Wrongfully Convicted Inmate Freed From Death Row in Lousiana

The 141st wrongfully convicted death row inmate in the U.S. was released from jail today after serving 15 years for a crime he didn't commit. Damon Thibodeaux, now 38, left prison today. The cause of his wrongful conviction: A false confession. Later DNA testing excluded him as the perpetrator of the crime.

Nationally, DNA has freed 18 wrongfully convicted death row inmates.

< PA Execution Halted Due to Prosecutorial Misconduct | Saturday College Football Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    and yet, they'll keep right on (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by cpinva on Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 08:28:32 PM EST
    sentencing them. i guess they figure, if they sentence enough people to death, statistically the odds are they're bound to get one right on occasion.

    actually... (1.33 / 3) (#2)
    by diogenes on Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 09:29:30 PM EST
    Statistically, if they keep on convicting people the odds are that they're bound to get one WRONG on occasion, given the extreme rarity of actual executions of innocent people.

    "...on occasion" (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by shoephone on Fri Sep 28, 2012 at 10:38:04 PM EST
    Yeah, if the state actually cares about falsely convicted people, it doesn't really matter how "occasional" it is. The fact that even ONE falsely convicted individual is exonerated by DNA evidence matters a whole he[[ of a lot. And the fact is, a good number of convicted people don't have competent enough counsel, or the financial means to find competent enough counsel, to push for the DNA work to be done, sometimes years after the incarceration...

    According to the Innocence Project, there are now 299 cases of DNA exoneration.

    Tell us again: how many exonerations qualifies as "occasional"??

    Apparently, you do not believe in the due process of law. Too bad. Perhaps it is time for you to admit you have no idea how many innocent people have been put to death.


    If it is true that actual executions of the (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Peter G on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 01:32:43 PM EST
    wrongly convicted are "extremely rare" -- and this is something we can only pray is true, not prove -- there is one and only one reason for that ... the dogged efforts of anti-death penalty defense attorneys and organizations.  Most of the death row exonerees, who now number around 140, would have been executed, effectively murdered by the state, had it not been for those defense efforts.  It is not "the system" that "works," and no comfort can be taken in any such record. Unless "the system" is for prosecutors and judges to put people on death row, place them at risk of wrongful execution, and then switch the burden to their private and public defenders to ferret out the errors, all the while facing fierce resistance from those same judges and prosecutors.  

    How many wrongfully executed? (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 12:27:56 AM EST
    Naturally, it's impossible to know. But, what we do know is that enough wrongfully convicted suspects have been exonerated by the use of modern forensics that to continue executing them flies in the face of logic, reason, and just plain decency.

    And, there's another reason that a country that likes to think of itself as being fair, democratic, and enlightened should cease using executions in its criminal justice system. Its use serves no beneficial purpose. It should be obvious to any sentient being that its promotion only serves the political interests of those politicians who stoop to pandering to the most angry, least educated, and often racist segment of their constituency. We're better than that.

    Government sanctioned killing of its citizens has no place in the 21'st century for a country that calls itself the Leader of the Free World.

    Question. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by lentinel on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 09:00:04 AM EST
    It should be obvious to any sentient being that its promotion only serves the political interests of those politicians who stoop to pandering to the most angry, least educated, and often racist segment of their constituency. We're better than that.

    Now why can't the titular head of the Democratic party understand that?


    A test of the thesis.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by Rojas on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 11:34:27 AM EST
    The last titular head of the Democratic party oversaw the largest expansion of the federal death penalty statutes in the history of the nation.
    It's not ancient history.
    Who was he pandering to? Were they angry, ignorant  racists lacking education?

    If (none / 0) (#11)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 01:51:52 PM EST
    you're referring to Clinton, his support for it had entirely to do with his ambition - imo.

    He started out as an opponent of capital punishment, but shifted to a pro-death guy after losing to a pro-death opponent. Then he won.

    The height, or depth, of his actions regarding the death penalty came during his campaign for president. He oversaw the execution of a man who was so retarded, or brain damaged, that he was saving a piece of pie for himself to have after the execution.

    He now was sufficiently tough on crime to win the votes he was seeking. Were those votes the votes of the angry, the ignorant or a bunch of uneducated racists? You make the call.

    As for Obama....

    He's tough.
    Real tough.

    Whose votes is he seeking?
    Not mine, apparently.


    CDS (none / 0) (#12)
    by Yman on Sun Sep 30, 2012 at 04:40:06 PM EST
    Apparently, it's for life.

    PTVS (none / 0) (#13)
    by Rojas on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 08:01:41 AM EST
    Apparently it's not just for part time virgins..



    Rojas Rorschach (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Yman on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:47:32 AM EST
    Evil ...... Bill Clinton.

    Anything bad .... Bill CLINTON!

    Kittens .... BILL CLINTON!!!

    Too funny.


    Off topic (none / 0) (#15)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 09:51:16 AM EST
    But I'm cooking a pork loin today that I will turn into pulled pork by tonight.  I also have thick bacon and four lbs of onions.  I told my husband to eat a light lunch, I'm surprising him with this tonight if I don't botch it :)

    Nice! (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Yman on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 10:24:49 AM EST
    The tricky part with the onions is to turn them to a low simmer and keep stirring them frequently when the liquid is getting low so they don't scorch.  For the first hour or so though, you don't have to do much.  In the last few minutes it turns from a light brown/beige to a rich/dark carmelized brown and then it's done.  Pork butts also tend to be a little more moist/tender than the loins, but I often use the loins because they're easier to work with.

    He's gonna love it!


    When was the last time... (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by unitron on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 08:58:17 AM EST
    When was the last time you were going to commit murder and said to yourself "If the risk of getting caught was the same, but the penalty was only life without parole, I'd go ahead and do it and take my chances, but if it's execution I won't."?

    Is it really a greater deterrent?

    SITE VIOLATOR (none / 0) (#8)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 29, 2012 at 12:49:47 PM EST
    SPAM. They are spamming all the threads today.