DNA testing proves executed Virginia inmate was indeed guilty

[valvano]

went to the death room proclaiming his innocence, but was guilty all the time:

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128769279378

i recall all the hollywood celebrities who supported him, claimed he was innocent, blah blah blah....what do they have to say now...

"An innocent man is going to be murdered tonight," the 33-year-old said moments before he was electrocuted on May 20, 1992. "When my innocence is proven, I hope America will realize the injustice of the death penalty as all other civilized countries have."

:eek:

[Bob]

this just in, criminal lies, decieves public

[valvano]

i'm just waiting for the main stream media to give us much press to these DNA results as they did when Coleman was executed. it was circus here in Richmond, the cries of innocence, on and on, one hollywood lib after another, he was on all the talk shows.......proclaiming his innocence..

where's all the death penalty opponents who earlier this week who said this could turn the nation and its views on the death penalty...does this therefore strengthen those majority views??

all those liberal apologists for criminals, now they look like fools...
:D

[STANKY808]

where's all the death penalty opponents who earlier this week who said this could turn the nation and its views on the death penalty...does this therefore strengthen those majority views??
:D

And what do you say to the majority in your state that prefer sentences of life with no parole instead of the death penalty?


Richmond Times-Dispatch/News-Channel 10 poll found that 58% of Virginians favor a moratorium on executions until issues surrounding the death penalty can be resolved. The poll also found that 91% favored allowing DNA testing for death row inmates to establish guilt or innocence when DNA was unavailable at trial. (Richmond Times-Dispatch, 11/6/00)

You think that majority view should be heeded?

[valvano]

there is no channel 10 in richmond you idiot

the broadcast networks channels are 6, 8,12, and 35 if you count fox, plus the pbs channels

[valvano]

besides your quote references nothing about people prefering life with no parole vs death here in the COMMONWEALTH of Virginia (not State of Virginia)............

you can spin the polls all you wants, the end results is liberals and criminal cuddlers whined and cried this coleman was innocent, no way he committed these crimes, he went to the chair proclaiming his innocence.....

and he had all those suckers fooled.. :p

[Schmeltz]

Whether an alleged criminal is innocent or not is only one facet of the question of whether or not the state should have the power to execute its own citizens. I see a lot of "liberal"-bashing in your clumsy, incoherent posts here. I gather you are a conservative who believes in minimal government intervention in people's lives. Yet you wish your government to have the ability to take your very life.

The end result is that your empowerment of the government in this capacity is at complete odds both with your own political ideology and with humanitarianism in general.

[valvano]

Whether an alleged criminal is innocent or not is only one facet of the question of whether or not the state should have the power to execute its own citizens. I see a lot of "liberal"-bashing in your clumsy, incoherent posts here. I gather you are a conservative who believes in minimal government intervention in people's lives. Yet you wish your government to have the ability to take your very life.

The end result is that your empowerment of the government in this capacity is at complete odds both with your own political ideology and with humanitarianism in general.

if i took the life an innocent person, i would expect the govt to punish me to the fullest extent of the law....if that includes capital punishment, so be it..

humanitarianism should have started with this slimeball killed that girl in grundy va....

quit making excuses for killers and criminals and and bunch of liberal wishy washy talk, the fact remains, mike farrell and company took the bait and are now looking like the fools they are....


(y) (y)

[STANKY808]

there is no channel 10 in richmond you idiot

the broadcast networks channels are 6, 8,12, and 35 if you count fox, plus the pbs channels


Ummmm... fuck you asshole.

And I guess there is no Richmond Times Dispatch in Richmond, Va either?

Anyhow, why don't you explain (as I really don't know) what the difference is between the state and the commonwealth? Are they not interchangeable? Cause the Virginia government website - http://www.virginia.gov/cmsportal/government_881/index.html

has a link to the "state government branches".

I've probably asked the wrong person though.

[synch]

How insecure must you be about the validity of the death penalty if a guilty man being executed is newsworthy material?

[STANKY808]

besides your quote references nothing about people prefering life with no parole vs death here in the COMMONWEALTH of Virginia (not State of Virginia)............

