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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (96897)	3/2/2005 4:59:59 PM
From: Ish	Respond to of 108807

<<The DNA cases generally exonerate the criminal entirely- since they usually prove the wrong suspect was aprehended.>> I remember a case in Illinois where a guy was convicted of rape, got around 20 years. 5 years later the woman admitted she was mad at the guy and had lied, DNA was fairly new but it was used and he wasn't the guy. He was paroled waiting his pardon and that night he got drunk and injured a guy in a bar fight. Violation of parole so he got sent back to serve the rest of his time. The pardon didn't cover parole violations. Talk about being stupid.