1151 users online (232 members and 919 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,341

    Prosecutors Block DNA Testing

    [Snippet]

    "Louisiana, where Mr. Reed is in prison, is one of 46 states that have passed laws to enable inmates like him to get such a test. But in many jurisdictions, prosecutors are using new arguments to get around the intent of those laws, particularly in cases with multiple defendants, when it is not clear how many DNA profiles will be found in a sample.

    The laws were enacted after DNA evidence exonerated a first wave of prisoners in the early 1990s, when law enforcement authorities strongly resisted reopening old cases. Continued resistance by prosecutors is causing years of delay and, in some cases, eliminating the chance to try other suspects because the statute of limitations has passed by the time the test is granted.

    Mr. Reed has been seeking a DNA test for three years, saying it will prove his innocence. But prosecutors have refused, saying he was identified by witnesses, making his identification by DNA unnecessary.

    A recent analysis of 225 DNA exonerations by Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, found that prosecutors opposed DNA testing in almost one out of five cases. In many of the others, they initially opposed testing but ultimately agreed to it. In 98 of those 225 cases, the DNA test identified the real culprit."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us...&_r=2&emc=eta1
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    [Snippet]

    "Louisiana, where Mr. Reed is in prison, is one of 46 states that have passed laws to enable inmates like him to get such a test. But in many jurisdictions, prosecutors are using new arguments to get around the intent of those laws, particularly in cases with multiple defendants, when it is not clear how many DNA profiles will be found in a sample.

    The laws were enacted after DNA evidence exonerated a first wave of prisoners in the early 1990s, when law enforcement authorities strongly resisted reopening old cases. Continued resistance by prosecutors is causing years of delay and, in some cases, eliminating the chance to try other suspects because the statute of limitations has passed by the time the test is granted.

    Mr. Reed has been seeking a DNA test for three years, saying it will prove his innocence. But prosecutors have refused, saying he was identified by witnesses, making his identification by DNA unnecessary.

    A recent analysis of 225 DNA exonerations by Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, found that prosecutors opposed DNA testing in almost one out of five cases. In many of the others, they initially opposed testing but ultimately agreed to it. In 98 of those 225 cases, the DNA test identified the real culprit."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/us...&_r=2&emc=eta1
    Thanks for posting nudge. Eyewitness testimony of someone you've never seen before is notoriously shaky (I just saw an American Justice program about the subject) though juries accept it very readily.
    I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    33,799
    Eyewitness testimony is a lame argument and definitely not as reliable as DNA. If a prosecutor insists on using DNA to convict, they should also be obligated to use it to exonerate.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Cajun Country, Louisiana
    Posts
    7,598
    I smell a BIG ol' rat. If those prosecutors were convinced they had the right man behind bars, they'd test that DNA right now.

    It ought to be the right of every person accused or convicted of a crime to have ALL the evidence analyzed and taken into consideration.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    12,317
    Quote Originally Posted by SuziQ View Post
    Eyewitness testimony is a lame argument and definitely not as reliable as DNA. If a prosecutor insists on using DNA to convict, they should also be obligated to use it to exonerate.
    I agree with you on this one.

    I want the right person to pay for the crimes he/she have committed!
    Thoughts and prayers for the people of Paris and all of France!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Oh Captain, My Captain
    Posts
    28,119
    Look what it took to exonerate Anthony Capozzi who was believed to have been the Bike Path rapist for 22 years. It was law enforcement who repeatedly brought to the DA the information that Capozzi clearly was not guilty of the crimes, in spite of being convicted based on eyewitness testimony of a victim. The actual serial killer/rapist was pillar of the community Altemio Sanchez. Even after Sanchez pled guilty, LE could not get the DA to release Capozzi until by some MIRACLE the rape kits of the victims were found and the DNA matched Sanchez. Prior to the match, the DA argued that there was no hard evidence eliminating Capozzi, a lifelong schizophrenic, from the crimes.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altemio_Sanchez

    I actually just watched this story on Dateline ID last night. It is a heartbreaker-fortunately, NY legislators enacted a law named for Capozzi making it easier to get the wrongly convicted out of prison.
    Last edited by KateB; 05-30-2015 at 11:51 AM. Reason: repair url tag.
    email me


    Long Lost Love: The Bob Harrod Story Disappeared/ID Network
    Amazon: Purchase Long Lost Love $1.99


    Bob Harrod SAR


    “The first time someone shows you who they are, believe them.”
    ― Maya Angelou

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    3,027
    Quote Originally Posted by believe09 View Post
    Look what it took to exonerate Anthony Capozzi who was believed to have been the Bike Path rapist for 22 years. It was law enforcement who repeatedly brought to the DA the information that Capozzi clearly was not guilty of the crimes, in spite of being convicted based on eyewitness testimony of a victim. The actual serial killer/rapist was pillar of the community Altemio Sanchez. Even after Sanchez pled guilty, LE could not get the DA to release Capozzi until by some MIRACLE the rape kits of the victims were found and the DNA matched Sanchez. Prior to the match, the DA argued that there was no hard evidence eliminating Capozzi, a lifelong schizophrenic, from the crimes.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altemio_Sanchez

    I actually just watched this story on Dateline ID last night. It is a heartbreaker-fortunately, NY legislators enacted a law named for Capozzi making it easier to get the wrongly convicted out of prison.
    You know what gets me about this case is how Sanchez's uncle did not tell the police about him driving his car. If he had been truthful how many women would have not been victims? Why is it so hard for some family members to do the right thing?

    VB
    Boyfriends and girlfriends are not Babysitters.
    Just because you want to be with somebody does not mean they will take care of your children.



Similar Threads

  1. block a forum?
    By LadyL in forum Forum Finesse
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-11-2014, 10:51 AM
  2. Is there a way to block...
    By mister happy in forum Forum Finesse
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-08-2009, 12:55 PM
  3. Attorney Files Motion To Block Testing
    By Cher352 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 117
    Last Post: 09-12-2008, 01:42 PM