Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NNN0LHI

(67,190 posts)
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:06 AM Jan 2012

Prosecutors maintained he was guilty even after he was excluded through DNA testing

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-lake-county-prosecutors-wont-challenge-murder-conviction-in-92-slaying-of-11yearold-20120106,0,6889975.story

Rivera freed after Lake County prosecutors stop seeking retrial in girl's '92 slaying

By Dan Hinkel, Ruth Fuller and Lisa Black Tribune reporters

12:50 a.m. CST, January 7, 2012

Ending nearly 20 years in custody, Juan Rivera walked out of prison today hours after authorities said they will not challenge an appellate court’s reversal of his murder conviction in the 1992 slaying of 11-year-old babysitter Holly Staker. snip

Prosecutors maintained that Rivera was guilty even after he was excluded through DNA testing as the source of semen found in the Waukegan girl’s body, who had been stabbed and sexually assaulted.

On Dec. 9, the Illinois Appellate Court released a harshly worded, 24-page ruling that reversed the conviction, stating that the theories that prosecutors offered at trial were “highly improbable” and “distort to an absurd degree” the testimony from witnesses.

The ruling accused veteran detectives of using leading questions and using psychology to manipulate the fragile Rivera, as well as possibly feeding Rivera information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Which begs the question, why would they do that?
6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Prosecutors maintained he was guilty even after he was excluded through DNA testing (Original Post) NNN0LHI Jan 2012 OP
They thought he was guilty and got tunnel vision. Swede Jan 2012 #1
First they find their man. Then they fit the crime to him. Ikonoklast Jan 2012 #6
Same reason people protect those they elect to office The Straight Story Jan 2012 #2
Exactly obamanut2012 Jan 2012 #4
By law you can NOT sue a prosecutor for prosecutoria misconduct - (Good O'l Boy Law) FreakinDJ Jan 2012 #3
Too many times it's simply about closing cases. DCKit Jan 2012 #5

Swede

(33,234 posts)
1. They thought he was guilty and got tunnel vision.
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:09 AM
Jan 2012

This happens over and over. It ought to be a subject they teach in law school and police academies - don't get tunnel vision.

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)
6. First they find their man. Then they fit the crime to him.
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 04:09 PM
Jan 2012

And it happens every day in this country.

'Justice' is what those in power say it is.

The Straight Story

(48,121 posts)
2. Same reason people protect those they elect to office
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:09 AM
Jan 2012

They don't want to be seen as having made a mistake and are sure it is the right guy, no matter what.

obamanut2012

(26,068 posts)
4. Exactly
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:18 AM
Jan 2012

Go to Yahoo news or other message boards (probably even here): people still think Amanda Knox is a guilty she-devil slut, that the West Memphis Three are cold-blooded killers, that the Duke Lacrosse players were racist rapists, etc.

The problem is that when detectives and DAs act like this, people go to prison, and may even be put to death. This is the main reason I am against the death penalty. The WM3, for example, was a "slam dunk" murder case as per the State, the Judge, the jurors, and the local media.

 

FreakinDJ

(17,644 posts)
3. By law you can NOT sue a prosecutor for prosecutoria misconduct - (Good O'l Boy Law)
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:17 AM
Jan 2012

he can only be disbarred

 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
5. Too many times it's simply about closing cases.
Sat Jan 7, 2012, 12:31 PM
Jan 2012

I've heard it said here (in DC) that they'll arrest someone for a crime they know he (usually a he) didn't commit because, eventually, he'll commit some other crime.

It's proactive policing. Eventually they'll get the guilty party through attrition.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Prosecutors maintained he...