• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

DNA clears Texas man who spent 30 years in prison

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
You mean an example of an unjust system, possibly? I do not know the details of the case...the "accomplice" that was convicted with this man was arrested for rape prior to them being held on this charge and subsequent conviction, FWIU; makes a person wonder!

The lack of DNA evidence does not mean the person was not there, and was not culpable in the crime (example: if DNA was taken from a rape victim, but one of the men used a condom...there would likely only be the DNA of the person who did not cover-up). It appears that in some of these cases the DNA is just a portion of a case that had been handled negligently.

I read(e) that the man who was with the woman could not or did not identify in a photo line-up the man that has been exonerated.

If an innocent man was found guilty by our court system, is the system unjust? Is the conviction or process unjust? Was the ruling just, based on the information at the time, but unjust in that it convicted an innocent person? Can a just system convict people unjustly? Can an unjust system convict people justly? So many questions....
 
Last edited:

Aaron1124

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2009
Messages
2,044
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
You mean an example of an unjust system, possibly? I do not know the details of the case...the "accomplice" that was convicted with this man was arrested for rape prior to them being held on this charge and subsequent conviction, FWIU; makes a person wonder!

The lack of DNA evidence does not mean the person was not there, and was not culpable in the crime (example: if DNA was taken from a rape victim, but one of the men used a condom...there would likely only be the DNA of the person who did not cover-up). It appears that in some of these cases the DNA is just a portion of a case that had been handled negligently.

I read(e) that the man who was with the woman could not or did not identify in a photo line-up the man that has been exonerated.

If an innocent man was found guilty by our court system, is the system unjust? Is the conviction or process unjust? Was the ruling just, based on the information at the time, but unjust in that it convicted an innocent person? Can a just system convict people unjustly? Can an unjust system convict people justly? So many questions....

That's the difference between a "just system" and a "perfect system".
 

CDT COX

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
277
Location
NC
Why was a vaginal swab taken in 1979 when DNA profiling didn't start until the mid 80's?
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
Because the fluid evidence collected by a vaginal swab contains more than just DNA. Ejaculate can indicate blood type, and whether the attacker was an "excreter".

Excreter?

I am sorry, but I have been studying a lot (beginning of the quarter)...when I read(e) your response I thought, "they forgot...'to test for the gender of the perp'." DUH, I am so freaking tired!
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
You mean an example of an unjust system, possibly? I do not know the details of the case...the "accomplice" that was convicted with this man was arrested for rape prior to them being held on this charge and subsequent conviction, FWIU; makes a person wonder!

The lack of DNA evidence does not mean the person was not there, and was not culpable in the crime (example: if DNA was taken from a rape victim, but one of the men used a condom...there would likely only be the DNA of the person who did not cover-up). It appears that in some of these cases the DNA is just a portion of a case that had been handled negligently.

I read(e) that the man who was with the woman could not or did not identify in a photo line-up the man that has been exonerated.

If an innocent man was found guilty by our court system, is the system unjust? Is the conviction or process unjust? Was the ruling just, based on the information at the time, but unjust in that it convicted an innocent person? Can a just system convict people unjustly? Can an unjust system convict people justly? So many questions....

No our system is broken. No longer do I hear at all, from anyone in the system about how it is better to let a 100 guilty men go than try one innocent man. Something I strongly believe in, but for our "justice" system it's about points and conviction and winning the game. Unfortunately they are playing this game with peoples lives.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
No our system is broken. No longer do I hear at all, from anyone in the system about how it is better to let a 100 guilty men go than try one innocent man. Something I strongly believe in, but for our "justice" system it's about points and conviction and winning the game. Unfortunately they are playing this game with peoples lives.

Exactly, and while young Asst DA's rise through the ranks on the backs of innocent victims of the justice system, The People are the ones who loose.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
Excreter?

I am sorry, but I have been studying a lot (beginning of the quarter)...when I read(e) your response I thought, "they forgot...'to test for the gender of the perp'." DUH, I am so freaking tired!
Sorry, my bad typo. Should have been "secretor".

A "secretor" passes along an identifiable amount of blood type information in certain bodily secretions, like saliva and ejaculate. Vaginal swabs would detect if the ejaculate belonged to a secretor or not, and if positive, his blood type. It only applies to blood types A, B, or AB.

http://www.right4eu.us/secretor.html
 
Top