Maddy McCann

There has never been a proven case, post-Furman, of an innocent executed. Sadly, a murderer, e.g. Mrs. McCann, is much more likely to go free. Particularly when they can afford high-priced attorneys.

 

If you think that an innocent has never been put to death here in America, you are fooling yourself.

Innocence: List of Those Freed From Death Row

Since 1973, 126 people in 26 states have been exonerated from death row. Dozens of them after more than 10 years and frighteningly close to their execution date. Many of them after their date had been commuted.

And this is coming from someone that ardently supports the death penalty if it is used properly during trial. The sad fact is, all too often the juries do what you are doing. Convicting on a preponderance of maybes.

 

Not one person executed. Our system works.

 

Not one person executed. Our system works.

The McCann's Are Guilty! Petition : [ powered by iPetitions.com ]

The other seven of the Tapas Nine should be interrogated until one cracks.

 

Our "system" ruined 126 lives in just this particular punishment, and that's just going back to 1973.

There is NO WAY whatsoever that America hasn't executed innocent men. NO WAY! Logic and just the plain 'ol law of averages says this is impossible.

DNA has only been solid for about ten years and it is usually the only reason people have been exonerated. Many counties discard evidence shortly after a conviction, leaving no recourse for the wrongly convicted.

I support the death penalty but don't lie like a snake and tell me you find it preposterous to claim that innocents have not been killed by the state.

There is no way conceivable, given the evidence of wrongful death penalty convictions, that at least a few (probably several) people have been strapped to the electric chair thinking "WTF I didn't do a damn thing".

The reason this happens is because our juries are fickle and are easily poisoned by overzealous prosecutors that spread lies and build a case entirely upon "maybes".

 

You can't name one innocent man. What you refer to as maybes is circumstantial evidence that starts adding up. At some point a collection of evidence where not one single piece overcomes reasonable doubt establishes guilt. You have been a criminal your whole adult life and sympathize with scumbags. You are the ideal juror for a defense attorney. Ye probably thinks OJ is innocent.

The reason OJ walked free is our juries and the population at large tend to oversympathize with monied defendents i.e. the McCanns

 

I just named 126 of 'em.

They were sentenced to DIE for something they didn't even do. This is quite telling.

Circumstantial evidence can often be the only way to convict a guilty person whom has come close to committing a perfect crime.

The problem is when the reasonable doubt gets placed to the side to make room for a few easily explainable theories. There is a reason why the McCann's are not being indicted. This is because the evidence isn't there. Not even circumstantial evidence. It's all anecdotal and flawed. Every bit of it.

The only "evidence" they have barely qualifies as circumstantial. Which is a hit by cadaver dogs on their car, which wasn't even their car. It was a rental car hired 4 weeks after Maddy went missing and was driving by dozens of other people. If I cut a small chunk of my finger off in the trunk while changing a tire or what not, the scent would be recognizable by a cadaver dog as rotting human flesh.

What else they got? A few minuscule drops of blood that cannot even be identified as Maddy's?

You watch to much TV. As do our esteemed idiot juries.

This one is for you Hugo;
Gerry and Kate McCann Murdered Madeleine - South Park Style

 

No, he was guilty as hell. He got away with it because the juries are fickle and they watch too much television. It goes both ways. The evidence in that case was OVERWHELMINGLY circumstantial. As a matter of fact, it wasn't circumstantial at all. Blood in the suspects vehicle that directly matches the victim 100%, is direct physical evidence.

Ohhh c'mon Hugo. Don't try and paint me into a corner. I am a very unbiased observer that weighs every instance with an equal eye. Yes, I am a criminal. I used to be a very active one at that, committing a litany of crimes in my life. But I haven't victimized anyone since my youth. Minor assaults, drug dealing and petty thefts.

Since probably the age of 20, my only crimes have been smoking a weed that makes me giggle.

I do not sympathize with violent criminals, or any criminals that victimize other people.

 

How many of them wrongly convicted deathrow inmates had high priced attorneys? The fact is the McCanns are in the group that is most likely to get away with homicide. The initial investigation did not concentrate on them and left them the chance to dispose of the body despite the fact that statistics show the parent is the most likely perpetrator in a child abduction case.

There is a lot of blood that seems to be following the McCanns around. It must just be an unlucky coincidence.

Yes, the McCanns have lawyered up. Unless one of their partners in crime (another member of the Infamous Nine) confesses they will walk. Just like Durst, Patsy and OJ preferential treatment, plus a high priced attorney, will set them free.

On the other topic not one single innocent executed post-Furman. Not one.

