Ninteen Years Gone: Using DNA Testing to Catch the Crimals Essay

In March of 1985, Bloodsworth was sentenced to death. Through it all Bloodsworth maintained his innocence and in 1993 with the help of a new technique used to test for DNA, Bloodsworth got his chance to prove he was innocent. Bloodsworth became the first person ever to be exonerated from death row by DNA evidence. (Jain, 2001) In one

In October of 2001 John Taylor was arrested for the murder of Leanne Tiernan due to the abundance of evidence that was found in regards to her murder. Due to the study of the pollen they were able to clearly say Leanne was at John Taylor’s place for certain. John Taylor was later given 2 more life convictions for 2 rapes he committed and they were able to say that he did them because of DNA

claims his innocence of the murder, he was prisoned for two terms of life imprisonment at the

Once a long sixteen years were over for McCormick, the case reopened, McCormick was granted a new trial, the DNA testing was proved false, and a criminal court jury found McCormick not guilty of all charges for the murder of Nichols. McCormick, who was fifty-five years old at the time of the new trial, was now a free man. After the trial, McCormick stated, “I hope they get the right person and convict them. I had nothing to do with it.”

DNA exonerations are very common. So much so that in the United States alone, there have been “317 post-conviction DNA exonerations” (2014). The very first DNA exoneration dated back to 1989. The Innocence Project examined these DNA exonerations and found that “8 of the 317 people exonerated through DNA served time on death row. Another 16 were charged with capital crimes but not sentenced to death” (2014). More so, the average time served was about 13.5 years, and the average age was 27 (2014). This means that before the age of

Due to the interview taking place after hours and the case not being assigned until the following day, I was unable to be present at the time of the interview. However, I have since observed a copy of that interview. The following is a summary of the forensic interview conducted that night by Megan Merrill with Deja Jones. This is a summary, not an exact transcript.

In addition to undeserved charges, DNA testing has exonerated hundreds of people for crimes in which they were convicted over the past few years. When DNA testing became readily available to the criminal justice system, crucial flaws began to surface. It was realized that people were serving hard-time for felony crimes they didn’t commit.

In general, there are several factors that can cause wrongful conviction and later exoneration. One factor is a false confession. As authors Earl Smith and Angela J. Hattery stated in their journal that a false confession can be caused by individual

Being wrongly accused of a crime and sent to prison for years is something people would not think of happening to them on any day. However, it does occur. Two men, Richard Alexander and Kirk Bloodsworth were accused of a crime and sent to prison. Both of these men were exonerated through genetic DNA testing years later.

Due to doubts surrounding the forensic evidence in this case it may have led the jurors to have reasonable doubt regarding returning a guilty verdict ("Forensic Analysis of the Casey Anthony Trial - Crime Museum", 2017). The jurors finally found Casey Anthony guilty of aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child ("Forensic Analysis of the Casey Anthony Trial - Crime Museum",

A failure in the justice system had taken place. Kirk Bloodsworth was the first person to be exonerated based off of DNA evidence. During the course of the investigation it was shown the detectives should not have allowed the two boys to be together during the creation of the suspects sketch. The prosecution had withheld exculpatory evidence, namely evidence of other suspects; albeit, the suspects were not involved in the murders, they could have helped sway the jury decision. Allowing witnesses to see images of Bloodsworth prior to a line-up also proved detrimental. Inept defense lawyers allowing for the absence of alibi witnesses also weakened his efforts. Detective Capal had wrongly testified about Bloodsworth’s afore knowledge of the murder

In 1987 in Texas, a prosecutor was faced with this dilemma. Michael Morton was convicted of murdering his wife based on circumstantial evidence. Morton’s defense attorney was never told about, or given access to, the police report in which Morton’s three year old son had told police that his daddy had not killed his mommy. After serving 25 years for murdering his wife, Morton was exonerated after attorneys were finally given access to the police report and DNA testing of a bloody bandana found at the scene of the murder matched a man who was serving a sentence for the murder of another woman.

What is most interesting about this story is that it exposes a flawed justice system. The police did a reasonably good job of investigating the murder scene, but right away they focused their attention on two men without solid evidence. The obvious suspect would have been the last person seen alive with the victim, someone who knew the victim and thus could gain access easily to her apartment, and definitely someone who had argued with the victim the night she was murdered (Thornburgh 28). There were many valid clues pointing to other suspects. Instead, the police convinced themselves early on that Ron Williamson was their killer. After five years when they were unable to solve the crime, and with pressure mounting, they pieced together a paper

There are often mistakes made that falsely determine an individual’s sentence. Sloppy police work and loss of documents are examples of careless errors. There is also some room for error with determining the results of a DNA sample that do not fall under the human error category. Many times there may not be ample DNA samples at a crime scene. Only a fraction of crimes reveal DNA. Drive-by shootings and bombings often do not provide DNA for investigation purposes. “There is a public perception that DNA is the cure-all for these kinds of mistakes. DNA is not the whole answer.” (Dieter, Richard) Eye witnesses cannot solely and accurately determine a person’s fate 100 percent of the time. There are numerous amounts of cases in which those found guilty were indeed later found innocent. Many times, these individuals have already served time in jail. Many argue that the time inmates spend in

On the other hand, the case of Daniel Taylor, who was convicted of murdering two people also, had a solid Alibi with paperwork and witnesses to support his alibi it seemed almost impossible for the jury to find him guilty. But on “December morning in 1992, 17 year old gang member, Daniel, confessed to a double murder committed two weeks earlier in the Uptown neighborhood. (Chicago Tribune)”. The case was built upon Taylor’s confession.