SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: E who wrote (3565)3/19/2002 11:48:59 PM
From: J. C. Dithers  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 21057
 
An innocent man executed for murder?

E, I read through your posts, and may look more carefully at Bedau's claims later..

The one case you cite that caught my attention was that of Roger Coleman, executed for killing his sister-in-law. Just recently I read a book about this case, May God Have Mercy by John C. Tucker. The author was involved in the case (I forget just how) and very clearly was of the firm belief that an innocent man had been executed. Reading this book at the time, I was amazed at how non-objective the author was in this non-fiction tale. When talking about the police and the prosecution, every conflicting statement, or incident of forgetfulness, no matter how minor and trivial, was characterized in purple prose as dramatic evidence of misconduct and vendetta. When talking about Coleman, every lapse of memory (such as an important confrontation on the night of the murder that no one would forget), or inconsistent statement, or missing times in his alibi, or obvious lies, were dismissed as the most natural result of nervousness. Despite the author's continually haranguing the reader that this was an innocent man, I ended up believing that, yes, this guy was guilty. I passed the book on to my attorney-daughter, who came to the same conclusion. And this, despite that the author's telling of the crime and the evidence was shamelessly distorted to favor the accused.

Coleman refused to take a lie detector examination throughout the investigation and the legal proceedings. His lawyers finally convinced him to take one on the very eve of his execution, in the hope of convincing the governor to grant him clemency. He failed the examination.

That this case would end up on Belau's list as "proof" that an innocent man was executed tells me something: this is not an objective researcher. That you would throw it onto SI to back up the same claim, tells me that you are not interested in studying and evaluating cases impartially -- but only in trying to overwhelm readers with numbers to bully them into accepting your own pre-conceived judgment.

I would recommend that you read this book yourself -- if I thought you could read it with an open mind. I don't recommend that your read it.