Innocent man convicted of rape, dies in prison

[Chris]

(CNN) -- A Texas district court judge Friday reversed the conviction of a man who died in prison nearly a decade ago, almost two decades into a prison sentence for a rape he swore he did not commit, CNN affiliate KXAN reported.

Timothy Cole died in prison while serving a sentence for a rape DNA tests show he did not commit.

Timothy Cole was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison for the 1985 rape of 20-year-old Michele Mallin. He maintained his innocence, but it was not confirmed by DNA until years after his 1999 death, when another inmate confessed to the rape.

Texan who died in prison cleared of rape conviction - CNN.com

 

[Anguille]

That's a very very sad story.

"But there was one detail: Mallin told police her attacker was a smoker. "He was smoking the entire time."
Cole, who suffered from severe asthma, "was never a smoker," said his brother, Cory Session. "He took daily medications [for asthma] when he was younger."
"He was the sacrificial lamb. To them, my brother was the Tech rapist, there was no backtracking. It was the trial of the decade for Lubbock."

 

[Sidestreamer]

In Texas, as long as you look the part... black skin... black skin.... must be a negro... yeah, he raped her!

 

[KittenKoder]

Doesn't surprise me one bit.

 

[xsited1]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

 

[Chris]

Thank God for DNA.

Look how long JonBenet Ramsey's parents were suspects until they found someone else's DNA on her body.

 

[KittenKoder]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

Actually, death is a better alternative. Even put on probation he would have been labeled a sex offender and would never be allowed to live a normal life. But by fighting it the case can be reopened and once found innocent he could have had the whole thing overturned and gotten his name taken off the list. The problem is that if someone takes a plea bargain their names are stuck on the sex offender registry, it's like admitting to some crime even if not the one convicted of. It's the primary reason I think the registered sex offender list is a bad idea, it doesn't protect people really (a false sense of security is not true security) and only places the few who are actually innocent in danger of "witch hunts" ... or something like this case will occur.

 

[KittenKoder]

Thank God for DNA.

Look how long JonBenet Ramsey's parents were suspects until they found someone else's DNA on her body.

Many courts still resist DNA evidence and will often work to make it inadmissible. If they would only stop fighting it, it is the best tool in catching criminals and avoiding mistakes like this.

 

[garyd]

There is no damn reason DNA evidence in cases like this ought not to be mandatory.

The real problem here isn't so much racism as it is that neither the defense attorney or the prosecutor are truly interested in the truth. They are interested in winning and losing and the truth becomes just another innocent bystander, the victim of collateral damage. The only profession that truly needs to be nationalized is the legal profession at least as regards criminal proceedings.

Kitten the sex offender registry didn't exist at the time that man was convicted.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Thank God for DNA.

Look how long JonBenet Ramsey's parents were suspects until they found someone else's DNA on her body.

Many courts still resist DNA evidence and will often work to make it inadmissible. If they would only stop fighting it, it is the best tool in catching criminals and avoiding mistakes like this.

Provide evidence of this claim. Or is this another one of your " I just said it for effect" stories?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There is no damn reason DNA evidence in cases like this ought not to be mandatory.

The real problem here isn't so much racism as it is that neither the defense attorney or the prosecutor are truly interested in the truth. They are interested in winning and losing and the truth becomes just another innocent bystander, the victim of collateral damage. The only profession that truly needs to be nationalized is the legal profession at least as regards criminal proceedings.

Kitten the sex offender registry didn't exist at the time that man was convicted.

And of course when this case went to trial DNA was so easily tested and had such stellar results. You two are making claims that simply are not true. Lawyers are scum? Sure I can buy that, but they also do their jobs. DA's are out for convictions? THAT is the problem. Until we start holding DA's to the oath they took when they signed up, which is to seek JUSTICE for the people and not see how many cases they can win, nothing will change. But the people buy into it, come reelection time people want to see that conviction list as long as it can be.

ANY DA that prosecutes just because they can get a conviction should be investigated for violating their oath of office and the ethics of their position. Mistakes will happen and innocent people will go to jail, no system is perfect. BUT if we can not get away from the idea that how many convictions a DA has determines how good they are we will see DA's try people they do not believe are guilty.

 

[inquisitive]

Did anyone ever read that the words "I'm sorry", came out of the victims mouth? She sounded very non-schalante. I would feel absolutely horrible if I sent the wrong man to prison!

 

[editec]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

Yeah...those innocent people who protest their innocence when in the clutches of the criminal justice system are making a mistake.

Better to make it easier on everyone and just accept the fact that you must be guilty since the police think you are.

And for sure those innocent people who demand a trial have to be punished far more than the truly guilty who won't.

