Led by murder victim family members speaking out...
Telling their stories of love, forgiveness and understanding. Hoping for an end to the cycle of violence.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
An interview with Curtis McCarty
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Janelle Fowler was 7 years old when she was raped and beaten to death with a baseball bat. McCarty took police to her body in exchange for his freedom. He also was convicted of raping a 14 year old girl. You have an obligation to warn these young girls, almost still children. The judge when releasing him said she was sure he was involved in the murder of Pam Willis, but because of the problems with the evidence, had to let him go. Sounds like a technicality to me. While I understand that you have opposition to the death penalty, this is the wrong person to tout as an innocent man. Some girl, somewhere along the way, is going to get hurt. You will have some responsibiltiy in that with these lies by omission in your story. You present him as innocent without appearing to have put any research into his history at all.
If this information is true, than, of course, many people need this. We often must rely on the research of many folk we trust - who are much more adept than we are - to be able to do these stories. Would you mind giving us your facts & their references?
And yes, we do need to raise an intermittent concern in general for any and all cases - safety precautions - that each and every story may possibly be missing some important facts from all perspectives.
It's only smart, no matter the innocent reputation of some represented here or not - to use good sense and encourage others to do the same.
I will seek some advise on just how we may want to word such a statement.
Actually, I was pretty upset when I read this comment:
All that anonymous stated is accusations without giving any proof. Normally this is called defamation and something like this is actually a crime and can be punished by law. And perhaps this is also why he (or she) did not leave a name or address with it? So he can't be traced and charged for a defamatory statement?
Plus I believe this writer has a very strange idea about the American law system:
He's suggestin that a 7-year old got murdered and the district attorney let the murderer go free for showing the police the corps?
He's talking of rape of a 14-year old but there's never been a rape conviction for Curtis McCarty. Isn't it normally NOT guilty unless convicted? But for our writer this just does not seem to be true....
Curtis McCarty was cleared by DNA evidence. THIS is the reason he was set free and exonerated! see also http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/576.php
Yes, the judge expressed her personal opinion. Nevertheless this DNA evidence was there and the same judge set Curtis free. All that this expression of personal opinion shows is that the judge did not work in a professional manner: a judge should never talk about their personal feelings while being on the bench.Judges are not supposed to rule by their feelings or to rule by whom they like or dislike or to rule by their sympathy for a victim family - judges are supposed to rule by the facts. Which she did and therefore set him free.
In future if anyone here on this blog wants to accuse anyone else of anthing I definitely expect some kind of proof to come with this!
And I learned something else from this again: people who are upright don't have problems to stand up for their words and give their name and/or e-mail address.
If all of you readers could see the comments that come as anomynous, then perhaps you could all see that 95% of these are insulting, poor language or defaming statements without proof.
We definitely publih all comments no matter if for or against the death penalty as long as they're written in normal language (for example ask Dudley Sharp) but I'm definitely tired of people without manners.
Therefore: There will be no more comments posted which don't state WHO actually wrote them!
Due to our policy we haven't allowed any anomynous comments for several month now since we believe that everybody who thinks he has to say something is also able to leave his identity. Since "He Knows My Name" is not an identity a comment from this person was rejected
"IMRIGHT" does not give any information about identity neither. Since all these comments were posted in just a few minutes, it does give the feeling someone tries very hard to hurt an other person without allowing himself to be known. This is not a very upright thing to do, so these comments all get rejected
"IMRIGHT" does not give any information about identity neither. Since all these comments were posted in just a few minutes, it does give the feeling someone tries very hard to hurt an other person without allowing himself to be known. This is not a very upright thing to do, so these comments all get rejected
6 comments:
Janelle Fowler was 7 years old when she was raped and beaten to death with a baseball bat. McCarty took police to her body in exchange for his freedom. He also was convicted of raping a 14 year old girl. You have an obligation to warn these young girls, almost still children. The judge when releasing him said she was sure he was involved in the murder of Pam Willis, but because of the problems with the evidence, had to let him go. Sounds like a technicality to me. While I understand that you have opposition to the death penalty, this is the wrong person to tout as an innocent man. Some girl, somewhere along the way, is going to get hurt. You will have some responsibiltiy in that with these lies by omission in your story. You present him as innocent without appearing to have put any research into his history at all.
If this information is true, than, of course, many people need this. We often must rely on the research of many folk we trust - who are much more adept than we are - to be able to do these stories. Would you mind giving us your facts & their references?
And yes, we do need to raise an intermittent concern in general for any and all cases - safety precautions - that each and every story may possibly be missing some important facts from all perspectives.
It's only smart, no matter the innocent reputation of some represented here or not - to use good sense and encourage others to do the same.
I will seek some advise on just how we may want to word such a statement.
Do you yourself have any such suggestions?
Actually, I was pretty upset when I read this comment:
All that anonymous stated is accusations without giving any proof. Normally this is called defamation and something like this is actually a crime and can be punished by law. And perhaps this is also why he (or she) did not leave a name or address with it? So he can't be traced and charged for a defamatory statement?
Plus I believe this writer has a very strange idea about the American law system:
He's suggestin that a 7-year old got murdered and the district attorney let the murderer go free for showing the police the corps?
He's talking of rape of a 14-year old but there's never been a rape conviction for Curtis McCarty. Isn't it normally NOT guilty unless convicted? But for our writer this just does not seem to be true....
Curtis McCarty was cleared by DNA evidence. THIS is the reason he was set free and exonerated!
see also http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/576.php
Yes, the judge expressed her personal opinion. Nevertheless this DNA evidence was there and the same judge set Curtis free. All that this expression of personal opinion shows is that the judge did not work in a professional manner: a judge should never talk about their personal feelings while being on the bench.Judges are not supposed to rule by their feelings or to rule by whom they like or dislike or to rule by their sympathy for a victim family - judges are supposed to rule by the facts. Which she did and therefore set him free.
In future if anyone here on this blog wants to accuse anyone else of anthing I definitely expect some kind of proof to come with this!
And I learned something else from this again: people who are upright don't have problems to stand up for their words and give their name and/or e-mail address.
If all of you readers could see the comments that come as anomynous, then perhaps you could all see that 95% of these are insulting, poor language or defaming statements without proof.
We definitely publih all comments no matter if for or against the death penalty as long as they're written in normal language (for example ask Dudley Sharp) but I'm definitely tired of people without manners.
Therefore: There will be no more comments posted which don't state WHO actually wrote them!
Susanne
Due to our policy we haven't allowed any anomynous comments for several month now since we believe that everybody who thinks he has to say something is also able to leave his identity.
Since "He Knows My Name" is not an identity a comment from this person was rejected
"IMRIGHT" does not give any information about identity neither. Since all these comments were posted in just a few minutes, it does give the feeling someone tries very hard to hurt an other person without allowing himself to be known. This is not a very upright thing to do, so these comments all get rejected
"IMRIGHT" does not give any information about identity neither. Since all these comments were posted in just a few minutes, it does give the feeling someone tries very hard to hurt an other person without allowing himself to be known. This is not a very upright thing to do, so these comments all get rejected
Post a Comment