Sentenced to Life For a Crime Impossible For Him to Commit!
In the news yesterday: Convicted robber says he couldn't have committed the crime
You might just ask yourself, how could this be possible? During the process of an investigation, the process of discovery and the process of an defense attorney's alibi motions you would have thought that someone along the way would have picked up on the fact that Mr. Montgomery was already incarcerated on another charge when this robbery occurred!
It appears that both sides of the system let him down. Yes, as the article states he's not the most upstanding citizen in the world, but does that make him the target of being the most likely suspect for this investigation and his subsequent conviction of LIFE for a robbery he didn't commit? Really, all these trained professions missed the most obvious fact and answer to the most basic question in the investigative process of a crime, "where were you when this crime occurred?" One would think that this would be the simplest fact to confirm by even the least experienced lawyer or investigator. Don't you really need some substantial corroborating evidence to convict a man of robbery and then sentence him to life? Let's ask ourselves some simple questions here:
1. How did he become a suspect in the first place?
2. Did he confess to the crime?
3. Was there eye-witness identification and testimony?
4. What happen to basic alibi verification by his defense attorney?
5. What real evidence was collected by investigators and evaluated by prosecutors that let them decide they had a good solid ethical case against Montgomery?
6. What happen to the idea of a fair jury trial?
What was presented to a jury that would surpass the whole reasonable doubt theory of law when there couldn't be any possible evidence linking Montgomery to the crime? Unless of course, the state's opening statement was something like, "Now I want you to close your eyes for a moment and imagine a horrific robbery by a black man..." Ridiculous right? But something ridiculous happened to get this jury to convict him.
And then to add insult to injury; they have documentation to show he was incarcerated at the time of the robbery and the courts will now wait until January to decide if these charges are wrong, to over-turn the conviction and to let him continue to sit in prison, depriving him of his freedom while our system of justice slowly wades though the neck deep BS in order to right it's wrong! It's seems so simple to convict and provide the speedy process to do so, but when it comes to undoing these messes; well they simply must first get their stories straight, immune themselves from blame and finally months or years later say "I'm sorry, we're not sure how this could have happened". And then when it comes down to the wrongful conviction lawsuits, they won't likely want to accept that responsibility either!
The Innocence Project, a non-profit group, fights to free those that have been wrongfully convicted by those "for profit" groups like lawyers, prosecutors, investigative agencies and our courts. It's no wonder it's an uphill battle and why so many innocent people are still sitting in prison. The Innocence Projects around this country fight to win for truth and freedom; while all the others are in it for power, profits and politics! I'm on the side of truth. What about you?
You might just ask yourself, how could this be possible? During the process of an investigation, the process of discovery and the process of an defense attorney's alibi motions you would have thought that someone along the way would have picked up on the fact that Mr. Montgomery was already incarcerated on another charge when this robbery occurred!
It appears that both sides of the system let him down. Yes, as the article states he's not the most upstanding citizen in the world, but does that make him the target of being the most likely suspect for this investigation and his subsequent conviction of LIFE for a robbery he didn't commit? Really, all these trained professions missed the most obvious fact and answer to the most basic question in the investigative process of a crime, "where were you when this crime occurred?" One would think that this would be the simplest fact to confirm by even the least experienced lawyer or investigator. Don't you really need some substantial corroborating evidence to convict a man of robbery and then sentence him to life? Let's ask ourselves some simple questions here:
1. How did he become a suspect in the first place?
2. Did he confess to the crime?
3. Was there eye-witness identification and testimony?
4. What happen to basic alibi verification by his defense attorney?
5. What real evidence was collected by investigators and evaluated by prosecutors that let them decide they had a good solid ethical case against Montgomery?
6. What happen to the idea of a fair jury trial?
What was presented to a jury that would surpass the whole reasonable doubt theory of law when there couldn't be any possible evidence linking Montgomery to the crime? Unless of course, the state's opening statement was something like, "Now I want you to close your eyes for a moment and imagine a horrific robbery by a black man..." Ridiculous right? But something ridiculous happened to get this jury to convict him.
And then to add insult to injury; they have documentation to show he was incarcerated at the time of the robbery and the courts will now wait until January to decide if these charges are wrong, to over-turn the conviction and to let him continue to sit in prison, depriving him of his freedom while our system of justice slowly wades though the neck deep BS in order to right it's wrong! It's seems so simple to convict and provide the speedy process to do so, but when it comes to undoing these messes; well they simply must first get their stories straight, immune themselves from blame and finally months or years later say "I'm sorry, we're not sure how this could have happened". And then when it comes down to the wrongful conviction lawsuits, they won't likely want to accept that responsibility either!
The Innocence Project, a non-profit group, fights to free those that have been wrongfully convicted by those "for profit" groups like lawyers, prosecutors, investigative agencies and our courts. It's no wonder it's an uphill battle and why so many innocent people are still sitting in prison. The Innocence Projects around this country fight to win for truth and freedom; while all the others are in it for power, profits and politics! I'm on the side of truth. What about you?
Comments
Post a Comment