What this really shows us is that eyewitnesses are often wrong.

I will remind you all that if the criminal justice system is only wrong 1 out of every 100 cases, then about 23,000 innocent people are now residing in hell on earth.

Sucks to be them, huh?

 

[xsited1]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

Yeah...those innocent people who protest their innocence when in the clutches of the criminal justice system are making a mistake.

Better to make it easier on everyone and just accept the fact that you must be guilty since the police think you are.

And for sure those innocent people who demand a trial have to be punished far more than the truly guilty who won't.

What this really shows us is that eyewitnesses are often wrong.

I will remind you all that if the criminal justice system is only wrong 1 out of every 100 cases, then about 23,000 innocent people are now residing in hell on earth.

Sucks to be them, huh?

What this shows is that you have to know how to play the criminal justice system. This guy flirted with an undercover cop and offered to give her a ride home. Since 'justice' is given to the side who has the stronger case, his legal counsel should have told him that there was a big possibility that he would lose.

 

[indago]

In Texas, as long as you look the part... black skin... black skin.... must be a negro... yeah, he raped her!

I was on the ACLU message board a few years back, and there was a string about illegal police arrests. There were a couple of police persons there discussing also. A black woman related an incident where she was standing in a store waiting for her grandmother buying lottery tickets. The woman was eating peanuts from a bag. A man walked by and noticed her eating the peanuts. He then stopped and asked to see a receipt for the peanuts. The woman asked him for a badge. The man was not dressed as a policeman. The confrontation became hostile, and the woman was arrested for resisting arrest. The woman related that there were several errors in the "affidavit" that the officer filed. One of the policemen on the message board excused the officers demeanor by declaring: "I have personally observed people pop open stuff inside of stores, eat something, and then put the bag/box/can back on the shelf." I wrote back: "Well, of course; why didn't I think of that; how stupid of me; she's black, and she's eating peanuts. She obviously stole them. Now all you have to do is drag her down to the precinct, charge her with an EPWB, and beat on her until she admits it."

The policeman wrote back, asking what an EPWB was. I noted: "(EPWB — Eating Peanuts While Black)"

 

[auditor0007]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

Reasonable doubt rarely comes into play in felony cases, and it only seems to be getting worse. I've always said that it's worse to convict an innocent person than to let a guilty one go free.

 

[auditor0007]

There is no damn reason DNA evidence in cases like this ought not to be mandatory.

The real problem here isn't so much racism as it is that neither the defense attorney or the prosecutor are truly interested in the truth. They are interested in winning and losing and the truth becomes just another innocent bystander, the victim of collateral damage. The only profession that truly needs to be nationalized is the legal profession at least as regards criminal proceedings.

Kitten the sex offender registry didn't exist at the time that man was convicted.

You hit the nail on the head. Prosecutors only care about their record.

 

[auditor0007]

Very sad.

He declined a plea bargain offer that would have put him on probation... Wow. That was a big mistake. Our justice system favors those who can make the best argument. He either should have been better represented or swallowed his pride. Based on what I've read, he didn't sound very intelligent. All the more reason to get good legal representation. Of course, that costs money...

Yeah...those innocent people who protest their innocence when in the clutches of the criminal justice system are making a mistake.

Better to make it easier on everyone and just accept the fact that you must be guilty since the police think you are.

And for sure those innocent people who demand a trial have to be punished far more than the truly guilty who won't.

What this really shows us is that eyewitnesses are often wrong.

I will remind you all that if the criminal justice system is only wrong 1 out of every 100 cases, then about 23,000 innocent people are now residing in hell on earth.

Sucks to be them, huh?

I don't doubt that there are a great many innocent people serving time for crimes they did not commit. The worst thing about this case is that the evidence was there that should have exonerated this man. He never smoked, so how in the hell could he have been the culprit? The prosecutor, judge, and jury all disregarded the most important peace of evidence. That one bit of information certainly was enough to bring reasonable doubt.

 

[editec]

It's a damned shame that polygraphs tests aren't 100% accurate, isn't it?

The system we have sucks, but sadly it's the best system we can devise.

I STILL object to the fact that if you go to trial, your punishment is greater than if you cop a plea, though.

That's just WRONG.

 

[Anguille]

That's a very very sad story.

"But there was one detail: Mallin told police her attacker was a smoker. "He was smoking the entire time."
Cole, who suffered from severe asthma, "was never a smoker," said his brother, Cory Session. "He took daily medications [for asthma] when he was younger."
"He was the sacrificial lamb. To them, my brother was the Tech rapist, there was no backtracking. It was the trial of the decade for Lubbock."

I wonder how this very obvious clue got over looked. Must have been mostly smokers prosecuting him and sitting on the jury.