when those criminals do walk you are always willing to say they were innocent and the system works but is faulty or they would not have been locked up at all. When the 1 in 1000 person who is innocent is sent to DR and released you then say it shows how the system is broken. You will always have law officers who are disgusted with the system of letting criminals go free that are willing to take the chance to get the guilty person locked up, it is however the exception rather than the rule. The system works when the facts come to light as they did in this case. Tell me what is the difference if a man is sentenced to lwop and dies in prison, or is sentenced to death and dies in prison? personally I see little difference except in one we keep them around so they can enjoy life for a lot longer. The big difference with LWOP is that there is hope that you will be alive when crucial findings come to light to prove innocence and also as long as an individual is alive such cases can continue to be worked on, but when the person is dead that is not generally the case as people loose interest?
|
|
|
Post by Felix2 on Apr 4, 2008 2:08:55 GMT -6
That is one helluva an effort to put a positive spin on this one Big Al. The bottom line is that this man HAD been sentenced to death, and he was very very lucky to have had the truth discovered. It also illustrates that those precise people that pro's neccessarily have to trust in the system, have demonstrably on this occasion shown they will and do lie even in cases of this gravity. I see no evidence to support any reasonable beleif that this has not happened elsewhere and simply has not come to light. If I were a pro this case would shake my viewpoint to its very foundations. And I dont believe there should be a statute of limitations for the officers concerned. This does not shake my viewpoint to the foundation. It merely confirms the faith I have in the OVERALL system. The statute of limitations on such crimes should be lengthened. It's utterly absurd that these people will just get away with it. Although they might lose a civil lawsuit. I wouldn't mind at all if lying cops and prosecutors had to spend the same amount of time as the innocent victim did and in the same conditions. Of course they would know they are not going to die so it would be different no matter what. But to spend 15 years in jail under DR conditions. I absolutely hate people that are supposed to protect the population and stoop down to this level. I do applaud your utter disgust at the way these officals have escaped what in my view amounts to possible attempted murder. I also do not think there should be a statute of limitations in such cases. I do remain concerned that there are likely to be other such cases, maybe not the massive amounts that some anti's might like to argue, but definitely some. I ahve no doubt that the majority of people on death row are there because they are in fact guilty, I dont doubt that at all.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 4, 2008 6:52:32 GMT -6
If it was just one person doing the deciding I would agree with you, however there are many layers to protect the person. In fact it is designed to protect a criminal who is guilty as sin, but has the good fortune to have a lawyer find some small technicallity to ensure he is released. This is what I know about human nature criminals will always be criminals and will find and use any loop hole to escape justice. People like you will say that is the way it should be, and in some respects I agree, however when those criminals do walk you are always willing to say they were innocent and the system works but is faulty or they would not have been locked up at all. When the 1 in 1000 person who is innocent is sent to DR and released you then say it shows how the system is broken. You will always have law officers who are disgusted with the system of letting criminals go free that are willing to take the chance to get the guilty person locked up, it is however the exception rather than the rule. The system works when the facts come to light as they did in this case. Tell me what is the difference if a man is sentenced to lwop and dies in prison, or is sentenced to death and dies in prison? personally I see little difference except in one we keep them around so they can enjoy life for a lot longer. The big difference with LWOP is that there is hope that you will be alive when crucial findings come to light to prove innocence and also as long as an individual is alive such cases can continue to be worked on, but when the person is dead that is not generally the case as people loose interest? I see you artfully avoided the question, what is the difference in a perso who dies from the DP and one who dies of LWOP. They both die in prison and may even live the same lengt of time in prison. The hope is the point I do not want a murderer to have hope of ever seeing the light of day in freedom again. I want them to know they are going to die in prison.
|
|
|
Post by brumsongs on Apr 4, 2008 7:10:39 GMT -6
"I see you artfully avoided the question, what is the difference in a perso who dies from the DP and one who dies of LWOP. They both die in prison and may even live the same lengt of time in prison."
The difference is that I don't end up with blood on my hands.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Apr 4, 2008 9:43:17 GMT -6
The difference is that I don't end up with blood on my hands. That's a lame answer, Ben. David's right. You are killing a man for what he's done, one way or the other. Unless you aren't a supporter of true LWOP, which is irreversible.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 4, 2008 10:15:11 GMT -6
"I see you artfully avoided the question, what is the difference in a perso who dies from the DP and one who dies of LWOP. They both die in prison and may even live the same lengt of time in prison." The difference is that I don't end up with blood on my hands. I did not know England had the DP for you to have blood on your hands. I see no difference they both die in prison because of a sentenced passed in a jury. Dead is dead.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Apr 4, 2008 10:32:49 GMT -6
It's easy to say that the appeals take too long, especially if you are not in the loop within the judicial system. Obviously there is a reason why it takes as long as it does. Why do you say there is no reason for it? How would you speed things up without compromising the levels of the appeals all the way to SCOTUS (up to 3 times)? there is zero reasons for it to take as many years as it does period. How would I do it? I would require the courts to look at it sooner than they do on DP cases, they wait saying their docket is too big, if that is so then a court should be set aside just for these cases. Are you sure there are no reasons for it? Because your solution seems too simplistic. Perhaps you can add additional courts at the county level, but adding additional ones to the supremes is unrealistic. Unless it's an emergency, it takes years for petitions to reach the SCOTUS and each DP case can have 3 of them. It gets over 7,000 petitions per year. And, as this story goes, all "slam dunk" cases may not be what they appear to be. All the evidence, including admissions, is gathered by the police. How do you distinguish one "slam dunk case" where; the police doesn't fabricate evidence, doesn't withhold evidence that could clear the defendant, and doesn't lie under oath, from one where the police does ALL of that - as in this case? We've seen corrupt police and corrupt forensic scientists. They're all capable of making a slam dunk case out of nothing.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Apr 4, 2008 11:06:37 GMT -6
there is zero reasons for it to take as many years as it does period. How would I do it? I would require the courts to look at it sooner than they do on DP cases, they wait saying their docket is too big, if that is so then a court should be set aside just for these cases. Are you sure there are no reasons for it? Because your solution seems too simplistic. Perhaps you can add additional courts at the county level, but adding additional ones to the supremes is unrealistic. Unless it's an emergency, it takes years for petitions to reach the SCOTUS and each DP case can have 3 of them. It gets over 7,000 petitions per year. And, as this story goes, all "slam dunk" cases may not be what they appear to be. All the evidence, including admissions, is gathered by the police. How do you distinguish one "slam dunk case" where; the police doesn't fabricate evidence, doesn't withhold evidence that could clear the defendant, and doesn't lie under oath, from one where the police does ALL of that - as in this case? We've seen corrupt police and corrupt forensic scientists. They're all capable of making a slam dunk case out of nothing. There are plenty of cases that are slam dunk and that is all there is too it yet they plug up the courts with appeal after appeal. There are many cases that there is no doubt going in to the court of the person guilt. I know that people like you would see the person killing another and then say well it may not be slam dunk because it does not sit well with you that a person is guilty. How many cases go before the Supremes? Those could be a little longer it is state courts and some levels of Federal I am talking about.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Apr 4, 2008 11:20:28 GMT -6
I know that people like you would see the person killing another and then say well it may not be slam dunk because it does not sit well with you that a person is guilty. Now you're talking nonsense. You don't know me. Are you that incapable of debating issues without making ridiculous ASSumptions of my character?
|
|