The most disturbing part is not even the hypnosis. It’s the state looking at junk science, a garbage identification, no physical evidence, and still saying, “Yeah, let’s keep the death penalty on the table.” That’s not justice. That’s ego with a gavel. If Penn & Teller can explain how the trick was done, maybe Texas should stop pretending it witnessed a miracle.
Between Malcolm Gladwell's season of Revisionist History called "The Alabama Murders," and the most recent season (3) of the "Proof" podcast detailing the misconduct of a certain Michigan Cold Case team, I do not have much faith in our criminal justice system... particularly the apparent vigor some people have to close a case or get a conviction, more so than finding the real facts of the case.
I do not get the people who think it's more important to kill an innocent man than admit they fucked up. It's barbaric. What these idiot always fail to grasp is that this means the real murderer (accomplice?) is still out there, able to do more damage. This is some warped "Check the box so it's over" crap. Everyone involved in this mistake should be not just fired, but arrested for attempted murder. What else do you call it when people pretend procedure is more important than justice?
They will never acknowledge this about memory because it would saw off the branch their religious beliefs sit on. The earliest of the Christian gospels was written at least 40 years after Jesus died. They're the product of the world's most profitable game of Telephone.
I'm reminded of a crack by Gandalf, in "The Lord of the Rings", wherein Frodo, having heard the story of Gollum, snaps, "He deserves to die!". Gandalf looks at him, and says, "And many die who deserve to live. Can you give that to them? If not, then be not so hasty to judgement."
(And, as usual, Gandalf was right - Gollum had yet a part to play.)
Back some 40 years ago I was riding in a car driven by a woman I had been interested in. She had just told me that she wasn't interested in seeing me again when two minutes later we t-boned a car that had skidded into the main road (no one was hurt). I didn't see her or talk to her again for three years or so until she called me up to be a date at her 30th birthday. We started going steady (as it were) for a couple of years until I unceremoniously dumped her. Some nine months later I crawled back to her and she accepted me. During the next several months we happened to go through the same intersection from the same direction and we both stared at each other. Had we gone to court back four years previous, we both would have sworn in court that we had seen the southbound vehicle hit its brakes and skid into the intersection where we, on the main road, were traveling westbound. As we went through that same intersection we could plainly see that there was no way we could have seen the southbound vehicle through a stand of mature trees. We were both prepared to swear in court to we'd seen something we couldn't have seen. That's when I realized how little eyewitness testimony is worth. (BTW, the driver and I will be celebrating our 35th wedding anniversary in November.)
Human memory is shit. Next time you go to a high school reunion, make up a story about something that could have happened but didn't and see how many people you can get to agree with you that it did.
So is there any indication why the "officer hypnotist" was hell bent on getting the witness to finger this guy? I'm assuming he wasn't priming her to ID a Hispanic guy just randomly, so whay did this officer have against the defendent?
And how much could he be sued for?
(It would also be great to have the witness also sue him for emotional distress when she realizes he basically tricked her into blaming an innocent man.)
I’m still stuck on the fact that the actual killer served his sentence and has been released where the guy who, even if the id had been legitimate, would have only been an accomplice, is sitting on death row.
How the hell is that justice?
Even under the theory behind the “law of parties,” they both should have received equal sentences. Punishing the accomplice much more severely makes no sense.
I'd bet a chunk of money rhat the actual killer pled guilty for a lesser sentence. While the innocent guy stubbornly refused to plead guilty and therefore had to be taught a lesson.
The most disturbing part is not even the hypnosis. It’s the state looking at junk science, a garbage identification, no physical evidence, and still saying, “Yeah, let’s keep the death penalty on the table.” That’s not justice. That’s ego with a gavel. If Penn & Teller can explain how the trick was done, maybe Texas should stop pretending it witnessed a miracle.
