Good for him! Let's just hope that he can restrain himself from thievery and drugs going forward.

He was wrongly convicted on eye witness testimony.
DNA testing, now that we have the technology, should mandatory for all prisoners if enough evidence is there to perform the test. I can't think of much worse than spending 27 years of your life in a Georgia prison for a cime you didn't commit.

....can't think of much worse? How about being married to Hillary, or her being your President. That'll give the DR lefties a retort to spit out over the next two days.

Yes, he was also paroled and returned to Jail twice which kicked in his original sentence again. I agree that DNA testing should be mandatory but it should never be the only evidence should it?

I agree that DNA testing should be mandatory but it should never be the only evidence should it?

Posted by 2fast4u at 2007-12-11 10:15 PM | Re


DNA results come back with results showing usually millions to one that it either was or was not the person involved. You can't get those kinds of odds with any other form of evidence presented -- particularly eye witness testimony which is known to be unreliable. If you have to choose between going with eye witness testimony (or even a fingerprint found at the scene) OR the results of a DNA test -- then that DNA result found should be given priority even if it means disgarding other evidence to do so.

You can't send a man to prison and disregard the kind of evidence (DNA) that provides proof showing the odds are millions to one that he didn't do the crime.

I suspect that with too many of us the black color is so prominent in our minds that black people tend to look alike (can't remember how tall or what he was wearing, but he was black).

Thanks for DNA testing and better standards.

They should have hurried this up and put him to death the way god intended. Now they have caused all kinds of harm to those who rushed to assemble faulty evidence and judgement.

Clearly he wasn't incarcerated in Texas where he belonged. They would have cleaned up this mess before it ever became one.

Regards,
etc.

White is the seventh Georgia convict to be cleared by DNA evidence, said Aimee Maxwell, director of the Atlanta-based Georgia Innocence Project. In every case, the men were wrongly convicted on eyewitness accounts.

Apparently just being a black guy with the audacity to be named White is enuff to convict you in Georgia.

That's it, thinks Spud, no more Georgia Peaches fer the tater o' doom. Stephen Colbert recently opined that the taste of a Georgia Peach was like you'd imagine Ted Turners ass would taste like.

Blech, just Blech!

Only South Caroline Peaches from now on!

More seriously, spuddish shout out to good folk over at the Innocence Project.

You kidZ do good work.

Ya prolly already know that but Spud'll mention it, just in case.

Be Well.

Yes, but by all means, let's continue with the death penalty.
Obviously the system is fool proof and we can be assured of never executing an innocent man in the name of The State(us) thereby making The State(us) murderers.

And the wheels on the bus go round and round...round and round...

They should have hurried this up and put him to death the way god intended. Now they have caused all kinds of harm to those who rushed to assemble faulty evidence and judgement.

Clearly he wasn't incarcerated in Texas where he belonged. They would have cleaned up this mess before it ever became one.

Regards,
etc.

Posted by ThePerfectStorm at 2007-12-12 12:18 AM |



TPS: FF

Again the "just us" system prevails.

Right turn second post.

Obviously the system is fool proof and we can be assured of never executing an innocent man in the name of The State(us) thereby making The State(us) murderers.

Posted by briwo at 2007-12-12 01:39 AM | Reply

In cases where there is surviving evidence prisoners have the right to DNA testing to clear themselves. The vast majority refuse the test ... even those on Death Row. Preferring instead to argue technicalities of the law.

If prisons were chock full of poor, innocent people, why do those victims of society refuse the test that will set them free? They know that the DNA test will prove that they are vicious predators who belong behind bars.

As a predictable Liberal, you want all criminals set free with a hug and a kiss, and a monthly check from the state (us). Sorry, nanny.

I agree that DNA testing should be mandatory but it should never be the only evidence should it?

Posted by 2fast4u

I guess it isn't 100%. Look at OJ, he's still free.

I suspect that with too many of us the black color is so prominent in our minds that black people tend to look alike (can't remember how tall or what he was wearing, but he was black).

When I was in grad school a black co-student pointed out that the typical police description-black male 20-40, white tee shirt and jeans covered about 70% of his neighbors at any given time.
And Sniper-it wasn't the DNA, it was the incompetent and corrupt prosecutors.

They had DNA that linked him to the crime scene. The prosecutors wern,t that great but neither was the jury. I was pointing out that DNA dosen't put the nail in the case, right or wrong.

"Good for him! Let's just hope that he can restrain himself from thievery and drugs going forward."

Are you kidding? He should get a freeby, or a whole bunch, depending on what crimes he committs.

He should get a freeby, or a whole bunch, depending on what crimes he committs.

Posted by member2586

You gotta be shittin. Two wrongs don't make a right.

face it , he shoulda done the rape in Arkansas, Huckleberry would have had him out years ago.

Damn, they should have put him to death. That would have made all this hullabaloo irrelevant.

Pish Posh, who cares if they are guilty as long as someone gets killed by the culture of life for revenge?

Amazing the yucks and guffaws you can put together about the least funny situation possible, being jugged (or executed) for something you didn't do. And the righties herein are trying to politicize it, somehow tie it to Clinton or Huckabee or Libs in general. herm

I agree that DNA testing should be mandatory but it should never be the only evidence should it?

Posted by 2fast4u at 2007-12-11 10:15 PM | Re


DNA results come back with results showing usually millions to one that it either was or was not the person involved. You can't get those kinds of odds with any other form of evidence presented -- particularly eye witness testimony which is known to be unreliable. If you have to choose between going with eye witness testimony (or even a fingerprint found at the scene) OR the results of a DNA test -- then that DNA result found should be given priority even if it means disgarding other evidence to do so.


You can't send a man to prison and disregard the kind of evidence (DNA) that provides proof showing the odds are millions to one that he didn't do the crime.

Posted by CalifChris at 2007-12-11 10:30 PM | Reply |


This doesn't seem entirely correct either. DNA should not be the only evidence. Its true its a terribly solid piece of evidence, but DNA doesn't tell you what really happened. Only perhaps that at some point said defendent dripped blood or something on said victim. Which may or may not have had anything to do with the crime. Not much to say beyond that though, every case is going to be a bit different. And in some DNA may very well be the only worthwhile factor in the decision.

As for this case though, I would agree DNA > eyewitness testimony.

DNA is not in the Bible, therefore it does not exist.

White was arrested six weeks after the Aug. 11, 1979, rape, and the victim, who had also been beaten and robbed, picked him out of a photo lineup.

She later picked White, then 20, out of a live lineup.

He was found guilty the following May of rape, aggravated assault, burglary and robbery and sentenced to life in prison plus 40 years.

He served about 10 years of that sentence before he was paroled in 1990.

White was convicted three years later for marijuana and cocaine possession and spent another two years in prison.

Then, after two years of freedom, White was convicted in 1997 of robbery and sentenced to seven years.

More importantly, White's parole was revoked, which reinstated the original sentence of life in prison for the rape that he adamantly claimed from the beginning he didn't commit.

CalfChris and (s)pud should know the facts...

Good for him! Let's just hope that he can restrain himself from thievery and drugs going forward.
Agreed. And now he can work to repay those he was convicted of robbing.