Man Jailed for 26 Years While Lawyers Knew He Was Innocent

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Lord MJ
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1562
Joined: 2002-07-07 07:40pm
Contact:

Man Jailed for 26 Years While Lawyers Knew He Was Innocent

Post by Lord MJ »

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/413947
CHICAGO – For nearly 26 years, the affidavit was sealed in an envelope and stored in a locked box, tucked away with the lawyer's passport and will. Sometimes he stashed the box in his bedroom closet, other times under his bed.

It stayed there – year after year, decade after decade.

Then, about two years ago, Dale Coventry, the box's owner, got a call from his former colleague, W. Jamie Kunz. Both were once public defenders. They hadn't talked in a decade.

"We're both getting on in years," Kunz said. "We ought to do something with that affidavit to make sure it's not wasted in case we both leave this good Earth.''

Coventry assured him it was in a safe place. He found it in the fireproof metal box, but didn't read it. He didn't need to. He was reminded of the case every time he heard that a wronged prisoner had been freed.

In January, Kunz called again. This time, he had news: A man both lawyers had represented long ago in the murder of two police officers, Andrew Wilson, had died in prison.

Kunz asked Coventry to get the affidavit.

"It's in a sealed envelope," Coventry said.

"Open it," Kunz said, impatiently.

And so, Coventry began reading aloud the five-line declaration the lawyers had written more than a quarter-century before:

An innocent man was behind bars. His name was Alton Logan. He did not kill a security guard in a McDonald's restaurant in January 1982.

"In fact," the document said, "another person was responsible.''

* * *

They knew, because Andrew Wilson told them: He did it.

But that was the catch.

Lawyer-client privilege is not complete; most states allow attorneys to reveal confidences to prevent a death, serious bodily harm or criminal fraud. But this case didn't offer that kind of exception.

So when Andrew Wilson told his lawyers that he, and not Alton Logan, had killed the guard, they felt powerless – aware of information that could free a man they believed to be innocent, but unable to do anything with that knowledge. And for decades, they said nothing.

As they recall, Wilson – who was facing charges in the February 1982 murders of police officers William Fahey and Richard O'Brien – was even a bit gleeful about the McDonald's shooting. To Kunz, he seemed like a child who had been caught doing something naughty.

"I was surprised at how unabashed he was in telling us," he says. "There was no sense of unease or embarrassment. ... He smiled and kind of giggled. He hugged himself, and said, 'Yeah, it was me.'''

Alton Logan already had been charged with the McDonald's shooting that left one guard dead and another injured. Another man, Edgar Hope, also was arrested, and assigned a public defender, Marc Miller.

Miller says he was stunned when his client announced he didn't know Alton Logan and had never seen him before their arrests. According to Miller, Hope was persistent: "You need to tell his attorney he represents an innocent man.''

Hope went a step further, Miller says: He told him Andrew Wilson was his right-hand man – "the guy who guards my back" – and urged the lawyer to confirm that with his street friends. He did.

Miller says he eventually did tell Logan's lawyer his client was innocent, but offered no details.

First, though, he approached Kunz, his fellow public defender and former partner.

"You think your life's difficult now?" Miller recalls telling Kunz. "My understanding is that your client Andrew Wilson is the shooter in the McDonald's murder.''

Coventry and Kunz brought Wilson to the jail law library and this, they say, was when they confronted him and he made his unapologetic confession. They didn't press for details. "None of us had any doubt," Coventry says.

And, he adds, it wasn't just Wilson's word. Firearms tests, according to court records, linked a shotgun shell found at McDonald's with a weapon that police found at the beauty parlour where Andrew Wilson lived. The slain police officers' guns also were discovered there.

Now the lawyers had two big worries: Another killing might be tied to their client, and "an innocent man had been charged with his murder and was very likely ... to get the death penalty," Kunz says.

But bound by legal ethics, they kept quiet.

Instead, they wrote down what they'd been told. If the situation ever arose where when they could help Logan, there would be a record – no one could say they had just made it up. They say they didn't name Wilson, fearing someone would hear about the document and subpoena it. They didn't even make a copy.

