Death Penalty

Judge Overturns 1944 Conviction of Black 14-Year-Old Put to Death in South Carolina

|

George Stinney
South Carolina

George Stinney was 14 years old when he was arrested in Jim Crow South Carolina for allegedly killing two white girls, convicted, and put to death in less than three months in 1944. A judge in South Carolina has vacated Stinney's conviction after a years-long effort by Stinney's family, who says police beat a confession out of the boy. Executioners had to place phone books on the electric chair for Stinney he was so small. WIS in South Carolina reports:

"By not putting the state's case to the test at all, by not cross examining witnesses, not putting up a defense at all, not giving a closing argument, George was never afforded effective council and as a result his Sixth Amendment rights were violated," [Steven] McKenzie said. 

Judge [Carmen] Mullen also stated clearly that this ruling does not necessarily open the door for other long and completed cases to be revisited. The relatives of the two young girls that were murdered were not happy about the news. Attorneys say at this point they don't believe the true murderer will ever be caught.

It should never be judged better to have someone in jail for a crime he didn't do than to have no one at all in jail for that crime.

South Carolina executed at least 278 people between 1900 and 1972. About 4,367 people were executed by electric chair in the U.S. since 1900, and more than 5,000 people were hanged in the U.S. in the 19th century. The State executed more than 8,000 people between 1900 and 2002, about half of them black.

Related: Judge overturns 1996 conviction of 18-year-old ethnic minority put to death in China

NEXT: "North Korea-based thriller with Gore Verbinski and Steve Carell canceled"

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. THERE ARE NO COMMENTS

    Nor words, really.

  2. When the relatives of the white victim are despondent about the exoneration of an innocent black kid who was sacrificed to satisfy the mob, that is racism.

    That’s not a microaggression.

    1. Did no one in their family ever realize just what had gone on with that sham?

      How did they get so convinced-throughout the last 70 years!-that the kid did it? It’s not like they had a lot of evidence to point to.

      1. It’s like religion. Admitting you’ve been wrong about something so fundamental to your identity isn’t easy.

        1. It’s like religion

          Yeah, not really.

      2. Some of Mary Phagan’s relatives still Leo Frank did it but oddly enough her sister-in-law Mary Phagan (yes, on marriage that became her name) did think he was innocent.

        1. Leo Frank was guilty as hell and got exactly what he deserved.

      3. How did they get so convinced-throughout the last 70 years!-that the kid did it?

        Maybe because Stinney was convicted in a court of law?

    2. When the relatives of the white victim are despondent about the exoneration of an innocent black kid who was sacrificed to satisfy the mob, that is racism.

      Well if they think he’s guilty then it isn’t racism?

      1. If they think he’s guilty then they’re just fools.

        1. Why? The conviction was overturned on procedural grounds. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t the killer.

          1. And how would they know he was? All they know is that a 14 year old kid confessed, most likely under duress, and that his prosecution was rammed thru the system.

            There was no physical evidence.

            1. There was no physical exculpatory evidence.

              I’m not saying the kid did do it or didn’t do it. And I certainly won’t defend the violations of his due process in getting the conviction. All we know here is that there were severe issues with the procedural system here (although the “beaten into a confession” may have been less about beating out a confession for a ghastly crime that I’m sure the investigators would like to convict the appropriate person for and more about punishing someone depraved enough to committ such an act, assuming they genuinely believed in the accused’s guilt, although that could be racist-tainted judgement)

              1. There was no physical evidence connecting him to the crime.

                “Prove you didn’t do it” is a pretty low bar for the prosecution.

                1. Obviously, burden of proof is on the prosecutor. For legal purposes, the case having been vacated doesn’t function as an exoneration. It’s only admission that there was insufficient allowable evidence to convict. It makes no claims as to the innocence.

                  I’ll readily admit to being unable to place myself into the mind of a 1944 SC police interrogator. I realize the racist sentiments around then are something beyond my own ken. But I gotta think a heinous double murder of two young girls would be something that even the most avowed racist would want the actual perpetrator to suffer for rather than just picking on the local uppity 14 year old colored boy.

                  1. Why can’t you imagine them pinning a conviction on an innocent? They still do it to this day. Martha Coakley is still alive for God’s sake.

                    1. The difference, of course, is that in this case someone did murder the little girls; while Coakley’s prosecution was of an entirely imaginary criminal act.

