The Innocence Project

Between 1989 and 2010 a nonprofit watchdog and advocacy group reported that in the state of Illinois 85 people cases we overturned by D.N.A testing. This had cost the taxpayer in Illinois $214 million (Lydersen, 2011). There were overall 316 post-conviction DNA exonerations in this country since 1989, there have been an average of 1 per month (Johnson, 2015). The cost of wrongful conviction is extremely expensive. It cost the citizens of this country to

With the number of DNA exonerations growing in the recent years, wrongful convictions reveal disturbing trends and fissures in the justice system. It shows how broken the system is, and why it needs urgent fixing. According to Huff (1996), over ten thousand people are convicted wrongfully for serious crimes each year. This study established that factors leading to wrongful convictions are false eyewitnesses, a prejudiced jury, incompetent prosecutors, and suspects’ ignorance. Where DNA evidence clears a suspect, array of reasons emerge; misconduct, mistakes, to race and class factors. It is important to make DNA data available to attorneys in order to enable them mount a strong

This Organisation is a non-profit Legal organisation dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted people through DNA testing and reforming the criminal justice system to prevent future injustices. The Innocence Project was established in a landmark study by the United States Department of Justice and the United States Senate in conjunction with the Benjamin N.Cardozo School of Law, which found that incorrect identification by eyewitnesses was a

We will examine the importance of DNA in the conviction of Tommie Lee Andrews and the significance of this decision in the United States Judicial System. We will discuss an overview of some of the essential elements in conducting utilizing this DNA evidence and its repercussions. This case signified the first time in the United Sates that DNA evidence was actually admissible in court proceedings during a criminal trial.

Every time an innocent person is exonerated based on DNA testing, law enforcement agencies look at what caused the wrongful convictions. There are many issues that contribute to putting guiltless lives behind bars including: eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, imperfect forensic science, and more (Gould and Leo 18). When a witness is taken into a police station to identify a suspect, it is easy for their memories to be blurred and their judgment influenced. This can lead the witness to identify a suspect who is actually innocent. Flawed forensic science practice also contributes to wrongful imprisonments. In the past, analysts have been inaccurate due to carelessness, testified in court presenting evidence that was not based

There are many noteworthy events that occur throughout the Actual Innocence book. The emergence of DNA and the Innocence Project where stories that were kind of hard to follow throughout the book. Throughout the book there were bits and pieces about each, when it might have been easier to follow if the authors just kept all this information together. After so many were exonerated, states started to put restrictions on when and how prisoners could appeal. According to Berger (2006), “Furthermore, in many states, stringent time limits on making motions for a new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence seemed to bar judicial relief even if a prisoner could somehow obtain an exculpatory DNA result” (p. 320) Even though there are many injustices that occur in the justice system on a daily basis, the book gave readers hope in the justice system again. The hope was from the Innocence Project. Two lawyers named Barry and Peter got together in New York City, their goal was to free innocent people in prison. They had many trials and tribulations, but they used DNA testing to free hundreds of innocent. This book even informed readers of what DNA testing was, and how it was created. The only downfall of getting them exonerated, is that DNA and the Innocence project could not help all of them get back on their feet. There were no solutions to this problem in the book either.

According to Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer (2003), the majority of convictions overturned by DNA evidence involved mistaken eyewitness testimony. The Innocence Project estimates that around 70% of the convictions due to eyewitness misidentification have been overturned by DNA evidence (2015). A main factor in this occurrence is that eyewitness memory is unreliable (Wright, 2007). Eyewitness identification in a line-up is an important tool in criminal investigations. The eyewitness evidence that results from these line-ups has an impact on the subsequent investigation and prosecution procedures (Wells, 1984). Furthermore, according to Wright, it is not just about witnesses making errors when identifying, misidentifying, or not identifying, a suspect

The innocence project has exonerated 349 people and of those 349 people, 71% of them have involved eyewitness misidentification. In the Malcolm Bryant case, eyewitness misidentification was a huge reason why he was convicted. The witness testified against Bryant during court and was certain that it was him. David Camm and Malcolm Bryant were convicted based on testimony and evidence, which lead to issues in their cases, but they were later exonerated based on advancements in DNA testing.

