Some Good News in the Cory Maye Case

Last word on the Cory Maye case came late last summer, when the trial judge threw out Maye's death sentence due to ineffective assistance of counsel, and ordered a new sentencing trial. I heard from Cory's defense team earlier tonight that the DA's office has now said it will no longer pursue the death penalty.

That means Cory will now start his appeals process with the death penalty off the table. That's good news. But he'll still likely be re-sentenced to life in prison. So it's not great news.

My original reason report on Maye here .

Comments

[Pregnant Lesbian Sex]

Absolutely ourageous. This poor man will spend the rest of his life in prison for defending his home.

But he\'s been already convicted. Anyone know the legal process on this? Does he have a chance of getting a new trial and having the sentence reversed?

[[e-mail]]

This isn't good news. Well, kind of.

Now that he isn't going to get executed, his chances on appeal just dropped immensely.

He will probably spend the rest of his life in jail now.

[kwais]

What kind of shit bag prosecutes this man?

What kind of worthless retarded jury convicts in such a case? What kind of worthless America hating communists convict a man for defending his own home?

God this angers me. I would like to meet one of the jurors.

[Andrew]

It's good that the death penalty is off the table, but unfortunately this will likely do away with whatever urgency or "push" there was to see his release anytime in the near future.

[thoreau]

Despite the difficult prospects for further progress, kudos to Radley Balko for his reporting on this!

Besides, where there is life there is hope. At least the state no longer has the option of killing Cory Maye to try to make the whole matter go away.

[Ron Hardin]

You're fighting the goober wall of silence.

[d]

thoreau: Not only kudos to Radley for reporting this story, I think we can, in large part, credit his work with Cory Maye's removal from death row.

Radley: keep shining that light, brother!

[tlxtftrf]

Kwais

What kind of worthless retarded jury convicts in such a case? What kind of worthless America hating communists convict a man for defending his own home?

The twelve white jurors in the case convicting a black man in the Southern US with questionable evidence (its not that surprising in Deliverance country is it).

What kind of shit bag prosecutes this man?

The prosecutor from the down who is probably friends with the sheriff who's son was shot while breaking into Maye's house

[The Wine Commonsewer]

Radley has done a phenomenal job of bringing this case to the public.

As to the shitbag prosecutor? In this case it is more critical because a man's life is at stake, but it happens all the time on every level of the judicial system, civil and criminal. It isn't limited to Deliverance Country, it's just as bad or worse in upscale, forward thinking, progressive, suburbia as it is in the cities or the deep south.

The judicial system in this country is only loosely connected to the concept of meaningful justice.

[Radley Balko]

Just for the record, there were ten white men and two black women on the jury.

See my interview with one of the black women here.

[LarryA]

See my interview with one of the black women here.

Wow. Just wow. Everyone go read this.

That she even made it onto the jury, I think, is yet another data point in support of the argument that Rhonda Cooper provided no real representation for Cory Maye at all.

I'd add that a chemically impared person on a jury also indicates that the judge failed as well.

[thoreau]

On second thought, maybe Cory Maye should be convicted for drug smuggling (I oppose drug prohibition but believe the law must be enforced).

[heh2k]

I think it's very important that you posted what that juror said. It's absolutely insane. *shakes head*

[thoreau]

Who the hell posted as me at 7:40 pm?

[tarran]

thoreau

There seems to be some wrecker going through posting as regulars or semi-regulars whom he disagrees with at that time. He, and I'm pretty confident that it's a he, posted on several threads about that time.

It's always a shame to see someone who is obviously unarmed try to start a battle of wits.

[Jack C Jaxson 3rd]

I hope people don't forget about him just because he has been "spared" death. I think I might try the penpal thing.

[Not thoreau]

it wasn't me

[kwais]

I just read the interview of the juror lady. I wonder, wouldn't that alone be grounds for an appeal?

Two reasons:

- Miss representation. His lawyer was incompetent.

- Miss representation, the Judge was incompetent for letting the juror serve.

[thoreau]

It's always a shame to see someone who is obviously unarmed try to start a battle of wits.

tarran wins the thread.

[thoreau]

If we adopt the position that personal autonomy is a matter of one having ownership over himself, does that mean that one has a right to sell himself into slavery?

[kwais]

Another possible reason: her lawyer was a nigger!

[omar]

Radley,

Your reporting is getting better every day. You really are at the forefront (maybe the #1 journalist now) of where libertarians should (IMHO) be concentrating their efforts. Keep it up friend; you are making waves.

[thoreau]

How can we defend enforcement of good laws if we don't also defend the enforcement of the bad laws?
More importantly, if we are to maintain a working system of government, then there must be some DESIGNATED group or individual who makes the laws; who should it be and who makes that decision?

[the REAL thoreau]

Who the hell is impersonating me? And I'm pretty sure that second post by kwais was an impostor as well.

[the REAL thoreau]

I meant the third post by kwais. The one with the n-word. That's out of character for him, even as sarcasm.

[the REAL thoreau]

And a similarly vile comment has appeared on Unqualified Offerings by somebody claiming to be kwais. The IP address is almost certainly not kwais's.

I've contacted the Hit and Run webmasters.

[the REAL thoreau]

Any conclusions one forms from logic must ultimately be based on faith because a premise may be evaluated through either of the following means:
? The conclusion is based on the premise, which must be validated by validating the premise upon which it is based ad infinitum.
o This is the ideal approach except that we can not perform this analysis since it requires an infinite amount of thought.
? The premise is the conclusion (i.e., an example of circular logic).
o This proves nothing since one cannot use a premise to prove itself.
o This approach is not any better than assuming the premise is true.
? The premise is true for no reason.
o This proves nothing because we simply assume the premise is true.
Clearly, only the first approach can prove the premise except that its use is beyond human comprehension, whereas the other two approaches prove nothing.

[honestly, this one really is t]

I'm signing out of this thread.

Piss off, troll.

[honestly, this one really is t]

If one has ownership over himself, then one has the right to sell himself into slavery ,much like one has the right to sell his land to someone else.

[kwais]

The post with the n- word was not me.

[kwais]

I clicked on the link of the name of my impostor, to see if I got any clues who it was, and 39 pages opened up, all going nowhere.

[Dave W. (the real one)]

Glad to see that Mr. Balko has started policing his threads for impostors. About time.

[Warren]

At least no one wants to be me.

Here's hoping things continue to go Cory's way.

Radley,
You deserve to go to heaven.