For those that fight against the death penalty, there is one aspect that troubles me and to discuss it, a person could quickly be labeled racist and incorrectly so in my opinion.

But my question is this: why do those against the death penalty choose those on death row with innocence that is questionable as the focal point rather than people like Cameron Todd Willingham?

(This is not about those who are purely against the death penalty, but those people and organizations who push individual inmates as being "innocent" in their goal to abolish the death penalty.)

Here is a wikipedia link to Willingham...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham

The New Yorker did a large, in depth article on Willingham and that I believe quite adequately shows Willingham was innocent of what he was convicted of. Yes, he might have been a person with a criminal background, but forensic science showed he did not do what he was convicted of.

Over the last few years several inmates of questionable innocence have been thrown out there in the media with huge coverage, while Willingham's case in comparison, has received much less attention.

Why? If the goal is to abolish the death penalty, would not the best example of a flawed penalty be that of an innocent man?

Why the attention of people like Mumia Abu Jamal and Troy Davis? Am I missing something? Is it that white people as a whole in America don't really care about the death penalty and aren't as compassionate about the death penalty like people of color, so the best way to create a force about it is to engage those who care the most?

(For those curious, personally, I am conflicted about the death penalty and heavily so - intellectually, I know it does not work - except for the one executed - but I also know there are people in our society that are beyond human salvation.)