re: #142 MandyManners

Are these commissions looking at DNA evidence that was not used at trial because the technology did not exist then? If so, I’m all for it.

This one is, it’s the only one. Most prosecutors don’t want to play along and test DNA once they’ve managed to convict someone. Reminds me of this story:

Now the clock is ticking on another Texas death row inmate who has steadfastly maintained his innocence – with credible evidence to support his claim. The condemned man is Henry Watkins “Hank” Skinner, and much of that evidence was unearthed by the Medill Innocence Project and reported in the January 28 and 29 editions of the Texas Tribune, “Case Open” and “Case Open: The Investigation”. Yet, Skinner faces death by lethal injection on March 24, less than five weeks from now. (Due to a clerical error, a state court judge yesterday delayed the scheduled execution by a month.)

Texas continues to lead the nation in executions. But will the state earn the dubious distinction of executing five innocents in two decades? Hank Skinner’s fate lies in the hands of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, Gov. Perry and the U.S. Supreme Court.

They have DNA from the crime scene available to test and the prosecutor is fighting having the test done. I don’t know if the guy is guilty or not but it seems they’d want to do the test to at least make sure.

medillinnocenceproject.org