14-year-old executed convict exonerated posthumously

[Rakehellion]

The system works. Eventually.

http://www.upworthy.com/in-1944-we-...-did-it-take-70-years-for-us-to-exonerate-him

 

[Jaskalas]

In January 2014, the attorneys presented their argument for reopening the case.

Here is the evidence that pointed to Stinney's innocence:

• In 1944, South Carolina Gov. Olin Johnston wrote a letter stating that Stinney killed 8-year-old Mary Emma first, then killed and raped Betty June. But a recent autopsy report indicated there was no evidence that Betty June was sexually assaulted.
• Stinney's sister testified that she had been with Stinney on the day the girls were murdered.
• A child psychiatrist testified that Stinney's confession had likely been coerced and unreliable.

1: How could there be evidence of sexual assault 70 years later? Of course it wasn't found. Moreover, the capital crime was murder.
2: Families usually testify to the innocence of their loved ones.
3: Not an unreasonable assumption... but just an assumption.

Does the case hold up today? Of course not. People demanded far less evidence back then. That doesn't mean everyone convicted was innocent or guilty. It just means that we don't know. It also means the process of digging it up is baseless, without something concrete to back up the effort. I see nothing solid about the argument presented, other than the case wouldn't meet today's standards.

 

[Retro Rob]

How can the system "work, eventually" when the wrongful execution has already been carried out?

That's not the system eventually working -- that's simply highlighting how bigoted and racist our society was during the Crow era, and how justice was unequally applied.

 

[fskimospy]

1: How could there be evidence of sexual assault 70 years later? Of course it wasn't found. Moreover, the capital crime was murder.
2: Families usually testify to the innocence of their loved ones.
3: Not an unreasonable assumption... but just an assumption.

Does the case hold up today? Of course not. People demanded far less evidence back then. That doesn't mean everyone convicted was innocent or guilty. It just means that we don't know. It also means the process of digging it up is baseless, without something concrete to back up the effort. I see nothing solid about the argument presented, other than the case wouldn't meet today's standards.

I would suggest reading the background on this case, what happened is truly monstrous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stinney

 

[fskimospy]

The 'bible used as a booster seat' is the worst.

 

[jhbball]

How can the system "work, eventually" when the wrongful execution has already been carried out?

That's not the system eventually working -- that's simply highlighting how bigoted and racist our society was during the Crow era, and how justice was unequally applied.

My guess is that he was being sarcastic.

 

[Retro Rob]

My guess is that he was being sarcastic.

Well, he didn't expound on his remark, so I took it at face-value.

If he was being sarcastic, then my bad.

 

[Jaskalas]

I would suggest reading the background on this case, what happened is truly monstrous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stinney

I think we take due process for granted today, without knowing how truly little of it there was. Even as recently as 70 years ago.

I have no doubt that the case does not hold up to today's standards. Does that mean the boy was innocent? I suggest it means we simply do not know.

 

[werepossum]

The system works. Eventually.

http://www.upworthy.com/in-1944-we-...-did-it-take-70-years-for-us-to-exonerate-him

Just not for all values of "works".

 

[WelshBloke]

Does that mean the boy was innocent? I suggest it means we simply do not know.

Doesn't the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing mean anything?

 

[Mursilis]

The 'bible used as a booster seat' is the worst.

The 'railroaded a black teenager and fried him' is the worst.

 

[fskimospy]

I think we take due process for granted today, without knowing how truly little of it there was. Even as recently as 70 years ago.

I have no doubt that the case does not hold up to today's standards. Does that mean the boy was innocent? I suggest it means we simply do not know.

Sure, we don't know it for certain, but I think we can agree that putting a child to death on the basis of a few cops saying he confessed to something with no evidence of any confession is pretty horrible.

 

[jhbball]

I think we take due process for granted today, without knowing how truly little of it there was. Even as recently as 70 years ago.

I have no doubt that the case does not hold up to today's standards. Does that mean the boy was innocent? I suggest it means we simply do not know.

Just face it. Innocent people are executed. Conservatives take note.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

Fucking bastards. RIP.

 

[SlowSpyder]

This is my hang up on capital punishment. I'm not to sure that it is so much more important we kill the guilty as it is we make sure we don't execute the innocent.

 

[Brainonska511]

Just face it. Innocent people are executed. Conservatives take note.

As our great moral compass, Darth Cheney, tells us, the ends justify the means. If a few extra eggs are broken in the process, well, that's life.

 

[Linux23]

i can't even begin to imagine the fear and terror that young boy went through, knowing that he was going to die, but not really fully understanding what was going on until they fried him like an animal.

smdh.

 

[Moonbeam]

we were raised in a savage culture to be savages. Things like this are bound to happen. Those who retain some semblance of humanity will try to push our evolution along. The rest will try to hold everybody else back so they don't have to compare themselves to better people.

 

[Rakehellion]

How can the system "work, eventually" when the wrongful execution has already been carried out?

That's not the system eventually working -- that's simply highlighting how bigoted and racist our society was during the Crow era, and how justice was unequally applied.

And still is!

 

[werepossum]

How can the system "work, eventually" when the wrongful execution has already been carried out?

That's not the system eventually working -- that's simply highlighting how bigoted and racist our society was during the Crow era, and how justice was unequally applied.

The improvement is that today he'd be shot dead by the SWAT team coming to arrest him.

Blamblamblamblamblamblamblamblam!
Thump.
"Get down!"
. . .
"He was coming right at us!"

Wait a minute, that's not an improvement . . .

I have absolutely no idea if he killed those two kids, but apparently neither did the jury. It was enough that he was disposable, and if he was innocent, well, the real killer will probably kill again and maybe we'll get him next time.

 

[Blue_Max]

Just face it. Innocent people are executed. Conservatives take note.

"Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience." Catherine Comins

 

[AznAnarchy99]

1944? There are probably hundreds of cases like this.

 

[tynopik]

This is my hang up on capital punishment. I'm not to sure that it is so much more important we kill the guilty as it is we make sure we don't execute the innocent.

funny the same standard doesn't seem to apply to assisted suicide

 

[sandorski]

This makes it all better....

 

[sandorski]

funny the same standard doesn't seem to apply to assisted suicide

What?