Texan declared innocent after 30 years in prison

And people still support the death penalty!

What I also find shocking is that the system is all gung-ho about this sex offender stuff. It wasn't just a rape. They threatened the poor woman's life with a gun! They kidnapped her! They carjacked her! Why does the sex offense get special attention? Why do they kick people who had consensual sex with a minor in with people who carjack, kidnap, threaten with a gun and actually rape?

What were the circumstances of his arrest and his conviction? What was his alibi? He didn't go to jail just because a woman said he looks like the guy who did it.

If you know why he went to jail, tell us. If you don't know why, then you don't know why not.

Your list of questions reads like CYA for something. An innocent man went to jail and stayed there despite DNA testing being available for 15 years or more. Something is wrong, you just don't want to see it apparently.

runwithscisssors - you don't know why as the article didn't bother to mention it. However, you probably do know that there was a trial that included more than just reciting a photo identification from the woman.

as for CYA - that's just funny. The person had a trial, so my post was inquiring as to what the other evidence was.

You apparently don't want to know the details, just to criticize so you feel smart.

You asked questions and drew a conclusion despite answering them. No sense trying to weasel out of it now.

manfromamerica: What were the circumstances of his arrest and his conviction? What was his alibi? He didn't go to jail just because a woman said he looks like the guy who did it.

And her certainly didn't go to jail based on any physical evidence.

her = he

Been proven by studies that eye-witnesses testimonials become unreliable after 24-48hrs after the incident, often even earlier.

More time passes and more unreliable they become, often contradicting earlier statements.

runwithscissors -

You asked questions and drew a conclusion despite answering them.

you are making no sense, just nitpicking. The "conclusion" is that the man had a trial that included evidence in addition to a photo ID. Do you actually deny that?? :-)

Sure, there was more evidence. Evidence even more flimsy than the witness' choice of picture! Do you deny that?

As Super says, it was not based on any physical evidence, not unless it was really bad physical evidence, or even planted.

You are correct to say it was not "just" the pictures, but is that nitpick really necessary?

runwithscissors -

Evidence even more flimsy than the witness' choice of picture! Do you deny that?

How do you know this?

You are correct to say it was not "just" the pictures,

Thanks!

but is that nitpick really necessary?

the entire trial except for the photo ID is just nitpicking?

manfromamerica: The "conclusion" is that the man had a trial that included evidence in addition to a photo ID.

Right. That's the scary part.

How do you know this?

If it was any different he would not have been in jail for 30 years! How could he have been? Something is wrong! Can't you tell?

runwithscissors - you are confusing yourself. :-)

Under Texas compensation laws for the wrongly imprisoned, Dupree is eligible for $80,000 for each year he was behind bars, plus a lifetime annuity. He could receive $2.4 million in a lump sum that is not subject to federal income tax.

Looks like much-maligned Texas is far more "progressive" than ppl realize.

manfromamerica: "However, you probably do know that there was a trial that included more than just reciting a photo identification from the woman."

It says quite clearly in the article that misidentification is: "the most common cause of wrongful convictions". Since any other 'evidence' they had in the case, if any (and since you seem to insist there was, tell us what it was, my friend), was clearly wrong.

This could have been tested FIFTEEN years ago and at least once when the court of appeals rejected him without checking. Ridiculous... and I agree with a poster above; it's moronic that people still believe in the death penalty when it's clear there are a LOT of wrongful convictions.

2.4 million isn't all that much money given he lost his entire youth in prison.

If his prosecutor(s) is/are still alive, can we have a nice long jail sentence for them?

So no one has ever beaten a misidentification? What was this guy's alibi?

It is moronic that people think the taxpayers should subsidize the lives the worst criminals.

If there were other evidence in the old trial, those evidence are obviously so inconsequential that the new DNA evidence could easily trump them, such that the DA office didn't even fight it but instead recommended his release.

Looks like much-maligned Texas is far more "progressive" than ppl realize.

I never thought I'd see the words "Texas" and "progressive" in the same sentence.

I wonder how they compensate all the innocent people they execute?

Can't take back the past and he does not seeem to be bitter. Life moves on. At least this guy is getting a consolation prize of $2.4 million tax free money. If he manages the money well, he can have comfortable retirement. There are many many more people that are falsely convicted and still serving time in Texas prison. He is the lucky one that was able to get out.