:p

All I can think is that you were attemptinng some sort of humour.


US-Politics: Commonwealth vs. State

Confusion around the Commonwealth!

There are 4 so-called "Commonwealth States" among the 50 US states:

Massachusetts,
Kentucky,
Pennsylvania and
Virginia.
Now the question is, whether they have another status or not?
No, they don't - it's basically a historical reality and has no political or judicial consequences.

All four states must integrate themselves into the legal system and the political order of the United States - in terms of the United States they are a state under the federal US Constitution, even when they use in their own State Constitution the expression "Commonwealth", see e.g. Massachusetts.

[kaiser soze]

so DNA tests proving guilt or innocence are post mortem?

ok, so the test proved he was guilty beyond a doubt.....after he was dead

why wasn't it tested prior to his execution?

[ASsman]

How does that make any sense, tree hugger.

[kaiser soze]

oh yeah, duh, you're right

kill em all and let god sort em out

[ASsman]

Haha, sarcasm, sorry.

Well volvano was making so much sense I felt like jumping in and seeing how it felt, felt stupid to be honest.

[valvano]

Haha, sarcasm, sorry.

Well volvano was making so much sense I felt like jumping in and seeing how it felt, felt stupid to be honest.


if only he had writen childrens books while on death row might he have garnered a bit more sympathy.......

:D

[valvano]

And I guess there is no Richmond Times Dispatch in Richmond, Va either?



yes, its is the main paper for Richmond, their sports section sucks but otherwise its a pretty good paper considering the population of the metro-Richmond area...

[valvano]

How insecure must you be about the validity of the death penalty if a guilty man being executed is newsworthy material?


no, what makes this newsworthy is all of the celebrities, etc who came out in support of this loser and believed him and totally ignored the evidence

From Amnesty International:

Cruel and Incredible: The Case of Roger Coleman

All too frequently, compelling new claims of innocence are never addressed during the appeal process because of procedural barriers intended to prevent undue delay in carrying out death sentences. This judicial vacuum can lead to bizarre events immediately prior to an execution, where substantial doubt over the prisoner's guilt remains but all legal avenues of appeal have been exhausted.

On 22 May 1992, Roger Coleman was put to death by the state of Virginia. Years after his conviction, new evidence was uncovered which implicated a different suspect and which challenged the prosecution’s theory of the crime. So troubling were the lingering uncertainties concerning his guilt that Governor Douglas Wilder offered Coleman a polygraph test (also known as a 'lie detector'). The offer inferred that if Coleman passed the test, the Governor might reconsider his decision not to commute the death sentence. The test monitors the assumed rise in the heart rate and blood pressure caused by the stress of lying to determine truthfulness. It was carried out on the day of Coleman's scheduled execution.

Strapped and wired for the test in a manner not unlike that used for the death by electrocution he would face later that same day, Coleman not surprisingly 'failed' the polygraph and was executed within hours. Governor Wilder later told the press: "If he had passed...it could have affected what the ultimate result would have been".5

Roger Coleman was charged with the 1981 rape and murder of his sister-in-law, Wanda McCoy. Too poor to afford a private attorney, he was represented at trial by court-appointed lawyers who had never handled a murder or rape case before and who neglected to fully investigate many significant points of evidence. At trial, the defence failed to challenge crucial aspects of the prosecution's case, severely limiting the scope of Coleman's post-conviction appeals.

Although the case against him was entirely circumstantial, Roger Coleman was sentenced to death. The only direct evidence came from the testimony of Roger Matney, a jail-house informant who claimed that Coleman had confessed to the crime. A month before the trial, all four sentences which Matney was serving were suspended and he was released from custody on the urging of Coleman's prosecutor. Matney has since recanted his testimony.

On initial appeal, Coleman was represented by attorneys who failed to file a timely notice of appeal with the Virginia Supreme Court. The necessary paperwork was inadvertently filed just after the 30-day deadline had expired. Prosecutors requested that the Court dismiss the appeal without addressing its merits because it was "procedurally defaulted"; the Court wrote a one-paragraph order summarily denying Coleman's petition without review.