But on March 17, 1982, Kunz, Coventry and Miller signed the notarized affidavit: "I have obtained information through privileged sources that a man named Alton Logan ... who was charged with the fatal shooting of Lloyd Wickliffe ... is in fact not responsible for that shooting ... "

Knowing the affidavit had to be secret, Wilson's lawyers looked for ways to help Logan without hurting their client. They consulted with legal scholars, ethics commissions, the bar association.

Kunz says he mentioned the case dozens of times over the years to lawyers, never divulging names but explaining that he knew a guy serving a life sentence for a crime committed by one of his clients.

There's nothing you can do, he was told.

Coventry had another idea. He figured Wilson probably would be executed for the police killings, so he visited him in prison and posed a question: Can I reveal what you told me, the lawyer asked, after your death?

"I managed to say it without being obnoxious," Coventry says. ``He wasn't stupid. He understood exactly what I was asking. He knew he was going to get the death penalty and he agreed.''

Coventry says he asked Wilson the same question years later – and got the same answer.

But ultimately, Wilson was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

His death penalty was reversed after he claimed Chicago police had electrically shocked, beaten and burned him with a radiator to secure his confession. (Decades later, a special prosecutor's report concluded police had tortured dozens of suspects over two decades.)

Logan's case was working its way through the courts, too. During the first of two trials in which he was convicted, Coventry walked in to hear part of the death penalty phase. "It's pretty creepy watching people deciding if they're going to kill an innocent man," he says.

The lawyers had a plan if it came to that: They would appeal to the governor to stop the execution. But with a life sentence, they remained silent.

Still, there were whispers. When Logan changed lawyers before his second trial, Miller says the new lawyer approached him. He had heard that Miller knew something more.

Please, he asked, can you help?

Miller says he told him he could do nothing for him. But he says he repeated the words he had uttered to Logan's first lawyer, more than a decade earlier:

"You represent an innocent man.''

* * *

In prison, Alton Logan heard the news: First, Andrew Wilson had died. Second, there was an affidavit in his case.

"I said finally, somebody has come (forward) and told the truth," Logan says. "I've been saying this for the past 26 years: It WASN'T me.''

In January, the two lawyers, with a judge's permission, revealed their secret in court.

Two months later, Marc Miller testified about his client's declaration of Logan's innocence.

But an affidavit and sworn testimony do not guarantee freedom – or prove innocence.

And Alton Logan knows that. After spending almost half his 54 years as an inmate, this slight man with a fringe of gray beard, stooped shoulders and weary eyes seems resigned to the reality that his fate is beyond his control.

"I have to accept whatever comes down," he says, sitting in a visitor's room at the Stateville Correctional Center in Joliet.

He insists he's not angry with Edgar Hope – the man who first said he was innocent – or even Andrew Wilson. He says he once approached Wilson in prison and asked him to "come clean. Tell the truth." Wilson just smiled and kept walking.

Nor is Logan angry with the lawyers who kept the secret. But he wonders if there wasn't some way they could have done more.

"What I can't understand is you know the truth, you held the truth and you know the consequences of that not coming forward?'' he says of the lawyers. "Is (a) job more important than an individual's life?''

The lawyers say it was about their client – Wilson – not about their jobs, and they maintain that the prosecutors and police are at fault.

Kunz says he knows some people might find his actions outrageous. His obligation, though, was to Andrew Wilson.

"If I had ratted him out ... then I could feel guilty, then I could not live with myself," he says. "I'm anguished and always have been over the sad injustice of Alton Logan's conviction. Should I do the right thing by Alton Logan and put my client's neck in the noose or not? It's clear where my responsibility lies and my responsibility lies with my client.''

On April 18, Logan will be in court as his lawyer, Harold Winston, pushes for a new trial. Along with the affidavit, Winston has accumulated new evidence, including an eyewitness who says Logan wasn't at McDonald's and a letter from an inmate who claims Wilson signed a statement while in prison implicating himself in the murder – and clearing Logan.

