Ahhhh, spoken like a true attorney Fabs.......instead of answering my question you danced with examples of other cases....I'll ask you again, why is a guy still suckin up my air space when he was convicted in 1990.....with a confession and updated DNA evidence? Why cant the victim and the people of his state get Justice?

I am attackin a problem and not a personality here, so I wont apologize OK.

PS heres the latest dance the attorneys are doing for this creep:

Cambria County
Death row inmate says car killed toddler

Attorneys seeking a new trial for a man on death row for the rape and murder of a toddler contend that there was no murder and that her injuries resulted from being run over by a car.

Stephen Rex Edmiston, 47, was convicted in 1990 of abducting 2-year-old Bobbi Jo Matthew from her home in Beccaria, Clearfield County, in October 1988 and driving her to a remote area in northern Cambria County, where he raped, beat and scalped her.

Edmiston's attorneys said recently that color slides from the autopsy indicated that the child's scalp was removed when a car backed over her and that her internal injuries were also from the car, not an assault.

Enough is enough...this stuff makes me sick....

Val,

I thought I answered your question, but I guess you need it to be as short as possible.

In essence, you have not received justice because he must receive justice before we take his life. If there is any possiblity that he is not guilty of murder, it should be listened to.

By the way, how much discovery do you think the Public Defender does? Do you think they do as much as the OJ Simpson attorneys did. Do you think they hire investigators that specialize in this stuff or forensics guys that specialize in this stuff.

At the end of the day, if there is NEW evidence that shows that this guy might not be guilty, like the DNA evidence in Illinois, he should get a new trial.

Sometimes, evidence is overlooked in trials and courts nowadays are not too willing to postpone trials and back up dockets so that a huge amount of discovery can be done.

In the end, it is all about justice and making sure that he gets his before you get yours. He has a lot more to lose than you do in this situation.

Did that answer your question, or should I limit it to a single sentence?

Let's not get testy, folks.

I detect a bit of an edge in the last two posts.

We're all friends here.

How does the pledge of allegiance end.

I think it ends with "with Liberty and JUSTICE for ALL".

It doesn't just say Justice for victims or Justice for alleged perpetrators. Justice is for everybody and it isn't a one way street.

What a lot of people do not understand is that once a Court enters a verdict it is really hard to appeal it and get it overturned. I saw a Nightline episode about two guys incarcerated for 15+ years in New York City and the Courts are unwilling to overturn the verdicts for them even though there is a ton of evidence showing that somebody else is responsible for the shooting/murder of the person. The guy will not talk without immunity and the state will not give him immunity.

Come on now, this guy already served a bunch of time for other crimes and just got out of prison. Is it worth it to keep two innocent guys locked up over this. The state should give this guy immunity, let him testify as to what happened that night, and be done with it even if it means the real killer (i.e., this guy) goes free.

Will these two guys get their 15 years back. NO. Will these two guys be compensated by the state. NO.

Where is the Justice in that?

Life isn't fair, but I don't think executing people left and right as fast as the needles and electric chairs can go is going to solve the Justice issue.

Val,

You look at it one sided, execute the guy. Me, I say let the system run its course and let the guy be executed at the end of the day.

The really sad thing is that we will never know how many innocent people have been executed/murdered by the state because they were railroaded through the system.

Trust me, the system doesn't work great all the time for victims and it doesn't work great all the time for accused people either.

We cannot do anything for the innocent, dead child, at this point, but we can take some precaution to make sure that another innocent life is not ended.

well we have accomplished one thing.....we have agreed to disagree.....you will have a few examples of justice gone awry in the next few years...with the increased technology of DNA....I would venture a few people will be exonerated for crimes they did not commit....but in the same vain, when it validates the guilty...

Hey but I will lean towards your side and figure this was just a misunderstood guy who had a very valid reason for takin this baby in the middle of the night to a deserted area...maybe he was takin her to Disney World, yea that was it...just got lost along the way...somehow her insides fell out....and the car accidently rolled over her and lost the top of her head...and I am sure it was a misunderstandin that he left her out there....you know those pesky two year olds....stuff like that happens to all of us at sometime right?:rolleyes:

As this has devolved into a two-person discussion, and all that can be said has been...

I think I'll close the thread.

This isn't a punishment, just an administrative decision because I'm going to be off-net and don't want this to catch fire while I'm gone.