Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/31/2006 4:45:52 PM EST
I have questions regarding the parole violation but overall I'm not sure how I would feel if something like this happened to me

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061101/ap_on_re_us/conviction_cleared

DALLAS - A decorated Vietnam veteran convicted of rape 25 years ago became a free man Tuesday after a judge ruled he probably wouldn't have been found guilty if DNA testing had been available.


Specialized DNA testing performed this year proved Larry Fuller, 57, was not the assailant who raped a Dallas woman in her home. Fuller has spent about two decades in prison for the crime.

"My faith was tested and I won," he said, trembling slightly as he left the courthouse carrying two worn paperback Bibles.

Fuller was sentenced in 1981 to 50 years behind bars after jurors convicted him of aggravated rape. Authorities claimed that he broke into a 37-year-old woman's apartment and raped her, using a butcher knife to cut her as she struggled.

The woman looked at two photo lineups, both of which included Fuller. She picked him in the second one, even though Fuller was bearded in the picture and she said her attacker had no facial hair.

At the time, Fuller was a 32-year-old Vietnam veteran who had received the Air Medal for taking care of his crew. He was pursing a career in art and had worked as a driver and warehouse employee.

Fuller served 18 years in prison before being released in 1999. He was sent back to prison last year for a parole violation. All the while, he professed his innocence and tried to prove it through DNA. This year, the Dallas County prosecutor's office agreed to allow the additional testing.

Both the assistant district attorney and state District Judge Lana McDaniel apologized to Fuller; neither were involved in the original case. The judge said she felt sick to her stomach over all the time he spent in prison for a crime he didn't commit.

"Thank you," Fuller responded. "Apology accepted."

Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:47:44 PM EST
When asked what he wants to do now that he is a free man he replied, 'I'm gonna go fuck that bitch. It's pre-paid".
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:48:30 PM EST
Society owes him.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:48:44 PM EST


"Thank you," Fuller responded. "Apology accepted."


He handled that much better than I would have.
I'd be one bitter SOB if I was in his place.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:49:26 PM EST
Eh...It happens
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:51:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By ben72227:
Eh...It happens

till it happens to you.
good thing he didn't get executed
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:51:29 PM EST

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights: Society owes him.
He needs a professional escort service on the prosecutor's budget.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:52:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2006 4:55:29 PM EST by CWS1911]
It's funny how DNA testing did the opposite for OJ.

His ex wifes DNA was all over the Bronco,his DNA was at the scene of the murder.

Funny how this DNA shit works.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:54:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2006 4:55:16 PM EST by TheTracker]
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 4:55:05 PM EST

Originally Posted By Yankee1911:


"Thank you," Fuller responded. "Apology accepted."


He handled that much better than I would have.
I'd be one bitter SOB if I was in his place.


With the faith comment and the bit about his carrying two Bibles with him in court, it doesn't surprise me that he's this... calm, about it. Apparently, unlike many shills with such claims, he really did find religion in prison.

Words fail to describe how horrible it would be to lose so much of your life for something you didn't even do.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:00:54 PM EST

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
With the faith comment and the bit about his carrying two Bibles with him in court, it doesn't surprise me that he's this... calm, about it. Apparently, unlike many shills with such claims, he really did find religion in prison.

Words fail to describe how horrible it would be to lose so much of your life for something you didn't even do.


Or he already had it before he went in.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:20:22 PM EST
Sue.
The.
Bastards.



Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:20:33 PM EST
The same thing happened a couple years back here in Wisconsin. Man served 20 something years for a rape he didn't commit, let go after DNA proved he wasn't the rapist..........turns out the victim's real rapist was already in prison for another crime (I believe rape as well), and she may have actually been in the same room as him as she was doing victim awareness work in the same prison!

Fast forward.......Man can't seem to get his life together after spending all that time in prison (no shit) and I guess he was probably a little messed up in the head from all of it, so he murders a female reporter (with the help of his nephew) and burns her body!

That just goes to show you that the world is F***ed up!!!!!!!!!

Maybe he thought he would get credit for all those years towards this case, kinda a get out of prison free card! I can totally understand him being messed up from all those years and bitter and all that, but he should be put to death for what he's done now!
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:23:56 PM EST
Sue. Sue. Sue.
Millions would not be enough.
Then they need to lock up the cops and the DA that put him there.

These assholes never have to pay if they are wrong.
Time to start locking up the folks that screw this stuff up.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:28:29 PM EST
The man showed total class and dignity. I respect that.

I dont know if I could have.

