DNA Evidence Clears Texas Man Who Spent 30 Years In Prison

Discussion in 'Politics' started by phenomena, Jan 4, 2011.

  1. "You're free to go."

    With those words from a judge, Cornelius Dupree Jr. "was exonerated this morning in a Dallas courtroom," the Morning News writes.

    The verdict, though, comes after Dupree already spent 30 years in prison "for a rape and robbery he didn't commit," the Associated Press adds.

    "It's a joy to be free again," Dupree said after the judge's ruling (he has been out on parole since July; today's decision clears his record).

    The 51-year-old Dupree was cleared of wrong-doing thanks to DNA evidence. According to the AP:

    "Nationally, only two others who have been exonerated by DNA evidence spent more time in prison, according to the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal center representing Dupree that specializes in wrongful conviction cases. James Bain was wrongly imprisoned for 35 years in Florida, and Lawrence McKinney spent more than 31 years in a Tennessee prison."

  2. olias


    This is the kind of news story that should be spread. Thanks
  3. TGregg


    Spread, but also include more details. How was this innocent man found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? The anti-punishment folks have an agenda so they are pushing this story out. Nobody is more happy than I that an innocent man is . . . well, he was already free but now he's exonerated.

    But WTF happened? If we now have plenty of evidence that shows he really is innocent, then one wonders if this poor guy was railroaded while the hunt stopped for the guilty party. That's a pretty serious travesty of justice and Shirely (RIP Leslie) worth reporting if not actually investigating.
  4. Lucrum


    Our justice system is filled with prosecuting attorneys that care more about a "win" than justice. I'm normally as big a supporter of police as most BUT there are some who are either incompetent or don't like being proven wrong, even if they are.
  5. It's because you don't need to prove anything beyond a reasonable doubt, you just need to convince jurors to vote 'guilty'. Prosecutors measure their success in convictions. The overwhelming majority just care about convicting people, not whether or not the party is guilty.

    Just like a salesman. He is trying to sell you. He doesn't really care if HIS product is actually the best one for you, or whether or not you actually need one at all. He just wants to sell you. Prosecutors aren't much different, 95% of the time. So many death row cases they have not allowed DNA evidence to be presented after a trial. Why? Why would they fear new evidence if they were actually after the facts? They just don't want anything messing up their conviction, and they certainly don't want anything surfacing which could damage them professionally. Facts be damned. They have an agenda.

  6. jem


    sadly, I agree. very good comments.

    1. The idea of "beyond reasonable doubt is hardly ever followed at trials in my opinion." I do not think the defense argues it enough. I think typical prosecutor arguments about the definition of byrd - should be banned as prejudicial and erroneous.

    2. I was friends with probably 10 to 20 prosecutors.
    I would not put the number at 95%, but I would say far too many young deputy D.A.s were over zealous. I heard comments that sent off alarm bells in my head more than once.

    I also knew some exceptional prosecutors who did the right thing all the time.

    ( i did work in a prosecutors office during law school)
  7. he is 51, spent his life in prison, does not have a credit score. what are his options but to live homeless the rest of his life?

    does he get some sort of a compensation for 30 years?

    on positive note, he does appear to be in better shape than his lawyer.
  8. BSAM


    I wonder if the man had a court appointed attorney.

    If you ever had any dealings with the police, jail systems, judges, attorneys, etc. you'd know that the law, at least in the beginning, is pretty much whatever they say it is. Lots of corruption / stretching of the intent of the law.

    Texas owes this man a lot of money, imho. They stole his life.
  9. da-net


    biased judge + prosecutor only interested in convictions = guilty verdict

    from the story;

    "Under Texas compensation laws for the wrongly imprisoned, Dupree is eligible for $80,000 for each year he was behind bars, plus a lifetime annuity. He could receive $2.4 million in a lump sum that is not subject to federal income tax.

    The compensation law, the nation's most generous, was passed in 2009 by the Texas Legislature after dozens of wrongly convicted men were released from prison. Texas has freed 41 wrongly convicted inmates through DNA since 2001 -- more than any other state."

    It would probably be a good deterrent if the Texas law had a provision that the judge & prosecutor shared some of the costs to Texas for wrongful convictions Mr Dupree was robbed of his life by the judge & prosecutor!
  10. A black man found guilty on circumstancial evidence in Texas...and evidence overturns the conviction.

    Shocking that a black man did not get a "fair" trial...in Texas.
    #10     Jan 4, 2011