                    1. THIS re Sudden’s comment. Threading has screwed it all up

                  2. But I gotta think a heinous double murder of two young girls would be something that even the most avowed racist would want the actual perpetrator to suffer for rather than just picking on the local uppity 14 year old colored boy.

                    Are you new here? have you missed the *years* of police misconduct stories. The reports of prosecutorial misconduct – actively *hiding* exculpatory evidence from defendants to protect their case?

                    its quite believable that a couple of 1944 detectives grabbed the first person they could pin this on in order to give their superiors a victory in the press. Just because someone is racist/hates another race doesn’t mean that they give a damn about others of their own.

                  3. I think you are kidding yourself. How many examples does it take of prosecutors being willing to prosecute and convict a person they actually know is innocent while at the same time letting actual perpetrators go free does it take? How much withholding of evidence and the rest does it take?

                  4. Keerist in a bucket you are naive. For starters, that kind of deep blind racism doesn’t give a holy rat’s ass about justice except as it keeps the nigras in line. Secondly, the article makes it pretty clear that there’s a good chance the real killer was one of the white elite. Of course the white police will protect any such slanders by finding a black scapegoat and rushing through a trial and execution; even if the white elite were somehow involved, letting word of that get out would disrupt society, and that’s the absolute worst thing possible, far more so than some 14 year old no good nigra.

                    1. You seriously fail at resisting confirmation bias and/or reading comprehension.

                    2. Secondly, the article makes it pretty clear that there’s a good chance the real killer was one of the white elite

                      Neither the reason piece nor the linked article mention anything about the alleged elite white that was suspected. The only mention I’ve heard of that is from George Freirson, a local activist who never provides a name of the alleged perp and only provides heresay evidence in support of that proposition (i.e., he heard from a member of that family that this man made a deathbed confession). I’m not trying to impugn Frierson’s motives here, and in fact I commend him for getting this case brought up for a new hearing. But let’s not pretend he has presented anything that would merit conviction in criminal court of the alleged perp either.

                    3. And while I certainly won’t pretend like South Carolina in 1944 wasn’t absolutely teeming with racists, I still maintain that the gruesome beating death of two small girls would be so abhorrent to the investigators that they’d want to get the actual perp. I don’t mean that to be support of Stinney’s guilt. In fact, I realize that given the racism of the day, the investigators may have believed Stinney responsible solely on account of his blackness (even while blacks were not so disproportionately represented in violent crime stats back then as they are in the post Great Society dystopia that has ravaged the black family unit). And nor do I hold any misgivings about the moral fortitude of police (though I sometimes wonder if that culture is worse these days than it was back in the day). I simply state that witnessing and 11 year old and 8 year old girl bluldgeoned to death, even the most heartless among us would seek justice. In light of that, it would not surprise me if these investigating police believed Stinney (the last known person to have seen the girls alive, mind you) was actually the killer.

                    4. You are naive and ignorant as hell if you can’t recognize that to people in power, the absolute top priority is remaining in power. If anything, even a whiff of an idea that one of the elite might be implicated would induce a panic reaction to shut down that thinking as fast as possible, and a 14 year old black kid would be a fine ticket.

                      If you actually cannot imagine that, then you are willfully blind. There are examples from the dawn of time to today. Remember Hilary’s “What difference, at this point, does it make?” Exactly the same panic that someone would uncover something that would threaten the elite’s reputation. Everything else pales in comparison.

                    5. I’m not sure what power or elite patriarch you imagine living in and terrorizing pre-pubescent girls in a small working-class and rural 1944 SC podunk lumber town, but you’re welcome to take the word of a single self-described activist without any other corroboration of said hearsay for the past 70 years. It don’t phase me.

                      And I’m not saying the kid was guilty either. I’m playing agnostic here. It appears there was perhaps enough doubt about the procedural due process to merit the judge’s order to vacate (although I’d be interested to read the decision and what alleged due process violations occurred seeing as this was the pre Warren court).

                      I just don’t buy this narrative on its face that the investigators in this case were entirely callous and bloodthirsty racists here just trying to use the brutal beating deaths of two girls by some unknown well-to-do local as pretext to kill some 14 year old negro boy.

                    6. I just don’t buy this narrative on its face that the investigators in this case were entirely callous and bloodthirsty racists here just trying to use the brutal beating deaths of two girls by some unknown well-to-do local as pretext to kill some 14 year old negro boy.

                      Who implied that? The implication is not that they wanted to kill a 14 year old black boy, just that it was more convenient to scapegoat a negro for the crime.

