Saturday, June 24, 2023

Sam Bassett – Cameron Todd Willingham

originally published 10/17/2009 (1)

To: Sam Bassett, Former Chairman, Texas Forensic Science Commission

Reply to Sam Bassett – Cameron Todd Willingham – MSNBC’s HARDBALL (below)

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Dear Mr. Bassett: 

Thank you for your reply (below).

It would have been simple and important for you to say that there is already a contradictory report to Beyler, from the Corsicana FD. 

It would have been simple and important for you to say that Beyler never said the Willingham fire wasn’t arson and never said it was accidental.

Based upon worldwide media reports, that would have cleared up much confusion. 

Many, like you, are sick of the vitriol over the guilt and innocence arguments. It would have been the ideal time for you to correct Barry Scheck, publicly, for his blatantly unsupported claim that ‘There can no longer be any doubt that an innocent person (Willingham) has been executed.” Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck says. (1) 

In the spirit of clarity, will you, now, issue a statement covering those three issues? 

You are, now, in a unique position to bring more reason to this discussion. I hope you choose to do so. 

Later note: No surprise, as of March 2024, he has not, which should tell you all you need to know, as to why Gov. Perry took him off the board.

Sincerely, Dudley Sharp 

(1) The Innocence Project, http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/2149.php Also see:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html

======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======

In a message dated 10/15/2009 10:00:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, SBassett@mbfc.com writes: 

Dear Mr. Sharp: 

Thank you for your comments.  Unlike you, I am a novice to these shows and must say that I’m not used to the back and forth format of having to try to deal with a complex topic in a 3-6 minute window.

Most of my trial work involves several hours and/or days of testimony, cross examination, arguments and the like so I hope you’ll give me some latitude in this= new arena.

Having said that, I appreciate your comments and you should know that I am not an opponent of the death penalty and I represent criminal defendants in my criminal law practice and often represent victims of crime in my family law practice.  

One of my great disappointments about recent developments in the Forensic Science Commission is the vitriolic arguments in the case about guilt or innocence as well as the death penalty.  

The Commission was committed to findings relating only to the forensic science in the case. 

Unfortunately, that good work has been interrupted and/or stopped by recent actions taken by the Governor. 

We had only begun our work and had solicited input from the State Fire Marshall’s Office as well as other law enforcement entities who certainly would have held different perspectives than Dr. Beyler.

It was only after a full consideration of same that we were going to render our final report, if I had been permitted to continue. 

I was fully aware that the criminal case involved evidence having nothing to do with forensic science and that was one of many reasons I stood for the proposition that the commission would not comment on innocent or guilt issues.

1) http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/17/re-reply-to-sam-bassett-cameron-todd-willingham-msnbcs-hardball/ 
 
======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts, herein
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Willingham: Have you read the Beyler report? It could, hardly, be worse.

Originally published 10/3/2009 (1)

Cameron Todd Willingham:
Have you read the Beyler report? (2) It could, hardly, be worse.

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Here is an, almost, unbelievable example of how bad it can be:  

p 46 “The appearance of brown stain on the porch at the front door was taken as an indicator of an accelerant spill which was ignited to start the fire. “AC Fogg did not consider or explain how this could be true in light of the early eyewitnesses who saw no fire on the porch or at the front door.”  

Dr. Beyler, try this.  There could have been multiple locations where the fire was started, not just one.  Willingham lit the fire from the porch, as the fire traveled inside, the fire died down on the porch, as the accelerant was consumed. The fire travels down the hall into the children’s room, the fire expands in the bedroom as it ignites all of the flammables.

 Thereby none of the early witnesses saw the fire on the porch.  

The brown stains on the porch had nothing to do with arson, but are representative of formerly spilled lighter fluid, which would be consistent with the number of lighter fluid containers found on the porch.  

The fire was started inside the house, in the hallway and burned toward the twins and away from the front of the house.  

All the early witnesses said there was little visible smoke and no visible fire. 

How is Beyler unaware of that?  

Everyone who has used lighter fluid in grilling, knows that if you spill some on concrete or wood and it becomes ignited, it’ll burn for a few seconds and is all but invisible and then it just goes out when the source is burned away.  

Beyler is well aware of all those possibilities, as to why none of the early witnesses saw any fire. 

