The State of Texas Kills Frances Newton

http://www.freefrances.org/

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/25/1342238&mode=thread&tid=25

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all

good lord that's so depressing.

At one point, Jackson showed Gregory Exhibit No. 60—a photograph of an Iron Maiden poster that had hung in Willingham’s house—and asked the psychologist to interpret it. “This one is a picture of a skull, with a fist being punched through the skull,” Gregory said; the image displayed “violence” and “death.” Gregory looked at photographs of other music posters owned by Willingham. “There’s a hooded skull, with wings and a hatchet,” Gregory continued. “And all of these are in fire, depicting—it reminds me of something like Hell. And there’s a picture—a Led Zeppelin picture of a falling angel. . . . I see there’s an association many times with cultive-type of activities. A focus on death, dying. Many times individuals that have a lot of this type of art have interest in satanic-type activities.”

jesus

Yeah, I read that article last night. Infuriating.

good article

terrifying.

Would have liked more on current state of fire investigation.

me too tbh but it'd probably require a whole article unto itself

this

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, in 2006, voted with a majority to uphold the death penalty in a Kansas case. In his opinion, Scalia declared that, in the modern judicial system, there has not been “a single case—not one—in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred in recent years, we would not have to hunt for it; the innocent’s name would be shouted from the rooftops.”

Just read something that speaks to tbe entrenched interests of the state and the legal system in not bringing miscarriages of justice to light.

Lord Denning on The Birmingham Six pressing charges against West Midlands Police in 1977:

"Just consider the course of events if their [the Six's] action were to proceed to trial ... If the six men failed it would mean that much time and money and worry would have been expended by many people to no good purpose. If they won, it would mean that the police were guilty of perjury; that they were guilty of violence and threats; that the confessions were involuntary and improperly admitted in evidence; and that the convictions were erroneous. That would mean that the Home Secretary would have either to recommend that they be pardoned or to remit the case to the Court of Appeal. That was such an appalling vista that every sensible person would say, 'It cannot be right that these actions should go any further.' They should be struck out either on the ground that the men are estopped from challenging the decision of Mr. Justice Bridge, or alternatively that it is an abuse of the process of the court. Whichever it is, the actions should be stopped."

They weren't acquitted and released for another 14 years.

That Denning quote sends me into paroxysms of rage pretty much without fail. The whole of Chris Mullen's book about that is just an astonishing series of guys at every level acting out that philosophy and covering their own arses.

the guy who prosecuted him is pretty butthurt now http://www.corsicanadailysun.com/opinion/local_story_241210447.html?keyword=topstory

I really can't fathom how someone like that sees the world

3. Blood-gas analysis at Navarro Regional Hospital shortly after the homicide revealed that Willingham had not inhaled any smoke, contrary to his statement which detailed “rescue attempts”

He admitted he lied about the rescue attempts so as not to appear cowardly.

That's a shockingly weak rebuttal, filled with facts that were already established in the full NYer article, and a couple of alleged witness statements.

ie., the smoke inhalation, wife abusing, refrigerater location etc. have all been covered.
The whispered statement to his deceased daughter just sounds very very hard to substantiate.

yeah there's a response here too http://www.corsicanadailysun.com/opinion/local_story_245221832.html
everything he says is like, ok that's not irrelevant but it really only helps if you're already convinced you did the right thing and just want to prop up your conclusion. and the fact that he refused to plead guilty is just like, well, think of what you would do if someone offered you LWOP to admit to killing three people when you didn't. argh.

even if he did whisper something to me that sounds like it could also mean "i wish i had died in the fire instead of you"

yeah, shocking that the dude became furious when his attorneys asked him to plead guilty to killing his children.

xpost

Also the refusal to take a polygraph test is pretty consistent with not wanting to admit to being to scared to actually make a rescue attempt.

"too" scared

The whispered statement to his daughter sounds like something you'd think if you would rather be dead than your kids.

x-post, and someone's beat me to it

someone mail Hon. Judge Jackson a copy of the NYer please

also the rebuttal is pretty ridiculous just for the idea of "oh well aside from the discredited scientific evidence we've got LOADS of circumstantial character evidence so the case is still solid!"

lol loads of circumstantial character evidence that would probably not be admissible at trial. good job, dude.

it's odd to me that he brings up the refrigerator thing, which iirc at least one of the original fire investigators said in the NYer article was irrelevant -- I don't say this to nitpick him factually, but it's just odd to me that someone's response to attention stemming from that article would use claims dealt with in the article itself. obviously he's trying to be brief and firm and persuasive, but it's sort of a non-response, like he's just restating things that sound like an argument even though he's not willing to go into the issue.