But obstacles remain.

Logan can't depend on Edgar Hope. According to his attorney, Hope probably will exercise his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

And he'll have to deal with eyewitnesses. His lawyer says one person changed her story in the two trials, but a second, the security guard injured in the shooting, did not. (A third, who has since died, had acknowledged that Wilson and Logan looked alike.)

Logan prefers not to look too far ahead or think too far back. He refuses to dwell on missed opportunities – marriage, children, job. "You cannot live with the situation I'm in and say, 'What if?'''

He says if he is released, he'll move to Oregon to be with his brother. "After spending 26 years in this hellhole, I want to get as far away from here as I possibly can," he says.

Last month, the Chicago Sun-Times, in an editorial, urged the attorney general or governor to release Logan, noting his claims of innocence "ring achingly true." (The state has declined comment on the case.)

Logan keeps a copy of the 26-year-old affidavit in his cell. Every now and then, he reads the single paragraph, trying to divine what the lawyers were thinking and if this piece of paper will help unlock the prison doors.

He's not banking on it.

"I'm not sold on it," he says. "The only time I'll be sold is when they tell me I can go.''

For now, though, Alton Logan waits. The heavy prison doors clank behind him as he walks down the corridor to his cell. He does not look back.
Very pissed about this. Turns out that even if the lawyers violated Attorney-Client privaledge and reported that their client was the guilty party, it would've been ruled inadmissible in court so the innocent man would still be convicted.

Though I would say that even if the evidence was ruled inadmissible as a matter of law, the prosecution should've considered it as a matter of fact and if the evidence was credible drop the charges against the innocent party.

[/url]
User avatar
Ariphaos
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-10-21 02:48am
Location: Twin Cities, MN, USA
Contact:

Post by Ariphaos »

I've heard rumors that convicting an innocent is considered a badge of honor for a prosecutor.
User avatar
Darth Ruinus
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2007-04-02 12:02pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Darth Ruinus »

Wait.

Wait.

Wait.

This guy is innocent, and the lawyers knew this, they had the confession from the actual murder, and they had the ballistic tests to prove it, and the innocent guy still went to prison? And they kept quite for 26 years?
"I don't believe in man made global warming because God promised to never again destroy the earth with water. He sent the rainbow as a sign."
- Sean Hannity Forums user Avi

"And BTW the concept of carbon based life is only a hypothesis based on the abiogensis theory, and there is no clear evidence for it."
-Mazen707 informing me about the facts on carbon-based life.
User avatar
Academia Nut
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2598
Joined: 2005-08-23 10:44pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Post by Academia Nut »

They had to keep quiet as it would be the only hope to get the guy out. As was mentioned, if they broke lawyer-client confidentiality to bring forth the necessary evidence, it would have all been rendered unadmissable, therefore the guy would have still been stuck in jail for life, and the evidence that cleared him would have been locked away forver instead of just for 26 years, known but useless.

It sucks but I'm sure a lawyer like Stravo could better illustrate exactly the problems this sort of case poses.
I love learning. Teach me. I will listen.
You know, if Christian dogma included a ten-foot tall Jesus walking around in battle armor and smashing retarded cultists with a gaint mace, I might just convert - Noble Ire on Jesus smashing Scientologists
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Post by Superman »

Xeriar wrote:I've heard rumors that convicting an innocent is considered a badge of honor for a prosecutor.
I seriously hope that isn't true. I know lawyers are all nutty, but could all of them be psychopaths?
Image
User avatar
Lord MJ
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1562
Joined: 2002-07-07 07:40pm
Contact:

Post by Lord MJ »

Darth Ruinus wrote:Wait.

Wait.

Wait.

