In a country built off of the belief of innocent until proven guilty, it seems that quite the opposite is happening in a Texas case. In 1988, Ben Spencer was convicted for murder and robbery. Later, it would be concluded that the testimony which had led to his conviction was false. The judge at the time said that his conviction should be overturned. But it was not. Instead, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals said that there must be evidence presented against his conviction in order for an appeal to be considered. In a case where the conviction appears to be unfounded and without evidence, it is quite contradictory to our national belief in "innocent until proven guilty". This NYT article written by Brandi Grissom describes the case of Ben Spencer and calls attention to the ridiculousness of the fact that his case has gone unnoticed and remained dormant. Grissom presents the article in what seems to be a neutral tone, but in doing so still is able to persuade the reader that Spencer deserves justice. Accompanying the article is a picture of a man who is in the distance and covered in darkness. It is used to illustrate the exact spot and distance where Spencer was claimed to be seen committing the act. By including this picture, the reader can really see how unfounded the evidence really is. This picture was essential for the reader to understand the problem that Grissom is describing. If the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has any sense of logic, it is only a matter of time that Grissom is finally exonerated, otherwise our justice system is truly broken.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us/declared-innocent-in-a-killing-but-still-behind-bars.html?src=recg
No comments:
Post a Comment