I mean, it's that sort of shaking-your-head "alls I know is X, Y, and Z" type of argument, the kind that sounds confident but is really just erecting a wall between yourself and the issue

its texas

that's the same kind of logic used by the original arson investigators, too xp

I know people have a lot of opnions on the death penalty & I am defs not NOT trying to derail thread/flamewar here but my gov. made me REALLY proud to live in new Mexico when he revently abolished the death penalty.

I would have far fewer qualms about the death penalty if I didn't believe that most people are incompetent.

The full article does make me curious as to what sort of practices are currently employed by arson investigators. There was a quote in the NYer piece that seemed to indicate that not only was the initial investigation not up to current standards, but it wasn't up to the standards of the time either. I hope this means that these guys aren't all using their intuition and feeling arson in their bones anymore.
The bit about how the arson investigation association (forgot what it was actually called) opposed the requirement to employ the scientific method in court proceedings is just absurd.

he revently abolished the death penalty.

reading this as "reverently abolished"

haha I did too

recently

ha xps

Abbott, I knowwwww!!! I saw R Maddow interview him about that, and he was SO AWESOME! You NEVER hear a politician say, "I used to believe one thing very staunchly, but now I know that I was wrong and as an honorable person, I admit it and I'm fixing that mistake right now." Srsly Bill Richardson was really impressive in an "honest, everyday guy" way.

and that one guy who bragged on his CV or whatever that almost all his investigations turned out to be arson! i wonder if he has a whole brain in his head. well no, i'm actually sure the people involved are of at least average intelligence but the lack of self-awareness/consciousness about the psychology of criminal investigation is just ??????? xxxp

The bit about how the arson investigation association (forgot what it was actually called) opposed the requirement to employ the scientific method in court proceedings is just absurd.

For real. And a somewhat sad thing when it is used is the last step of the scientific process, peer review, is performed by 12 randomly selected people.

Yeah Laurel I totally love Richardson. My mo-in-law ran into him in downtown Santa Fe and he headbutted her as a greeting!

it must be cool to have wesley willis as a governor

hahaha

You NEVER hear a politician say, "I used to believe one thing very staunchly, but now I know that I was wrong and as an honorable person, I admit it and I'm fixing that mistake right now."

George Ryan's death-penalty moratorium a few years back actually endeared him to me quite strongly, despite the fact that he was in almost every other respect a pretty crooked politician.

(Although that last part sort of goes without saying, since he was governor of Illinois.)

it's odd to me that he brings up the refrigerator thing, which iirc at least one of the original fire investigators said in the NYer article was irrelevant -- I don't say this to nitpick him factually, but it's just odd to me that someone's response to attention stemming from that article would use claims dealt with in the article itself.

He's not responding to the NYer, though. The Fire Commission's finding has been in every paper around here, I'm sure Texas Monthly and the Texas Observer have both contacted him, etc..

er, to the NYer or to attention relating to the NYer.

Not to talk shit about Corsicana, but you might have to drive 45 minutes to find a store that sells the New Yorker.

what galling about death-penalty debate is that hardly anyone is even willing to argue for any compelling benefit for it -- the benefit presented is just this gut-level moral-justice thing that it needs to be done, even if it's flawed or biased, even if it's expensive, even if there's an alternative, even if it has no deterrent effect ... at this point it continues pretty much solely based on tradition and a gut-level moral intuition that cannot really be argued with.

xpost - yeah Milo I think in that case he's referring to an AP article, but still, the defense of certainty doesn't really engage with any of the stuff that's making people un-certain, you know? (and I'm sure he's aware of the NYer article and the attention stemming from it)

his article came out aug. 28 btw, i think the nyer thing is from sept. 3

I guess part of the thing is that death-penalty skeptics usually look at a particular case as an example of systemic failures, totally apart from whether the person turns out to be innocent or not -- and then someone like him makes this totally irrelevant retort that this was just a horrible person and you shouldn't sympathize with him

xpost - oh, my bad!

a bunch of people *do* argue it has a deterrent effect and that each person executed prevents a certain number of future murders but there are so many problems with that it's worthless to me, and not just because i'm against it for other reasons. i mean the same people who argue that it's a deterrent would refuse to allocate tax money to other stuff, like schools, that would also prevent kids from growing up to be murderers, or anything that would prevent premature death (like i dunno healthcare). but i would also agree that even if they couldn't find a way to use statistics to justify their bloodlust they'd support the dp anyway.

i am now thinking about this girl i went to law school with who would basically counter any statement about punishment with BUT THE VICTIMS!!!!! CHILDREN! INNOCENT VICTIMS!!!!! some people really are beyond help.