The federal courts ruled that Coleman could not appeal on constitutional issues because he had "waived" his state review by filing after the deadline. The US Supreme Court agreed, citing the need to show adequate respect for the findings of state courts and the obligation to protect state officials from having to endure uncertainty and undue delay in the resolution of criminal cases. The Supreme Court's decision in Coleman v. Thompson created a new rule under which almost any failure of an inmate to meet the procedural requirements of the state courts results in forfeiture of the right to file a habeas corpus petition in federal court.

According to the Supreme Court decision, "Coleman must bear the risk of attorney error that results in procedural default". The Court further ruled that Coleman had no right to challenge mistakes made by his appellate attorneys, since he was not constitutionally entitled to a lawyer at that point in the proceedings.

Before his arrest, Roger Coleman was a coal miner in rural Virginia. It defies all reason to presume that he was fully versed in Virginia capital trial procedures and the complexities of Federal habeas corpus appeals. For the US Supreme Court to conclude that the defendant must bear the fatal consequences of mistakes made by his lawyers is to render meaningless the most basic legal protections afforded by the US Constitution.

Once a prisoner is executed in the USA, the case is considered legally closed. The US criminal justice system offers no legal mechanism to review posthumous claims and uncover lethal error. It will likely never be known with absolute certainty if Roger Coleman was guilty or innocent of the crime for which he was put to death. Nonetheless, his case history illustrates many of the structural flaws which can result in mistaken executions. Its troubling outcome establishes beyond doubt that the authorities in the USA are prepared to execute prisoners even when confronted with substantial questions about their actual guilt.


FOOLS

[yeahwho]

If the fashion police had the death penalty at they're disposal, they would of killed him for his glasses (http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?blobcol=urlmainpicture&blobheader=image/jpeg&blobkey=id&blobtable=MGImage&blobwhere=1128769277527&ssbinary=true). A gross injustice.

[Ace42X]

i'm just waiting for the main stream media to give us much press to these DNA results as they did when Coleman was executed.
all those liberal apologists for criminals, now they look like fools...
:D

Actually, putting the specifics of this case to one side, if you read the actual article, it is rather innaccurate. Firstly, the chances of someone matching his DNA finger-print are incredibly unlikely. But the article doesn't mention the shortfalls of DNA finger-printing. The chances of DNA testing giving a false positive are a lot more probable than a million to one.

Secondly, DNA finger-printing cannot "prove" guilt, any more than finding actual finger-prints can. What it proves is that a person's genetic material was present at the scene.

If someone's DNA was found at a murder scene, that just happened to be on a subway train or bus, then that doesn't mean they are necessarily even a suspect, let alone a murderer, for example.

So, in reference to the case cited, without knowing the precise nature of the genetic sample, or where it was found, really it doesn't prove anything. If the DNA was reclaimed from under the finger nails, all it proves is that she scrammed him. If it is semen in her body, that only proves that they had intercourse.

"all those liberal apologists for criminals, now they look like fools..."

For criminal*s* ? Sorry, how does this case have any bearing on any other? Because one executee was found to have been at the crime-scene, that means that every other executed person must be undeniably guilty?

And how can you have the audacity to call anyone a "fool" ?

"It will likely never be known with absolute certainty if Roger Coleman was guilty or innocent of the crime for which he was put to death. Nonetheless, his case history illustrates many of the structural flaws which can result in mistaken executions. Its troubling outcome establishes beyond doubt that the authorities in the USA are prepared to execute prisoners even when confronted with substantial questions about their actual guilt."

That is what you quoted, verbatim, and it says quite clearly "it will (...) never been known (...) if [he] was guilty or innocent"

And yet you seem to think that means "We know he's innocent!"

What it ACTUALLY means, to anyone aquainted with plain and simple English, is that his appeals were ignored when there was still *doubt* about his guilt. So, really, what you are saying is "when in doubt, execute, because 25 years later DNA evidence will definitly prove that all executed prisoners are guilty!"

