home

Jury Acquits Man Who Spent 15 Years on Death Row

A Tennessee jury has found Michael Lee McCormick not guilty following a retrial of his murder case. McCormick spent 15 years on death row.

< Supreme Court Hears Guantanamo Case | Update Your Bookmarks >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Heh Parsing are you? (1.00 / 0) (#9)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 07:18:27 AM EST
    of course kerry never claimed to be cambodia,

    You didn't understand what I wrote? And here I was thinking you were one of the smarter ones around here.. Oh well, you did and I know you did....so..

    "Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968, sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia."

    Note that the end source is the Congressional Record

    Learn something everyday, eh??

    hehe

    (Just razzing you cp... hope this finds you well...and able to understand...)

    And, as I noted, making false claims of being in Vietnam(or Cambodia)proves nothing but that the person lied. The reason may not be apparent, and it may not make sense, but it doesn't prove that they are insane.

    CSI aside, all crime scenes do not have forensic evidence of the perp's previous presence....

    The guy said he did it. The motive was fear that the victim was going to rat him out on the robbery.... and a jury juggled the facts in their heads...

    Luck counts.

    innocent? no-"not proven" (none / 0) (#1)
    by diogenes on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 11:26:48 AM EST
    Basically, there was no physical evidence. He gave a detailed confession/description of knowing the victim, killing her, etc, but his lawyer said that he was a "habitual liar".  There was no physical evidence.  The case remains unsolved.  
    Maybe there isn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt (if you believe that people make lying confessions to murder), but he probably did it, and the Scottish verdict of "Not Proven" may be the best one.

    Mike McCormick (none / 0) (#6)
    by tennessee on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 03:35:10 PM EST
    Mike was and is mentally ill.  He has made claims that we knew were untrue such as being wounded in Viet Nam.  He was never there.  It's one of those things where you would just have to know him.

    [ Parent ]
    Can you be more specific?? (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 04:08:05 PM EST
    Claiming to have been in Vietnam is not an indication of mental illness, but of dishonesty.

    As was Kerry's claim of being Cambodia.

    And then we have the question, did he know he was lying when confessed??

    All in all, since the motive is claimed to be that the victim found out about a robbery, this appears to be about shutting up a witness to a criminal act.

    [ Parent ]

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHHA! (none / 0) (#10)
    by Dark Avenger on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 11:45:04 AM EST
    Claiming to have been in Vietnam is not an indication of mental illness, but of dishonesty.

    Claiming to have been in Vietnam when he wasn't could be an indication of mental illness, or could be an indication of dishonesty.

    As for what is known about false confessions:

    Types of False Confessions
    According to Saul M. Kassin, a professor of Psychology at Williams College and one of the leading researchers into the phenomenon of false confessions, there are three basic types of false confessions:

        * Voluntary false confessions
        * Compliant false confessions
        * Internalized false confessions

    While voluntary false confessions are given with no outside influences, the other two types are usually coerced by external pressure.

    Voluntary False Confessions
    Most voluntary false confessions are the result of the person wanting to become famous. The classic example of this type of false confession is the Lindbergh kidnapping case. More than 200 people came forward to confess that they had kidnapped the baby of the famous aviator Charles Lindbergh.

    Scientists say these kinds of false confessions are prompted by a pathological desire for notoriety, meaning they are the result of some mentally disturbed condition.

    But there are other reasons that people make voluntary false confessions:

        * Because of feelings of guilt over past transgressions.
        * The inability to distinguish fact from fiction.
        * To help or protect the real criminal.

    Compliant False Confessions
    In the other two types of false confession, the person basically confesses because they see confessing as the only way out of the situation they find themselves in at the time.

    Compliant false confessions are those in which the person confesses:

        * To escape a bad situation.
        * To avoid a real or implied threat.
        * To gain some kind of reward.

    The classic example of a compliant false confession is the 1989 case of a female jogger was beaten, raped and left for dead in New York City's Central Park in which five teenagers gave detailed videotaped confessions of the crime.

    The confessions were discovered to be completely false 13 years later when the real perpetrator confessed to the crime and was linked to the victim through DNA evidence. The five teenagers had confessed under extreme pressure from investigators simply because they wanted the brutal interrogations to stop and they were told they could go home if they confessed.

    Internalized False Confessions
    Internalized false confessions occur when, during the course of interrogation, some suspects come to believe that they did in fact commit the crime, because of what they are told by the interrogators.

    People who make internalized false confessions, believing they are in fact guilty, even though they have no recollection of the crime, are usually:

        * Younger suspects.
        * Tired and confused by the interrogation.
        * Highly suggestible individuals.
        * Exposed to false information by interrogators.