This guy is innocent, and the lawyers knew this, they had the confession from the actual murder, and they had the ballistic tests to prove it, and the innocent guy still went to prison? And they kept quite for 26 years?
The lawyers were defense attorneys for the actual murderer so they would be betraying their ethical obligation to their client if they told about it. Even if they did, the evidence would not be allowed into the innocent man's trial since it would've been obtained by the violation of the attorney client privilege, so the innocent man would've still be convicted and sent to prison.
User avatar
Beowulf
The Patrician
Posts: 10621
Joined: 2002-07-04 01:18am
Location: 32ULV

Post by Beowulf »

Communication between an attorney and a client is privileged. It can't be released without the clients consent.
"preemptive killing of cops might not be such a bad idea from a personal saftey[sic] standpoint..." --Keevan Colton
"There's a word for bias you can't see: Yours." -- William Saletan
User avatar
Masami von Weizegger
Padawan Learner
Posts: 395
Joined: 2007-01-18 01:33pm
Location: Normal, Illinois

Post by Masami von Weizegger »

Superman wrote:
Xeriar wrote:I've heard rumors that convicting an innocent is considered a badge of honor for a prosecutor.
I seriously hope that isn't true. I know lawyers are all nutty, but could all of them be psychopaths?
Not for all of them. But amongst a certain breed of dubious prosecutors, you bet your ass that convicting an innocent is an accomplishment, not an error.
"That a man might embiggen his soul"
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Post by Superman »

Masami von Weizegger wrote:Not for all of them. But amongst a certain breed of dubious prosecutors, you bet your ass that convicting an innocent is an accomplishment, not an error.
There's no doubt in my mind that certain professions attract certain types of people. It's just downright disturbing to know that people like that can sleep at night. It makes me think of Scott Peterson carrying on with life as usual right after killing his wife.
Image
User avatar
Darth Ruinus
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2007-04-02 12:02pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Darth Ruinus »

Lord MJ wrote:
The lawyers were defense attorneys for the actual murderer so they would be betraying their ethical obligation to their client if they told about it. Even if they did, the evidence would not be allowed into the innocent man's trial since it would've been obtained by the violation of the attorney client privilege, so the innocent man would've still be convicted and sent to prison.
Screw the fucking obligation to their client and whatever attorney client privilege, their client is a murderer who laughed about it! They had his confession and evidence to look up the bastard and save the poor sod, and this attorney client stops them from doing so?

Maybe Stravo can explain to me how this makes any sense at all, but right now it just sounds like a load of bullshit and I wonder who is the idiot who makes this attorney client thing interfere when the client and attorner know the guy is guilty.
"I don't believe in man made global warming because God promised to never again destroy the earth with water. He sent the rainbow as a sign."
- Sean Hannity Forums user Avi

"And BTW the concept of carbon based life is only a hypothesis based on the abiogensis theory, and there is no clear evidence for it."
-Mazen707 informing me about the facts on carbon-based life.
User avatar
Durandal
Bile-Driven Hate Machine
Posts: 17927
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:26pm
Location: Silicon Valley, CA
Contact:

Post by Durandal »

Unless I'm mistaken, the evidence would have been ruled inadmissible insofar as it could be used against the guilty party. Why couldn't the innocent man's lawyer file a motion to separate the two cases? The guilty man's confession wouldn't be admissible in the case against him, but it doesn't even seem like they needed it to convict him. But it would have been admissible in the case against the innocent man.
Damien Sorresso

"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
User avatar
Academia Nut
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2598
Joined: 2005-08-23 10:44pm
Location: Edmonton, Alberta

Post by Academia Nut »

It's called ethics, and its there to protect people. Sometimes it protects the guilty, but usually it protects the innocent. Sure, you'll occasionally hear about stories like this and there will be cries for the whole system to be torn down, but that's because you never hear about all the times when laws and ethics like these shelter the innocent, because that is when the system is working as it is supposed to. You can't tear it all down to get at the evil men who abuse the system without stripping away the shelter for the countless innocents who are also protected.
I love learning. Teach me. I will listen.
You know, if Christian dogma included a ten-foot tall Jesus walking around in battle armor and smashing retarded cultists with a gaint mace, I might just convert - Noble Ire on Jesus smashing Scientologists
User avatar
Darth Ruinus
Jedi Master
Posts: 1400
Joined: 2007-04-02 12:02pm
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Darth Ruinus »

