Texas (probably) executed innocent guy

[Tender Branson]

In a withering critique, a nationally known fire scientist has told a state commission on forensics that Texas fire investigators had no basis to rule a deadly house fire was an arson -- a finding that led to the murder conviction and execution of Cameron Todd Willingham.

The finding comes in the first state-sanctioned review of an execution in Texas, home to the country's busiest death chamber. If the commission reaches the same conclusion, it could lead to the first-ever declaration by an official state body that an inmate was wrongly executed.

Indeed, the report concludes there was no evidence to determine that the December 1991 fire was even set, and it leaves open the possibility the blaze that killed three children was an accident and there was no crime at all -- the same findings found in a Chicago Tribune investigation of the case published in December 2004.

Willingham, the father of those children, was executed in February 2004. He protested his innocence to the end.

The Tribune obtained a copy of the review by Craig Beyler, of Hughes Associates Inc., which was conducted for the Texas Forensic Science Commission, created to investigate allegations of forensic error and misconduct. The re-examination of the Willingham case comes as many forensic disciplines face scrutiny for playing a role in wrongful convictions that have been exposed by DNA and other scientific advances.

Among Beyler's key findings: that investigators failed to examine all of the electrical outlets and appliances in the Willinghams' house in the small Texas town of Corsicana, did not consider other potential causes for the fire, came to conclusions that contradicted witnesses at the scene, and wrongly concluded Willingham's injuries could not have been caused as he said they were.

The state fire marshal on the case, Beyler concluded in his report, had "limited understanding" of fire science. The fire marshal "seems to be wholly without any realistic understanding of fires and how fire injuries are created," he wrote.

The marshal's findings, he added, "are nothing more than a collection of personal beliefs that have nothing to do with science-based fire investigation."

Over the past five years, the Willingham case has been reviewed by nine of the nation's top fire scientists -- first for the Tribune, then for the Innocence Project, and now for the commission. All concluded that the original investigators relied on outdated theories and folklore to justify the determination of arson.

The only other evidence of significance against Willingham was another inmate who testified that Willingham had confessed to him. Jailhouse snitches are viewed with skepticism in the justice system, so much so that some jurisdictions have restrictions against their use.

Samuel Bassett, an attorney who is the chairman of the commission, said the panel will seek a response from the state fire marshal and then write its own report.

Contacted Monday, one of Willingham's cousins said she was pleased with the report but was skeptical that state officials would acknowledge Willingham's innocence.

"They are definitely going to have to respond to it," said Pat Cox. "But it's difficult for me to believe that the State of Texas or the governor will take responsibility and admit they did in fact wrongfully execute Todd. They'll dance around it."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-execute-0824-082aug25,0,5812073.story

[Franzl]

Obviously not the first time.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Obviously not the first time.

nor the last

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Obviously not the first time.

nor the last

[Landslide Lyndon]

As if Texans really care about guilt or innocence.
All they care is their reputation of being tough on crime.
If an innocent man gets in the way, then tough luck.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

As stated, it's not the first, not the last, and how about all these innocence projects trying to get guys out of jails in all 50 states now that DNA evidence can be used to acquit them.


I guess I don't get the point of this posting.........

[minionofmidas]

As stated, it's not the first, not the last, and how about all these innocence projects trying to get guys out of jails in all 50 states now that DNA evidence can be used to acquit them.


I guess I don't get the point of this posting.........

"There's not one case of a proven innocent man actually innocent - the system is working!" is a pro-dp talking point.

("Ever" in the opening line is incorrect btw. First since the reintroduction of the death penalty in the US is what it ought to read, I think.)

[Coburn In 2012]

Strawman.

[Ebowed]

Strawman.

You need to stay away from the genius pills.

They are making you too smart.

[Scam of God]

The problem is less with the death penalty than the jury system, however, which means we take mouth-breathing retards off the street and when they see a so-called "expert" like that fire marshal tell them the evidence incontrovertibly proves the guy did it, they vote to kill him. We have essentially democratized the dying process, with expected results. We need more to eliminate trial by jury if we're going to retain our present legal system and replace it with inquiries based on the establishment of fact; I would go so far as to completely eliminate civilian participation and create entirely a court system made up based entirely on trial by panels of professional and highly trained jurors, their training making them an even mix of forensic scientists and lawyers.

We furthermore need to divorce evidence gathering from the prosecutor's office. The actual prosecution should be a separate organization of attorneys general with the gathering of evidence being done by a Forensic Departments separate from both the police and the offices of attorneys general; the Forensic Departments would present the evidence to the professional trained jurors and then the attorneys general prosecuting the case and the defense attorneys could throw their own interpretations and observations onto the evidence provided.

The real problem with the death penalty is that it serves as a legitimation of the State's monopoly of violence; it says that the State is quite competent to choose who lives and who dies, but that individual citizens of that State are not. This is completely backwards, for obvious reasons.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The problem is less with the death penalty than the jury system, however, which means we take mouth-breathing retards off the street and when they see a so-called "expert" like that fire marshal tell them the evidence incontrovertibly proves the guy did it, they vote to kill him. We have essentially democratized the dying process, with expected results. We need more to eliminate trial by jury if we're going to retain our present legal system and replace it with inquiries based on the establishment of fact; I would go so far as to completely eliminate civilian participation and create entirely a court system made up based entirely on trial by panels of professional and highly trained jurors, their training making them an even mix of forensic scientists and lawyers.

We furthermore need to divorce evidence gathering from the prosecutor's office. The actual prosecution should be a separate organization of attorneys general with the gathering of evidence being done by a Forensic Departments separate from both the police and the offices of attorneys general; the Forensic Departments would present the evidence to the professional trained jurors and then the attorneys general prosecuting the case and the defense attorneys could throw their own interpretations and observations onto the evidence provided.

The real problem with the death penalty is that it serves as a legitimation of the State's monopoly of violence; it says that the State is quite competent to choose who lives and who dies, but that individual citizens of that State are not. This is completely backwards, for obvious reasons.

     I agree. The life & liberty of the defendant is far too important to put in the hands of 12 people who oftentimes know nothing about criminal justice or, worse yet, think they know something about it because they watched CSI.

[ilikeverin]

As stated, it's not the first, not the last, and how about all these innocence projects trying to get guys out of jails in all 50 states now that DNA evidence can be used to acquit them.

Actually, they're usually quite chronically underfunded; it's really no surprise there's so much demand for their services!

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

What evidence was he convicted on?  I don't have all the facts, but that was enough to put reasonable doubt in my mind.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Respectfully, Inks, c'mon we weren't in a jury box listening to the testimony....

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Probably executed innocent at large:

http://www.truthinjustice.org/prob-innocent.htm

Number of course might be higher

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Respectfully, Inks, c'mon we weren't in a jury box listening to the testimony....

I'm not saying that the dude's for sure innocent (I have probably 0.1% of the facts in the case right now).  I'm just saying that this is probably something that should be looked into.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Respectfully, Inks, c'mon we weren't in a jury box listening to the testimony....

I'm not saying that the dude's for sure innocent (I have probably 0.1% of the facts in the case right now).  I'm just saying that this is probably something that should be looked into.

Agreed!