                  5. I gotta think a heinous double murder of two young girls would be something that even the most avowed racist would want the actual perpetrator to suffer

                    Conversely, it may be better to present the family with a perpetrator to punish instead of leaving it unsolved. Which is also the sort of bias that causes the brain to filter out dissonant evidence.

            2. Innocent people do get convicted and have been executed. South Carolina was a racist as hell in 1944.

              That said, they believed Stinney committed the murders. No one in that community or in the justice system wanted to let the “real killer” walk free nor would they want to execute an innocent 14 year old. The prosecution did not present physical evidence or other witnesses because they didn’t need it. We don’t know that it didn’t exist at the time.

              The conviction was vacated based on a 21st Century Judge’s determination that Stinney’s lawyer didn’t do a good enough job defending him. There is no suggestion of the suppression or existence of exculpatory evidence or witnesses

              1. When the mob wants blood, the prosecutors deliver, real or not.

                1. Problem is if there was any physical proving his guilt or innocence it doesn’t exist anymore, was probably not collected by the cops, if they did then the cops probably did not have the expertise or technology to properly analysis it.

                  And they probably felt the point was moot once Stinney supposedly confessed. And since his confession was not recorded we have no idea what exactly he confessed to or have any way to corroborate what he said.

                  1. The police claim he led them to the weapon.

                    1. If true that is pretty damning. How do we know that they aren’t lying or whatever they found really was the murder weapon?

                    2. We don’t due to Stinney’s incompetent defense, which is why the case was overturned.

                2. When the mob wants blood, the prosecutors deliver, real or not

                  In this case, there is much less evidence that the prosecutors bowed to the whims of the mob than there is that the public defender for Stinney, who was running for office at the time, provided inadequate (and disbarment-worthy) legal counsel because he didn’t want his effective defense of Stinney to cost him an election.

            3. All they know is that a 14 year old kid confessed, most likely under duress, and that his prosecution was rammed thru the system.

              No, that’s all you know because you just read about a blog post about the case.

              1. Stinney’s family reportedly “always believed” Stinney’s confession was coerced. Everybody’s mom thinks their boy is innocent.

          2. This is what I kept thinking.

            Obviously, the kid got screwed on any chance of mounting an effective defense and even guilty as sin defendents deserve as much. But having not researched the case to any degree, all this article shows are denials of due process. Never is any exculpatory evidence presented. Such evidence may exist, but the article here makes no mention.

            1. Addendum:

              I’ve also searched around the interwebs looking for the case facts in this instance. The best I could find is the portion halfway down this page.

              It appears that the confession that the investigators allegedly received from Stinney reads much less like a confession “beaten out of his” and far more like a justification:

              Prosecutor Frank McLeod introduced Stinney’s statements of March 25 into evidence. In his initial statement to Deputy Sheriff Newman, Stinney explained that he was near his own home outside Alcolu when the oldest girl came along and asked him where she could pick some flowers. As he attempted to show the girls where the flowers grew, he said, the younger girl accidentally fell into a ditch. As he tried to help Mary Emma, both girls suddenly attacked him. Stinney admitted to hitting the girls with the railroad spike but claimed he did so in self-defense.

              Of course, a second confession was later gained, one that has more appearance of being beaten out of the defendent. Obviously, the confessions in both events are “he said, he said”, but assuming that the inital confession was freely given, there is considerable reason to believe that Stinney may not be the marytr that he seems merely because he was a young black kid executed in 1944 SC.

              1. Apparently contemporaries were upset about his age and the speed of the trial rather than belief in his innocence.

                1. NO SHIT!

                  Call me old-fasaioned but I think a 14 y/o boy killing 2 younger girls in cold blood deserves to die. I’d prefer it be extra-judicial but sometimes the State surprises you and actually “does the right thing”.

    3. Were they despondent? The article says they were not happy about the news. There are a lot of reasons why that might be true.

      1. True enough

      2. The statement about the victims’ families is very brief, but I didn’t interpret it to mean they are despondent because he’s been exonerated.

        “Attorneys say at this point they don’t believe the true murderer will ever be caught.”

        Sounds to me like they are despondent because they accept the exoneration and believe the true murderer got away with it.

        1. Well, evidently at least some of the family members do believe he did it.

          http://www.theguardian.com/the…..t-innocent

    4. that’s not racism – they’re not upset that a *black* kid is exonerated, they’re upset that the guy they’ve invested so much time and effort in *believing* he was the killer is freed.