Tell her to hold a rally in of support SCHIP and stfu.

death penalty her

she once said she was interested in how middle eastern countries use corporal punishment and maybe we could learn something from them because their crime rates seem low and i was like "um, sweden has a pretty low crime rate and it barely punishes anyone" and she just kind of sneered. lol.

huge scalia fan, incidentally

In re the rebuttal by The Hon. John Jackson, now Sr. Judge, 13th Judicial District: congratulations, you're a douche

4. Consistent with typical Navarro County death penalty practice, Willingham was offered the opportunity to eliminate himself as a suspect by polygraph examination. Such opportunity was rejected in the most vulgar and insulting manner;

Last time I checked, inviting you to shove a polygraph up your self-righteous ass wasn't a hanging matter.

And as already noted upthread, his point 6 is just contemptible.

Wow, Texas Gov Rick Perry, you really are a douchebag. But hey, what's the life and good name of trailer trash like Cameron Willingham compared with your career. Stay classy, you fuck.

http://images.chron.com/blogs/txpotomac/GovRickPerry-headshot2.jpg

3 Texas commissioners looking into arson dismissed
By JEFF CARLTON (AP) – 4 hours ago

DALLAS — A report concluding a faulty investigation led to a Texas man's execution won't be reviewed by a state board as planned Friday after Gov. Rick Perry abruptly removed three people from the panel, forcing the meeting's cancellation.

Perry, who has said the execution was appropriate, replaced the head of the Texas Forensic Science Commission and two of its eight other board members Wednesday. The upheaval on the commission came just 48 hours before it was to consider a report critical of the arson finding leading to Cameron Todd Willingham's execution for the deaths of his three daughters in a 1991 fire.

Baltimore-based arson expert Craig Beyler, who was hired by the commission, concluded the arson finding was scientifically unsupported and investigators at the scene had "poor understandings of fire science." His report has bolstered arguments from advocacy groups that Willingham was innocent and wrongly executed.
Perry told The Associated Press the terms of the dismissed board members were expiring and replacing them "was pretty standard business as usual." But several board members have served more than one term and had their appointments renewed.

Earlier this month, Perry expressed confidence in Willingham's guilt and derided reports questioning the arson investigation, referring to their authors as "supposed experts." He said he had not "seen anything that would cause me to think that the decision" to execute Willingham "was not correct."

Perry was governor in 2004, when Willingham was executed.

The state commission doesn't have the power to rule on Willingham's guilt or innocence but was expected to release a report next year on the validity of the arson investigation.

Perry appointed Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley as the new head of the panel, replacing Austin attorney Sam Bassett. Bradley acknowledged he and the other new member appointed by Perry have a steep learning curve ahead of them. Friday's canceled meeting has not been rescheduled.

"I don't see how we can successfully have a meeting with the board turnover and lack of time for an orientation and education for the new board members," Bradley said.

The other new appointee, forensic scientist Norma Jean Farley, said she learned of her appointment Tuesday. Perry can't appoint a third replacement until he receives a recommendation from the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association.

Bassett said he suspected he would be replaced last month after Beyler issued his report. At that point, he said, he heard Perry's office began looking for new candidates.

He said he hopes the Willingham investigation is completed. "In my view, we should not fail to investigate important forensic issues in cases simply because there might be political ramifications," he said.

Prosecutor Alan Levy, who heads the criminal division in the Tarrant County DA's office in Fort Worth and supports the death penalty, said he learned he had been fired in a Tuesday afternoon phone call.

"I was a little surprised, given the timing," Levy said. "The commission should do its job and follow the facts. And if the facts are that this is not good science, then so be it."

Willingham, 36, was convicted of setting the fire that killed 2-year-old Amber and 1-year-old twins Karmon and Kameron on Dec. 23, 1991, in the family's Corsicana home.

He maintained his innocence, even from the death chamber. But a now dead state fire marshal and a local fire investigator ruled it was arson, testifying a liquid accelerant was ignited and the blaze was set to prevent anyone from rescuing the children. The investigator stands by his conclusions.

Associated Press writer Juan A. Lozano in Houston contributed to this report.

PBS reran "Death By Fire," the Willingham piece, last night. I don't watch much true crime stuff, but this was riveting. I can't determine his guilt/innocence from the facts provided, but yeah, Perry comes off as a class-A dick in it.

there's a article in the new Discover about the state of fire science now, mentions the willingham case

http://discovermagazine.com/2011/nov/24-seven-myths-about-arson