Posted by Bob Lord
A few weeks ago, I posted on the Debra Milke case. Her murder conviction, based almost exclusively on the testimony of a dishonest cop, was thrown out. The prosecution had concealed exculpatory evidence.
Today, I read in the Phoenix New Times how a 77 year-old man, wrongly convicted of murder in 1975, was just released. Another man had confessed to the murder, but the prosecution wanted the confession suppressed. The judge agreed.
Yesterday, I read Amy Goodman's account of Herman Wallace, freed after 42 years in solitary, for a murder he didn't commit. Wallace has but weeks to live. He's dying of liver cancer.
Years ago, a co-worker told me how her friend Ray Krone had been convicted wrongly. Turned out, he had. His conviction, based on contrived testimony of a supposed expert, was overturned. Ultimately, Krone received millions in damages, and rightly so.
The Innocence Project has freed over a hundred wrongly convicted prisoners. Its affiliates, like the Justice Project here in Arizona, have freed hundreds more.
I could go on. I could cite statistics on how connected your odds of conviction are to the color of your skin.
And the juries behind those wrongful convictions all concluded, unanimously, that the defendants were guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. How could jurors unanimously blow it so badly so often?
Ideally, the public discussion of this travesty would be front and center. Instead, it's relegated to the pages of the New Times and blog sites like Truthdig. The mainstream media and the illiterate majority, could care less.