Alabama to Execute T. Arthur after DNA proves he was not there.

[Bo]

April 15, 2009 Court Ordered DNA test results are in!!!!

Ignoring recent DNA results , the State of Alabama is moving forward with a new execution date.

1. Thomas Arthur has sat on Alabama's death row for over 25 years for murdering
Troy Wicker, and he has always maintained his innocence.

2. He has been scheduled for execution 4 times. Hair and finger prints found at the
crime scene did not match him. No physical evidence linked him to the murder.
No murder weapon was ever found. Eye witnesses said he was 75 miles away
when the murder was committed. Recent DNA testing of the crime scene evidence
came back negative for Thomas Arthur.

3. The state's key witness, the victims wife, Judy Wicker (Mary Turner now) was
convicted of murdering her husband for $90,000.00 of insurance money. She
was given a life sentence.In 7 sworn statements while under oath, Judy Wicker
testified Thomas Arthur had nothing to

http://www.thomasarthurfightforlife.com/home.html

[sasquatch]

1. Well it is Alabama

[Taverner]

2. Remind me never to move to AL

Or MS, LA, KY, WV, VA, TX, GA, TN, NC or SC

[yesphan]

7. Don't forget

OK

[KamaAina]

14. Last I heard, we had the DP here in CA, too

so I guess this is goodbye. :hi:

[Taverner]

20. It's not about the DP

It's about "Frontier Justice" in the age of information

[Leftist Agitator]

19. You do know that WV doesn't have the death penalty, right?

Yeah. Didn't think so...

:eyes:

[Taverner]

21. It's not about the DP

It's about Frontier Justice in the age of information

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

I gotta ask - how'd he get convicted in the first place? (nt)

On edit - I'm not suggesting that he's guilty. It just seems that the evidence (finger prints and such) is so lacking in the first place that even a jury of blindfolded monkeys should've come to the right conclusion in the first place, much less the three separate times he got convicted!

[Horse with no Name]

3. What an outrage--the blood is on Jeff Sessions hands on this one and we should hold his feet to the

fire over it.
This is exactly why the DP should never ever ever be an option.

>>>snip

Last, but very important and damaging to my appeals, is that the 1995-1996 Alabama State Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, was running for election to become a United States Senator. He was behind in voter polls in the area where I'm from and other areas of the state as well.

In order to boost his public image, Mr. Sessions wrote a personal letter to the Alabama Criminal Court of Appeals and to the Alabama Supreme Court (State Court).

In that letter Mr. Sessions specifically named six death row inmates from the area where he was falling behind in voter polls in his bid for election to the Senate. I was one of the six he specifically named. In his letter, he demanded that the death sentence appeals of those six men be accelerated and pushed through the system. This is a direct Civil Rights violation. News of this letter demanding the acceleration of appeals of six death row inmates was leaked to several leading newspapers in areas where he was behind in the voter polls.

This was a hit-list -- an order to kill six men for the express purpose of influencing voters on his stand against crime. In other words "I will kill for votes!"


http://www.fa-ir.org/ai/alabama.htm

[Joe Chi Minh]

28. Selling his soul for an eternity in Hell.

[paulsby]

4. unsupported conclusion

i do not see justification for your claim that DNA proves he was not there. i see it stated that his DNA was not recovered from the scene. those do not mean the same thing. he may very well be innocent, i'm not going to come to any conclusion based on that one site, but i see no evidence that there is proof he was not there. maybe you can clarify how it is determined he was not there. i'd be interested to learn how it's been proved

[Flaneur]

5. How do you prove a negative?

[paulsby]

8. it's often difficult, but not impossible

for example, if he had an alibi that he was somewhere else. some alibis are rock solid. let's say he was at a game show and there was video of him present there at the time the murder occurred. that would PROVE he was not there. it's one example. don't get me into the logical fallacy where people say "you can't prove a negative". that's a misstatement of an analytical reasoning maxim. it is possible to logically prove some negatives. for example, i can prove that there is not a full grown rhino in my left shoe. but i digress

[Recursion]

12. It's one of the easier kinds of proof

I assert there is no greatest prime number. I will now prove that negative:

Suppose there were a greatest prime number. Call it p. It would then be possible to write down all the prime numbers starting with 2, up to p: 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, ... p. Take all of those numbers and multiply them together. Call the product q.

q is a multiple of every prime number. Now consider q + 1. q + 1 is one greater than a multiple of every prime number, so it cannot have any prime numbers as its factors. But by the fundamental theorem of arithmetic, if a number does not have any prime factors smaller than itself, it must be prime. As this is contrary to the supposition that p is the greatest prime number, there can be no greatest prime number.