 Beyler really is THAT bad.  

======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======

Secondly, Beyler has no idea how long the fire had been burning, prior to the “early witnesses”, yet, Beyler presumes, with NO evidence, that these eyewitnesses should have seen fire on the porch or doorway. 

Dr. Beyler, just because they didn’t see a fire, doesn’t mean there wasn’t one, set on the porch, earlier, when Willingham lit it. 

Reread the above.  

Beyler appears to be creating alleged evidence to exonerate Willingham. 

It makes no reasonable sense and conflicts with any notion of a scientific method.  

Then, Beyler presents this:  

p46 “The only basis proffered for Willingham as the fire setter was that had the hallway been subjected to an accelerant spill, he could not have escaped without serious lower body injuries.”  

If Willingham was on the porch when he lit the fire, how and why would he have serious lower body injuries going through the hallway?  

If Willingham decided to stay in the house and travel through the hallway, after he lit the fire, the fire could have remained very small in the hallway, when only a small amount of accelerant was used.

There would be no reason for him to suffer any lower body burns.  

Willingham had several options to leave the house without coming near to the fire.  

Beyler is aware of all of those options, but failed to mention them.  

Is Beyler a moronic defense attorney or an arson expert?  

As I have stated, repeatedly, depend on more evidence not less and wait upon rebuttals, prior to reaching a final conclusion. 

Read everything available.  

======
Texas State Fire Marshall's Response to Dr. Beyler's Report
Exhibit 12, computer  counter 218-226 out of 934
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1454542/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf  
 
Corsicana Fire Dept Response to Dr. Beyler's Report
Exhibit 13, computer counter 227-242 out of 934
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1454542/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf 
 
Texas State Fire Marshall's Response to TFSC
Exhibit 28, computer counter 457-465 out of 934
https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1454542/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf  
 ======

FN

1) http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/03/have-you-read-the-beyler-report-from-dudley-sharp-contact-at-bottom/

2) Beyler Report http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=10401390  

 ======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone in a public policy debate
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts, herein
======
 
Partial CV

Posted by at

Media Disaster: Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Colludes w/ the Anti-death Penalty Movement

A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

Undoubtedly, you can find, or have found, hundreds of media outlets proclaiming Willingham's innocence.

They are lying to you and/or have failed to, thoroughly, fact check and vet the case, and/or were fooled, as detailed . . . or, often, from my experience:

When Media Colludes with the Anti-death Penalty Movement

1) Rebuttal: "Trial by Fire: Did Texas execute an innocent man?":
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media meltdown & the death penalty  https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2009/10/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html

This also destroys the film "Incendiary: The Willingham Case"
 
2) Cameron Todd Willingham: Guilty By Forensic Science  https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2019/04/cameron-todd-willingham-guilty-by.html  

======
The Death Row "Exonerated"/"Innocent" Frauds 
 71-83% Error Rate in Death Row "Innocent" Claims, 
Well Known Since 1998
=======

3) Rebuttal to Craig Beyler:
The Corsicana Fire Dept Response to Dr. Craig Beyler's Report 
Re: Willigham Matter, p 118-138 (as per computer counter), 9/29/2009, from Report of the Texas Forensic Science Commission: Willingham/Willis Investigation, 4/15/2011,

4)  Cameron Todd Willingham:
Have you read the Beyler report? (2) It could, hardly, be worse.
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/willingham-have-you-read-beyler-report.html 

5) Why Gov. Perry shook up the Texas Forensic Science Commission

======
Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of anyone within a public policy debate and which rebut all anti-death penalty claims.
  
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
(7 pro-death penalty experts are included)
======

6)   Reply to Sam Bassett, former Chairman, 
Texas Forensic Science Commission:
Cameron Todd Willingham – MSNBC’s HARDBALL
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/sam-bassett-cameron-todd-willingham.html 
 
7) Does (Did) The Texas Forensic Science Commission have any jurisdiction in Willingham case?