Academia Nut wrote:It's called ethics, and its there to protect people. Sometimes it protects the guilty, but usually it protects the innocent. Sure, you'll occasionally hear about stories like this and there will be cries for the whole system to be torn down, but that's because you never hear about all the times when laws and ethics like these shelter the innocent, because that is when the system is working as it is supposed to. You can't tear it all down to get at the evil men who abuse the system without stripping away the shelter for the countless innocents who are also protected.
No, I am not saying get rid of the entire system, I know it helps out the innocent too, all I am saying is, why isnt there some clause or something that stops situations like these (though I doubt this happens very often) form happening.

It just, the idea of the innocent man being put in jail for so long. How old was Mr. Logan when he got sentenced? Does anyone know or do they not let that info out?
"I don't believe in man made global warming because God promised to never again destroy the earth with water. He sent the rainbow as a sign."
- Sean Hannity Forums user Avi

"And BTW the concept of carbon based life is only a hypothesis based on the abiogensis theory, and there is no clear evidence for it."
-Mazen707 informing me about the facts on carbon-based life.
User avatar
Stark
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 36169
Joined: 2002-07-03 09:56pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by Stark »

Indeed, it's unlikely the confession would have been made if such communication wasn't privledged.
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

The most ethical solution would have been to assassinate the real killer so they could release the documents :)
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
The Yosemite Bear
Mostly Harmless Nutcase (Requiescat in Pace)
Posts: 35211
Joined: 2002-07-21 02:38am
Location: Dave's Not Here Man

Post by The Yosemite Bear »

oh and if you haven't seen the photos, the innocent man convicted of the murder, was in fact black. yup, score on for rounding up the usual suspects.
Image

The scariest folk song lyrics are "My Boy Grew up to be just like me" from cats in the cradle by Harry Chapin
User avatar
Masami von Weizegger
Padawan Learner
Posts: 395
Joined: 2007-01-18 01:33pm
Location: Normal, Illinois

Post by Masami von Weizegger »

Superman wrote:
Masami von Weizegger wrote:Not for all of them. But amongst a certain breed of dubious prosecutors, you bet your ass that convicting an innocent is an accomplishment, not an error.
There's no doubt in my mind that certain professions attract certain types of people. It's just downright disturbing to know that people like that can sleep at night. It makes me think of Scott Peterson carrying on with life as usual right after killing his wife.
To some lawyers, the specifics of the legal system, of justice and law and so on is only so much background noise to "the game". And it is a game that is played to win.

The psychological reasons behind becoming a lawyer must be vast in their number. I imagine many are trying to forge a successful career and that means winning cases whether you "should" or not.
"That a man might embiggen his soul"
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Post by Superman »

Masami von Weizegger wrote:To some lawyers, the specifics of the legal system, of justice and law and so on is only so much background noise to "the game". And it is a game that is played to win.
Sure, but in a case like this, that doesn't help them to become anything better than the scum that they are. I know I personally couldn't do that, and I think that's a good thing.
Image
User avatar
Chris OFarrell
Durandal's Bitch
Posts: 5724
Joined: 2002-08-02 07:57pm
Contact:

Post by Chris OFarrell »

There must be SOME way to put together a mechanism for introducing this kind of evidence in the future, SOMEHOW, but I'm buggered if I can easily see a way that won't have clear negative consequences or open an avenue of abuse for less then honorable lawyers to use...
Image
User avatar
Illuminatus Primus
All Seeing Eye
Posts: 15774
Joined: 2002-10-12 02:52pm
Location: Gainesville, Florida, USA
Contact:

Post by Illuminatus Primus »

Durandal wrote:Unless I'm mistaken, the evidence would have been ruled inadmissible insofar as it could be used against the guilty party. Why couldn't the innocent man's lawyer file a motion to separate the two cases? The guilty man's confession wouldn't be admissible in the case against him, but it doesn't even seem like they needed it to convict him. But it would have been admissible in the case against the innocent man.
Way to take a big shit on lawyer's bullshit. :P
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish

"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.

