CelesX: Can someone explain to me why there's a statute of limitation on rape cases, especially with DNA to test?

/serious question

Texas standard limitations is 10 years on rape except no limitations if:
1. Victim is a child under age 14 or
2. Proper DNA sample collected or
3. Weenis goes in mouth

Baryogenesis: The death penalty doesn't deter anyone and it costs a boatload thanks to endless appeals, among other things. The only point in having a death penalty is to satisfy blood lust.

False. There are 17 people saved from murder for every one we execute.

Think about this: the population is growing in states with active death chambers and shrinking in the pussy states where they don't execute killers.

TheWhoppah: Baryogenesis: The death penalty doesn't deter anyone and it costs a boatload thanks to endless appeals, among other things. The only point in having a death penalty is to satisfy blood lust.

False. There are 17 people saved from murder for every one we execute.

Think about this: the population is growing in states with active death chambers and shrinking in the pussy states where they don't execute killers.

Correlation != Causation

CruiserTwelve: Ah... When you have no evidence to support your argument, attack your opponent personally. Good tactic.

So, I'm wrong then?

dave2198: untaken_name: dave2198: Oh, and never visit Texas. That way you never have to do the aforementioned running.

Could you do me a favor, and pass this message to California and Mexico? In that order? That'd be great. Thanks.

I'm surprised you're still living in Texas. Aren't you afraid of being convicted of a crime you didn't commit?

Wait, are you white? By all means, disregard.

Lot of assumptions in that post, aren't there? Of course I'm afraid of being convicted of a crime I didn't commit. So what? There's nowhere perfect on Earth, at least as far as I know.

untaken_name: dave2198: untaken_name: dave2198: Oh, and never visit Texas. That way you never have to do the aforementioned running.

Could you do me a favor, and pass this message to California and Mexico? In that order? That'd be great. Thanks.

I'm surprised you're still living in Texas. Aren't you afraid of being convicted of a crime you didn't commit?

Wait, are you white? By all means, disregard.

Lot of assumptions in that post, aren't there? Of course I'm afraid of being convicted of a crime I didn't commit. So what? There's nowhere perfect on Earth, at least as far as I know.

I usually make a lot of assumptions in my jokes. That's why they're funny.

CruiserTwelve: untaken_name: Color me shocked.

/not actually shocked.

Apparently you're willing to make a huge assumption that I'm not willing to make. If the smoking thing is true then one of these scenarios must be true:

1. His attorney didn't bring it up at trial. In this case his attorney is an idiot.

2. It was brought up at trial but other evidence refuted it.

3. It was brought up at trial, but the evidence of his guilt was so strong that it overcame it.

4. It was brought up at trial but the jury was so intent on convicting the guy that they ignored it and chose to convict an innocent man.

You're willing to assume scenario 4. I'm not. I have more faith in the jury system than that. It's not perfect, but I don't think 12 jurors would unanymously decide to convict an obviously innocent man.

But of course you're willing to make the assumption that the defense knew about this, and 3/4 scenarios involve it being brought to trial. I'm not assuming #4. I'm assuming that piece of evidence was buried long before trial. But keep lecturing me about assumptions - at least I admit mine. Also, I'm willing to be swayed by evidence. That's another key difference between us.

lumyai: For 2008, the average murder rate in states with the death penalty was 5.2 per 1000, while the average mrder rate in states without the death penalty was 3.3 per 1000.

Clearly, the death penalty itself provides an incentive for murder, and should therefore be abolished.

You confuse cause and effect. Some states NEED the death penalty more than others just to keep the murder rate down. These have a more serious murder problem and are dealing with it in the most effective way possible, by killing the killers.

TheWhoppah: lumyai: For 2008, the average murder rate in states with the death penalty was 5.2 per 1000, while the average mrder rate in states without the death penalty was 3.3 per 1000.

Clearly, the death penalty itself provides an incentive for murder, and should therefore be abolished.

You confuse cause and effect. Some states NEED the death penalty more than others just to keep the murder rate down. These have a more serious murder problem and are dealing with it in the most effective way possible, by killing the killers.

...says the guy who did the same thing just 7 posts ago.

