US executes innocent man.

[Mark1031]

July 14, 2005
Convicted, Executed, Not Guilty
By BOB HERBERT
If Larry Griffin were being tried today for the murder of Quintin Moss, he would almost certainly be acquitted. The evidence is overwhelming that he did not kill Mr. Moss.

But Mr. Griffin is not being tried today. He has already been executed for the murder.

While significant, this development is not that much of a surprise to those who understand that human beings are fallible and that much of the criminal justice system in the United States is a crapshoot. Whether it is this case or some other, it is inevitable that we will learn of someone who has been executed for a crime that he or she did not commit.

Judges and juries are no less prone to mistakes than politicians, reporters, doctors, engineers or center fielders. Which is why the death penalty should be abolished.

Larry Griffin's case is probably not the best one for advancing this argument, but it's the case at hand. He was not a solid citizen. While it seems clear that he did not commit the crime for which he was executed - the killing of Mr. Moss - he did plead guilty to killing someone else.

Mr. Griffin's character, or lack of same, does not make the principle at stake any less valid. This was recognized by Jennifer Joyce, the circuit attorney in St. Louis, where Mr. Moss was murdered way back in 1980. Ms. Joyce has taken the extraordinary step of officially reopening a murder investigation after the defendant was executed.

Quintin Moss was 19 years old and a locally well-known drug dealer when he was shot 13 times in a drive-by attack on a notorious block in St. Louis known as "The Stroll." A bystander, Wallace Conners, was also shot but not seriously wounded.

Mr. Conners, who knew Larry Griffin, saw the men who drove up and opened fire. He said Mr. Griffin was not one of the men. But he was never called, either by the prosecution or the defense, to testify at Mr. Griffin's trial.

The key testimony was given by Robert Fitzgerald, a professional criminal who said he had witnessed the murder and identified Mr. Griffin as one of the shooters. Mr. Fitzgerald was in the federal witness protection program at the time. He had a number of felony charges pending and was an admitted user of heroin and speed.

A Missouri Supreme Court justice said of Mr. Fitzgerald: "The only eyewitness to the murder had a seriously flawed background, and his ability to observe and identify the gunman was also subject to question."

There was no physical evidence against Mr. Griffin, and no one else at the trial placed him at the scene of the attack. But he was convicted nevertheless, and executed by lethal injection on June 21, 1995.

Mr. Fitzgerald was formally released from custody on the day Mr. Griffin was convicted.

One of the reasons we have not had a definitive example of the execution of an innocent person is that official investigations cease once the death penalty has been carried out.

In this case, an extremely unusual private investigation was conducted after Mr. Griffin's death. It was sponsored by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and led by Samuel Gross, a professor at the University of Michigan Law School. That investigation has pretty much demolished Mr. Fitzgerald's account of what occurred and prompted Ms. Joyce to reopen the case.

Mr. Conners, the wounded bystander, says flatly that Mr. Fitzgerald, who died last year, was not at the scene when the attack took place. And a St. Louis police officer who supported Mr. Fitzgerald's account at the trial now says that Mr. Fitzgerald told him, "I didn't see nothing."

The officer says he can't explain why he supported Mr. Fitzgerald's false testimony at the trial.

Professor Gross, who has received extensive pro bono help from prominent law firms, has given prosecutors the names of three men he believes committed the murder, and the evidence that points to their guilt.

Ms. Joyce, who is reopening the case, was not in the circuit attorney's office when Mr. Griffin was prosecuted. She told me in a telephone conversation yesterday, "I just want to see the truth."

The investigation will be thorough, she said, adding, "I wanted to take an independent look at it, and if mistakes were made, do what I can to rectify them, recognizing that there may not be much I could do."

E-mail: bobherb@nytimes.com

Well he doesn;t sound exactly innocent but innocent of the crime he was executed for. I'm sure there are many more although the cases never get reopened after the execution. If you favor the death penalty how much error will you tolerate?

 

[h4ppy]

Ofcourse this article doesn't go into the fact that most people sentenced to death in America actually committed a crime.

 

[Yom]

Things like this infuriate me. The officer who supported Mr. Fitzgerald's testimony should be tried for perjury, if not murder.

 

[ainwood]

There is mre to the death penalty that just "for" and "against". I do favour the death penalty, but only for exceptional circumstances where the crime is particularly brutal, the victim shows no remorse and the evidence is overwhelming.

I think you need to consider also that not only are judges and jurors prone to make mistakes, police who gather the evidence are as well, and there are cases where they fabricate evidence and testimony. The point of this is that not only can people be executed when they are innocent, they can also spend many, many years in prison when they are innocent. Is this really any more acceptable than a false execution?

 

[SeleucusNicator]

The "investigation" was committed by a group strongly opposed to the death penalty, and which has a very incentive to both manufacture and to overhype that which can be used in argument against the death penalty. I'm not saying the investigation is hogwash or even bunk, I'm merely saying that it shouldn't be accepted as gospel.

Personally, I am confident that modern justice standards (not those of 1980), particularly with the multi-parsec leaps forward that have been made in evidence gathering and analysis (DNA and the such), coupled with redundancy (appeals system, gubernatorial pardon powers) make it virtually impossible for a false conviction to be returned in a capital case.