As a Dallasite, sue the shit out whoever needs it. As a taxpayer, I dont mind flipping the bill on that.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:36:51 PM EST

Originally Posted By twonami:

Originally Posted By ben72227:
Eh...It happens

till it happens to you.
good thing he didn't get executed



Which is my only reservation with the death penalty.

DNA and Video evidence? Hell, I'd shoot you my self. He said, She said too high an OOPSIE factor to kill someone.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:38:42 PM EST

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.


Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to prison"?
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:47:16 PM EST

Originally Posted By GeorgeInNePa:

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.


Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to prison"?


If you have a better system , I'm all ears
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:51:25 PM EST
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:53:04 PM EST

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....


Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 5:53:44 PM EST
I'd sooner see my tax dollars sent to right the wrong of his life than to welfare.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 6:43:44 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/31/2006 6:44:32 PM EST by FLAL1A]

Originally Posted By GeorgeInNePa:

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.


Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to prison"?


That would be better. However, if your acceptable error rate is zero, you can't have a criminal justice system of any kind. It is simply a fact that innocent people will from time to time be punished if you undertake to punish anyone. We accept an astronomical number of deaths as the price of a system of transportation by private car. Some things, among them punishing criminals and travel by car, carry an inevitable cost in offenseless lives. A certain number of people die every year because we allow amateur home repairs; people fall off ladders, cut off limbs with chain saws, et c. We could reduce the price in blood if we only allowed certified professionals to do house work, but we accept the price as reasonable. The justice system has its costs as well.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:43:12 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:44:34 PM EST
Damn... 25 years...

I'd be fixin' to get some tang after that

But seriously, that's fucked up. Glad the guy got out and people apologized to him.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:46:46 PM EST

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Society owes him.


+1.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:49:52 PM EST
Eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of conviction of the innocent.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:54:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By GeorgeInNePa:

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.

Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to prison"?

With today's criminal justice system, I'd wager that more than ten guilty men go free for every one innocent man in prison.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 9:57:52 PM EST

Originally Posted By CWS1911:
It's funny how DNA testing did the opposite for OJ.

His ex wifes DNA was all over the Bronco,his DNA was at the scene of the murder.

Funny how this DNA shit works.


DNA doesn't count if you are black and the cop is white.
Link Posted: 10/31/2006 11:07:08 PM EST
My God, that poor man lost out on his entire life.....

Can a wrongly convicted person sue the hell out of the state? That man should live in luxury for the rest of his life (what's left of it) after shit like that.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 12:09:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.



And we've been known to execute a few too.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 12:15:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Society owes him.


Yup. And I don't think either of us say that very often.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 12:36:12 AM EST
That's what happens when you're naive and can't afford good legal help.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 2:47:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By TheTracker:

Originally Posted By GeorgeInNePa:

Originally Posted By TheTracker:
Our jury system has a lot of flaws , but it's better than any other system in the world.

Until some other system is figured out innocent men will go to prison sometimes.


Whatever happened to "Better that 10 guilty men go free, than one innocent man go to prison"?


If you have a better system , I'm all ears


Well, to start, we need a law that makes it a virtual impossibility for one to get out of doing jury duty. The court should pay the jurors a daily rate based off of their last W-2, that way their time is paid fairly. If this were the case, it would be possible for someone to get a true "jury of their peers", not some fat housewife who has all the time in the world, and is angry shes missing opra. I would gladly pay more taxes, and higher court costs, to know I was getting a jury of people that was not the bottom of the barrel.
I could go on for hours, but I think the above is easily do-able, and would be very effective. Also, I think that there should be some kind of punishment for the officers and the DA in cases like this. Crimes should be investigated to their fullest, not just investigated until theres enough evidence to prosecute.

Mike
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 9:27:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By 53vortec:

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Society owes him.

Yup. And I don't think either of us say that very often.

I'm on the cusp/precipice of agreeing with the two of you, but I'd like to know more about the case history before doing so.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 9:35:54 AM EST
a tragedy, reparations are in order big time. I doubt this incident will make anyone claim we should free all the rapists because it's better to let all the guilty ones go instead of jailing an innocent one, but yet that's the logic they use for someone selling meth, making an illegal machine gun, or whatever law they're personally against
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 9:42:51 AM EST
Rape should have a requirement for a much stronger burden of proof than a "victim" saying, "Yup, that's the guy". There should be laws on the books that prohibit rape convictions if that is the bulk of the evidence.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 9:48:10 AM EST
Would it be possible??

Double Jeopardy
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 2:23:12 PM EST

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
Rape should have a requirement for a much stronger burden of proof than a "victim" saying, "Yup, that's the guy". There should be laws on the books that prohibit rape convictions if that is the bulk of the evidence.

Hence my comment earlier re: wanting to know more about the case history before passing judgement.

