State Rep. Harold Dutton has filed a bill that aims to prevent wrongful death sentences in cases that involve unreliable testimony from alleged accomplices or jailhouse snitches who receive a reward for implicating someone. HB 189, as he is calling it, would be a bill that would help the accused against individuals seeking awards such as, lesser prison sentences or even immunity. According to the article, Bill Would Restrict Informant Testimony in Death Cases in The Texas Tribune, "informants played a major role in more than 45 percent of overturned death sentences nationwide." The 45 percent does not mean that they were wrongly convicted, but it could account for some who were. The article states that, "under HB 189, prosecutors in death penalty cases would be unable to use testimony from informants or from alleged accomplices of the defendant if the evidence were obtained in exchange for immunity, leniency or any other special treatment. The measure would also make testimony from cellmates of the defendant inadmissible unless the conversation was recorded."
This would be a great bill if it were passed. I have seen and heard about people spending years and even decades behind bars because of wrongful convictions and it is tremendously sad. People who are wrongfully convicted lose their lives and their reputations and may never regain stability if they do end up released from prison. Criminal informants have a really strong incentive to lie and therefore their testimony is most likely to be completely fabricated. I am not sure why a bill like this has not been already in place but according to Jeff Blackburn, the government relies on criminal testimony when they "really need to convict somebody and they really don’t have the evidence." I don't know about everybody else but I do not think that is considered justice. For those who will be charged with a crime with the death penalty attached, hope for this bill to be passed.
Ms. Kleinschmidt's article is well written, with a direct sense of purpose. She has identified a major issue with the Texas criminal justice system, supplied supporting articles, and discussed positive benefits of the bill.
ReplyDeleteIn addressing the 45% statement from the cited article, she has provided empirical evidence of how often these easily swayed testimonies are taken into consideration. Undoubtedly, such an environment is less than just.
Along with the empirical data, she has used pathos in the concluding paragraph to increase appeal and persuasion for the bill to her audience. As humans, emotions play a critical role in the decision making process and by forcing her crowd to consider an unjust life in confinement, Kleinschmidt creates a strong argument.
Overall Kleinschmidt presents a compelling argument in favor of HB189. Her investigative nature has brought an issue to light. Raising awareness, as done here, is critical to keep elected officials in check.
Throught many years, some people have been sent to jail for wrongful convictions.On December 2, 2012, my colleague,Jennifer Kleinschmidt, talks about an article named "Bill Would Restrict Informant Testimony in Death Cases" from The Texas Tribune, that State Rep. Harold Dutton, has filed a bill that aims to prevent wrongful death sentences in cases that involve unreliable testimony from alleged accomplices or jailhouse snitches who receive a reward for implicating someone.
ReplyDeleteThis topic that my Kleinschmidt brought up was quite interesting to me. I found it interesting because another topic has come up about people being wrongfully convicted of crimes. Kleinschmidt states "that HB 189, as he is calling it, would be a bill that would help the accused against individuals seeking awards such as, lesser prison sentences or even immunity". The article states that, "under HB 189, prosecutors in death penalty cases would be unable to use testimony from informants or from alleged accomplices of the defendant if the evidence were obtained in exchange for immunity, leniency or any other special treatment. The measure would also make testimony from cellmates of the defendant inadmissible unless the conversation was recorded."
I agree with both Kleinschmidt and Dutton that it is wrongful that people are being cruelly convicted for crimes they didn't commit. Their are unreliable testimonies that are used against them and it isn't fair. I also find it unfair that they're isn't enough evidence that can accuse them for these crimes but people still get sent to jail for 50 years or more. Im pleased to know that they filed this bill so peoples future can change. Lots of people haven't committed any crimes and face serious consequences. I believe Kleinschmidt's comments on the article were great and informative. Its important to know wht types of bills could possibly be passed and it can change many people for good or bad.