 

[Rambuchan]

Kill kill kill. :shakehead

America has managed to kill a great number of 'innocents' through this clever little policy. Ooops, another parallel with their enemies. Medieval man. When is it going to join the civilised world?

 

[tonberry]

Ofcourse this article doesn't go into the fact that most people sentenced to death in America actually committed a crime.

Probably, but, as an old english proverb say, it's better to release 10 guilty men than to condemn 1 innocent.

 

[Rambuchan]

The "investigation" was committed by a group strongly opposed to the death penalty, and which has a very incentive to both manufacture and to overhype that which can be used in argument against the death penalty. I'm not saying the investigation is hogwash or even bunk, I'm merely saying that it shouldn't be accepted as gospel.

Personally, I am confident that modern justice standards (not those of 1980), particularly with the multi-parsec leaps forward that have been made in evidence gathering and analysis (DNA and the such), coupled with redundancy (appeals system, gubernatorial pardon powers) make it virtually impossible for a false conviction to be returned in a capital case.

Those are the two words which the 'innocent's' family will be taking exception with.

 

[SeleucusNicator]

Kill kill kill. :shakehead

America has managed to kill a great number of 'innocents' through this clever little policy. Ooops, another parallel with their enemies. Medieval man. When is it going to join the civilised world?

No, it hasn't. There has never been an instance in the past 150 years of a man (or woman) being executed in the United States and thereafter having been found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

 

[Sanaz]

US executes innocent man.

While it seems clear that he did not commit the crime for which he was executed - the killing of Mr. Moss - he did plead guilty to killing someone else.

I don't really care that this guy is now dead, he should be. He was not innocent.

 

[Rambuchan]

No, it hasn't. There has never been an instance in the past 150 years of a man (or woman) being executed in the United States and thereafter having been found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

In the same way someone should make a documentary of people branding Islamic countries around the world as unfree, oppressive dictatorships. I wonder which documentary would get more ratings?

I'm just returning the favour of a wonderous display of ignorance.

 

[ainwood]

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

Moderator Action: Agreed.

@Others: Please do not turn this into a US bashing thread. This is hardly a US-only issue, in fact the standards of criminal investigations and collections of evidence in the US is much better than in many other countries. Ask Schappelle Corby.

 

[Mark1031]

No, it hasn't. There has never been an instance in the past 150 years of a man (or woman) being executed in the United States and thereafter having been found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

Well after they are executed no one will look into it anymore thus proving that no one innocent has ever been executed in the US. And as I'm sure you are well aware your state emptied it's death row because of all the falsely convicted. And while DNA evidence is all well and good it is not the best evidence as OJ showed. (It is of course best from a rational POV but juries are not always that rational). The best evidence for getting a conviction is an eye witness account which is also some of the least reliable and easy to manipulate as many psychological studies have shown.

 

[Yom]

@Ainwood: Can you add a "I do not know" option? None of the other ones really fit for me.

 

[Nobody]

Ask Schappelle Corby.

but they are not executing her. Just 20 years.

 

[Rambuchan]

Sorry Ainwood. I'm just trying to get used to the quantum shift in opinion that has taken place in OT since about 6 hours ago (and happens eveyr night). Guess it's time I go do something else. Enjoy discussing killing your fellow citizens .

 

[Sickman]

I do favour the death penalty, but only for exceptional circumstances where the crime is particularly brutal, the victim shows no remorse and the evidence is overwhelming.
The point of this is that not only can people be executed when they are innocent, they can also spend many, many years in prison when they are innocent. Is this really any more acceptable than a false execution?

I agree with those lines as well.
If somebody favors life sentence, is it better to sent innocent for 25 years in prison then?
Without reopening the case it's pretty awful outcome still.

Medieval man. When is it going to join the civilised world?

Never, there has never been such place as civilised world.
It's medieval times always.

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

Tendency to defend America for whatever it is accused for is amazing especially since some times there isn't even any attack.
I think there should be documentary about this forum.
Full of total whackos here (me included).

 

[luiz]

While I don't feel sorry for this guy, I must agree with the general thesis that humans are falible, and that a fair death penanlty system is way too expensive to be worth it. So I agree that the US and other nations should drop said pactice.

 

[blackheart]

I don't really care that this guy is now dead, he should be. He was not innocent.

Not innocent of what? You should be punished for the crimes you committed, but not the crimes you didn't have squat to do with. He was sentenced to death for that shoot while the real murderers got off with nothing.

No, it hasn't. There has never been an instance in the past 150 years of a man (or woman) being executed in the United States and thereafter having been found innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The tendency on this board to turn virtually every scrap that can be spun into an attack on America is amazing. Somebody should make a documentary about you guys.

I don't see it as an attack on America, it's an inherent flaw in all justice systems. Doesn't this article relay that Griffin was beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt NOT at the crime scene?

 

[Cheetah]

I think the poll lacks an option.

It is possible to support death penalty for Hitler, Saddam, etc, and still demand an error = 0%.