Did the fuzz lean on him, saying "We've already got the victim saying it was *you* who raped her," and he 'broke' and gave them a confession that he later disavowed?

Who knows, it may *eventually* be in order, but at this moment, I'm not quite ready to string the detectives, prosecutor, etc up from the nearest lamp post.

When we see a "travesty of justice," often times the "victim" contributed to his/her station at least a little bit. Not saying it's the case here, or whether it's right or wrong when it does happen, but just saying it does happen...........
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 2:34:39 PM EST

Originally Posted By AR5000:
Would it be possible??

Double Jeopardy


This applies to the SAME CRIME, not two different crimes.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 2:39:08 PM EST

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....


Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.


Need to lock up the 12 jurors too. They were the ones that found him guilty.
Link Posted: 11/1/2006 5:34:59 PM EST
Review all cases that had the possibility of being overturned with new DNA testing. Do the testing, if at all possible, and see where the chips fall.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 4:27:38 AM EST

Originally Posted By BIKECOP29:

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....

Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.

Need to lock up the 12 jurors too. They were the ones that found him guilty.

Agreed, in principle. But what were they allowed to see/hear?

Still, we need more from the case history before *any* of us can throw stones.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 5:03:18 AM EST

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:
Sue. Sue. Sue.
Millions would not be enough.
Then they need to lock up the cops and the DA that put him there.

These assholes never have to pay if they are wrong.
Time to start locking up the folks that screw this stuff up.


+1000000000
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 5:15:35 AM EST

Originally Posted By hughjafj:
My God, that poor man lost out on his entire life.....

Can a wrongly convicted person sue the hell out of the state? That man should live in luxury for the rest of his life (what's left of it) after shit like that.


Short answer: No. Look up "sovereign immunity." There are very few exceptions to this and limits on the causes of actions that are excepted. However, I have heard the State of Texas giving people in this type of situation some kind of money payment for the hard time.

Link Posted: 11/2/2006 5:20:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By CWS1911:
It's funny how DNA testing did the opposite for OJ.

His ex wifes DNA was all over the Bronco,his DNA was at the scene of the murder.

Funny how this DNA shit works.


Actually, i believe that is actually not the case. Dr. Henry Lee, the world's leading real life forensic scientist actually worked on the case and wrote about the many, many screw ups in the forensic evidence by the LAPD that would have definitively shown OJ to be either innocent or guilty. There was no blood in his Bronco, and his DNA which was found at the scene of the murder was very, very suspicious. One example being the glove, with it's very small amount of blood still being wet when found 8 hours after being allegedly dropped, and no blood on the grass or dried leaves it was found. And how did the glove get there in the first place? Why did the LAPD nurse draw 8 milliliters of a blood from OJ on July 13th when testing consumed only 6.5?

I personally believed like 99% of America that OJ was guilty until I read Dr. Lee's book "cracking cases" and heard the facts from the horse's mouth.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 5:48:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By thelastgunslinger:
Rape should have a requirement for a much stronger burden of proof than a "victim" saying, "Yup, that's the guy". There should be laws on the books that prohibit rape convictions if that is the bulk of the evidence.



BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.....


Now you're dreaming.

In Colorado the courts and the legislature have bent over backwards so that nothing but a bald allegation is enough.

Indeed, In Colorado a Prosecutor MUST (in almost every case) go forward if he/she has a complaining victim who is willing to testify.

MOST forensic evidence in sex assault cases is complete hogswalup and could as easily be explained by consensual sex, a yeast infection or other things.....

The rules of evidence have been changed to allow more hearsay and other questionable (prior acts, unsubstantiated hearsay by a child) evidence in to court while the criminal defendant is often precluded from introducing evidence regarding the accuser.

Now, I'm not saying that we should go back to the old days when you could successfully defend against a charge of rape by introducing evidence that the victim is a slut.

That noted, should we, as a society, change the rules of evidence, procedure, and the confrontation clause to expedite conviction because a crime is particularly abhorrent or because it is politically expedient?

The Kicker....if you are found guilty of sex assault in Colorado you get 1 year to life in prison or life time probation/parole AND life time registration as a sex offender and "treatment."

I have no sympathy for violators.

But some people are wise to how the system works. They are ruthless. They are vengeful. They are dishonest.

This system makes their life's-work easier.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 6:12:59 AM EST

Originally Posted By wise_jake:

Originally Posted By BIKECOP29:

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....

Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.

Need to lock up the 12 jurors too. They were the ones that found him guilty.

Agreed, in principle. But what were they allowed to see/hear?

Still, we need more from the case history before *any* of us can throw stones.