======
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======

8)  Innocence Project Report: Cameron Todd Willingham 

======
Media Disasters in Death Penalty Stories
As a general rule, media refuses to fact check/vet anti-death penalty claims . . . even worse, many in the media know their stories are false and/or misleading.  This section title, really, defines why this website is necessary.
======

9) District Attorney John Jackson cleared in "Trial By Fire" case (2017) 
 
10) "Cameron Todd Willingham Guilty" No doubts: 
Those closest to case shed no tears for Willingham

======

11) Rebuttal: The film "Trial by Fire"

an absurd film, as was "Incendiary: The Willingham Case"

12) Ex-relative: Executed inmate confessed to murders, 
October 16, 2009

13)  What the Willingham case is really about

======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Friday, June 23, 2023

Does Forensic Science Comm. have any jurisdiction in Willingham case?

originally published 1/28/2011

Does Forensic Science Comm. have any jurisdiction in Willingham case? 

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom  

Regarding the jurisdiction, by time, of the Texas Forensic Science Commission in the Willingham case: It seems clear that the TFSC has no jurisdiction in this case. But that is why we have AG opinions. 

Added later - NOTE: The AG determined the obvious, the TFSC broke the law.

The question in not why the TFSC has submitted questions to the Texas AG for his opinion, now, but why and how the TFSC could have spent all of the time, money and other resources on the Willingham case, without being responsible enough to get an opinion from the AG, prior to all of those expenditures. 

Were John Bradley and R. Lowell Thompson, Navarro County District Attorney, the only ones who took the time to read the law? Of course not. 

Has the TFSC been breaking the law this entire time?  

added later: Yes. Quite obvious.

Review: CAPS/BOLD/UNDERLINE/QUOTE For my emphasis 

“WILLINGHAM WAS EXECUTED IN 2004”

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, TITLE 1. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CHAPTER 38. EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL ACTIONS Art. 38.35.  FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF EVIDENCE; ADMISSIBILITY. SECTION 21.  Article 38.35, Code of Criminal Procedure, as amended by this Act,  (fn 2) “APPLIES ONLY TO THE ADMISSABILITY OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL PROCEDING THAT COMMENCES ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT.” 

(NOTE: WHICH IS 9/01/05)

The admissibility of physical evidence in a criminal proceeding that commenced before the effective date of this Act is governed by the law in effect at the time the proceeding commenced, and that law is continued in effect for that purpose.

 SECTION 22.  (a) “THE CHANGE IN THE LAW MADE BY THIS ACT APPLIES TO:  

(1)  EVIDENCE TESTED OR OFFERED INTO EVIENCE ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS OF THIS ACT (9/01/05); AND

(2)  AN INDIVIDUAL WHO, ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ACT (9/01/05):

(A)  IS CONFINED IN A PENAL INSTITUTION OPERATED BY OR UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE TEXAS DEPATEMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 411.148(a)(1)

(B), GOVERNMENT CODE, AS AMENDED BY THIS ACT;” SNIP applies to TYC and DNA  SECTION 23.  “THIS ACT TAKES EFFECT September 1, 2005."        

If the law doesn’t mean what it says, then why does it say it? Just a thought.

The law can always be changed.

The question should be asked. “As the law seems clear, why wasn’t it followed?” or “Why wasn’t an AG opinion requested before all of the resources were expended?”

======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======

FN

(1) Does Forensic Science Comm. have any jurisdiction in Willingham case?http://homicidesurvivors.com/2011/01/28/does-forensic-science-comm-have-any-jurisdiction-in-willingham-case/

(2) links http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/CR/htm/Cr.38.htm  http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/79R/billtext/html/HB01068F

======

600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Additional research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts included
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Media Disaster: What the Willingham case is really about

Originally published 10/27/2009 (1)

Reply to Dallas Morning News “What the Willingham case is really about”  

RE:  Editorial: “What the Willingham case is really about”, Dallas Morning News, October 26, 2009 

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

The Dallas Morning News (DMN) writes:” What counts most is the truth, no matter what the ultimate verdict.”. 

We can all hope.       

The DMN, until recently, has been extremely biased in this case. This anti-death penalty media bias, by many in the media, has been, overwhelming, throughout the US, over the past two months, in the Willingham case, just as it has, over the last two decades, with most death penalty issues (2).

The truth has suffered, greatly.       

For example, instead of just reviewing the Chicago Tribunes’ Mills’ CYA piece, possibly the DMN and others will look at Stacy Kuykendall’s revised or contradictory statements, her standing by Todd Willingham, then condemning him, to determine if these are common characteristics of a woman suffering what is commonly called Battered Woman Syndrome.

