For the past two decades, “The Innocence Project” with the help of updated science methods have worked relentlessly to get innocent people out of prison. Through DNA testing, they have been able to find new evidence that have freed hundreds of prisoners who were wrongfully convicted. Other factors such as eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, government misconduct, and inadequate defense also played keys roles in the wrongful convictions. The case that I would I would like to highlight today is that of, Johnnie Lindsey. Johnnie Lindsey was a 30-year old laundry worker who was falsely accused of rape. On August 25, 1981, a white woman reported that she raped while riding her bike at White Rock Lake in Dallas. She told police that …show more content…
It’s mind blowing how the justice sentence can convict somebody solely off an eye witness testimony, especially if the eye-witness isn’t accurate. “Eyewitness misidentification is the greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions proven by DNA testing, playing a role in more than 70% of convictions overturned through DNA testing nationwide.’’ (Eyewitness Misindentification,2017) Immediately after reporting the crime, the victim was taken to a hospital where a rape kit was administered, and swabs were taking from her body. Days after the rape the victim was also shown two photo lineups of suspects, however she didn’t identify anyone. Following the attack, the victim moved from San Antonio to Dallas. The case remained unsolved for a little over a year, that was until Dallas detectives mailed another photo line up to the victim in San Antonio, where she subsequently chose Lindsey as her alleged rapist. Just imagine someone picking you out of a photo lineup that they received in the mail a year after a crime was committed. This lineup was improper because no law enforcement officer was present to administer the lineup in a controlled setting, a year had passed since the crime and only two of the six men pictured were shirtless. (Johnnie Lindsey, …show more content…
However, the main contributing cause to his wrongful conviction was eyewitness misidentification. According to Walker (2015), eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions with “72% of cases being wrongfully convicted based on eye witness testimony.” Another thing I noticed while looking at The Innocence Project, which was also discussed in the book, was racial bias. In the book, they mentioned “wrongful convictions involve a strong racial disparity, with 62 percent of the Innocent Projects 302 cases involving African Americans.”
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Case 1 Name: Mayella/female Place with the case: The girl who said she was raped Summary: Mayella Ewell is called to the witness stand. Unlike her father, who looked like he had prepared for his appearance in court by bathing for the first time in months if not years, Mayella looks like she actually has an ongoing acquaintance with soap and water. Mr. Gilman asks Mayella to describe what happened that night in her own words, but she doesn't answer, so he switches to more specific questions. Her answers are still minimal, so the judge asks her to just tell the court what happened, and she bursts into tears. Judge Taylor tells her that she has no cause for shame or fear, so long as she tells the truth.
In the story “Our Guys: The Glen Ridge Rape and the Secret Life of the Perfect Suburbs” by Bernard Lefkowitz describes the events of Leslie a mentally ill woman that was raped by the treasured group of high school athletes in Glen Ridge, New Jersey. The gang rape occurred on March 1, 1989. Leslie left her house in the afternoon to go play basketball in the park. When she arrived at the park, many of the school 's athletes were there, either watching or taking part of baseball practice. One of the boys Chris Archer approached her and asked her to come down to a basement of a nearby house for a party.
dishonourable false testimonies in 1987, at the trial for a case of double rape that put Dale Woodall, a 29-year-old from Charleston, West Virginia, in prison for life. A brief background of the case entails a man wearing a brown and yellow ski mask had taken hold of two women outside a Huntington, West Virginia, shopping mall and raped them in the car of one of the victims. The women, not able to offer thorough account of the rapist, were ‘forensically hypnotized’ to improve their memories. Dale Woodall was put on trial, and Fred Zain distinguished one of his pubic hairs as being in the victim’s car and a semen stain as matching his blood type. ‘He testified that 1 in 10,000 people had Wooddall 's grouped and subgrouped blood type, a statistic
Evidence was not properly searched and witness questions were set up so Steven Avery would be the man that the witness would choose. Steven Avery was arrested by Sheriffs order. He was denied a phone call which is legally not allowed and had his name kept off the list of inmates so that public defender’s office would not be aware of his arrest. It was obvious that they wanted Steven in there for something they know he didn’t do. After a long 18 year Steven Avery was finally released due to DNA test showing that the pubic hairs found on Beernsten was not his.