Also remember the standard for a guilty verdict is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Few of those 126 were proven innocent.

 

You know that may be true but I can't believe that our system is so great that it's not possible. It's expensive to retire and even reopen a case. So no ones gonna foot the bill to check out to many past cases. But.... We've seen exonerated cases of death roe inmates due to DNA testing. I know you would not concede that it's impossible that we in fact executed an innocent man. You are merely stating the rules of engagement. And I understand. You are correct.

 

Of course, it is possible. However, it must be very rare because the anti-death penalty folks have been looking for the innocent executed poster boy for a damn long time and they got resources. It does not apply to the McCanns anyways. They are among the socioeconomic group that tends to get away with murder.

 

Yeah I agree totally. They're gonna walk because they got the money. I wouldn't doubt if they didn't already use a lot of money covering this up. I think they would've had local help buts that's my thoughts.

 

But that standard isn't always met. And this goes both ways, innocent and guilty verdicts. OJ, for example, a case wherein the preponderance of evidence was extraordinary and the reasonable doubt was quite unreasonable.

Also, to comment on what you said; "Few of those 126 were proven innocent".

Sometimes you CANNOT prove yourself innocent, no matter how much cash you dump into a lawyer. Sometimes I wonder just how many innocent people have gone to prison just for being unlucky enough to find a body./

But the worst thing that can happen to you, the one thing that mindf*cks the jury into killing you for something you did not do, is faulty eyewitness testimony.

This guy was innocent and despite prosecutorial foul play, he was wrongly convicted TWICE! F*king twice! If not for DNA, the world would have buried this man as a guilty man.

Another thing to consider; Many counties/districts actually throw away all evidence after the execution. Making the task of proving an executed man innocent, impossible.

 

Money does nothing if they have real evidence against you. Nothing. Celebrity and racial bias, now thats a different story.

'No evidence' means we cannot get in the habit of convicting people because they may be guilty, maybe, possibly, just might be if you think about it.

 

Yes money can cover up evidence. You have "tampering with evidence" all the time. Money can get you out!

 

Scenario: If Some one is paid to say you went to check on your kids every 20 minutes and the police took that into account that would be covering your tracks for money.

That was one of the conflicting stories.

 

A scenario like that would unravel as fast as it was concocted.

You either have proof of tampering or you do not. Money has nothing to do with it. OJ's trial shouldn't even be used as precedent because that trial was a f*cking circus. The excuses he came up with were the likes that a rookie public defender could have dreamed up.

As soon as it was discovered that Mark Fuhrman said "n*gger": that trial was over.

Tampering was never proven in that case on Fuhrman's behalf.

As to the McCann's; there is no evidence for them to pay to make disappear. A few microscopic traces of blood that cannot be shown from whom the blood came. I don't know why we're discussing how money can get you off when the McCann's having spent a dime defending themselves. They've spent money trying to find their daughter, but not defending themselves.

 

Maybe you should google Durst murder. They don't pay them lawyers high fees for nothing. The McCanns will most likely get away with murdering their daughter.

The McCanns' lawyer ain't working pro bono. They get a bunch of suckers paying for the best lawyer money can buy.

McCanns are using the Madeline fund to pay off their and their parents' mortgages. They gettin' other rich people to pay the lawyers. Killing their daughter has been profitable for them. Who says crime don't pay?

Kate refused to take a lie detector test. Guilty as hell.

 

I think it is really sad that so many people could say such awful things about people they don't know. They aren't using fund money as a profit to pay their mortgage. That is just so wrong, Hugo. They paid their legal costs out of pocket for some time and damn near were going broke after being out of work for 6 months, so they used some of the fund money to pay for their mortgage that they paid out of pocket with permission from the fund treasurer. They weren't working so they could concentrate on their case and their daughter. Thusly, the fund money being used to pay for 2 months of their mortgage seems justified to me. Thats probably $2,000 out of the $2.3 million they have at their disposal.

Or at least that is the understanding I had of it. Of course those that already think that they killed their daughter are jumping on this like sharks on a wounded seal. With no regard to how they would feel if they were in the same boat.

This whole thing is sicko entertainment.

I just wanna know how y'all are gonna feel if and when the case is solved and the McCann's are cleared? Maybe that is an inappropriate question but I cannot help but to wonder.

 

Dude, I would NEVER take a lie detector test. EVER. Junk science that has been proven highly fallible. Fail that and they're done, guilty or not.

Do not ever ever take one of those ignorant tests. Some critics have placed a 10%-20% fallibility rate on the lie detector. The true degree of err is unknown. 32 of the 50 states spit at the lie detector for use in court. For good reason.