Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smooth
I guess the larger question is: who cares?
I mean, who really cares about those 3500 people? How do we find the few innocent people in there without unraveling our judicial processes and opening a flood of appeals based on requests to hear new evidence? We can't even adequately handle the flow of appeals now--let alone if people could raise new issues every few years.
|
I should imagine that if you found yourself, or one of your friends or loved ones, in that situation then you would care. A great deal.
It is commendable that there are prisoner advocates, many of them working pro bono.
There have been many cases, not just in the US but also a great deal in the United Kingdom, where people have been found to have been deliberately framed. This is not the topic at hand here.
The issue is that if someone can
prove their innocence by the use of DNA, then why should this not be permitted?
It really is quite simple in my eyes.
But then again, I'm not a US legal PhD.
Things can sometimes look very black and white when one is not intimately familiar with the system.
Mr Mephisto