    An example of an internalized false confession is that of Seattle police officer Paul Ingram who confessed to sexually assaulting his two daughters and killing infants in Satanic rituals. Although there was never any evidence that he ever committed such crimes, Ingram confessed after he went through 23 interrogations, hypnotism, pressure from his church to confess, and was provided graphic details of the crimes by a police psychologist who convinced him that sex offenders often repress memories of their crimes.

    Ingram later realized that his "memories" of the crimes were false, but he was sentenced to 20 years in prison for crimes he did not commit and which may never actually happened, according to Bruce Robinson, the Coordinator for The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance.

    Developmental Handicapped Confessions
    Another group of people who are susceptible to false confessions are those who are developmentally handicapped. According to Richard Ofshe, a sociologist at the University of California, Berkeley, "Mentally retarded people get through life by being accommodating whenever there is a disagreement. They've learned that they are often wrong; for them, agreeing is a way of surviving."

    Consequently, because of their excessive desire to please, especially with authority figures, getting a developmentally handicapped person to confess to a crime "is like taking candy from a baby," Ofshe says.

    Sources:
    Saul M. Kassin and Gisli H. Gudjonsson. "True Crimes, False Confessions. Why Do Innocent People Confess to Crimes They Did Not Commit?" Scientific American Mind June 2005.
    Saul M. Kassin. "The Psychology of Confession Evidence," American Psychologist, Vol. 52, No. 3.
    Bruce A. Robinson. "False Confessions By Adults" Justice: Denied Magazine.



    [ Parent ]
    Help me understand (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 11:33:21 AM EST
    This man decided to lie and say he killed her.

    Absent any proof that he is mentally incompetent or that he was tortured, I think this is purely nuts.

    maybe they waterboarded (none / 0) (#3)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 12:20:14 PM EST
    him; which wouldnt have been torture.

    What continues to nag at me is how the prime beneficiaries and enablers of a system that breaks down time and time again such as Doug "Thin Blue Line" Mulder from "the great state of Texas" continue to not only skate with the bare minimum of accountability, but are, in effect, rewarded for their reptilian standard of what constitutes justice.

    [ Parent ]

    Try this help (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 12:54:50 PM EST
    Yes, I understand the theory (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Dec 05, 2007 at 01:26:58 PM EST
    but nothing of that nature was introduced. Plus, we have this:

    Cindy Reed Kennedy, cousin and best friend to the victim, said the family is sure McCormick carried out the murder. "We know things that were not allowed in court. There's no doubt he did it," she said.

    Ms. Nichols was killed in the early morning of Valentine's Day 1985. She was apparently shot in her car after leaving the Brainerd Beach Club, then her body was dumped on the parking lot of Eastgate Mall.

    Authorities said McCormick had carried out a burglary with Ms. Nichols' brother and she had found out about it.

    Link

    Nothing inspires Jim (none / 0) (#11)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 01:42:46 PM EST
    like a misguided campaign of persecution; that much should be obvious at this point.

    Out, damn spot!

    [ Parent ]

    wrong again diogenes! (none / 0) (#8)
    by cpinva on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 12:39:18 AM EST
    you do this for sport, don't you? the apparent complete absence of any physical evidence linking mr. mccormick to the crime, and physical evidence linking someone else entirely, is evidence in and of itself of his innocence, in this particular case. people always leave and take something from everywhere they go, that's a basic premise of forensic science.

    as usual, jim sticks his foot in his mouth, then twirls it, with his multiple times disproved, swiftboatian claim that:

    As was Kerry's claim of being Cambodia.

    of course kerry never claimed to be cambodia, he's not nearly big enough. cambodia has a lot of rivers running through it, kerry would never be able to stay dry. and yet, he does.

    just razzing you jim, but it's sooooooooooooo easy! lol

    This man decided to lie and say he killed her.

    yeah, geez, that's never happened before, in the annals of human history! of course, since the "confession" wasn't videotaped, well never know for sure exactly what might have prompted him to do so; a stunning bout of remorse, or maybe a hint of coercion from the police.

    "a hair" (none / 0) (#12)
    by diogenes on Thu Dec 06, 2007 at 08:54:40 PM EST
    Please add a link; the news stories I saw do not say "There was a pubic hair found on her proving that she was with a different man at the time of the killing".  Where was this hair found, was there only one hair, could it have come off of her dress if she danced with someone else at the club, and is there anyone else with any plausible motivation to have killed her?
    I'm sure that you could have found a hair that didn't belong to OJ Simpson in Nicole Brown's apartment too-does that prove his innocence too?