Between Malcolm Gladwell's season of Revisionist History called "The Alabama Murders," and the most recent season (3) of the "Proof" podcast detailing the misconduct of a certain Michigan Cold Case team, I do not have much faith in our criminal justice system... particularly the apparent vigor some people have to close a case or get a conviction, more so than finding the real facts of the case.
I do not get the people who think it's more important to kill an innocent man than admit they fucked up. It's barbaric. What these idiot always fail to grasp is that this means the real murderer (accomplice?) is still out there, able to do more damage. This is some warped "Check the box so it's over" crap. Everyone involved in this mistake should be not just fired, but arrested for attempted murder. What else do you call it when people pretend procedure is more important than justice?
They will never acknowledge this about memory because it would saw off the branch their religious beliefs sit on. The earliest of the Christian gospels was written at least 40 years after Jesus died. They're the product of the world's most profitable game of Telephone.
And now, Teller's amicus brief:
"
"
Want to see it again?
Texas is so messed up, my brain has trouble taking it all in. Perhaps I need a bs "hypnotist"
I'm reminded of a crack by Gandalf, in "The Lord of the Rings", wherein Frodo, having heard the story of Gollum, snaps, "He deserves to die!". Gandalf looks at him, and says, "And many die who deserve to live. Can you give that to them? If not, then be not so hasty to judgement."
(And, as usual, Gandalf was right - Gollum had yet a part to play.)
Ta, Robyn. The death penalty is an abomination. Its only just application is for one crime: TREASON.
Back some 40 years ago I was riding in a car driven by a woman I had been interested in. She had just told me that she wasn't interested in seeing me again when two minutes later we t-boned a car that had skidded into the main road (no one was hurt). I didn't see her or talk to her again for three years or so until she called me up to be a date at her 30th birthday. We started going steady (as it were) for a couple of years until I unceremoniously dumped her. Some nine months later I crawled back to her and she accepted me. During the next several months we happened to go through the same intersection from the same direction and we both stared at each other. Had we gone to court back four years previous, we both would have sworn in court that we had seen the southbound vehicle hit its brakes and skid into the intersection where we, on the main road, were traveling westbound. As we went through that same intersection we could plainly see that there was no way we could have seen the southbound vehicle through a stand of mature trees. We were both prepared to swear in court to we'd seen something we couldn't have seen. That's when I realized how little eyewitness testimony is worth. (BTW, the driver and I will be celebrating our 35th wedding anniversary in November.)
interesting story - congrats on the 35 year anniversary
This is depressingly familiar.
Human memory is shit. Next time you go to a high school reunion, make up a story about something that could have happened but didn't and see how many people you can get to agree with you that it did.
So is there any indication why the "officer hypnotist" was hell bent on getting the witness to finger this guy? I'm assuming he wasn't priming her to ID a Hispanic guy just randomly, so whay did this officer have against the defendent?
And how much could he be sued for?
(It would also be great to have the witness also sue him for emotional distress when she realizes he basically tricked her into blaming an innocent man.)
They get promotions based on how many cases they can close.
All I can guess
I think this sort of thing happens all the time
Thank you for your continued dedication to covering death row.
"the officer keeps telling her that her memory is like a videotape that she can rewind and fast-forward at will."
This is what Scientologists actually believe.
Memory is far less reliable, and far more easily influenced, than any of us like to believe. It’s a disconcerting thought.
Hoomon memory is not less reliable than I believe. I know its untrustworthy.
effing pig bastards.
I’m still stuck on the fact that the actual killer served his sentence and has been released where the guy who, even if the id had been legitimate, would have only been an accomplice, is sitting on death row.
How the hell is that justice?
Even under the theory behind the “law of parties,” they both should have received equal sentences. Punishing the accomplice much more severely makes no sense.
I'd bet a chunk of money rhat the actual killer pled guilty for a lesser sentence. While the innocent guy stubbornly refused to plead guilty and therefore had to be taught a lesson.
Plus skin color, apparently.