Evidently, it didn’t even cross Mills’ mind. 

Instead of the DMN’s backhanded “We’re not calling (Stacy) Kuykendall a liar. “, maybe some should look into that.

======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======

Maybe many in the media could make things a little less painful for her (and everyone else) by being more thorough.

The DMN has already revealed one major error in the Beyler Report. Look harder.    

The Corsican Fire Department Report (CFDR) made some solid points against Beyler with regard to both errors and bias and the Texas Fire Marshal’s (TFM) office has already stated that they will be standing by their expert’s, Vasquez’, forensics, meaning that they will have to correct the Beyler Report in some convincing fashion, in order to defend Vasquez.

Craig Beyler is no slouch.

We are still waiting on what may be an updated CFDR. They stated they lacked much of the time and the evidence necessary to deliver a thorough report. 

Due to Perry’s delay, they, now, have that time. And we are still waiting for the TFM Report.     

While lacking all of that, as well as having no idea where a thorough, objective investigation by DMN reporters (or others’) may, eventually, lead, when it has already uncovered some damaging information, re Beyler, what does the DMN editorial board say, as do many others?  . . . that Perry shamelessly thwarted the investigation by sacking commission members, that he blocked that search for truth and he should not fear putting the case under the microscope.     

Can the DMN or others support any of that, with the facts? Of course not. 

So much for a search for truth. 

In other words, the DMN, as many, have already reached a verdict.

Is it possible that Perry did the prudent thing with all of the facts that he had before him? Of course.     

Is it possible that he made a strictly political, stupid decision, based, only, upon course self protection? Of course.     

Neither the DMN nor anyone else in the media can know, for sure. Not yet.   

FN

1) Reply to Dallas Morning News “What the Willingham case is really about”   http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/27/reply-to-dalls-morning-news-what-the-willingham-case-is-really-about/

2) Full rebuttal of media's anti-death penalty claims and /or showing why the pro-death penalty positions are stronger:

Research, w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone in a public policy debate  

The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts, herein

600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 

====== 
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at

Innocence Project Report: Cameron Todd Willingham

Originally published 10/26/2009 (1)

Innocence Project Report: Cameron Todd Willingham 

From:  Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom   

In the Willingham case, the Innocent Project Report (IPR), in their executive Summary, found the fire was not an incendiary fire (2).

The IPR provided no evidence of that and no other source for the fire was established. 

Discounting their statement goes to their lack of proof/evidence for the claim, for which they have none.

 It may go to a professional standard that says, if you can’t prove it’s arson, then it is accidental.  Not true, of course, at least in this case.       

Therefore, the IP Executive Summary conclusion is highly misleading or a lie, based only upon this layman’s understanding of “the fire was not an incendiary fire."

Not surprising. Barry Scheck, the head of the Innocence Project, states:

"There can no longer be any doubt that an innocent person (Willingham) has been executed.” (3)        

How, blatantly, dishonest can Scheck get? All Scheck is doing is removing any remaining doubt as to the IP’s bias and hurting an already damaged image of forensic scientists as anything but objective parties. Barry, why do that? 

Likely, it is only based on a partisan anti-death penalty bias. No excuse.         

Has the media gone after Sheck on this? Of course not. This goes to the media’s unchallenged bias against the death penalty in this, as in many death penalty cases.  Same ole story.   

======
A Complete Compilation:
Cameron Todd Willingham: Media Meltdown & the Death Penalty
When Media & Anti-death Penalty Advocates Are the Same 
https://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2023/06/cameron-todd-willingham-media-meltdown.html
and
A Repudiation of Journalism, by Journalists?
The Society of Professional Journalists & The Sigma Delta Chi Award: 
======    

The IPR, a short review:       

NOTE: I have significant problems with the way the IPR was written. The IPR often travels down one road, only, seemingly, that of the defense in a criminal case. What the IPR fails to do, is tell the reader the full story.       

I quote sections of the IPR, below, and after those are my reply, which is “WTIFTM” or “what the IPR forgot to mention”.       