QED

[Horse with no Name]

6. The burden of proof is on the state--not the accused

there are no witnesses (other than the ones placing him 75 miles away), there is no physical or other proof he WAS there. In addition, there is someone else who is convicted of the murder.
What more do you want?

[Drunken Irishman]

9. What's the case?

This article doesn't state why he was found guilty in the first place. Without that, it's hard to choose a side. Sure, this sounds damning and if true, they're about to execute an innocent man. However, what was the case of the prosecution? I'm unfamiliar with this and I would like to know what they ultimately convicted him on.

Anyone know?

[paulsby]

11. i'm not choosing a side

i am saying the thread title is not supported by anything i see in the article/site. whether or not he is guilty or innocent is another question entirely

[Drunken Irishman]

27. I just want to know why he was found guilty.

There has to be some case against him.

[paulsby]

31. of course

but you are not going to get the whole story, let alone an unbiased account from a website whose purpose is to convince people that he was wrongly convicted. look at the case of mumia. i saw numerous websites spouting all the reasons why he should be freed or get a new trial, etc. then, i found sites that had actual case transcripts, etc. and i came to a conclusion. mumia is guilty as fuck. in this case, i have no idea if the guy got a fair trial, or if he should be freed or whatever. without links to case testimony, pc certs, and a lot more information, i come to no conclusion

[JoeyT]

33. Not necessarily

I've been in a jury in this state that had a majority willing to convict based on the fact the guy "Looked guilty". They had to be browbeaten into even looking at the evidence at all.

[paulsby]

10. you totally miss the point

i am simply saying that the title of the thread is not supported. i'm not talking about burden of proof. i am saying i see no support for the conclusion that it is PROVED that he was not there merely because his DNA was not found. if you can't see the logical fallacy there, i can't help you. of course the burden is on the state. but actually, when it comes to APPEALS, you are wrong. the burden is on the defense. legal analysis 101. hth

[Horse with no Name]

15. The Appeals process isn't about discovery and proof

It focuses on legal principles from the original trial, Mr. Smartypants.

[paulsby]

17. the smartypants is right

i repeat... in an appeal the burden is on the defense. do you deny that? i never mentioned discovery fwiw.

[Horse with no Name]

23. The Appeals process is automatic in DP cases

I am really not understanding the point you are trying to make.
I am not sure you REALLY understand it, except in a subordinate role.
BOTH sides present briefs. Both are trying to win their case.
How is the burden on the defense when nothing new can be introduced?
Your argument makes no sense.

[paulsby]

26. as a matter of law

the burden is on the defense in an appeal. let me explain. in a trial, the burden is on the prosecution to prove X. if they do not prove X beyond a reasonable doubt, the person is not convicted. there is no requirement that the defense prove or disprove anything (unless they are preventing an affirmative defense, which is another issue entirely, but i digress). they MAY of course, as part of their case. in an appeal, the burden switches. since the finder of fact (the jury) has already come to a conclusion that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that X happened, it is the BURDEN of the defense to show why that should be overturned (either as a matter of law - like the judge gave improper jury instructions, or a matter of fact). that's black letter law. it is NOT the burden of the prosecutor to offer evidence that the conviction was just. it is the burden on the defense to offer evidence that it was unjust. and of course the prosecutor can try to rebut. but absent the defense successfully meeting their burden (which varies depending on state law and the type of case), the prosecution stands. again, this is not debatable. it's first year criminal procedure stuff

[Horse with no Name]

22. Did you even read the link?

1. Thomas Arthur has sat on Alabama's death row for over 25 years for murdering
Troy Wicker, and he has always maintained his innocence.

