|
|
Gary Graham: Who is really the murderer here?Jun 25 '00 Write an essay on this topic.It seems that “Kids and Family Editorials” really is the best place for this article. I have quite a few problems with Jesse Jackson, but no matter what his motives are on this issue, we are in agreement this time. His words were well taken when he said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth is barbaric, but killing an innocent man is murder." When a man can be convicted of murder and sentenced to death when the only evidence is the testimony of one person who claimed to see the murderer's face for two seconds at a distance of thirty five feet, while another witness claimed to have seen his face for much longer at a distance of fifteen feet, and claims that Graham is not the suspect she saw, then there is something horribly wrong with the system. When the U.S. Supreme Court and the Texas governor do nothing to get this innocent man a new trial, there is something wrong with the system. As I said, the only evidence against Graham was one very shaky eyewitness (Bernadine Skillern). None of the other seven eyewitnesses identified Graham as the murderer, and even Skillern couldn't identify Graham at first. Almost two weeks after the murder, she could not pick Graham's picture out of a photo lineup. She told the officers that she could not say that Graham was the suspect she saw, and she said "the photo of Gary Graham looked like the suspect I saw on the night of the offense except the complexion of the suspect I saw was darker and his face thinner." The next day, police presented Skillern with a live lineup. The only person in both lineups was Graham. Is it any surprise that Skillern identified the only person she recognized? This is a common trick police use to get dishonest evidence against a suspect. I said that there was no evidence other than the testimony of Skillern, but that wasn't always the case. The .22 caliber pistol that the police found on Graham represented a little bit of circumstantial evidence, until, that is, the police firearms examiner found that Graham's gun could not have been the gun that killed the victim. There wasn't even enough evidence to justify indicting Graham, so I almost can't believe we have murdered him simply because his lawyer was a lazy, stupid, a**h*l*. If you can look at this case, and say that Gary Graham is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then there is not only something wrong with the system, but there is something terribly wrong with you. What about Bush? We are probably going to go from having a president who lies, cheats and steals on a regular basis, to a president who would let an innocent man be executed when he has the power to stop it. I think I am going to throw up. Jeremy Barger  |
| Read all comments (37)|Write your own comment |
|
Ads by Google
|