This thread has been real... something. Off to bed, work in the morning.

dave2198: esteban9: Can we just let Texas have their independence, and just build a big wall around it so no one gets out?

I'm all for this plan, except my version would include a cleansing with fire.

Wouldn't that kill all of those poor black people you supposedly care about? The ones who, you know, live here before they get wrongly convicted? Oh, right - you don't actually give a crap about anything but scoring a few invisible points on a website. Nice. Stay classy.

CruiserTwelve: brainiac-dumdum: SCOTUS even ruled that the state does not have to turn over DNA for testing if the person in question has been convicted. Even if the test would prove conclusively the guilt or innocence of the accused.

No no no. That's not what the SCOTUS said. Read the case again. Their ruling was very specific to the case they were given.

damn, you really are naive. The Supreme is the arbiter of Constitutional rights. There's really no such thing as a limited SCOTUS ruling.

Also, follow the posted links. The clearly and thoroughly delineate racism in the justice system.

dave2198: untaken_name: dave2198: untaken_name: dave2198: Oh, and never visit Texas. That way you never have to do the aforementioned running.

Could you do me a favor, and pass this message to California and Mexico? In that order? That'd be great. Thanks.

I'm surprised you're still living in Texas. Aren't you afraid of being convicted of a crime you didn't commit?

Wait, are you white? By all means, disregard.

Lot of assumptions in that post, aren't there? Of course I'm afraid of being convicted of a crime I didn't commit. So what? There's nowhere perfect on Earth, at least as far as I know.

I usually make a lot of assumptions in my jokes. That's why they're funny.

Jokes?

Funny?

I'm sure they're around here somewhere.

TheWhoppah: lumyai: For 2008, the average murder rate in states with the death penalty was 5.2 per 1000, while the average mrder rate in states without the death penalty was 3.3 per 1000.

Clearly, the death penalty itself provides an incentive for murder, and should therefore be abolished.

You confuse cause and effect. Some states NEED the death penalty more than others just to keep the murder rate down. These have a more serious murder problem and are dealing with it in the most effective way possible, by killing the killers.

OK, fine, whatever. But I was j/k.

CruiserTwelve: So of 19 wrongfully convicted men, 8 were misidentified by persons of another race. Less than 50%. That hardly supports a sweeping indictment of the criminal justice system as racist.

Holy schnit dude, follow the goddamn links and educate yourself

CruiserTwelve: Ah... When you have no evidence to support your argument, attack your opponent personally. Good tactic.

I have tons of evidence, and yet I still want to attack you personally.

CruiserTwelve: Yes, very much so.

So, which community college did you get your one semester certificate from?
Note: I don't hate cops, but the posts you threw into this thread indicate that you can only see things from a very limited (and disturbing) prospective.

CruiserTwelve: untaken_name: But of course you're willing to make the assumption that the defense knew about this, and 3/4 scenarios involve it being brought to trial. I'm not assuming #4. I'm assuming that piece of evidence was buried long before trial. But keep lecturing me about assumptions - at least I admit mine. Also, I'm willing to be swayed by evidence. That's another key difference between us.

If it counts for anything, I've read more about this guy's trial and it appears the whole thing was mishandled both by the prosecution and by the defense. The guy got the shaft.

By the way, I wasn't assuming anything at all. That was my entire point. I was complaining that others were making assumptions based on nothing. Most posters even misread the story and didn't even realize the guy was long dead when DNA cleared him.

You weren't assuming anything? Really? Is that why the only scenario you posted under which important evidence wasn't released at trial was the fault of the defense? If you really, truly think you are thinking completely objectively about *anything*, you have already failed. It is impossible to operate with NO assumptions. It can't be done. What is important is to recognize them and change them if/when they are contradicted by reality.

ThreeEdgedSword: The Gubernatorial Election is this week here in Texas. Take that as you will.

THIS!

You guys not from Texas don't remember that Tim Cole was exonerated last year in a big ceremony in Austin that Governor Perry was "too busy" to attend. Notice there is no comment by Perry's office in the story, the newpaper is just calling him out on the Cole case a few days before the election to try to force him to act on it.