      For them this means either their children’s killer has had his name cleared or gotten clean away with it for 70 years.

      Shit like that is why prosecutors and judges keep holding to the ‘closure’ line of bullshit when it comes to opening up old cases.

  3. My heart literally hurts. Pangs. Why does the legal world involve the most dead-hearted and ethically-challenged types? Why doesn’t the legal world pull kind-hearted, ethical, and sledgehammer-rational types? Because the legal system in total is at its core inhumane, distracted, unaffected by human suffering, and primarily about reward?

    1. For the same reason DAs are concerned more with conviction rates than with justice dealt. Because politics infects everything within polite society, and bowing to the pressure exerted by the mob is just politicking.

    2. I guess the cyborg proof medicine cabinet hasn’t made it out of the design phase.

    3. I guess the cyborg proof medicine cabinet hasn’t made it out of the design phase.

    4. Because decent and humane people are not drawn to positions that give them authority over others.

    5. Why does the legal world involve the most dead-hearted and ethically-challenged types?

      I’ll say that that is often times a feature, not a bug. And a desirable feature at that.

      Many crimes are so heinous and brutal that it’s good to have people whose hearts are dead (largely from having seen too many of such cases) because they can remove the emotional elements that may cause procedural malpractice that lead to innocent by unsympathetic and inherently conspicuous people being wrongly convicted.

      1. But prosecutors send people to prison for years over ‘crimes’ that will never be heinous and brutal…, Sudden.

        Many poverty stricken types deep in the hills who MAKE their OWN fuckin drugs off a baggy of crank and heat are NOT horrible human beings. People who die on heroine are NOT horrible human beings. People who fuck their fingers up on crack are NOT horrible human beings…

        Horrible human beings are those who imprison the weak. Destroy whole cultures. Desire to own the entirety of humanity through regulation, torture, religion, and prison…

  4. The teen was so small he had to sit on a phone book to be executed by the chair.

    1. That sentence pulled me in and punched me in the face.

      Sad.

    2. Did they send for a NYC, LA or Chicago phone book? There sure as hell wasn’t a South Carolina phone book much thicker than an inch(if that) in 1944. Wikipedia says he sat on a Bible, citing a book from 2007.

      The execution of George Stinney was carried out by Old Sparky at Central Correctional Institution in Columbia, on June 16, 1944. At 7:30 p.m., Stinney walked to the execution chamber with a Bible under his arm, which he later used as a booster seat in the electric chair.[7]

  5. You wanna posthumously deal with the pricks who wronged this lad while you’re at it?

    1. That won’t happen. They won’t cross the brotherhood of prosecutors.

  6. So the Interview is totally dead: http://variety.com/2014/film/n…..201382167/

    And the State Department is saying that they have proof that North Korea was behind the hacks.

    1. Did they use both of their TRS-80 Color Computers?

      I know a white-hat hacker whose opinion is that this is a disgrutled Sony Employee.

      1. that this is a disgrutled Sony Employee.

        Well he could have been in league with the Norks…

  7. From wiki:

    George Frierson stated in interviews that “…there has been a person that has been named as being the culprit, who is now deceased. And it was said by the family that there was a deathbed confession.” Frierson said that the rumored culprit came from a well-known, prominent white family. A member, or members of that family, had served on the initial coroner’s inquest jury which had recommended that Stinney be prosecuted

    This was from 2 years ago, I wonder what happened to that evidence?

  8. My comment here is, arguably, worthless…. but I have read about cops “interrogating” suspects, over periods of days, and extracting confessions. Perhaps it was an old H. L. Mencken column, I can’t remember. But it left me with the realization that one hell of a lot of people, black and white, have been executed back in the first half of the 20th century at least, because of brutal interrogations that led to convictions.

    1. It’s easier and more fun than actually solving a crime.

      1. And apparently carries no consequences for the better part of seven decades.

    2. Brutal interrogations by the police is pretty much standard operating procedure anywhere outside of the Anglosphere.

  9. I’m sure that George is totally excited by this news.

  10. I don’t see any evidence that he didn’t actually commit the murders.

    1. True, problem is there doesn’t seem to much evidence that he did do it beyond talking to the girls before they disappeared and supposedly confessing.

      1. His family claims that his confession was coerced. If there’s any evidence supporting this claim I haven’t seen it.

        The argument that the defence counsel didn’t adequately defend him seems pretty strage considering that his client had already confessed to committing the crime!

