Up front, I am against the death penalty and have been for years. I used to be for it, but as soon as intelligence crept into my brain, I turned against it. It is only a deterrent for one person - the executed - and there are just too many ways it can be abused, misused, or cause the execution of an innocent person.
With that, it pisses me off when the Left, celebrities, pundits, and activists pick the wrong case to trumpet by portraying the incarcerated as innocent.
After seeing so much of this with this man, I have tried to research his case in its entirety and have only found that those proclaiming his innocence are doing so on faulty criteria while ignoring the existence of completely relevant evidence that he committed this murder.
In what I have read, nothing deals with the dead woman's property in his possession, nor her laptop that he sold. Or other verifiable things entered into evidence (how he got to the woman's house, etc cetera), or of others he confessed to or saw bloody clothes on him.
What I have read is a lone prosecutor filed a motion with the defense to have his execution set aside and a witness recanted. There was also a claim a black juror was excused based on race, while the prosecutor discounts that claim.
Instead, those proclaiming his innocence are still speaking of the unknown DNA found on the knife, when it was later determined to be a prosecutor's after handling the knife (they are also using this later finding as a way to suggest mishandling of evidence, however, no one states if this DNA was left after initial testing or prior to testing. I mention this because if it was after initial testing, it is not uncommon for prosecutors to handle evidence prior to the trial - don't get me wrong, I would never suggest ANY person NOT wear gloves after testing because who knows what future technology will bring later - does everyone recall the Church's multiple murders in the Chicago area decades ago where an insightful person saved food eaten on by the suspect prior to the murders at a time when DNA was not available? They froze the food for preservation).
We had a case like this in the city I worked in. A black man eviscerated a black woman after binding her with a wire coat hanger and the activists got a hold of it because he convinced them that DNA testing on items would exonerate him. The poetic thing about this murder was many knew he was a liar, but they did the testing and he died in prison before the results came back that it was his DNA on the victim.
But my point is, there are some cases that are horrible to use when using "innocence" as the claim and this is one of them.
This man even made an Alford plea (a guilty plea that allows the person to maintain their innocence while admitting the state would succeed in conviction).
Sadly, where I have seen people ask about these items of evidence, the usual answer has been accusing the person asking of being a racist, or worse.
It just irks me that I KNOW there are cases that deserve this attention and this is not one of them.
