DNA Evidence Clears Texas Man Who Spent 30 Years In Prison

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

  1. No one wants truth, they want justice, no one wants justice, they want to win.

    Something like that.............:cool:
     
    #11     Jan 4, 2011
  2. I'm betting 2.4 million is more than he would've made in his lifetime if he hadnt gone to jail. Dont feel too sorry for him...sure he lived in a box for 30 years, but dont many of live in a box too? We live in a house shaped like a box, drive to work in a box, go into our box building and sit at our cubicle shaped like a box, working on our computer box, then we drive back home in our box and what do we do? We go to our refrigerator box, get a TV dinner that comes in a box, heat it in a microwaves shaped like a box, and sit in front of the tv box.

    Only difference is this guy has more money than you now.
     
    #12     Jan 4, 2011
  3. BSAM

    BSAM

    ^Warped thinking.^
     
    #13     Jan 4, 2011
  4. You're right, number probably closer to 99% :D

     
    #14     Jan 5, 2011
  5. And of course, the leftist pedophile supporter is the first one to come in and start race baiting. Yep, it's just cause he's black!! This NEVER happens to white people...

     
    #15     Jan 5, 2011
  6. Completely subjective.

    :p
     
    #16     Jan 5, 2011
  7. According to the article referenced in the OP, the following is true:

    "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."

    Including the Texas man just found innocent due to DNA, of the three referenced for spending more than 30 years wrongly convicted...all three were black, and convicted in Redneck States...

    Sure, it is just a coincidence...nothing racial...

    ...of course not.

    My guess is all were convicted on the basis of eye witness testimony...you know, they all look alike...
     
    #17     Jan 5, 2011
  8. DNA is not always reliable. There was a woman who had 2 different sets of DNA and she lost her children because DNA said the kids were not hers. With the birth of her 3rd child, the judge ordered a witness to watch the birth, they immediately took samples and the DNA said she was not the mother of that child she had just given birth to.

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

    Nobody knows how many people there are that have 2 different sets of DNA. These guys might have actually been guilty.
     
    #18     Jan 5, 2011
  9. Wrong, they now have tests for that phenomenon, known as Chimerism. They do know roughly how common it is as well, it's well into the 1 hundredths of a percent at most.

    Funny, the guy who is arguing against releasing exonerated detainees is the same guy who is arguing against evolution, and arguing for the prosecution of adultery or pre marital sex.

    LOL!! Trying to say that DNA isn't as reliable as eye witness testimony... ROFL!

     
    #19     Jan 5, 2011
  10. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    I agree.
     
    #20     Jan 5, 2011