Seriously Fark has been re-hashing Tim Cole stories every 6 months so everyone thinks Texas has this awful justice system. The truth of the matter is that Texas has one of the best indigent defense systems in the nation.

untaken_name: Wouldn't that kill all of those poor black people you supposedly care about? The ones who, you know, live here before they get wrongly convicted? Oh, right - you don't actually give a crap about anything but scoring a few invisible points on a website. Nice. Stay classy.

they can use their bootstraps to survive.

CruiserTwelve: That's a pretty sweeping indictment of the white population of an entire state, don't you think? Besides, you're assuming the jury was all white. On what do you base that assumption?

It's Texas.

2009:

Office of last chance, Texas will soon make sure that competent lawyers handle death-row appeals (new window)

mreuther: CruiserTwelve: That's a pretty sweeping indictment of the white population of an entire state, don't you think? Besides, you're assuming the jury was all white. On what do you base that assumption?

It's Texas.

Texas is about 50% Mexican at this point. Unless you think Mexicans are white just because they aren't black, that is. Then we're still mostly white. California, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico know what I'm talking about.

TheWhoppah: Seriously Fark has been re-hashing Tim Cole stories every 6 months so everyone thinks Texas has this awful justice system. The truth of the matter is that Texas has one of the best indigent defense systems in the nation.

Since I'm a native Texan I can tell you that this claim is ridiculous.

Follow the links and learn something.

Challenge yourself.

You live in the past. The Texas Fair Defense Act of 2001 is model for the rest of the nation.

Don't be jealous of Texans. Its not our fault we're better than you.

While African-Americans constitute 13% of the nation's monthly drug users, they represent 35% of those persons arrested for drug possession, 55% of drug possession convictions, and 74% of those sentenced to prison for drug possession.

source (new window)

According to a recent Human Rights Watch report, in no state are black men incarcerated at rates even close to those of white men. In fact, nationwide, black men are incarcerated at 9.6 times the rate of white men.

source (new window)

Under federal legislation enacted in 1986, it takes 1/100 as much crack cocaine as powder cocaine to trigger equal mandatory minimum sentences. In 1995, although American crack users were 52% white and 38% African American, blacks accounted for 88% of those sentenced for crack offenses and whites just 4.1%.

source (new window)

Almost 1.4 million African-American males, or 14% of the adult black male population, are currently disenfranchised as a result of felony convictions. Black men represent more than 36% of the total disenfranchised male population in the U.S., although they make up less than 15% of American males.

source (new window)

I brought the food for thought, now eat

CruiserTwelve: If you think that, then you aren't familiar with SCOTUS rulings. Many of them are unique to the case they are presented with and have little applicability to other cases.

it's called precedent, genius

CruiserTwelve: If you think that, then you aren't familiar with SCOTUS rulings. Many of them are unique to the case they are presented with and have little applicability to other cases.

Also, they interpret the Constitution. The cases they hear are specific, but once something is said to be Constitutional it can be applied in other cases

Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since it became a state. The story is that they abolished it while they were still a Territory because an innocent man was hanged over in Windsor, Ontario.

About 15 years ago, there was a push to bring the death penalty to Michigan. It was shot down by Gov. Engler (Republican) because it would be too expensive to implement.

xsarien: /// I blame heat strokes on a massive scale, it was 90F at NIGHT when I was there.

HAHA!!! You should come visit Phoenix. Some nights are around 108. Not always a dry heat either.

CruiserTwelve: Evidence which tends to support acquittal is commonly brought out by the defense. Why would I blame the prosecution for poor defense tactics, or even for rulings by the judge that denied the defense their evidence?

BECAUSE PROSECUTING PEOPLE YOU KNOW ARE INNOCENT IS EVIL.
My God, I don't like shouting. But you really asked this question? It's really up to the defense to provide any exculpatory evidence? So if the prosecution knows about it, they don't have to mention it, because after all, it's the defense's job to "prove" the suspect "innocent" after all, right? ARGHARGH
argh
argh
Why do I ever expect you to act human? And why am I always surprised when you show your true nature?

brainiac-dumdum: I brought the food for thought, now eat

This has nothing to do with Tim Cole's rape conviction and not much to do with Texas either.

Texas law has the same penalties for crack or powder cocaine so I guess you must be ready to admit that Texas is smarter than the Federal government when it comes to drug crimes.

