If your interested at looking into a case of law enforcement corruption and see what its like to be convicted of a crime you didn't do please take a good look at Projectinjustice.org the story of Mike Chapel. A Marine and Great Police officer from Gwynette County Georgia. Mike was set up by corrupt law enforcement officers for the murder of Mrs Thompson in 1993. Mike went to trial in 1995 and the evidence against him was extremely poor then and now given the improvement in Forensic Science. After you have a good look at the above web-site please take a couple minutes and send a letter to. Georgia Innocence Project 752 North Highland Ave Atlanta Georgia 30306 And ask them to take a look at Mike's case. He has been in prison for the past 14 years for a crime he didn't do. Please pass this request on to others, I'm not asking you to make a decision as to Mikes innocence or guilt, just ask them to take a look at the case. You know if you look up project innocence you will find hundreds of people that have been found innocent of convicted crimes while the guilty are still walking the streets. Help Mike and his family get back together again. And maybe we will be able to find out who really committed this horrible crime. Thanks TomC. Mikes address is. Mike Chapel 845840 Wayne State Prison P.O. Box 219 Odum Georgia 31555
There was a story on our local news the other day about a similar case, although this guy wasn't sent because of corruption. He had been in prison since 1992 (I think) for raping and killing a little girl. He was completely innocent. Despite this, he had been put behind bars until years later when someone else finally confessed to the crime. I have no law or criminal justice background, so I'm curious. What happens in a case like this? The poor guy has been in jail all those years for something he didn't do. I'd hope he gets some type of compensation or something.
Innocent people who were imprisoned usually come to a financial settlement with the government, and those who can't usually end up in court with a civil lawsuit.
Only if you can get it that far. Too many people who are innocent never get a chance for redemption. TomC.
I love the United States There are soooo many loopholes in the system that the likelihood of an innocent man going to prison is remote. Does it happen? Of course. Is it an exception to the rule? Of course. It is statistically insignificant. Yes. Our founding fathers have ensured that whoever victimizes you is more likely to go free than face incarceration in prison. For that very reason, I love the constitution of the United States and laugh at the incorrigible defendants who "fight the system."
an example of good science gone bad My wife is doing a report on Joyce Gilchrist for one of her forensic science classes. There are over a thousand cases that face being overturned because of her potential misdeeds as a forensic scientist.
ProjectInjustice.org Nobody here is suggesting that we fight the system. If you take it that way your missing the whole point. What I am suggesting is that we take steps to improve the system that we have, and allow for checks and balances along the way. Its true that MOST of the people in prison belong to be there, I don't thing anyone can argue that point. But if there is evidence that is available that can prove without a doubt that a person is innocent shouldn't he or she be given the oppertunity to present that evidence in court. I believe as you did at one time that the number of innocent people in prison is extremely small. If you believe that all you have to do is look at the number of people proven innocent with the help of DNA evidence and presented by the Innocence Project, the numbers have gone over a thousand, Georgia alone has almost 300. And that is based on DNA evidence alone. That doesn't take into account evidence presented in court that was later proved to be innacurate of phony science, and we all know that you can't reley on eyewitness testimony alone anyone in law enforcement will tell you that eyewitness testmony is considered the weakest form of evidence you can present. Before anyone starts throwing out comments about how someone that presents this information as a person who wants to break down the system really should rethink and understand that I don't want to break it down and replace it, we are asking for verification when warrented. I'm sure your opinion would change if you were one of those 1000 prisoners that have been released. In Mikes case people know that a mistake has been made, Now they are too ashamed to correct it. they would rather keep an innocent man in jail than to admitt they were wrong. Is that the type of system you want to support ? TomC.
ProjectInjustice.org Outstanding example from Airtorn. This is just one of many. If you had the chance to look up Joyce Gilchrist take notice that the district attorney was all to eager to use Gilchrist's junk science because it help in the advancement of his career. You can say well people make mistakes and that is true, the question is was the evidence that helped put people in prison ever double checked ? This is exactly was has happened in Georgia, the hell with accuracy when what I have makes me look good. thank you airtorn. TomC.
DNA is an interesting thing. I actually watched a show on the discovery channel last night about an odd DNA condition called Chimerism. Basically it's a genetic thing that happens shortly after a person is concieved. There are actually two fertilized eggs that fuse into one, and thus the new embryo has two sets of DNA. The show was focusing on this woman who had two kids and was pregnant with her third. I missed a bit of it, but the state was trying to take her kids away saying they weren't hers based on the DNA test. Her partner was even arguing saying how he was there to watch them born. Long story short, they waited a few days until her third child was born. The judge had ordered someone to observe the birth and immediately take blood samples from the mother and baby. The DNA from these came to the same result, that the mother wasn't the mother even though it was clear she was. The prosecutors eventually found an article in the journal of medicine about this condition, and with further testing, they realized that the woman had different DNA in her uterus or something, and that DNA was given to the kids. It was a very interesting show, and they posed the question about how rare this condition is. Perhaps it isn't rare at all, and people have different DNA in different parts of their body. If that's true, then criminal proceedings which use DNA would have to be very careful.
Really? Race and class have no bearing on probability of conviction? Having served on two juries which sent men to prison I'd welcome some statistical backup of your assertion. In my experience, winnowing truth in court is complex; our Founders deserve respect for bestowing a good - if crude - body of procedures from which to start. I submit, however, that the science and assumptions of their 18th century are often not up to the the task of identifying Truth in our 21st. Consider that neuroscientists are mapping the realm of the deep subconscious, a realm that was unknown in the Founders' day. Understanding the black box of our brains will revolutionize how we understand and react to criminal behavior, and God willing, it will enable us to understand and proactively address the failures of juries (it's not much of a stretch to recognize that deep, neurologically-based biases - biases unknown to the holder's conscious mind - surely account for some level of the US's racial and class disparity in prosecutions and sentencing, disparities occasionally spotlighted by high-profile DNA-based exonerations). http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/11/magazine/11Neurolaw.t.html https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/ http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/us/27vets.html?ref=us
Another issue are those plea deals from hell where an innocent person who can't afford a great lawyer may have a really gut-wrenching decision to make.
As with any trial proceedings, lawyers should not rely solely on DNA evidence but use it in conjunction with other evidence - the burden of proof just got heavier...
