I would explore every legal option available against that witness. I have no idea what they would be, but I'd explore them.
I graduated from UT Law this past spring. I know both Ashley and Dana, I remember them talking about this case last year. I'm glad this turned out well.
So, I've always wondered what kind of payment these guys would receive for them wrongly losing 12.5 years of their lives in a federal pound me in the *** prison? It seems like they should get 12.5 years of pay so like, half a mil or what?
I agree with Stat and would add the prosecutor to the list for bringing such a weak case to court. Eyewitnesses are not perfect so the prosecution needs to be damn certain before bringing a case to trial.
So, I've always wondered what kind of payment these guys would receive for them wrongly losing 12.5 years of their lives in a federal pound me in the *** prison? It seems like they should get 12.5 years of pay so like, half a mil or what? __________________________________________________ In Texas, this means $80,000 per year plus an annuity worth at least $40,000. As described by The Innocence Project, Texas' new compensation law (which went into effect in September) is the most generous amongst the 27 states which have passed laws to compensate those convicted of crimes but later found to be innocent. In addition to wrongly served jail time, it covers time spent on parole.
It is certainly a lot more than they would have made on the street. Their families will unfortunately bleed them dry and they will be broke within 5 years.
it is hard for me to blame the witness here. though the forgiveness of the aggrieved is more important than mine. it is also hard to imagine how many people are in jail for a long time based solely on single eye witness testimony even though single eye witness testimony is known to be fraught with problems. lastly, what happens to cases like these? are they considered reopen now? good work by the law students!
no shiner...that's not the job of the prosecutor. that's the job of the defense attorney. If a witness is credible enough to get on the stand, it's up to the defense attorney to make him look bad and negatively affect the jury's perception of his/her credibility. in this case, it should've been easy. btw, most crim pro professors do some sort of exercise with their students to show how difficult eye witness ID's can be to make (at least mine did). when you don't know you're about to witness an event, recall can be difficult. again, it's the job of the defense attorney to illuminate such details.
