Death Row Inmate wants testing to prove innocence; Governor refuses

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

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

Post Reply
User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1630
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: Cali

Death Row Inmate wants testing to prove innocence; Governor refuses

Post by Darth Yan » 2018-05-21 09:09pm

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... h-row.html

Okay, bit of background. This is probably one of THE most controversial death row cases in California because it has a lot of far reaching implications. Kamela Harris rejected calls to do DNA testing......only to do a 180 right after the article came out. John Chaing, one of the democratic candidates for Governor, also said testing should be done, and if Cooper is chosen to be executed (pretty likely since not only is he one of the guys who's appeals are gone but he's also the only man prior to the moratorium to cheat the executioner and walk out of the death chamber alive.)

Now DNA testing WAS done and SEEMED to confirm the guy's guilt but unlike a lot of other cases there's ample room to believe that tampering DID occur. There were three items that have the guy's DNA on them, and they all came there under pretty suspicious circumstances. They were some cigarettes found in the victim's car, a bloodstained shirt, and a stain found in the hallway dubbed A-41.

In 2009 Eleven Federal Judges dissented on the decision to deny Cooper an En Banc hearing, with one judge (William Fletcher) writing a 100 page dissent basically outlining numerous problems in the DNA testing, the testing done to determine whether the blood was planted, and just most of the main evidence in general (he also argued that the Judge in charge of his hearings, Marilyn Huff, purposefully sabotaged Cooper's hearings because she believed he was guilty.)

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/o ... 99004o.pdf

In addition at least two presidents of the american bar association, two former prosecutors, the former governor of Texas (Mark White), a former California Attorney General (John Van Der Kamp), and numerous other legal scholars have all expressed support for either Cooper being innocent or at the very least believe that there's enough ambiguity that a final round of testing is in order.

Kevin Cooper was NOT a nice man by any stretch (he was caught because he tried to rape someone) but a lot of compelling evidence has surfaced to argue that Cooper may well have been framed by the San Bernardino Sherrif's Department (which has a reputation for being disgustingly corrupt), or at the very least railroaded. In any case (As the article describes) there's compelling evidence pointing to an even bigger monster as the true killer.

For instance the Judge who heard his appeals (Marilyn Huff) has a bad reputation for dishonesty and incompetence (there's a website called the robing room, which is basically commented on purely by lawyers. Huff has a bad rating, and a common criticism is that she chooses which side she likes and shamelessly bends over backwards to give them every advantage in the book), and the only judge who even TRIED to rebut Judge Fletcher (Judge Rymer) not only misrepresented a lot of Fletcher's arguments, but also was the head of the three judge panel decision that was being appealed (and hence could be seen as more trying to defend her work since Fletcher was by extension calling HER incompetent as well.)

So whatd'ya all think?

Post Reply