
When the State gets it wrong, innocent people die – I was almost one of them - dsr12
https://medium.com/@damienechols/when-the-state-gets-it-wrong-innocent-people-die-i-was-almost-one-of-them-670c57d79796
======
Freak_NL
It is a very human trait to stick with a choice once made, even if the
information that led to that decision turns out to be faulty and the decision
itself no longer makes sense. Loss of face, stubbornness, a refusal
(subconscious or not) to admit our own fallibility, for any one person there
can be plenty of reasons to stick with a faulty decision.

But what always puzzles me in these horrific accounts of abuse by a _system_
is how all the people that are part of it somehow allow for this human trait
to seep into the system itself. What goes on in their minds? Is it something
to do with a fear of unjustly triggering a series of (costly) events that
might exonerate an innocent man? A fear of personal consequences in case they
proved guilty after all? Or is it simply always someone else's problem — even
if you were the governor himself?

~~~
isubkhankulov
politics and media play huge roles.

in this particular case though, the author provides zero evidence that the
crime wasnt committee. he hints that the guy was mentally not all there or
"insane".

~~~
Freak_NL
The author himself (not the other guy who was executed in a rush) was offered
the Alford Plea, which if I understand correctly means that the justice system
does in fact believe he is innocent and doesn't want an innocent death on
their hands, but also doesn't want to be held accountable for eighteen years
of unjust incarceration — i.e., admit that a grave mistake was made.

(Please capitalize your sentences, it makes your contributions easer to read.)

~~~
boomboomsubban
Though that is kind of how it was used in Echol's case, in general the
prosecutors think the person is guilty but don't want to spend money on the
proof. Avoiding huge lawsuits was probably why it was used in this situation.

------
dandare
> "An Alford Plea is a paradox — it means you get to maintain your innocence,
> even as you accept a guilty plea. It makes no sense to anyone capable of
> logical thinking, and the only reason it exists is so the state can’t be
> held accountable for sentencing an innocent person to death. Part of this
> plea deal was that I could never sue the state of Arkansas for what they had
> done to me. Why would I take such a deal? Because I knew that if I didn’t,
> I’d ... [be killed], despite having evidence that would have gained us
> exoneration in a less corrupt forum."

As a European I never stop being amazed how crazy corrupt the US legal system
is and how ignorant the US citizens are.

~~~
isubkhankulov
please don't equate Arkansas to the whole country

~~~
boomboomsubban
47 states allow Alford pleas, as does the Department of Justice.

------
defined
This is a horrifying story and, I fear, part of a trend in the USA towards
devaluing human rights.

~~~
theparanoid
Since '99, executions have declined by 3x
[https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions-
year](https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions-year)

~~~
defined
Maybe so, but the devaluation of rights goes far beyond executions. There are
ways to oppress people that are almost as bad as wrongful execution, such as
wrongful and malicious prosecution, wrongful imprisonment, profit-based prison
systems, and predatory plea-bargaining, and that's just the justice system.

In a broader sense, the willful dismantling of laws and programs meant to
prevent human suffering, and reduce vulnerability to robber barons is also
part of the trend: the denial of climate science, the attacks on net
neutrality, the attempts to dismantle healthcare assistance, the defunding of
scientific programs - the list goes on and on, and it is to the detriment of
all but the mega-wealthy.

------
gumby
> A judge ruled that the DNA, which could exonerate him, should never be
> tested.

This resonates will with the other HN submission today about the climate
denialist whose mind was changed by data.

