|
Written by Bill Branham
|
|
Wednesday, 21 March 2012 22:22 |
|
 M ost people would like to be a part of history. Even if you can’t “make history”, it’s kind of exciting to at least be there. That occasion graced me the other day with little fanfare, no warning, and little talk afterward. But I’d like to tell you about it.
One of PI's advisor's, Ken Wyniemko, has begun a radio series, which we have been recording and you can read about here. As an exoneree, Ken has devoted his life to reforming the criminal justice system so what happened to him doesn't happen to others.
This was the fifth show. Since it is not far from where I work, I was able to sit in the studio this day. One of the guests was Carl Marlinga. Carl was the Macomb County Prosecutor during the time that Ken was convicted. Carl was not directly involved in Ken’s case, but this occurred under “his watch” and he has stepped up and taken responsibility. This is not the first time that Ken and Carl have been together. With a sense of incredible gratitude and respect, Ken noted that Carl is the only person who has apologized to him. We’re not talking about reading a cold, soulless script, but a deep, sincere apology for the terrible injustice inflicted upon an innocent person by the very authority that is supposed to protect its citizens. Carl has become a strong advocate for the issue of wrongful convictions, helping others to understand how they come about and what to do about it.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Bill Branham
|
|
Wednesday, 23 November 2011 20:14 |
The New York Times article, New Jersey Ruling on Witnesses May Prod New York to Change, begins by taking a look at the first state to question accepted practices involving eye witness identification. It cites decades of research about the unreliability of memory and its vulnerability to manipulation, whether intentional or not. Of particular mention is the significant role misidentification played in over 70% of the first 250 DNA exonerations. As the title says, it notes the likelihood that New York will follow suit and re-evaluate their practices. The first sample tweet below is about Connecticut doing the same. We hope and expect more to come. 
Why now? Mainly due to the tireless efforts of the Innocence Project and the Innocence Network. Resistance has been monumental, but the inability of the established system to scrutinize itself and make adjustments has been evident to everyone else. We need to capitalize on the prevailing winds and urge our legislatures to enact substantial and truly revolutionary reforms.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Allen B. Woodside
|
|
Saturday, 10 December 2011 09:54 |
Andrew Rosenthal’s article in the NY Times, Nov 17, 2011, offers added insight as to how so many innocent Americans are wrongfully charged, prosecuted and convicted in this country. Yet we continue to self-righteously boast of "...liberty and justice for all" to the rest of the world despite an overwhelming preponderance of evidence to the contrary.
It is time the public at large become aware of some of the modus operandi by which so many rogue and opportunistic self-serving prosecutors climb the ladder of success for political gain; this at the expense of innocent citizens throughout the United States.
We all need to get involved in curing this long lingering affliction of our so called "Criminal Justice System". The average citizen is unable to understand it, our state and federal courts simply ignore it, our lawmakers refuse to address it, and the media continues to report it as best they can under the continuing erosion of the First Amendment Rights.
Read the Rosenthal story and it is easy to understand how our legal system has been usurped by a variety of miscreants and reprobates from all across the spectrum of the so called "Criminal Justice System." Suffice to say, this has become an oxymoronic Orwellian term.
Clearly, it is time for implementation of an autonomous mechanism by which to maintain strict oversight of the CJS - it is long past due!
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Written by Bill Branham
|
|
Friday, 06 May 2011 23:01 |
 No rational person, hearing from all parties involved, can conclude anything but that Lorinda Swain was knowingly wrongfully accused by her son and then wrongfully convicted by the court. Now that her son and his brother have recanted and other witnesses have come forth, the motivation behind the county prosecutor's actions is downright pathological. Apparently, it is just too much for her office to admit that a mistake had been made by one of her predecessors. When Judge Sindt ruled for a retrial, if the prosecutor is so convinced that Lorinda is guilty, then why doesn't she retry her? The obvious reason is that she has no case. She has no credible witnesses willing to testify against Lorinda. So, instead, she takes the cowardly way out and appeals the judge's decision. And one has to wonder about what is in the mind of an appeals court, which chooses to overturn the original trial judge's ruling for a retrial. On what basis does an appeals court think they know better than the original trial judge? Carl Marlinga drove home the point that a prosecutor's calling is not to win cases, but to seek justice. It is sad how so many prosecutors operate on other principles. No, I don't think they are all bad; many are very good. But when they are bad, they are so bad! because they have the power to ruin people's lives, something they care little about.
|
|
