Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (21316)	6/23/2000 3:43:00 PM
From: Father Terrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

The authors of the research and author of the article forgot to mention a crucial point that significantly weakens their argument: mainly that there is no judicial mechanism that follows up to conclusively prove that the person who claimed innocence was either telling the truth or lying. Once the person has been executed no DA, attorney or judge would want to drudge up the original case and fly in the face of the system in a crusade to prove that the system that provides their livelihood is terribly flawed. The fact remains that many have been unjustly imprisoned for years or decades. They were not convicted to death so had all the time they needed to finally prove their innocence. The recent spate of individuals convicted of rape and murder who, years after their convictions, were finally able to prove through DNA testing they truly were innocent, is just the tip of the iceberg. Those that have been put to death do not have the ability to fight for their own cause anymore and no person in the legal system has any motivation to do it for the (un)dearly departed.