Trial By Fire, By David Grann

In the last several years, too many people in the United States have been wrongfully sentenced with the death penalty. Several accused have their sentence overturned or they have been totally exonerated. There are at least 8 people who were executed by United States and later proven innocent (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org). Over a 20 year period, 68% of all death sentences were reversed (http://karisable.com). A noteworthy example is of Jerry Banks who was convicted and sentenced with the death penalty for two counts of murder in 1975. Five years later, in 1980, Banks' conviction was overturned on the basis of newly discovered evidence which was allegedly known to the state at the time of trial. Another example was the case of Lawyer Johnson who was sentenced to death in 1971 by an all white jury for the murder of a white victim. Later in 1982, Johnson’s conviction was overturned and Johnson exonerated when a previously silent eyewitness identified the state’s chief witness as the real murderer. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org) Human error is inevitable, particularly

One example of wrongful execution is the Cameron Todd Willingham case. Willingham was executed in February 2004 by the state of Texas for committing murder to his three daughters by setting his house on fire. Prosecutors believed that the girls were abused and killed by setting the house on fire to attempt to cover up the evidence (1). Willingham had maintained his innocence and spent 10 years appealing for his convection up until his execution in 2004 via lethal injection. However, there were multiple issues surrounding the investigation method, evidence,

In 2004, a Texas man named Cameron Todd Willingham was executed for murdering his three young daughters by setting his house on fire. This conviction was based on faulty forensic science which assumed that the fire was caused by arson. There multiple fire science experts who reviewed the case and became opposed to Willingham’s execution stating there was no evidence to prove that the fire was intentionally set. In 2010, the Texas Forensic Science Commission released a report admitting that Willingham’s conviction was based on “flawed science”. One of the witnesses during the trial who was an inmate at the same prison as Willingham testified that Willingham confessed to the killing while in jail but later on recanted his statements. Willingham’s

In late 1992, Cameron Todd Willingham was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death for a fire that claimed the lives of his three daughters the previous December. During the trial, the prosecution cited evidence from two arson investigators, Douglass Fogg and Manuel Vasquez, listing “more than ‘twenty indicators’ of arson,” along with testimony from medical experts and other witnesses. The trial lasted only two days and resulted in a unanimous guilty verdict. However, now following Willingham’s execution, it has come to light that much of the evidence used in his conviction in no way guarantees that arson had occurred. If this is true, the state may have put an

In David Grann’s “Trial by Fire: Did Texas Execute an Innocent Man?”, published on September 7, 2009, the overall question addressed is whether we should keep the death penalty legal. Grann begins his argument with his account of the events that occurred on the morning of December 23, 1991 in Corsicana, Texas. Cameron Todd Willingham, the husband and father of three children awakes to a blaze of fire in his one-story house (I). Willingham exits out the front door and distraughtly tells a nearby neighbor to call 911. By the time the fire is extinguished, Willingham’s children are dead and arson investigators come to the house to inspect four days later (I). The two investigators conclude that the fire is arson and it is considered a triple murder committed by Willingham so they bring him in for questioning. This along with neighborhood witness testimony leads to an arrest, which is punishable by death under Texas law. Before the trial, the state gives Willingham a plea deal that if he pleads guilty he will get life in prison avoiding the death penalty (I). Willingham rejects the plea deal and is found guilty. From there, Grann uses sections II through V to pick holes in the original case of the prosecution. Findings of Dr. Gerald Hurst give Willingham some sense of hope that his name might be cleared as an experiment on Lime street is conducted. The intention is to recreate the scene of a previous arson case similar to Willingham’s (IV). In the original findings of the arson investigators, the only way flashover can occur is by the presence of some sort of accelerant; however, the experiment shows that flashover can still occur in a wood structured house and these signs of flashover are similar to the signs of arson

The U.S. Department of Justice is responsible for enforcing federal laws and administrating justice systems in the United States. However, the U.S. Department of Justice has a criminal justice system that is not fair for everyone in the country, specifically for those who are mentally ill, or poor. Over the past couple of years in the United States, there have been many innocent people wrongfully convicted and put on death row due to the corruption of the government. The main factor that has been identify as the cause of wrongful convictions is eyewitness misidentification. The Bedau and Radelet’s study demostrates that there are around 350 wrongful convictions in capital cases. Many abolitionists have arisen against capital punishments, since the exponential increase of exonerations based on DNA or non-DNA evidence. Their goal is to improve the current methods performed by our criminal justice system. The U.S. Department of Justice has acknowledged that its current criminal justice system is not being very effective in punishing the guilty. Since there have been many cases of wrongful convictions, many people are starting to question what has been the improvements that the U.S. Department of Justice has make in order to prevent false imprisonment and death penalty of innocent people. The Department of Justice has tried to decrease the number of inmates who were wrongly put on death row by improving prosecutorial accountability, by researching past criminal cases, and by