During spring break one of the captain of the lacrosse team decided to throw a party and have two strippers there. One which was Crystal Mangum who has a mental problem and did not feel like preforming due to maybe the combination of alcohol and drugs. The party turned ugly and some people left and Kim Roberts the second dancer called the police to come and take her home or somewhere for help. The nurse asked if she was rape and the answer was yes for Crystal that knew the system well. The group of 88 of Duke facility had unequivocally asserted that something had happened to Crystal.
First, the victim was taken to a hospital for a rape examination and her clothing and bedspread were collected as evidence. The laboratory found sperm evidence in the rape kit, on the victim’s jumpsuit, and on a blanket, which matched Good’s blood type and one-third of the caucasian male population (Haynes: Circuit judge). This shows that there was evidence but not enough evidence to say it was Donald Good. Next, Good was convicted on the spot. Good spent more than seven years in jail for rape and murder has been exonerated because of a tainted testimony from a former State Police chemist.
Youngblood case has great relevance to today’s and future court cases. There are three things that this case has proved to today’s society. The first is that it covered the potential acts of good faith in the police officer, and how the evidence that was claimed to not be stored properly. The defendant blamed the officer and thought they should be accountable for the length of Youngblood’s sentences. It has been proven that even though the evidence is an essential piece to the individual case, the officer should not be held fully responsible for the entire sentence for a mistake.
In July 1984 Jennifer Thompson, a 22-year old white woman, was raped by a black man in her apartment. A man named Ronald Cotton was arrested and identified by Thompson in a line-up and a phot-spread. According to her interview with CBS’s 60 minutes in 1999, Thompson explained how she was confident in her identification. In 1985, Cotton’s conviction of raping Thompson was based largely on her identification. While in prison, two years later, a fellow inmate of Cotton confessed to the rape of Jennifer Thompson.
Throughout the case, Graham’s culpability was questioned multiple times due to the lack of provable and cogent evidence of his crime. For instance, although being a witness, Bernadine Skillerns’ testimony about glimpsing the murderer’s face through “a car windshield...30-40 feet away” was not ample enough to truly blame Graham of the crime ("Executed But Possibly Innocent"). Even more, two other witnesses that allegedly worked in the supermarket described Graham as not being the killer. Moreover, rather perfunctorily, the two witnesses were never “interviewed by Graham's court appointed attorney” ("Executed But Possibly Innocent"). Conceivably, decision-makers and court appointed attorney’s may fall back on conscious or oblivious preferences about who are the most noticeably awful sorts of convicts or who are the more sympathetic convicts, therefore, creating a potential bias system towards one's race.
Although many may argue that the accusations presented by the plaintiffs seemed quite plausible, further investigation proved many such claims to be false. For example, although Price and Bates accused the young African-American men of raping them on the freight train, “the Scottsboro doctor who examined the girls less than two hours after the alleged rapes […] was able to show on cross examination that the girls were both calm, composed, and free of bleeding and vaginal damage” (Linder). The fact that a certified doctor was able to prove that the young women were virtually unhurt after the supposed rapes shows that the girls were lying to the court. Although their claims made sense to the prejudiced judicial system, Price and Bates were simply using their positions in society as young white women to gain unwarranted sympathy from the all-white jury. Because scientific evidence was able to contradict the prosecution’s allegations, it was evident that false accusations were being made by the plaintiffs.
 In his book, “Missoula,” John Krakauer analyses the issue of rape in the college town of Missoula. Krakauer begins his work by quoting the article False Allegations of Sexual Assault: Rape is unique. No other violent crime is so fraught with controversy, so enmeshed in dispute and in the politics of gender and sexuality… And within the domain of rape, the most highly charged area of debate concerns the issue of false allegations. For centuries, it has been asserted and assumed that women “cry rape,” that a large proportion of rape allegations are maliciously concocted for purposes of revenge or other motives.
Moreover, the testimony of an eyewitness relies on how accurate their memory of an event actually is. Eyewitness misidentification is the greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions proven by DNA testing, playing a role in more than 70% of convictions overturned through DNA testing nationwide (“Eyewitness Misidentification,”
Wrongful convictions are one of the most worrisome and tragic downsides to the Canadian Criminal Justice System. As stated by Campbell & Denov (2016). “cases of wrongful convictions in Canada call into question the ability of our criminal justice system to distinguish between the guilty and innocence” (p. 226). In addition, wrongful convictions can have devastating repercussions on the person, who was found guilty, effecting their personal/public identities, beliefs and family lives. This essay will be examine some of the common factors that apply to the conviction of an innocence person.