Even someone as profoundly ignorant as yourself should be able to see the errors in that.

You need to brush up on your English skills. Also, you need to be executed for your mental inadequecies.

[Ace42X]

if i took the life an innocent person, i would expect the govt to punish me to the fullest extent of the law.

Your army does it all the time. So do your corporations, who are given the legal status of a person. The tobacco industry knowingly killed plenty of people - I don't see those corporations being "executed." What about a policeman who shoots the wrong guy - you'll be all for giving him the chair right?

Besides, I don't think you even know what guilt or innocence actually mean other than in the vaguest and most arbitrary of terms.

Guilt, for you, is anyone who falls into a demographic you dislike. Innocence is found in anyone you like. That's why you don't have a problem with capital punishment, in your juvenile understanding of society, you are firmly in the "innocent" (IE: as approved of by Valvano) camp, and thus immune to prosecution.

quit making excuses for killers and criminals

So you think that everyone who is found guilty in a court of law actually did it? Because that is what your argument hinges on, and you are actually quite quite wrong. There are no two ways about it, it is undeniable that innocent people do get found guilty. Or is it just tatooed stereotypes in orange jumpsuits that you think are "killers and criminals" ?

I think you'll find that people are "making excuses" (Here, in the adult world, we like to call that 'constructing a reasoned argument' - you might want to try it) against capital punishment for a variety of reasons. If you actually read what people said, you'd see that your gross simplification of the 'liberal' arguments are very very different to what people are actually saying.

Oh, and you make excuses for criminals and killers all the time. You even VOTED for them. Technically, that makes you guilty of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity - a much more serious offence, both in US and international law, than a single murder.

Go on, make your excuses. Tell us why you don't deserve the death penalty. Tell us why it doesn't count when people you approve of are guilty.

and and bunch of liberal wishy washy talk, the fact remains


The fact remains that capital punishment is ineffective in combating violent crime, as evidenced by the fact that the US is rife with crime, despite being one of the few nations barbaric enough to maintain a death penalty.

Valvano, you are a real wanker. I mean it, a true piss-artist. You must be in order to function between all your wet-dreams of murderer-hugging liberals feeding babies to demonic tattooed psychopaths and saying "oh, we must tolerate his baby-eating. It would be wrong to starve him."

I am sure that in Valvano land non-conservatives (IE people who base their arguments on objective fact and logic, rather than personal prejudice and which way their dick swings) all sit around with flowers in their hair smoking pot, while Nazi-zombies start amassing just down the street.

BLAM, Here comes neo-con man to save the day! A cross between GI Joe and Richie Cunningham, he alone has the moral fortitude and pragmatic world-view needed to fend off the facist nazi communist terrorist death-squads!

BOOM, a grenade sends limbs flying, meanwhile all those hippy liberals and bonging away, having casual sex with all the girls Neo-con man likes, and criticising his heroic nature! The traitorous ingrates!

And what would happen if Neo-con man wasn't constantly protecting those liburuls from themselves?

Why, here is the hippy liberal, weak from eating only vegetables, unarmed and smelly, he doesn't use animal tested products! What's this, how is he facing down the undead army? By offering them a flower! Oh, they ripped his head off... Guess if Neo-con man was around, that's how all liberals would go!

Meanwhile, in Gotham City...

[guerillaGardner]

D'oh!!!

How can I have been so wrong about not wanting to kill innocent people for so long???!!!!

This incident is so embarrassing to all of soft hearted woolly headed liberals.

Wahhhhhhh!!!!!

The humanity.

But seriously. So what? Doesn't change a damn thing. Is this somehow meant to mean that because one guy lied all the other people who were found to be unjustly convicted are suddenly now guilty.

What's really funny about people who say things like 'its worth a few innocent lives to punish the guilty' is that its okay as long as its not your innocent life that's threatened due to an incompetent or malicious expert witness, poor lab procedures, planted evidence, misuse of personality profile, etc. etc.

And if the death penalty is such a great thing why hasn't it ever deterred people from killing. The USA is one of the few countries with a death penalty but one of the highest murder rates. Go figure.