In his 2008 Columbia Law Review Article “Judging Innocence,” Brandon L. Garrett claims that there are four major factors responsible for a majority of wrongful convictions, all of which I will discuss in detail. In short, however, these four factors are: (a) false confessions, (b) testimony of informants (or “snitches”), (c) improper use of forensics, and (d) witness misidentification (p. 55). Through Garrett’s (2008) study of the first 200 DNA exonerees in the U.S., we see a breakdown of the percentage of cases in which these four types of evidence may be used to secure a confession: 79% of the 200 cases involved witness identification of the subject, 57% involved forensic evidence, 18% were convicted with the aid of informant testimony, and 16% of exonerees had given a false confession that was ultimately presented at trial (p. 76). Some of these exonerees were even sentenced to death (p. 75).

Before any release, there must be proper evidence showing that the accused had nothing to do with the crime. The introduction of the first person using DNA to prove his innocent was David Vasquez. In 1985, he was convicted, later in 1990; he was released due to DNA evidence (O’Leary, 2012). Since the Vasquez case, DNA testing has been a very powerful technique to use to prove a person’s innocence. A great reason for this is because victims are capable of lying and misidentifying.

The Innocence Project is a non-profit organization that is used to free wrongly convicted people through the use of DNA testing and to reform the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice.

Because there are many different types of crimes, it is often difficult to find enough physical evidence to convict a person. For example, in rape cases there is usually only a small amount of physical evidence, so cases are based on word alone. Because of DNA testing we can now take samples from the victim and attempt to match the results with those of the suspect. Therefore, DNA is sometimes the only real way of determining the guilt or innocence of a suspect without having any witnesses. Since many rape cases are left unsolved, DNA testing is believed to be the most accurate way of keeping sex offenders off the street. Because of the growing trend of using DNA in rape cases especially, a company in Brooklyn now advertises a small flashlight-like device intended to be used to jab at attackers in order to collect a sample of his skin for later use (Adler). According to a study by Joseph Peterson, with the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Illinois, DNA evidence does not have a major impact on the decision to either convict or acquit

I would like to look at a page of statistics on the Innocence Project website. The website states that, as of March 17 when the article was last updated, 337 people have been exonerated by DNA evidence since 1989. Over 200 of these people have been since 2000. The article then goes on to discuss the different statistics for race and crimes exonerated from. But, the importance of this article lies at the end, when they begin to discuss the leading causes of wrongful convictions. Eyewitness misidentification accounts for over 70% of wrongful convictions. False confessions account for 31%. These are both directly related to Steven Avery’s case. Not only was there a misidentification by the woman, but Brendan claims he was coerced into confessing.

In 1992, Barry C. Scheck and Peter J. Neufeld founded the Innocence Project at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University. The Innocence Project is an initiative to prove prisoners innocent through DNA technology. Exonerate the innocent, improve the law, reform through the courts and support the exonerated, these are the groups foremost goals. Not bad, considering that because of DNA technology eighteen death row prisoners have been exonerated to date.

The Innocence Project was established in the wake of a landmark study by the United States Department of Justice and the United States Senate with help from the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (Schneider, 2013). This study found that there were numerous reasons why people are wrongfully convicted including, but not limited to eye witness identification, perjured testimony, improper forensic science techniques, and government misconduct (Roberts & Weathered, 2009) The original Innocence Project was founded twenty two (22) years ago as a part of the Cardoza School of Law of Yeshiva University in New York City, New York (Davis, 2012). The Innocence Projects primary goal is to exonerate those whom have been convicted of a crime when there is DNA evidence available to be tested or re-tested (Mitchell, 2011). DNA testing has been possible in five (5) percent to ten (10) percent of cases since 1992 (Risinger, 2007). On the other side, other members of the Innocence Project help to exonerate those have been convicted of a crime where there is no DNA evidence to test. A goal of the Innocence Project is to conduct research on the reasons for wrongful convictions, how to fix the criminal justice system, as well as advocate for those who have been wrongfully convicted (Steiker & Steiker, 2005). The members of this organization strive to teach the world about the dangers of wrongful convictions. To date, this non-profit legal organization, has freed three hundred eighteen (318)