Not on ARFCOM you don’t. Jumping to uninformed conclusions is a favorite pastime here. Second only to rebelling against authority.

So, what solutions do we have to this problem? Disregard eye witness /victim testimony because people make mistakes?

Today, we have all that fancy CSI stuff. DNA, etc..etc.. We didn't have that 25 years ago. The best we could do was get a matching blood type from evidence taken from the victim. That, coupled with a positive ID from the victim and a bit of circumstantial evidence was enough to get a conviction from a jury of your peers.

The system we live under says that you have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The cops and the DA gather the evidence, and put it in front of a jury who decides guilt or innocence.
The DA and the cops didn't decide this man's fate and judge him guilty. 12 civilians did.

The system isn't perfect. Shit happens.
Feel free to look around the planet and find a better system. Until you find one, we'll just have to keep working with the one we have.
For what it's worth, without a doubt, there are far more guilty people set free, than innocent people convicted. And those innocents who get wrongly caught in the system are rare. As it should be.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 6:27:27 AM EST

Originally Posted By Tin_Star:

Originally Posted By wise_jake:

Originally Posted By BIKECOP29:

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....

Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.

Need to lock up the 12 jurors too. They were the ones that found him guilty.

Agreed, in principle. But what were they allowed to see/hear?

Still, we need more from the case history before *any* of us can throw stones.


Not on ARFCOM you don’t. Jumping to uninformed conclusions is a favorite pastime here. Second only to rebelling against authority.

So, what solutions do we have to this problem? Disregard eye witness /victim testimony because people make mistakes?

Today, we have all that fancy CSI stuff. DNA, etc..etc.. We didn't have that 25 years ago. The best we could do was get a matching blood type from evidence taken from the victim. That, coupled with a positive ID from the victim and a bit of circumstantial evidence was enough to get a conviction from a jury of your peers.

The system we live under says that you have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The cops and the DA gather the evidence, and put it in front of a jury who decides guilt or innocence.
The DA and the cops didn't decide this man's fate and judge him guilty. 12 civilians did.

The system isn't perfect. Shit happens.
Feel free to look around the planet and find a better system. Until you find one, we'll just have to keep working with the one we have.
For what it's worth, without a doubt, there are far more guilty people set free, than innocent people convicted. And those innocents who get wrongly caught in the system are rare. As it should be.


You make a good point.

Our system seem awful until you take the time to do some comparisons.

Sounds like a very flawed line up from the OP, that noted...

There are no winners in this case.
Link Posted: 11/2/2006 7:25:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By Tin_Star:

Originally Posted By wise_jake:

Originally Posted By BIKECOP29:

Originally Posted By KangarooAR-15A3:

Originally Posted By Mojo_Jojo:
I wonder how the victim can live with herself after apparently sending the wrong guy to prison for 25 years....

Lock her up with the cops and the DA.
5 years would do the trick.

Need to lock up the 12 jurors too. They were the ones that found him guilty.

Agreed, in principle. But what were they allowed to see/hear?

Still, we need more from the case history before *any* of us can throw stones.

Not on ARFCOM you don’t. Jumping to uninformed conclusions is a favorite pastime here. Second only to rebelling against authority.

So, what solutions do we have to this problem? Disregard eye witness /victim testimony because people make mistakes?

Today, we have all that fancy CSI stuff. DNA, etc..etc.. We didn't have that 25 years ago. The best we could do was get a matching blood type from evidence taken from the victim. That, coupled with a positive ID from the victim and a bit of circumstantial evidence was enough to get a conviction from a jury of your peers.

The system we live under says that you have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The cops and the DA gather the evidence, and put it in front of a jury who decides guilt or innocence.
The DA and the cops didn't decide this man's fate and judge him guilty. 12 civilians did.

It would be nicer if you had said:
"The cops and the DA gather the evidence, and put it *all* in front of a jury who decides guilt or innocence."

On the one hand, prosecutors can and sometimes [often?] will ignore evidence that does not fit the case they are trying to make.

On the other hand, that's not their job. That's the def atty's job.

On the other hand (hey, where did this other hand come from?!? guess I'll need to quit swimming in the pond by the nuclear reactor), the defense doesn't have the [in some cases, virtually-unlimited] resources of the state in order to counter the story/case the prosecutor *does* tell.

The system isn't perfect. Shit happens.
Feel free to look around the planet and find a better system. Until you find one, we'll just have to keep working with the one we have.
For what it's worth, without a doubt, there are far more guilty people set free, than innocent people convicted. And those innocents who get wrongly caught in the system are rare. As it should be.

Agreed. Read my comment at the top of the page.
Top Top