        Under those circumstances, what the hell kind of defence can you reasonably make? I’m surprised he didn’t just enter a guilty plea and call it a day.

        1. Obviously his supposed confession is what really did him in.

          Apparently no record was made of the confession which is what it difficult to prove whether it was coerced or not.

        2. Except, according to the wiki link:

          The police did not make written records of Stinney’s purported confession, and at trial, Stinney denied confessing to the crime.

          I’d say that’s reasonable doubt, especially absent no other evidence.

          1. It wasn’t reasonable doubt to the jury that heard the case.

            1. Right… That’s of course why it is said that KKK stood for “Koons, Kikes, and Katholics…”

              1. Weird. I heard it stands for Ku Klux Klan.

    2. Stinney likely did kill those girls. The conviction was vacated on 6th Amendment grounds that he had shitty legal representation. There is no evidence exonerating him or pointing to another individual as the real killer.

      1. There’s no evidence for conviction outside of a probable forced confession that was denied by the defendant in court. So how do you come up with probably did?

        1. Nothing but circumstance and a confession could get you convicted today.

    3. Jeeze, I don’t see any evidence that you didn’t either. Hmmm, pretty dang suspicious.

  11. I’ve read that one of things contributing to Southern lynch mobs was distrust of the police and courts. They were so incompetent that many verdicts would be overturned on procedural grounds so the mobs would lynch the suspects to prevent that from occurring.

    1. Or corruption. Leo Frank had the best legal representation and a well-scrutinized fair trial before being convicted of the murder of Mary Phagan and sentenced to death. The Governor who commuted Frank’s sentence to life in prison was the law partner of the lead defense attorney.That is why he was lynched openly and with no attempt by the perpetrators (some quite prominent) to conceal their identity.

      1. the law partner of the lead defense attorney.

        That and the belief that he was using his Yankee Jew Money to get away with murder.

        1. Yankee…yes. There was no partgicular hostility toward Jew in the South at that time. American anti-semitism was more of a Yankee thing. For example: there were 4 Jews on the grand jury that indicted Leo Frank.

          1. Right… That is, of course, why it is said that KKK stood for “Koons, Kikes, and Katholics…”

            1. The states with the largest KKK membership were Indiana and Pennsylvania.
              They got all fired up after The Birth of a Nation came out, started some Klaverns, looked around and realized they were kinda short on Black people up there in Yankee-land.

  12. Day late and a dollar short dont ya think? The dude is DEAD so what difference does it really make?

    http://www.AnonBay.tk

    1. Hillary-bot nails it.

  13. Death Penalty for the win. Yay.

  14. It should never be judged better to have someone in jail for a crime he didn’t do than to have no one at all in jail for that crime.

    profound

  15. Attorneys say at this point they don’t believe the true murderer will ever be caught.

    Gee, ya think? I mean its only been 70 years. What’s the standard on solving a murder – if you don’t have a strong suspect in the first 48 years you aren’t going to solve the case?

    And what does this do for the “no ‘provably’ innocent people have been executed” crowd? Though I have to wonder how the judge was able to sort through the ‘evidence’ of police misconduct from 70 years in the future. This seems like one of those ‘eh, he’s already dead and this won’t change anything but makes the family happy (and good PR)’ moves.

    1. Stinney is far from ‘provably innocent’. The verdict was overturned because he didn’t receive a fair trial (hard to see how he could in two hours), not because of police misconduct.

    2. And what does this do for the “no ‘provably’ innocent people have been executed” crowd?

      Is he “provably innocent”? His conviction was overturned because he didn’t receive a fair trial not because they have proof his confession was coerced or have exculpatory evidence.

  16. I’m not sure what to make of this other than to conclude South Carolina averaged about 4 judicial executions a year between 1900-72. FWIW, SC was majority Black up to the 1930s.

    South Carolina executed at least 278 people between 1900 and 1972. About 4,367 people were executed by electric chair in the U.S. since 1900, and more than 5,000 people were hanged in the U.S. in the 19th century. The State executed more than 8,000 people between 1900 and 2002, about half of them black.

    1. + 3/5ths

    2. Considering that blacks commit basically half the murders in the country, shouldn’t that be expected?

      1. Considering that blacks commit basically half the murders in the country, shouldn’t that be expected?

        Well, if I remember my Thomas Sowell correctly, no. That statistic is a fairly recent development stemming from the movement of rural Southern Blacks into the urban centers of the north circa 1930s but really picking up speed later and then having the drug war cranking it up to overdrive from the late 70s early 80s on.

