And you would do all of this out of the goodness of your heart, no pay involved?
Fame and money. If this had been a white boy, it would never even be considered. Of course, according to most easily influenced people, no white people were ever treated poorly.
The guy taking on the case is the son of South Carolina's first black chief justice. Something tells me he has a chip on his shoulder for wanting to right wrongs against blacks. Whatever his motivations, however, that doesn't affect whether this case has a leg to stand on. Whatever the race of the defendant, that doesn't affect whether this case has a leg to stand on. It sounds like you're jumping to a lot of conclusions based on race, and consistently defending these conclusions based on race, but you're not really addressing the case itself. You seem to be playing the race card just as much as you accuse them of doing so.
But as long as we're talking about race, of the 312 post-conviction exonerations I mentioned earlier, 70% were minorities. I don't think anyone is arguing that white people are never treated poorly, but as WE!!! mentioned earlier, it's slightly absurd to act as if just as many whites were treated poorly in comparison to minorities. Especially when you're talking about the Jim Crow era or earlier.
As far as this never happening for white people? Look up David Wayne Spence, Cameron Todd Willingham, Claude Jones, Jesse Tafero, Ellis Wayne Felker, etc. Again, you're playing the race card by suggesting the system caters to minority appeals only, when in reality, many whites have been exonerated as well. And those mentioned above? Exonerated post-execution.
The article says all evidence has been lost. But now, someone says they remember it differently? Would that open a new case for anyone else? No. But this case involves a minority. So it has to be handled carefully.
And therein lies the issue that some of us are addressing. If there is hard evidence that this was truly a travesty, then show it and by all means, set it right.
No, not all of the evidence has been lost, and the article acknowledges this. The autopsy report still exists, as a pathologist is indicating that he can refute the findings. Additionally, there are witnesses and news reports that acknowledge the fact that the prosecution failed to properly admit evidence it claimed would show Stinney's guilt.
Again, I'm not saying there is a ton of evidence and that this is a slam dunk case, but there are clearly reasonable grounds for an appeal. Whatever the reason for bringing this legal challenge, those grounds have to at least be considered, regardless of the defendant's race or the motivations of his representatives for bringing the case.
If they filed a motion that just said, "He black, reconsider dis," then yeah, you'd have an argument that this is solely based on race and should be promptly denied. But when an autopsy report is being challenged, the handling of evidence is being challenged, the manner in which the defendant was interrogated is being challenged, and there are witnesses who state that the defendant had an alibi? Then there's evidence to be reviewed. And you can judge the credibility of that evidence all you want, but in our legal system, that's left up to the jury to decide as the trier of fact.
65 Replies
12122 Views