The Innocence Project

I'm sure that statistically speaking, most people sentenced with a crime are probably guilty. And that's a good thing because justice is rightly being carried out. Despite this success rate, whether actual or perceived, it can't account for the myriad of people who languish in jail cells due to a miscarriage of justice.I remember thinking as a child how awful it would be to ever be wrongfully accused for a crime that I never committed and to sit there day in, and day out, bereft of answers and hope. I can only imagine how terrifying it must be, and how tragically unfair it is for those who have actually gone through this-- none of whom can regain the lost years, months, and days needlessly spent in prison.I was watching a television program tonight about the death penalty and how many people have been exonerated since the advent of DNA testing. The program directed me to a website called, "the innocence project," that reviews cases and requests DNA testing, particularly for alleged crimes that have occurred prior to this technology.Looking at the number of exonerated people, quite frankly, astonished me-- most of whom were sentenced to be executed. Well, I echo the Golden Rule here given to us by Jesus Christ-- "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Simply put, if I was an innocent man languishing in some dark, dank prison, I would want someone fighting for me through legislation. So isn't it then my duty to do that for my neighbor? I think the answer is yes.I have provided a link with all the names of the absolved. Feel free to peruse the cases at your leisure. I only ask that you follow up by clicking on the "Fix the System" link, followed by the "What can I do?" link. Beyond that, do what you will with it. Let your conscience be your guide.In any case, thanks for listening to my rant. I just felt really convicted about this. Page not found - Innocence Project

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

I think you have stumbled upon the greatest argument against capital punishment. Congratulations. (no irony intended, for once)

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

...We have had very many differences and, to be honest, I have never thought that you would post something like this. Of course, I do not know you except through this forum.I have been active in this area for many years and DNA science in death penalty cases is what helped to propel me towards a stronger interest in science in general. You know, emotional, eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence against forensics and DNA. The latter speaks volumes.Not everyone is innocent, but even those who are not do not always deserve death.

---

"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea

Reading studies about the (total lack of) accuracy of eyewitness reports can be quite terrifying.Like in so many other areas, people's ability to doubt and question their own experiences and impressions are crucial here. Everybody should understand his/her fallibility.

Kudos for having the courage to change your mind in public. Guilty of something, perhaps; but one wonders - in an age when porn pop-ups on a classroom computer almost sent a woman to jail for ten times as long as if she'd personally raped one of the students - how many people are actually guilty of the crimes they've been convicted of, as opposed to just being guilty of having done something wrong in the past and being in the wrong place in the present. Not to mention the wrongfully executed, for whom nothing can be done when their innocence is discovered long after the fact. Not to say "I told you so", but a lot of us were telling you so, several months ago.I wonder if you've had a chance, then, to attempt to synthesize your new views with your position on the Mumia case? In the light of all these people wrongfully convicted on the basis of recanted or inaccurate "eyewitness" testimony, do you see any reasonable doubt creeping in around the edges of a case you once implied was open and shut?Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

you know. sometimes i'm very impressed with you. keep up the good work.

---

i'm not going to capitalize my posts, get better eyes.

In general I'm opposed to capital punishment. There are cases however where you have to wonder. In Canda we have a man who molested and murdered 11 children that we know of.Clifford Olson - WikipediaWhile in prison he wrote letters to the families of his victims describing what he had done to the victims in detail. In addition he occasional comes up for parole causing more anguish for the families of the victims.http://www.ctv.ca/...y/CTVNews/20060718/olson060718/20060718Has he forfeited his right to life? I have a tough time in not agreeing that he has. As a Christian though I believe that Christianity is a religion of restorative justice, and that Christ would be opposed to the death penalty even in this case. It isn't an easy issue.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

Um... aren't you suppose to be all for capital punishment?

---

Disclaimer:

​

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

​

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!

Alright!!! Makin' progress! W00t!

Haven't we been over capital punishment before? I thought I have been vocal about my feelings concerning it. I have been against the death penalty for a number of years now. This only reasserts my convictions about. There is no other kind of evidence more effective than physical evidence. DNA testing has been such an asset to law enforcement and the whole judicial system.

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

In Colorado, there was the case of a young man named Samual Mandez. A Flawed Investigation with apparently outrageous presumptions led to Sam being sentenced to Life Without Parole.Examining the Evidence that matches the alibi leaves me convinced that this teen was a gross victim of injustice.Sam is now 29 and is serving Life in Prison. I plan on writing him and shall report his reply (with his permission).Edited by Phat, : No reason given.

if it were easy, he wouldn't have described it as a cross to bear. it's easy to demand vengeance. it's easy to say that people are dirty and have to be "pure" or be punished. it's easy to declare war on the infidels. it's easy to be a legalist, just look how many there are.but, jesus demanded mercy of us. and i, for one, am proud of you.

Thanks and amen. The enemy of Christians and Christianity is Evil. It isn't people. We are called to love our enemy, turn the other cheek and go the extra mile. This is the way that Jesus taught His disciples to deal with the Romans, who were occupying and oppressing His fellow Jews. Evil is defeated by love, not more evil.It sure is easy to say however, and much more difficult to put into practice. What would Jesus have done about 9/11. Frankly, I don't know. As we agreed, it isn't easy.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

Actually, I have been against capital punishment for a few years now. Activist judges, poor lawyering, and partial juries always have the possibility of rearing its ugly head. And, yes, I'm certain that there are many cases where the punishment didn't fit the crime-- either too light or too harsh. I've never been pro-execution for Mumia. I simply believe that Mumia is guilty. I am certainly open to new evidence if such would ever come available. I'm also open to a re-opening of the case, and for him to exhaust the appeals process. I've never been against that.What I am against is that Mumia is some political figurehead because of his ideologies. But believe me, if the man is innocent, or anyone for that matter, of course I would want them freed immediately. And if evidence surfaced that pointed to his innocence, but was suppressed to save face, I would condemn it and expect the perpetrators to serve a severe penalty.I think you and I will both agree that we just want justice-- nothing more, nothing less. We may think certain individuals are either guilty or innocent, but the foundation, I'm guessing, is one and the same for you and I.

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

I apologize for assuming otherwise. That's what I mean, I guess. I understood your great realization here to be that you've come to realize how inaccurate eyewitness testimony can be in the best of cases, and that the decision of twelve jurors shouldn't necessarily be taken at face value as incontrovertable.That's what I guess I'm talking about. In our discussion I listed a number of reasons why the testimony in the Mumia case appeared to be unreliable - it was recanted in one case, inconsistent in another, and proven to be outright police-instructed fabrication in yet a third.You were largely dismissive, as I recall; you seemed to think that Mumia's jury trial was aboveboard and that the decision of those twelve people could not be set aside.So I guess I'm asking you - in the light of your newfound skepticism of the accuracy of the criminal justice system, are you prepared to revisit your conclusions on the Mumia trial? Are you prepared to accept the idea that the prosecution's witnesses were largely refuted in nearly every element of their testimony, and that at the very least that introduces significant reasonable doubt as to Mumia's guilt?