
Texas may well have killed an innocent man - rajbala
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21601279-texas-may-well-have-killed-innocent-man-irrevocable
======
rbanffy
Death penalty would be applied much more responsibly if, in case an innocent
person got executed, everyone involved in the verdict, police, forensics
experts, prosecutors, judge and jurors, would have to be charged of at least
manslaughter.

Realistically, this would only bring the systematic destruction of any
exculpatory evidence.

~~~
bediger4000
_Realistically, this would only bring the systematic destruction of any
exculpatory evidence._

Is the US (Texas?) law enforcement that corrupt? That's actually pretty
shocking that the only realistic outcome of holding those who execute the
innocent is that the system would get even more biased.

~~~
gizmo686
This scenario does not seem that corrupt. Everyone involved in the case,
collectivly, has significant power to destroy evidence, and they would all be
facing criminal prosecution.

~~~
bediger4000
But the District Attorneys and the Law Enforcment officers have taken the
moral equivalent of Holy Vows to do the right thing, and destroying any
evidence is obviously the Wrong Thing.

Doesn't law enforcement derive all of their moral authority from always doing
the right thing, from treating everyone exactly alike? If there's a
significant percentage of law enforcement that is just out to "get someone",
they have about zero moral authority.

------
josecastillo
Also worth noting: in 2009, the Texas Forensic Science Commission was looking
into the Willingham case. Two days before the commission was scheduled to hear
evidence that could have exonerated Willingham, Gov. Rick Perry ousted the
chairman and two members. The hearing was canceled, and the inquiry was
effectively shut down. [1]

The final report, released a year and a half later, only recommended more
training for fire investigators; it did not examine exculpatory evidence, or
issue any finding regarding negligence or professional misconduct. [2] Two
months after that, Texas AG Greg Abbott issued a ruling prohibiting the
commission from investigating evidence from prior to 2005, ensuring that the
commission will not examine exculpatory evidence in the future. [3]

[1]
[http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2009/10/david...](http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2009/10/david-
grann-a-sudden-dismissal.html)

[2] PDF:
[http://www.fsc.state.tx.us/documents/FINAL.pdf](http://www.fsc.state.tx.us/documents/FINAL.pdf)

[3] [http://www.texastribune.org/2012/10/24/family-seeks-clear-
na...](http://www.texastribune.org/2012/10/24/family-seeks-clear-name-
executed/)

------
parennoob
A more in-depth article, which fills in a lot of details:
[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_...](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all)

This case seems to hinge mainly on the fact that a lack of a scientific
approach to investigating arson, combined with overzealous prosecutors, may
have contributed to what the original headline claims.

Some key paragraphs (though you should go there and read it yourself):

\--------

"With the naked eye, it is impossible to distinguish between the pour patterns
and puddle configurations caused by an accelerant and those caused naturally
by post-flashover. The only reliable way to tell the difference is to take
samples from the burn patterns and test them in a laboratory for the presence
of flammable or combustible liquids."

\--------

"On February 13th, four days before Willingham was scheduled to be executed,
he got a call from Reaves, his attorney. Reaves told him that the fifteen
members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles, which reviews an application for
clemency and had been sent Hurst’s report, had made their decision.

“What is it?” Willingham asked.

“I’m sorry,” Reaves said. “They denied your petition.”

The vote was unanimous. Reaves could not offer an explanation: the board
deliberates in secret, and its members are not bound by any specific criteria.
_The board members did not even have to review Willingham’s materials, and
usually don’t debate a case in person; rather, they cast their votes by fax—a
process that has become known as “death by fax.”_ Between 1976 and 2004, when
Willingham filed his petition, the State of Texas had approved only one
application for clemency from a prisoner on death row. A Texas appellate judge
has called the clemency system “a legal fiction.” Reaves said of the board
members, “They never asked me to attend a hearing or answer any questions.”"

------
spacemanmatt
They call it justice but it's really Texas.

------
mplewis
Does anyone have a way of bypassing the paywall? I can't read the article.

~~~
Atroxide
ON THE morning of December 23rd 1991 a fire destroyed a home in Corsicana,
Texas shared by Cameron Todd Willingham, his wife and their three daughters.
The fire killed the girls; Mrs Willingham was at the Salvation Army store
shopping for Christmas gifts. Mr Willingham survived. The next year he was
convicted of setting the fire. He was sentenced to death and executed in 2004.

His conviction rested on arson investigators’ findings and the testimony of
Johnny Webb, a jailhouse informant who claimed that Willingham had confessed
to him. Shortly before the execution, Willingham’s lawyers sent the governor
and parole board a report from Gerald Hurst, another arson investigator,
detailing multiple flaws in the first investigation. He concluded that the
fire was caused by a space heater or faulty electrical wiring. Officials
appear to have received this report before Willingham’s execution, but did
nothing with it. Several independent arson investigators reached similar
conclusions.

In this section The slow death of the death penalty Irrevocable Mass. appeal
Buy now or later? Family portraits on wheels Cowboys v Feds Because men are
not angels Reprints Related topics Crime Crime and law Willingham insisted on
his innocence, refusing to plead guilty even to avoid execution. Mr Webb
testified that, as he was passing Willingham’s cell, he heard him confess to
having done the deed to cover up child abuse committed by his wife. But no
bruises or signs of abuse were found on the children’s bodies.

Mr Webb recanted his testimony in 2000. He then recanted his recantation, but
admitted to a journalist that “It’s very possible I misunderstood what
[Willingham] said.” Mr Webb also testified that he was promised no benefit in
exchange for his testimony. In February, however, lawyers working to get
Willingham a posthumous pardon revealed a note discovered in Mr Webb’s file
with the Navarro County prosecutor promising a reduced charge “based on
coop[eration] in Willingham”. On April 3rd Texas denied Willingham a pardon.
His lawyers can reapply in April 2016.

~~~
xzf
"On April 3rd Texas denied Willingham a pardon. His lawyers can reapply in
April 2016."

They pardoned the dead guy?

~~~
timw0j
"lawyers working to get Willingham a posthumous pardon"

