The film, “The Case for Innocence” begins with the story about Roy Criner. In 1990, Roy Criner wa

The Debates Involved in “The Case for Innocence”

The second cased discussed in the film was that of an African-American named Clyde Charles. In 1981, Charles was hitchhiking home and tried to get a ride from a police officer, when he was arrested and charged with the sexual assault of a young white nurse. The following year, Charles was tried and convicted of aggravated rape by an all White jury, and sentenced to a mandatory life sentence in the state of Louisiana. The rape box of evidence was preserved from the incident but Charles did not have access to it. For years, Charles insisted he was innocent and wanted a DNA test however, his requests were ignored, blocked, or denied by state and federal officials. Eventually his case came into the hands of The Innocence Project founded by the Cardozo Law School. The Innocence Project consists of law students and DNA experts who take on cases where DNA could prove a prisoner’s innocence. The Innocence Project finally pressured the state to agree to a DNA test in May of 1999. The results of the test excluded Charles as the person responsible for the crime. Charles was released from prison later that year.

s sent to prison for 99 years for the rape and murder of 16-year-old Deanna Ogg. His conviction was largely based on the testimonies made by three of his friends and co-workers, which seemed to indicate that he had committed the crime. After years of unsuccessful appeal, Criner looked to DNA testing, which had been developing throughout the years. Criner submitted to a DNA test in July of 1997, in an attempt to prove his innocence. The test came back negative, indicating that Criner could not have contributed the genetic material found on the victim. Criner had hoped that these results would persuade the state to grant him a new trial however, based on a 6-3 decision, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals concluded that the DNA evidence would not have changed jurors' minds. Judge Sharon Keller, who wrote for the majority opinion, found that Criner had not met the “burden of proof to claim innocence”. She also found “overwhelming, direct evidence” that established Criner's guilt beyond the doubts raised by the new DNA evidence. Judge Keller also suggested that other men could have raped Ogg however, the evidence ultimately showed that Criner was involved in the murder. The dissent, on the other hand, argued that the majority invalidated judicial review by undermining the power of the DNA evidence and moved for a new trial. The District Attorney, who had requested for an additional DNA test, dismissed the results of both tests on the grounds that Criner “could have used a condom” or that Ogg was “promiscuous”. In addition, the D.A. did not want to a new trial because then “everyone else will want a retrial”. Criner and his family continued to work for his release but, the lawyers had no success in the courts.

Some topics in this essay:
Washington’s IQ, Brown Mississippi, , Roy Criner’s, Clyde Charles, Keller Criner, Charles Washington, Washington's DNA, Deanna Ogg, Innocence Project, dna test, dna testing, “the innocence”, brown mississippi, dna evidence, film “the innocence”, tried convicted, film “the, roy criner, due process, innocence project, washington’s iq 69, earl washington jr,