The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | Libertarian Socialist |
Image
User avatar
DPDarkPrimus
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 18399
Joined: 2002-11-22 11:02pm
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Post by DPDarkPrimus »

The Yosemite Bear wrote:oh and if you haven't seen the photos, the innocent man convicted of the murder, was in fact black. yup, score on for rounding up the usual suspects.
Did you read the fucking article? A witness who testified in the case even said that the two men looked similar. Meaning that the real killer was black as well. :roll:
Mayabird is my girlfriend
Justice League:BotM:MM:SDnet City Watch:Cybertron's Finest
"Well then, science is bullshit. "
-revprez, with yet another brilliant rebuttal.
User avatar
pucky18
Redshirt
Posts: 40
Joined: 2007-07-01 08:36pm

Post by pucky18 »

Jesus Fucking Christ. this is exactly what's wrong with may legal systems. The problem is that the goal of the lawyers is not to find out the fucking truth, which is the goddamn purpose of the court, it's to get another conviction/acquittal on their record. With this system, these lawyers are rewarded for deceiving the court, and will never get punished for it. Why don't we make the lawyers take an oath to tell the truth as well as the others?
_|_>.<_|_
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10424
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Post by Solauren »

Here is the best way I can think of to handle something like this;

Most states have laws about not being retried for the same crime after you've been cleared or convicted. I believe it's called Double Jeopardry.

If this is correct, add a law or legal proceedure to the court;

"Where in, if evidence comes to light to free an innocent man as a result of attorney - client privillage, that evidence is admissiable, once the client has been cleared or convicted of the case where in the evidence was brought to the attorney's attention. In this case, a retrail of the convicted shall be ordered, with the new evidence allowed, regardless of plea bargains or other deals that may have been negotiated.

If the client has since been cleared without trial, a trial can not be ordered unless additional evidence is also found."


So, in short
If asshole confesses to murder, allow the trial of the innocent man to continue.
Once both people have been tried or processed, allow the lawyers to say 'Hey, I couldn't tell you this earlier because..." and order a new trial with the new evidence.
If the asshole wasn't convicted, that evidence can't be used against him unless they find further proof.

THe only additionals I can think of would be keeping the confession out of the public eye if there was no conviction on the asshole (sealed evidence?), and being allowed to approach the prosecutor or judge under a 'lawyer to lawyer privillage' to say 'Hey, I've got a confession we can't use right now, here it is, so if the innocent man is convicted, send him to a really soft prison to just 'sit tight' until this is over with.
User avatar
Keevan_Colton
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10355
Joined: 2002-12-30 08:57pm
Location: In the Land of Logic and Reason, two doors down from Lilliput and across the road from Atlantis...
Contact:

Post by Keevan_Colton »

Yet again the sheer stupidity of the rules rears its head. Dont worry though, the rules exist for a reason even if they run counter to the results desired...we MUST follow the rules or all will fall apart...please do not question the rules, that way lies heresy and a visit from the God Emperors finest.
"Prodesse Non Nocere."
"It's all about popularity really, if your invisible friend that tells you to invade places is called Napoleon, you're a loony, if he's called Jesus then you're the president."
"I'd drive more people insane, but I'd have to double back and pick them up first..."
"All it takes for bullshit to thrive is for rational men to do nothing." - Kevin Farrell, B.A. Journalism.
BOTM - EBC - Horseman - G&C - Vampire
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

DPDarkPrimus wrote:
The Yosemite Bear wrote:oh and if you haven't seen the photos, the innocent man convicted of the murder, was in fact black. yup, score on for rounding up the usual suspects.
Did you read the fucking article? A witness who testified in the case even said that the two men looked similar. Meaning that the real killer was black as well. :roll:
That's not unusual in wrongful conviction cases, since all black people look alike to a typical racist.

I wonder why none of these asshole witnesses have never been sued for monster money by the men they helped wrongfully convict. Or maybe I just didn't hear about it.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Post Reply