like_any_other
a year ago
The post title at time of writing, "Missouri is about to execute a man even the prosecution believes is innocent", overstates the case for innocence. From the article:
Other evidence that helped convict Williams “remains intact,” the attorney general said. “The victim’s personal items were found in Williams’s car after the murder. A witness testified that Williams had sold the victim’s laptop to him. Williams confessed to his girlfriend and an inmate in the St. Louis City Jail, and William’s girlfriend saw him dispose of the bloody clothes worn during the murder,” the attorney general’s office said.
abracadaniel
a year ago
According to the same prosecutors whose DNA was found on the murder weapon. It’s unlikely he could be found innocent in the future, but when the evidence is that flawed, and the prosecution and the victim’s family are asking for life instead of execution, it seems like a no brainer.
like_any_other
a year ago
> According to the same prosecutors whose DNA was found on the murder weapon.
I'm not sure what this is meant to imply. That the listed witness statements and evidence was fabricated? I agree that life instead of death is sensible, but that doesn't mean we should mislead on the case for innocence.
ranger_danger
a year ago
Source?
kcplate
a year ago
The easy answer to me is that the governments should not be allowed to remove the right to life of its citizens. It’s too final. Sure, jail them indefinitely, but the death penalty is archaic and has no place in 2024.
giraffe_lady
a year ago
[flagged]
fragmede
a year ago
?
razodactyl
a year ago
Seems like a bot