South Carolina to execute man despite bombshell admission from key witness

Such as?

I would say the more reasonable doubt falls on the criminal.codefendant changing his story after giving it under oath in two trials years apart and to law enforcement officers right after the incident.
No DNA or id.
The only evidence has been recanted.
At the very least the execution should be "stayed" while the facts are established. That is not unreasonable.
 
No DNA or id.
So, like nearly every single murder until about 30 years ago...?

I don't think that alone basis for reasonable doubt. Else we would have convicted very few of murder until DNA evidence was established.

And he WAS ID'd by his codefendent, in signed confessions and in two separate trials that occurred years apart.

The only evidence has been recanted.
That's not true. He confessed the crime to 5 other people and to law enforcement.
 
There are doubts that he did it. Reasonable doubts.
Executing innocent prople is not justice, it is lynching.

Not reasonable, "any excuse we can make to stop an execution" unreasonable excuses.

If he really is innocent, are they demanding his release?
 
You’ve never lied, stolen anything, driven over the speed limit, cheated at anything? All are capital crimes in my mind.

I don’t debate. It would be a waste of my time trying to convince you people of anything.

This is why your life is so miserable. You've spent your entire life judging others by standards that no civilized being on the face of the earth could ever pass.

The Bible says "Judge not lest you be judged". If your way is so great, why are you so miserable? Hate destroys the hater not the hated.

Most people are decent, kind and honest. We're happy and we enjoy life. We're not perfect and we don't expect others to be perfect either. Live and let live is a way of life.

We don't got looking for things to piss us off to keep that rage burning.
 
It’s not a bomb shell admission. It is a very late in the game attempt to assist the accused, convicted and condemned prisoner.

Hm. What the turned co-defendant says now versus what he said under oath at trial.

Why should a recantation — years later — with zero corroboration — be taken all that seriously?
 
It’s not a bomb shell admission. It is a very late in the game attempt to assist the accused.

Hm. What the turned co-defendant says now versus what he said under oath at trial.

Why should a recantation — years later — with zero corroboration — be taken all that seriously?
They are trying to set a murderer free. And he confessed to others and the police.
 

Forum List

Back
Top