flightless hag

A chronicle of the adventures of birdwoman: a lonely, talentless freak who wanders the internet in search of entertainment.

My Photo
Location: Philly

I'm a 40-something married white female, survivor of weight watchers, avid reader of pulp. Dogs (not cats), extreme right (handed, not politics), ENTJ, alto, wanna-be knitter.

January 13, 2006

Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.

In case you’ve been in a cave recently, here’s something so you’re all up to speed on the Roger Keith Coleman case (and, incidentally, why do all bad, bad guys get reported on with three names? Is it a media rule?). Coleman was executed in 1992 for the heinous crime of raping, murdering, and mutilating his sister-in-law. DNA tests, fledgling though they were at the time, indicated Coleman as the culprit. Other evidence said the same.

Coleman, like every other person in jail, was innocent of all charges.

He protested his innocence right to the moment of his death.

10+ years later, as he’s leaving office, Govenor Warner (a potential prezzie candidate) agreed to more sophisticated testing to get the absolute truth of the matter.

And the truth? Coleman is guilty as sin. He’s also, surprise surprise, a liar. (funny, the inquirer had two HUGE front page stories yesterday showing how terrible it would be when the DNA evidence came back exonerating our poor hero. It’s just a sidebar today, now that the truth is outed. But there’s no political motive there. No siree.)

So, of course, the pro-death-penalty camp is all full of “see I told you so” and the pro-life-camp is all “this proves nothing.”

In fact, the closing of the inquirer’s story is a quote from the Innocence Project (not to be confused with the Innocence Mission, a groovy band from Lancaster): “Other governors should take their lead from Gov. Warner and do post-execution testing in their cases, because there’s no reason not to. It’s all about getting to the truth.”

I can name one reason not to. Expense. The jury found the guy guilty, enough so to put him to death. What a huge waste of resources! Unless there is significant question as to the verdict (in which case, I’d hope the governor would have granted stay), there is no reason TO do this testing.

Am I being a dope, or just callous?


(final aside: the crime happened in the town of Grundy. If you lived in the town of Grundy, wouldn’t you petition to change the town’s name? I would.)



Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home