Another Houstonian Wrongly Convicted by Problematic Crime Lab

Too bad you can't give someone back their time. He will get a few hundred thousand though.

 

Stories like these don't engender ENOUGH sympathy. It's impossible to imagine what that does to someone's life. To be imprisoned with rapists and criminals and spend a decade, a DECADE of your life without freedom, looking over your shoulder, etc. Your whole life is stripped from you. Cavity searches, controlled meals, controlled time outside, boredom, etc.

Imagine what it must like to have the initial shock of being found guilty of something you know you didn't do and having no way to stop it. All you can do is keep saying "I didn't do it!" but no one besides your family will believe you or even care. Then you show up to prison that first day knowing your life is over and they tell you to strip naked and bend over for the first cavity search.

What a nightmare. No amount of money can ever repair the damage that is done to those people who are wrongfully convicted of a crime.

 

I hope he sues the city for a few million. He has had his life ruined and who knows what issues he ran into in prison. We need a system where the accuser should be punished if stuff like this happens.

 

I'm not familiar with the process. How does a mistake in the crime lab result in two sets of DNA matching? I'm not doubting it happens, I just don't understand how it happens.

Wouldn't the lab have about the same percentage of mistakes resulting in guilty rapest being cleared?

The whole thing is fugazi.

 

Well the accuser never said this guy was guilty.

 

According to the article, the crime lab said there was NO DNA on the sheets to use for a DNA match. The NO crime lab tested the same sheets and found DNA that matched another criminal and he was therefore released.

 

This is simply disturbing. I don't even know where to begin in compensating this guy. What amount of money would be enough? What can be done to try to help him get his life back together?

I just don't know...but it needs to be something substantial, not just a gesture.

 

Considering what was said in the article, I wonder how he was convicted. If the victim picked him out of a lineup but openly admitted she only caught a glimpse of the attacker, that's not a positive ID is it? No DNA evidence either. How could you find the guy guilty beyond a reasonable doubt?

 

dude, don't you know you can watch tv in prison. they've got it too easy.

 

That's seriously messed up, sincerely...

 

Maybe this guy was his lawyer

 

This guy's story was on the front page of the Chronicle on Saturday, I think. Incredible... his fiance waiting nearly 15 years for this guy after he was convicted of rape and sent to prison. THAT is a woman, man! And the first thing he's going to do is marry her... damn. It must be so gratifying to have that kind of faith rewarded, 15 years later.

 

That's what I'm wondering. Either this dude had a ****TY lawyer, or someone seriously needs to explain to the jury of that trial what "reasonable doubt" means. No one should ever be convicted of RAPE based on no DNA evidence and a shaky ID by the victim who admits it is based on what was merely a glimpse.

Someone needs to look at this trial as much as someone needs to look at what the Houston Crime Lab did wrong.

 

I was going to say something about race, but i believe one of the first cases that was over turned because of a foul up in the hpd crime lab involved a white defendant. but i'm not sure.

they're just screw ups, but i know that doesn't involve why this guy was conviicted. most of the crime lab evidence has been faulty, but in this case as stated it wasn't used to convict. damn shame, wonder how the woman feels. not only did she get raped, she sent an innocent man to jail.

 

Yes indeed! I hope he is given enough money where he will not have to work for at least the same amount of time he spent in jail to make up for time lost. They both deserve to spend as much time possible together.

 

They should make a Houston CSI tv comedy show.

 

I would tend to view this case as an anomaly. Any DA will tell you that one of the hardest crimes to get a conviction for is a sexual assault. Sometimes you get a jury like this one but there are many more cases of sexual assault that wind up with hung juries or outright acquittals.

The problem with a lot of people in this thread is the CSI mentality that pervades America today. It's not that easy to get forensic evidence and the vast majority of sexual assault cases goto trial with no forensic evidence at all. It's just nearly impossible to have ANY evidence unless the victim goes directly from her assault to the hospital. I'm not saying that juries should find someone guilty of a crime if they have a reasonable doubt I just don't personally require forensic evidence to relieve me of all reasonable doubt.

As far as the ID, ID is always a troubling aspect. There's not too much you can do about an ID and as a juror i personally wouldn't trust an ID that the victim herself said was not trustworthy.

The problem in this case is that it seems the crime lab completely botched theforensic evidence evaulation. I have no problem with someone being convicted on a lack of forensic evidence in a jury trial in theory. As a juror myself, it would probably heighten my requirements of the other aspects of the case but it wouldn't outright prevent me from convicting. What is troublesome here is that it seems the crime lab missed evidence that would have exonerated. That to me is more troublesome than the conviction. The jury didn't know that there was evidence and, in fact, believed that there was no evidence at all. There's a big difference to me and that's why I would place the blame solely on the crime lab.