Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  16 17 18 19 20 (20 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Shasha HodnettDee Harris
Techie to my heart!!
10:56 AM on 07/07/2012
This case was based on testimony from a witness who said that the suspect "told him" that he killed someone at the house? Really? Did anyone even bother to determine if what the witness said, was credible? It doesn't seem like it.

I'm going there: If this had been a White man he never would have spent 30 years in jail. Why is George Zimmerman, the MURDERER of Trayvon Martin, allowed to walk around free, but a Black man "accused" of committing any type of criminal act is locked up immediately? Even when there is no valid proof that he did anything wrong? Then this particular Black man, Andre Davis, spends another 8 years in prison, after there is DNA evidence proving that he didn't commit the crime. If he had been White, I doubt that this would have happened.

A White man can openly kill a Black person and get away with it, because "they looked suspicious." But a Black man can't drive home from work in his mercedes benz to his "nice neighborhood" without the police stopping him everyday to "check him out." (continued on pg 2)
photo
stayingsaneinthemadness
The sun's not yellow, it's chicken!!!
11:57 AM on 07/07/2012
Well, not disagreeing with you. But don't forget, not only did a friend say Davis admitted to the murder of a "woman", but he was also left alone in the home where the child was found. There is more to it than skin color as far as the arrest. But, I agree that it is wrong for an innocent man, of any color, to be locked up for something he did not do. I pray he is able to forgive and have something for himself. I pray he can be happy. I'm happy for him, but I'm sad for him at the same time.
01:08 PM on 07/07/2012
that is so true i see it everyday in my home town african american male are pull over everyday for no reason at all but they say it for suspicious why are we the only people suspicious huh
10:38 AM on 07/07/2012
Meanwhile a killer has been walking the streets committing more crimes for over 30 years.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
taeyyenom1
09:57 AM on 07/07/2012
Another prime example why they should do away with the death penalty
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RichStine
Pro-Post-Womb-Lifer
11:19 AM on 07/07/2012
I have always had a struggle, both for and against it, myself. Thing is, it ain't about me, so sometimes I'm guilty of shrugging stuff like this off. And shame on me for it.

Totally agree that far too many INNOCENT people have been, and ARE going to be...executed, because of gross negligence and misconduct regarding investigations, prosecutions and defense.

What to do?

We need priorities changed, voices raised, and action taken. But what? Unless the majority's priorities are shared and are focused, I see no immediate resolution to the problem. Again, it's about priorities. Getting an erection, having breast augmentation, what's the latest gadget, and fretting over who will win America's Got Talent are the real priorities. Until that changes, what we Americans have, is the uncanny talent to do nothing.
photo
darkmark
capitalism th death of all
01:16 PM on 07/07/2012
what? what could be more important than america's go talent?
01:10 AM on 07/08/2012
That is also why when I saw the movie Somersby, I got really saddened. Richard Gere played the part of an innocent man jailed and hung. It made me so sad I never want to see that movie again.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
pattio66
Stand easy, Grace!
12:41 PM on 07/08/2012
Wrong - a prime example of why the death penalty must require irrefutable DNA evidence to be applied and carried out. If the DNA proved that someone raped and murdered my three-year-old, I'd expect that person to go to death row.
photo
WeNeed2Change
No Need 2 Cry About It...
09:54 AM on 07/07/2012
So...in 2004 DNA testing proved that was not the person who assaulted this child, but he wasn't released until 2012? Then add insult to injury, the prosecutor noted that she is choosing not to retry based on the fact that she wouldn't have a case (witnesses, accounts, etc.) NOT because of the DNA evidence exonerating him???? WTH! I can't imagine what kind of life he had inside being labeled a child killer and rapist, but I imagine it wasn't easy. And now there are probably 30 years of victims as a result of the true offender still being out there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Scott Gensemer
Pleasure & Happiness are quite different
02:49 PM on 07/08/2012
"Exonerating him" is not, well precisely, precise. The DNA evidence proves that someone else was there and comitted, either wholly or part, the crime. It does not prove that Mr. Davis wasn't present. I admit that had this evidence been available at the time of the trial, the jury would, most likely, not have been able find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't know enough about the case to know what the preponderance of the evidence would have been, but, this DNA evidence would have been an ace in the defence attorney's hand. In any event, this evidence is reason enough, in my mind, to warrent his release. I wish him well and hope employers will step forward and give him "a leg up" to help him build a satisfying life. I don't know if he can sue for wrongful imprisonment, but surely he deserves some financial compensation
photo
WeNeed2Change
No Need 2 Cry About It...
03:16 PM on 07/08/2012
I agree with everything that you said. The reason that I say he didn't assault this child is because the DNA was pulled from a semen sample. For me, that would suggest that someone else at least sexually assaulted the child. I agree that there isn't enough info on the case to determine if other evidence linked him to the scene, but I've heard that the prison system has a rule against crimes of this nature and if he truly is innocent then I feel for him. God willing, the true perpetrator will be caught using that same DNA testing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
llen
09:43 AM on 07/07/2012
Thank god for DNA. We are now finding out how unreliable human testimony can be, sometimes the person is quite sure of what he thinks he saw or they are out for themselves and say what they think the prosecutor wants them to say. To many times Police and Prosecutors are under pressure to convict and to many times, unbeknownst to the public, witnesses and evidence are not as it seems, or left out of trial, or not followed up. I have to wonder why the Prosecutor stated, after the DNA evidence, that they won't retry due to age of witnesses testimony etc...Why would you retry this case, he obviously didn't do the crime, it was not his DNA on that poor child.

I'm not familiar with this case, but DNA has freed another innocent man. Which proves my dislike for the death penalty, I'm not against the Death Penalty, just that our legal system is not reliable enough to use it, except in the rare occasions of the Jeffery Dalmer, Bundy types.

"...42 people exonerated by DNA evidence in Illinois." This is saying something, and it's not good. Multiply this by 50 states, it's scary.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
starchildjg24
Balance, Logic and Humor Rule
10:54 AM on 07/07/2012
Prosecutors surely do hate that they can be wrong! Not even them personally, because it wasn't this woman who was the original prosecutor, but they will defend any prosecutor. Have any of them said "We've made a terrible mistake"? I mean, surely there have been some!