Actually your source is making a stupid argument ... How often is anyone busted for crack by a FEDERAL agent? Duh almost never! The coke comes in as powser and is converted to crack in da hood. Crack busts are made by the local police and sheriff, not the FBI and DEA. The increase in crack penalties is meaningless... pure political theatre.

untaken_name: So if the prosecution knows about it, they don't have to mention it

You are wrong.

If the prosecution knows it is misconduct for them not to mention it. Do an internet search for "Brady material" if you don't believe me. The law in Texas specifically says that it is the duty of a prosecutor to seek justice, not convictions.

Lawyer: "We have proof that he didn't do it."

Judge: "What kine ah evodunce you talkin bout, boy?"

Lawyer: "DNA and confession from the guy who really did it."

Judge: "Oh, er, well..."

Lawyer: "Well what? He's an innocent man who's been locked up for over ten years!"

Judge: "Well, ya see son, dat dere's th' problem. Iffins we lets him out now he's alaukly ta come back and sue the bejezus out of our fine state, here. We're talkin' millions. Best if we just... forget... about dis here whole thing for a long, long time, see here?"

Lawyer: "What? You're just going to leave him locked up until he dies of old age just to avoid risking getting sued for a wrongful conviction?"

Judge: "Yeeeup! That sounds about right. Ye learn quick, boy."

Lawyer: "But his family will just sue on his behalf!"

Judge: "Aw nup, got that figured out too, I reckon. We just pardon him after he dies and dey gots no case. Tee hee!"

TheWhoppah: untaken_name: So if the prosecution knows about it, they don't have to mention it

You are wrong.

If the prosecution knows it is misconduct for them not to mention it. Do an internet search for "Brady material" if you don't believe me. The law in Texas specifically says that it is the duty of a prosecutor to seek justice, not convictions.

I meant from CruiserTwelve's perspective. Of COURSE I understand that - but did you read what I was responding to? There was a reason that was phrased as a question, guy. But thanks for "correcting" me.

The primary evil person in this story is Jerry Wayne Johnson.



This man should be the target of your rage. Not Texas.

Is it easier for you to hate innocent white redneck Texans than black rapist Texans?

untaken_name: But thanks for "correcting" me.

My bad.

CruiserTwelve: Now either start arguing your case in a rational manner or I'm done. No more wharrgarbl about what an idiot I am for disagreeing with you.

You said:
"Evidence which tends to support acquittal is commonly brought out by the defense. Why would I blame the prosecution for poor defense tactics, or even for rulings by the judge that denied the defense their evidence?"

This is to answer my question, "Why did you assume the evidence either came out at trial or was mishandled by the defense?"
So, when I asked why the prosecution might not have brought up the fact that they knew the guy was innocent, you said "because it's the defense's job to bring that up". That is not whargarble. Additionally, I have not stated in this thread that you are an idiot. However, if you need to feel persecuted so that you can exit the thread with your dignity intact, then by all means, pretend I am the bad guy. That doesn't change what you said, or what it reveals about you.

TheWhoppah: brainiac-dumdum: I brought the food for thought, now eat

This has nothing to do with Tim Cole's rape conviction and not much to do with Texas either.

Texas law has the same penalties for crack or powder cocaine so I guess you must be ready to admit that Texas is smarter than the Federal government when it comes to drug crimes.

Actually your source is making a stupid argument ... How often is anyone busted for crack by a FEDERAL agent? Duh almost never! The coke comes in as powser and is converted to crack in da hood. Crack busts are made by the local police and sheriff, not the FBI and DEA. The increase in crack penalties is meaningless... pure political theatre.

you are very stupid, have you ever heard about the Drug Enforcement Agency? (new window)

This has nothing to do with Tim Cole's rape conviction and not much to do with Texas either.

Texas justice system is farked, that's why it's relevant. I shouldn't have to tell you that.

CruiserTwelve: Now either start arguing your case in a rational manner or I'm done. No more wharrgarbl about what an idiot I am for disagreeing with you.

you're done alright

CruiserTwelve: Knock off the childish insults and I'll continue to repond to your posts.

How gracious you are to bestow your benevolent graces upon my unworthy self