        It would be interesting to see how the 8,000 are spread across the years.

        1. OTOH you’d expect the racial disparity in capital offense rate to be larger than the murder disparity absent some mitigating factors e.g. crazy-ass-head-in-freezer serial killing seems mostly a white thing.

          1. That’s a good point. I would assume criminals who commit murder(s) while committing another felony (e.g. armed robbery, carjacking, etc.) would have a greater chance of being sentenced to death. And when looking at those murder stats, it is mostly Black and Hispanic criminals.

          2. Not necessarily. A few things to keep in mind. When we’re talking about South Carolina, especially in the 1900-1972 period, I’d think the D.A. seeks capital punishment in most homocide cases. Head-in-a-freezer as a mitigating circumstance might cross the heinous threshold needed for the Contra Costa DA to seek death. A lot of states in the Deep South, I imagine death was sought in most murder cases.

            Also, whites, due to economic factors, are likely to have better legal defense broadly. That better legal defense also leads to better legal advice and a better understanding of the implications of various courses. I’d bet a lot of whites, where the evidence is strong, are willing to plead guilty to avoid the gallows.

            1. We’re talking about the US from 1900 to 2002, not SC from 1900 to 1972.

              You missed my point. If you have two normal distributions that differ in average or variance, the disparity increases the further you are from average. And since ‘committed a capital offense’ is further from average behavior than ‘committed a murder’ you’d expect the racial disparity in the former to be larger than the latter.

              When I said “mitigating factors” I meant things that make the capital offense disparity smaller, such as white people committing definitively capital offenses such as serial killing at a higher rate than a normal distribution would suggest.

              I imagine death was sought in most murder cases.

              Maybe sought, but definitely not achieved.

              Agree with your last paragraph.

        2. Ed’s link indicates one person was judicially executed in the US after 1949 by live gibbeting. That makes all the data therein suspect

  17. Assuming they’re all dead now, I’d like to see the prosecutors and police involved revived via modern technology and then put to death again. If nothing else their families can know their shame.

    1. Again they all did their jobs expertly. If you won’t to work off your “justice” boner I suggest you picture the defense lawyer getting lynched.

  18. At least the appeals process has gotten better.

  19. Hmm, apparently the cops claim that Stinney lead them to a railroad spike at the scene which he confessed was the murder weapon.

    Did the cops lie? Was the railroad spike the actual murder weapon?

    1. Probably not. Likely yes.

      Cosmotopia is going to have some pretty large prisons (albeit fewer/smaller than now). Anarcho-topia is going to have quite a few lynchings but I’d expect the wrongful execution rate wouldn’t be significantly higher than any other period in US history.

      1. This post by Sudden reveals some damning evidence at the kid:
        https://reason.com/blog/2014/12…..nt_4973445

        Though I suppose you could they beat that out of him too. Though why the cops would try to get him to make a dubious self-defense claim that would inflame lynch mobs is dubious.

        From what I can gather contemporary Black Activists felt that the racism was in how fast the trial and execution proceeded and in how young he was.

        1. Jury composition was also at play. Ultimately though, I believe it was Warren Court era that mandated ethnically proportionate jurists for the venue. The case might even be, sadly, fully compliant with due process as it existed at the time. I’m now interested in seeing the judge’s opinion to actually view the merits of the case at hand.

          In either event, my central thesis isn’t about the kid’s guilt or innocence, it’s that I don’t think this is some black-and-white (pun unintended) case about mouth-breathing racist scum using the beating deaths of extremely young girls as a pretext to rapidly prosecute and kill a black kid. Reality is not a Tarantino film.

        2. How could the execution have proceeded that fast? do not capital appeals usually take decades?

  20. Three months?

    I thought the appellate process took decades. did the laws of physics change or something?

  21. And the point is? I mean the kid is dead. Cant bring him back and say oops, sorry.

    http://www.TheAnonBay.tk

    1. Sounds like the only person who needs to say sorry is the defense attorney. Everyone else deserves an attaboy.

  22. Valerie `s posting is shocking… on saturday I bought a great new Jaguar XJ after I been earnin $6211 this last four weeks an would you believe 10k this past month . it’s by-far my favourite-work I’ve ever done . I started this eight months/ago and immediately startad bringin home over $71… per hour .
    am impresses but join this site and earn money easily.
    _________________ http://www.jobsfish.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.