That's the title of an OpEd by State Senator Rodney Ellis, Barry Scheck, and Cory Session. It appeared in the Saturday edition of the Dallas Morning News. LINK Cory Session is the brother of Timothy Cole; Barry Scheck, Co-Director of the Innocence Project. Here's an extended excerpt of this must-read:
When Gov. Rick Perry pardoned Timothy Cole earlier this month, it ended the Cole family’s long fight to clear his name. It is a heartbreaking case — and a stark reminder that we need to do more to ensure that our criminal justice system relies on solid evidence.
In Tim Cole’s case, solid science came too late. Perry was right to pardon him, but he would do well to learn from this case and make sure it doesn’t happen to anyone else.
One such person might be Hank Skinner, who is set to be executed March 24. Skinner has requested DNA testing for 10 years, and there is no good reason for state officials to continue blocking these efforts.
We don’t know whether Hank Skinner is guilty or innocent. But we know the governor has the power to step in and delay the execution so DNA testing can be done to resolve this case once and for all — before Skinner is executed.
Cole’s pardon and Skinner’s execution date come as questions continue to grow about the case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his children. At Willingham’s trial, forensic experts testified that evidence showed the fire was intentionally set. Several independent reviews — including one that was sent to Perry just hours before he failed to stop Willingham’s execution — have shown that the forensic science used in the case was invalid and that the analysts should have known that at the time.
Nearly four years ago, the Innocence Project asked the Texas Forensic Science Commission to review the cases of Willingham and another man, who was exonerated and pardoned by Perry because of faulty arson evidence. The Forensic Science Commission was asked whether the arson analysis in these cases was flawed, if other cases across the state might have been based on the same kind of faulty forensic analysis, and what improvements could prevent this from happening in other cases.
We believe it’s likely that there are other people in Texas prisons for arson convictions based on faulty forensic analysis. Unfortunately, politics interfered with the commission’s independent scientific work several months ago, when Perry replaced several commissioners. Days before the commission was to review the Willingham case, the new chairman canceled the meeting and has spent the past six months working on procedural issues.
Science proved Timothy Cole’s innocence 10 years too late. It threw Cameron Todd Willingham’s case into doubt several years too late. And it will soon be too late for science to definitively resolve Hank Skinner’s case before he is executed.
These cases remind us that much work remains to be done to ensure the integrity of Texas’ criminal justice system.
Sunday's Amarillo Globe-News carried a column by Amarillo attorney Matthew Wright, "DNA testing would resolve doubt in convicted killer's guilt."
Henry "Hank" Skinner is scheduled to be executed on March 24 for the murder of his girlfriend Twila Busby and her two teenage sons. The crime itself was horrible, so horrible that it is easy to see why most Texans continue to support the death penalty in appropriate cases.
The facts are so horrible that decent people cringe whenever they are discussed.
Hank Skinner and his supporters argue that he is innocent of the murders. They admit that he was present at the house that horrible night, but they claim that he was too intoxicated - on vodka and codeine - to have the strength or presence of mind necessary to commit the heinous acts. They say someone else - possibly, Twila's uncle, who has since died - actually committed the horrible acts.
More to the point, Hank Skinner and his supporters claim that the Gray County District Attorney's Office has possession of a rape kit, skin from the victim's fingernails, a windbreaker, and two weapons from the crime scene that were never tested for DNA. They claim that testing on those items would prove, once and for all, who committed the murders.
At the time of his original trial, Hank Skinner's controversial attorney decided not to test those items. (Skinner's trial attorney had previously prosecuted his client twice. Then he was removed from his office because of a scandal).
In 2000, the state agreed to test some of the evidence, expecting it to disprove Skinner's claims. But that didn't happen; a hair found clutched in the victim's hand came, not from Skinner, but from one of the victim's relatives. So far, the courts have ruled against Skinner's request to have the rest of the evidence tested. At the risk of oversimplification, the courts say they won't second-guess the questionable attorney's decision. The case has garnered a lot of attention recently because of the impending execution date, but Skinner and his supporters have been fighting to have those tests for more than a decade.
And:
That's why I encourage all responsible state officials to "take the high road" and order the DNA tests, then publish the results. That would show confidence in the outcome of the original trial. Those who believe Skinner is guilty don't believe they have anything to lose from the results, but they have much to gain.
I am troubled by the recurring suggestion that Texans are bloodthirsty and care nothing about innocence. Most people who support the death penalty believe it is the appropriate and moral punishment for someone who commits a heinous murder. No one believes that efficiency, finality, deterrence, or closure is so important that we should risk executing an innocent person.
Earlier coverage of the case begins with this post.
Comments