IPR: “This process can create patterns on those surfaces of the type described by Mr. Vasquez as “puddle configurations” and “pour patterns.” More importantly, these patterns can be created in compartment fires where no flammable liquids were introduced.” (fn 2, p 9, lines 8-11)

WTIFTM: It also can be created by flammable liquids in an arson fire. Possibly, persistent patterns remained.       

IPR: “Based on this work, significant differences in the condition and appearance of the fire compartments and contents were observed between experiments with the same method of ignition. Simply stated, the patterns produced could not be used to discriminate an arson fire from an accidental fire.” (fn2, p9, lines 28-31)

WTIFTM: Precisely, could have been arson, could have been accidental. Possibly, persistent patterns remained.       

IPR: “Even if we assume for the sake of argument that Mr. Vasquez’s repeated assertions that there was liquid accelerant used in this fire are correct, the distance between the three alleged areas of origin would not constitute an effective separation for a flammable liquid because the vapor would simply flash across the intervening space between the alleged pools of liquid fuel. In essence, there could only have been one origin given Mr. Vasquez’s determination.” (fn 2, p 12, lines 3-8)   

WTIFTM: Yes, assuming that Vasquez was correct, the fire, most certainly, could have been arson. There could have been three origination points for the arson. Yet, the effects of a flashover may have erased any evidence of separation, possibly making an arson fire indistinguishable from an accidental fire and producing evidence of a single origin, when there may have been multiple origins. Possibly, persistent patterns remained.

IPR: “Each and every one of the “indicators” listed by Mr. Vasquez means absolutely nothing, and, in fact, is expected in the context of a fire that has achieved full room involvement, as this fire clearly did. Low burning, charred flooring and burning underneath items of furniture are common characteristics of a fully involved fire.34 They mean nothing with respect to the origin and cause of the fire, and they absolutely do not support any hypothesis that the fire had been accelerated by liquid fuels.” (fn 2, p17 lines 19-24)       

WTIFTM: In fact, it supports neither hypothesis, that it was arson or accidental. It could have been either. Possibly, persistent patterns remained. 

IPR: “Further, as stated earlier, it is impossible for flammable liquid to flow underneath a threshold and burn, because there is a lack of available oxygen under the threshold to support flaming combustion. (fn 2, p 17, lines 41-43)

WTIFTM: To state the obvious, it depends upon how secure the threshold is. If loose, worn, old and cracked, there may be sufficient oxygen to support flaming combustion. 

IPR: “All of the (IPR) authors have seen reports like this one. If the Fire Marshal’s determination is wrong, his identification of the “lies” told by the defendant is equally wrong.”  (fn 2m p18, lines 13, 14)

WTIFTM: In this case, that may not be true. It is important to note the IPR said ” ‘If’ the fire marshal’s determination is wrong. Because the IPR cannot conclude arson or accidental, it is very possible that the Fire Marshall was correct in his conclusion of arson, even though his methodology and foundation for determining that may have been in error. He may have, allegedly, bumbled his way into the correct conclusion. If arson, Willingham’s lies may have been properly identified, bumbles and all. While the IPR may have made a good case for flawed forensics, they cannot dispute that the fire may have been arson. Therefore, the conclusion of the Fire Marshall may be correct, even though the method of arriving at it, possibly, was not. Possibly, persistent patterns remained.       

NOTE: we have, still, not seen the updated Corsicana Fire Department Report, if there will be one. I suspect there will be. Nor have we seen the report by the Texas Fire Marshal’s office, although we do have a statement from them that they will be standing by their expert, Vasquez’, report.

As I have, repeatedly stated, since August, do not make hasty decisions in this case. It has a long way to go.

1)  Innocence Project Report: Cameron Todd Willingham http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/10/26/innocence-project-report-cameron-todd-willingham/ 

2) http://www.innocenceproject.org/docs/ArsonReviewReport.pdf

3) http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/2149.php

======
600+ pro death penalty quotes from murder victim's families &
3300+ from some of the greatest thinkers in history
http://prodpquotes.info/ 
====== 
======
 
Additional research,w/sources, w/fact checking/vetting & critical thinking, as required of everyone.  
 
The Death Penalty: Justice & Saving More Innocents
and
Students, Academics & Journalists: Death Penalty Research
7 pro-death penalty experts, herein
======
 
Partial CV
Posted by at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)