- The West Virginia Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Harrison County prosecutors improperly withheld a DNA test in a 14-year-old sexual-assault case, setting the stage for a Clarksburg man to possibly be freed from state prison and cementing a new precedent in West Virginia criminal law…
- ‘Serial’-Esque Netflix Doc Will Explore A Bizarre Wrongful Conviction Case…
- Timothy R. Johnson, convicted for murder and armed robbery, spent 29 years in jail, after signing a confession files Civil Rights lawsuit after wrongful conviction…
- Tasmania’s Chief Justice prejudiced a trial by accidentally referring to a defendant as “Mr Guilty”, it has been argued before an appeals court…
- The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office is appealing a judge’s decision to overturn the conviction of a man who served 25 years in prison for the infamous 1990 subway murder of a Utah tourist…
- Manchester Man Loses Bid to Overturn Murder Conviction…
- How a Wrongful Conviction Traumatized a Canadian Family for Generations…
- Roseanne Beckett: Wrongful conviction payout increased to more than $4 million…
- The Intellectually Disabled Man Who Spent Over 25 Years in Prison for a Wrongful Murder Conviction…
Blog Editor
Mark Godsey
Daniel P. & Judith L. Carmichael Professor of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law; Director, Center for the Global Study of Wrongful Conviction; Director, Rosenthal Institute for Justice/Ohio Innocence Project
Order Here
Contributing Editors
Justin Brooks
Professor, California Western School of Law; Director, California Innocence ProjectOrder his book Wrongful Convictions Cases & Materials 2d ed. here
Cheah Wui Ling
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
Daniel Ehighalua
Nigerian Barrister
Jessica S. Henry
Associate Professor of Justice Studies, Montclair University
Carey D. Hoffman
Director of Digital Communications, Ohio Innocence Project@OIPCommunicati1
Shiyuan Huang
Associate Professor, Shandong University Law School; Visiting Scholar, University of Cincinnati College of Law
C Ronald Huff
Professor of Criminology, Law & Society and Sociology, University of California-Irvine
Phil Locke
Science and Technology Advisor, Ohio Innocence Project and Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic
Dr. Carole McCartney
Reader in Law, Faculty of Business and Law, Northumbria University
Nancy Petro
Author and Advocate Order her book False Justice here
Kana Sasakura
Professor, Faculty of Law, Konan University Innocence Project Japan
Dr. Robert Schehr
Professor, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director, Arizona Innocence Project
Ulf Stridbeck
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway
Martin Yant
Author and Private Investigator Order his book Presumed Guilty here-
Wrongful Convictions Blog 
Just to emphasize. The West Virginia case is a MAJOR BIG DEAL.
It could set precedent that prosecutors cannot withhold exculpatory evidence during a plea bargaining process.
How can you “bargain” honestly and in good faith if the other guy has secret information????
It’s terrible that a defendant would plead guilty when there is hard evidence he doesn’t know about that proves his innocence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/11/us/west-virginia-ruling-could-clarify-the-rights-of-criminal-defendants.html
🙂 Re « How can you “bargain” honestly and in good faith if the other guy has secret information ???? »
Thanks for the info , Mark „ and the comment , Phil •
Decades ago a graduate of the University of Cincinnati Law School attorney informed me that the reason folks misbehave is that the RISK:REWARD ratio is too low or does not exist , to DISCOURAGE misbehavior ‼
▼ A Modest Proposal for a fix ▼
Enhance the RISK:REWARD ratio to such a level that not only will the prosecutors refrain from THINKING of withholding exculpatory evidence ;;; their descendants for three degrees by consanguinity AND affinity „ will argue against withholding such evidence „ whether an attorney ‼
▼ E.G. ▼
1. The Tinville solution*1
2. The Stuart’s solution to the participants in the Charles I trial *2
3. ▬►IF◄▬ a victim , relative or good friend unlawfully*3 “eliminates” a rogue prosecutor from the criminal adjudication*4 protocol „ ▬►THEN◄▬ the maximum level of crime is capped at voluntary manslaughter ‼
*1 Prosecutor Antoine Quentin Fouquier de Tinville Esq. and several subordinates were severely sanctioned for prosecutorial misconduct on 07 May 1795 •
*2 The living (and a few of the dead ‼) participants at the trial , sentence , and execution of sentence were severely sanctioned in October 1660 — An Act of Free and Generall Pardon Indempnity and Oblivion, § XXXIV. Persons excepted by Name who were concerned in the Murder of King Charles I. ¶ and of the two Persons who appeared disguised upon the Scaffold.
*3 Reserve high level crime sanctions by victims to low level rogues •
*4 The term “criminal justice” was intentionally avoided •
Kindly submitted — Nemo Me Impune Lacessit — DJB
Thursday 12 Novenber 2015 @15:43 -0500 (EST)
Reblogged this on The Colder Case Series.