The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds
71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent"/"Exonerated" Claims,
Well Known Since 2000
from: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, pro death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds
1) 1988 The modern era death row "exoneration"/"innocent" frauds, errors and/or misdirections (FEMS) appear to have been inspired by a study by, well, known anti-death penalty activists Bedau and Radelet (1987, Stanford Law Review), both of whom, also, happen to be academics.
Depending upon category, Bedau and Radelet were, 50%, 60% and 100% in "error" with their claims, as I detailed.
Cassell and Markman, rebutted their nonsense in 1988 (Stanford Law Review).
2) 1992 The Innocence Project (DPIC) claims that, to take cases:
"There is physical evidence that, if subjected to DNA testing, will prove that the defendant is actually innocent."
"The Innocence Project does NOT review claims where DNA testing cannot prove innocence."
Both are untrue, based upon the McCarty case (14, below).
It's another example of frauds errors and/or misdirections (FEMS).
3) 1993 Just another perfect example:
The Hurricane was not and could not be "exonerated".
"Hurricane" Carter appointed executive director of the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted. (Guilty: Hurricane Carter,
4) 1998 The first, most obvious and semi honest public confirmation of the modern era "innocent"/"exonerated" FEMS occurred, when Northwestern U. Prof. Lawrence Marshall, the organizer of the 1998 Wrongfully Convicted on Death Row Conference in Chicago, stated that "In a good half of these 75 cases, the exoneration is so complete that it erases any doubt whatsoever."
Combining those two (1988 & 1998), with a 50-100% error rate, one admitted and one obvious, we have a template for the FEMS to follow. Note how predictive the 75% FEMS rate average has become, through today.
Somehow, the media and academia "missed" it.
5) Since 1998, the DPIC "exoneration" and/or "innocence" numbers have been an, easily, discovered deception, with a 71-83% error/fraud rate, as basic, simple fact checking/vetting confirms:
Deception: The DPIC "Exonerated"/"Innocence" List
(see fact checking/vetting model - use it)
6) 2000 The play "The Exonerated" - are any actually innocent?
7) 2000 "Death on Hold?", Dudley Sharp, Op/ed, Fort Worth Star Telegram, 2/5/00.
The first op/ed, suggesting that, possibly, half of the "exonerated"/"innocent" from death row may be FEMS.
From 1988-2000, with anyone who fact checked and vetted, they would have discovered that frauds, errors and mis-directions (FEMS) had become an intentional, integral part of the anti-death penalty mission.
8) 2002 "Not So Innocent", National Review, 1/14/2002,
Detailed deconstruction of how anti-death penalty folks lie, with regard to the "innocent"/"exonerated" from death row. It includes a number of well-known anti-death penalty folks trying to explain why they are so misleading.
It's telling to see how anti-death penalty leadership explains that lying is appropriate.
9) 2003 Not a death penalty case but a great example of media, etc. refusing to fact check/vet/research, as well as intentional deception.
The Absurdity of the "Exonerated Five":
The very obvious frauds of the Central Park Five
Yep, the media "missed" it.
10) 2005: New York Times: Death Row Innocent Claims 71% False
Death Row, "Exonerations", Media & Intentional Fraud
NYTimes Justice/ Supreme Court reporter Adam Liptak didn't "miss" it, but most others do.
11) 2006: One of the greatest examples of anti-death penalty mis-information, with the media, lapping it up, for years and years.
DNA Confirms Executed Man's (Roger Keith Coleman's) Guilt, 1/12/2006
at The Innocent Frauds: Standard Anti-Death Penalty Deception
The media didn't just "miss" it, they contributed with the "error"/fraud, as has become a pattern.
12) 2006-2008 Exoneration Inflation: Justice Scalia’s Concurrence in Kansas v. Marsh by Ward A. Campbell, Summer 2008, IACJ Journal, p 49-63
In detail, shows how deceptive and untrustworthy the DPIC "Innocence" List is, while finding a 0.5% rate of actual innocents found guilty, resulting in a 99.5% accuracy rate in factually guilty findings, with the 0.5% factually innocent freed, with one dying of illness on death row.
13) 2011 Innocence Project (IP) Invents False Confessions
150% fraud rate in "confessions"? (also see para 23, below)
14) 2011 McCARTY v. GILCHRIST
I, randomly, picked this one DNA "exonerated" case (See IP and NRE), making one wonder how many DNA "exonerations" are guilty and/or have no proof of "innocence"/"exoneration", as this case.
Based upon para 1-19, I suspect the DNA "innocent"/"exonerated" fraud, error and/or mis-direction rate (FEM) could be as ahigh as 50-70%, just based upon
a) the odds of me, randomly, picking out this one case,
b) in consideration of the 71-83% error/fraud rate of the DPIC, establishing a pattern of deception from these groups; and
c) which is confirmed with NRE, which has the vast majority of its criteria for declaring cases "innocent"/"exonerated", requiring no proof of "innocence" (para 15), just as DPIC.
as of 3/2023, 12 years later, both IP and NRE, intentionally, leave all of this out, which should tell you their dedication to deception.
See para 3) How many DNA exonerations are guilty? within
Death Row, "Exonerations", Media & Intentional Fraud https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/06/death-row-exonerations-intentional-fraud.html
15) 2012 Deceptions: "Exonerations", as defined by
The National Registry of Exonerations (NRE)
As of 2012, it was blatant and appears coordinated, with DPIC, IP, NRE, many in media and academia, that FEMS are an intentional, integral part of their mission.
16) 2014: "Innocence fraud demands prosecutor vigilance", JOHN M. COLLINS JR., The Prosecutor, OCTOBER / NOVEMBER / DECEMBER / 2014
Collins is the chief managing editor of Crime Lab Report and the principal instructor and consultant with The Forensic Foundations Group
(www.forensicfoundations.com). He has studied and published on overturned convictions and their causes.
Media vigilance? Abandoned.
17) 2015 The 4.1% "Innocent" on Death Row: More Nonsense
18) The "Innocent", the "Exonerated" & Death Row
An Open Fraud in the Death Penalty Debate:
How Death Penalty Opponents Lie
19) Crime, Film, & Fraud: Shameless Hollywood (and others)
Too Often Glorifying Murderers, Slandering Victims
The Death Penalty/Executions: Saving More Innocents
20) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-death-penalty-do-innocents-matter.html
21) Deterrence, Death Penalties & Executions https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/deterrence-death-penalties-executions.html
22) Innocents More at Risk Without Death Penalty
23) "Opponents in capital punishment have blood on their hands", Dennis Prager, TOWNHALL, 11/29/05,
24) "A Death Penalty Red Herring: The Inanity and Hypocrisy of Perfection", Lester Jackson Ph.D.
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/11/03/a-death-penalty-red-herring-the-inanity-and-hypocrisy-of-perfection.aspx
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/11/03/a-death-penalty-red-herring-the-inanity-and-hypocrisy-of-perfection.aspx
25) PROTECTING THE INNOCENT FROM FALSE CONFESSIONS AND LOST CONFESSIONS-AND FROM MIRANDA, PAUL G. CASSELL, JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY, Vol. 88, No. 2, 1998,
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
======
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.
1) The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
Partial CV