The death penalty has been a controversial topic among society for ages. An issue often brought up when discussing the legality of capital punishment is wrongful convictions. Advocates of the death penalty say that, while wrongful convictions are an issue, those few cases do not outweigh the need for lawful execution of felons who are, without a doubt, guilty. On the other hand, the opponents argue that the death penalty is wrong from both a legal and moral standpoint, an ineffective form of punishment, and should, ultimately, be outlawed. With both advocates and challengers constantly debating on this topic, the death penalty and wrongful convictions continue to be hot buttons issues for Americans and people throughout the world.

In 1992, Cameron Todd Willingham was accused of intentionally lighting all three of his children on fire. In 2004, he was executed. Shortly after, the Texas Forensic Science Commission found evidence against this statement, proving Willingham’s innocence. As it turns out, the evidence used against him was invalid, ruling it an accident. (Eric, “8 People Who Were Executed And Later Found Innocent”) But no good came from it, he was already dead.

Cameron Todd Willingham in his cell on death row, in 1994. He insisted upon his innocence in the deaths of his children and refused an offer to plead guilty in return for a life sentence. Photograph by Ken Light.

Years went by, and Willingham lost one appeal after another. Finally, in 2004, just weeks before Willingham’s scheduled execution, Gerald Hurst, an internationally known fire and explosives expert from Texas, was brought in to support a petition for clemency. 
After reviewing the evidence and videotapes of the fire scene, Hurst wrote a report debunking the Vasquez findings, calling them “invalid in light of current knowledge” (Starr, 2011). Hurst said the blaze was almost certainly accidental, perhaps caused by a faulty space heater or electrical connection. But even that would be difficult to prove, because the house had been shoveled out by investigators. The cause of the fire should have been labeled “undetermined,” Hurst said, because there

The death penalty can lead to the death of innocent people. For example, “…According to a new study, serious errors occur in almost 70% of all trials leading to the death penalty…”(Leibman). This shows that if 100 people were put on death row, 70 would have serious mistakes in their

In the past two decades, over half of the death penalty trials have contained constitutional errors, and five percent of those people were exonerated during retrial proving the faults of the current system. As Leahy stated, “ We have cast iron scientific proof that a significant number of people sentenced to death in America in the late twentieth century have been absolutely, undeniably innocent.” This goes to show that one out of three cases that are successful is simply not good enough. Cases in which DNA testing has proven inmates innocence shows that the system is not perfect, and when it comes to a person’s life, there is no room for constitutional violations. There is another problem in death penalty trials, the lawyers. In too many cases defendants have been assigned lawyers who were later disbarred, suspended or are fresh out of law school with little to no experience. Finding quality lawyers who can handle a death penalty trial appropriately to do it pro bono, or for little pay is hard. This is why Leahy came up with the “Innocence Protection Act” to provide funding in order to give defendants accurate representation in death penalty trials

According to a 1987 study published in the Stanford Law Review, at least 23 non-culpable individuals have been executed from 1900 to 1987, which is more than one innocent execution every four years. These miscarriages of justice are often due to evidence that was not discovered or made available until after the execution. Although recent scientific improvements, such as forensic DNA evidence, have enabled investigators to more accurately pinpoint guilt in a suspect, no current amount of scientific or technological advancement can completely guarantee that errors will never be made. In an issue such as the death penalty, where the stakes are so high – human life – any margin of error, no matter how minuscule, is unacceptable.

Capital punishment has been around for many years as a way of executing criminals. Despite what most believe, capital punishment is not functional in the American society. Defenders of the death penalty often claim that the execution of criminals will teach others not to do bad, initially decreasing crime rates. Unfortunately, statistics prove that thought to be wrong. Capital punishment also has great flaws. For example, many innocent people have been put to death because of capital punishment. There also is no consistency. Two of the same crimes can be convicted in two different states and the consequences with be different for both offenders. The death penalty shows to be