wrongfully convicted prisoners

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Aug 26, 2002
14,639
826
0
43
WWW.YABITCHDONEME.COM
#8
Man free after '87 conviction thrown out
By DAVID MERCER
Associated Press Writer

A man who spent 20 years in prison after being convicted of stabbing an eastern Illinois woman was freed Tuesday, after prosecutors decided not to retry him.

Herb Whitlock, who will turn 62 next week, was released eight years after a journalism professor and his students found problems with his conviction, and four months after an appeals court ruled that he should get a new trial because jurors hadn't been presented key evidence.

"He's going to go home and hug his grandchild, who he's never hugged before," said Whitlock's attorney Richard Kling. "Right now, let's just get them a cup of coffee in his kitchen and time with his family."

Whitlock was convicted in 1987 of killing Karen Rhoads, who was stabbed to death with her husband, Dyke, after a violent struggle in their home in 1986. Their house in Paris, about 50 miles southeast of Champaign, was set on fire after they were killed, according to court documents.

A separate jury convicted Whitlock's friend Gordon "Randy" Steidl of killing both victims. Whitlock was given a life sentence, while Steidl was sentenced to die.

In 1999, Northwestern University journalism professor David Protess and four students took their own look at the killings. They found enough problems with the convictions to get Kling and another Chicago attorney, Susana Ortiz, to represent Whitlock at no charge.

Steidl, after 12 years on death row, was freed in 2004, after a federal judge ordered the state to release or retry him. The judge said jurors might well have found Steidl innocent if they hadn't been deprived of key evidence that Steidl's defense knew nothing about.

In Steidl's appeal, a forensic pathologist testified that the knife reportedly used to kill the couple wasn't consistent with their wounds.

Whitlock, who had been convicted on much of the same evidence as Steidl, was denied a new trial in 2005 by another judge. He appealed, and the 4th District Illinois Appellate Court in Springfield overturned his conviction in September.

In noting problems with Whitlock's conviction, the appeals court said police gave a key witness liquor the day before he testified in front a grand jury. The witness, according to the court, also told investigators that "Jim and Ed" killed the couple, evidence Whitlock's trial attorney never presented.

Prosecutors last week filed paperwork saying they don't plan to retry Whitlock, but they say the Illinois State Police's investigation of the killings continues.

"We've always believed (Steidl and Whitlock) were responsible," said prosecutor Michael Vujovich of the state Office of the Appellate Defender.

Whitlock's two decades behind bars are a travesty, said Michale Callahan, a now-retired State Police lieutenant who reviewed the case in 2000 and concluded that Whitlock and Steidl were innocent.

"This can happen to anyone in this country if government's allowed to go unchecked," said Callahan, who was in the courtroom Tuesday.

Members of Dyke Rhoads' family have long said they believed someone else killed the couple and said Tuesday was full of mixed emotions.

"While Herb Whitlock and Randy Steidl today have the freedom they have sought for so long, Dyke and Karen still don't have the justice they deserve," family members said in a statement.

DAMN!

5000
 
Nov 10, 2006
2,124
2
0
47
#10
People getting millions for wrongful imprisonment is on the rare side; the average Joe gets much less if anything at all.

Look up the number of people on death row who later are found to be innocent.
 
Jul 10, 2002
2,180
18
0
45
#12
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/01/14/EDODUDQO7.DTL
Open Forum
OPEN FORUM
Lethal injection is the wrong debate
Ray Krone
Monday, January 14, 2008


The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in Baze vs. Rees,
which challenges the constitutionality of execution by lethal injection.
While the court wrestles with technical issues concerning the Eighth
Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, there's a much
larger reason our country is rethinking the death penalty: the possibility
of sentencing to death and executing an innocent human being.
Unlike almost any American, I speak from experience.
I spent more than 10 years in Arizona prisons for a crime I didn't commit,
including nearly three years on Death Row. In 1992, I was sentenced to death
for killing a bartender, even though I was at home, asleep, when the murder
was committed.
In 2002, through the tireless work of my attorneys, I was the 100th person
to be exonerated and released from death row since the death penalty was
reinstated in the United States. Despite DNA evidence that exonerated me, it
took years before the prosecution grudgingly acknowledged it had no case
against me. If it had been up to the state of Arizona, I'd be dead today.
Who knows how many more innocent people sit on death row today, guilty of
nothing more than the fact that they couldn't afford a lawyer? And can
anyone honestly say with certainty that of the nearly 1,100 people who have
been executed in the past 30 years, not a single one wasn't innocent?
As my story illustrates, even with DNA testing there will always be a chance
an innocent person will be sentenced to death and executed.
Recently, the New Jersey Legislature and governor showed courage and common
sense when they abolished that state's death penalty. One of the primary
reasons cited was the possibility of executing an innocent person.
New Jersey Sen. Raymond Lesniak, one of the bill's sponsors, recalled the
case of Byron Halsey, who spent 22 years in prison for the murder and rape
of two children before being released after DNA testing linked another man
to the crime.
"There are hundreds of Byron Halseys throughout the United States who were
wrongly convicted of murder," Lesniak said. "No doubt, some were sentenced
to death and executed."
Meanwhile, in December, at the same time the bill to abolish the death
penalty was making its way through the New Jersey legislature, three more
former death row prisoners were released. Michael McCormick (Tennessee),
Jonathon Hoffman (North Carolina) and Kenneth Richey (Ohio) had spent a
combined total of more than 40 years on death row before being freed.
Sen. Lesniak summed the problem up best when he said, "It's impossible for
human beings to devise a system free of the risk of human error."
The last time I checked, our criminal justice system was devised and run by
human beings.
And instead of equal justice under the law, in far too many capital cases we
see incompetent legal representation, racial discrimination and
prosecutorial misconduct. These blemishes to our justice system are
problematic, to say the least. But when a human life is at stake, such
potentially fatal flaws are an embarrassment to a nation that considers
itself the standard bearer for human rights.
So while the U.S. Supreme Court contemplates whether or not killing a person
with a particular combination of chemicals is cruel and unusual punishment,
all of us should recognize a much larger, more obvious fact: If sentencing
to death and possibly executing an innocent person isn't cruel and unusual
punishment, nothing is.
Quite literally, I'm living proof of that.

Resources
The Death Penalty
Information Center links.sfgate.com/ZCBA
Witness to Innocence links.sfgate.com/ZCBB
Ray Krone is director of communications for Witness to Innocence, an
organization of exonerated former death row prisoners and their family
members. He lives in York, Pa.

This article appeared on page B - 5 of the San Francisco Chronicle