re: #88 funky chicken

From the New Yorker:

Bolded part: perhaps reasonable doubt, but not “scientific PROOF of innocence.”

Italicized part: unbelievably poor investigative work. Where was the grill?

Is Fire Marshall an elected official or political appointee in Corsicana? One would hope that the Fire Marshall would be hired based upon expertise.

That’s the whole point, isn’t it? From three sentences, you are confident that reasonable doubt exists. Anyone governer who takes their duties seriously ought to use their discretion and at least make damn sure their state was doing the right thing. An honest governer comes out on top either way: he reprieves an innocent - he’s a hero. He exposes the new facts to the light of day and they only reinforce the original verdict - well, the governer was fair and acted in the interest of justice.

Just my opinion, but I think Perry is more interested in his cowboy image than to piddle around with such things as truth and justice.