2. He has been scheduled for execution 4 times. Hair and finger prints found at the
crime scene did not match him. No physical evidence linked him to the murder.
No murder weapon was ever found. Eye witnesses said he was 75 miles away
when the murder was committed. Recent DNA testing of the crime scene evidence
came back negative for Thomas Arthur.

3. The state's key witness, the victims wife, Judy Wicker (Mary Turner now) was
convicted of murdering her husband for $90,000.00 of insurance money. She
was given a life sentence.In 7 sworn statements while under oath, Judy Wicker
testified Thomas Arthur had nothing to do with the murder.

4. Judy and her sister Theresa were both found at the crime scene with blood on
theirclothes. Neither woman were tested for GSR (Gun Shot residue) to see if
they had fired a weapon. The bloody clothes have never been DNA tested to
see if Troy Wicker's blood was on them.

5. After serving 10 years in prison Judy Wicker was released from prison in exchange
for a new testimony to say Thomas Arthur killed her husband. She also changed
her testimony to say Thomas Arthur beat her up and killed her husband. In the
original interviews, Judy Wicker stated Thomas Arthur had sex with her after
killing her husband. This version changed after the interviews and police never
charged Thomas Arthur with rape. Judy Wickers statements disappeared from the
records along with much of the physical evidence.

6. Investigators ignored key evidence and did not disclose key evidence that could
of proven Thomas Arthurs innocence. This conviction was based on very weak
circumstantial evidence and the key witness is a convicted murderer and has
committed perjury.

7. Thomas Arthur has never had his 1st habeas corpus review.

8. Thomas Arthur's most recent execution scheduled for July 31, 2008 was stayed
by the Alabama Supreme Court after the stay had already been denied by the
Alabama Supreme Court. Another man, Bobby Ray Gilbert said that he committed
the murder not Thomas Arthur.Read Confession The July 31st, 2008 execution
was stayed based on the confession of Bobby Ray Gilbert. A hearing was scheduled
for April 15th, 2009 in Jefferson County Circuit Court before Judge Theresa
Pulliam. After hearing testimony from Bobby Ray Gilbert and several others,
Judge Pulliam ordered DNA testing on 3 pieces of physical evidence that was
collectedat the crime scene in 1982. The three pieces of evidence were clothing
worn by the victims wife, Judy Wicker, a wig prosecutors and Judy Wicker said
Thomas Arthur wore before, during and after the murder, and a single strand of hair
found at the crime scene on Judy Wickers shoe. Other key pieces of physical
evidence were not available for testing, including a rape kit, because the State had
lost them. On July 10th, 2009, DNA test results were turned over to Judge Pulliam.

9. Judge Pulliam "sealed" the test results and prevented the defense from disclsoing
results.

10. August 10, 2009, Judge Pulliam ruled Bobby Ray Gilbert lied and that DNA test
results proved he was not at the crime scene and could not have committed the
murder. She also ruled Thomas Arthur perpetrated fraud against the court and
provided Bobby Ray Gilbert with information to aid in his confession. There was
no evidence to prove Thomas Arthur provided information to Bobby Ray Gilbert.
However, lets assume he did provide information to Gilbert. What would this
prove? It would prove Thomas Arthur was attempting to prove his innocence
in the only way he could, to have the DNA tested. The courts would not allow
him to test the DNA evidence simply because of his claims of innocence. Even
the United States Supreme Court has ruled this year DNA testing to prove your
innocence is not a constitutional right.

11. The most crucial piece of evidence, the wig worn by the killer could not be DNA
tested by Alabama'sForensic Department becuase they lack the advanced
equipment needed for the test. Arthur requested that the wig be tested by a
more advnaced lab at the defense's expense. Pulliam denied the request.

Bobby Ray Gilbert's DNA was not present at the crime scene.
Neither was Thomas Arthur's.

[sabrina 1]

24. Maybe the state should have to prove that he WAS there??

Apparently they did not. NOT finding his DNA at the scene presents them with the problem of explaining how someone managed to be there, and not leave any trace of his presence at the scene. It also seems to back up the eyewitness accounts of his being somewhere else at the time of the crime.

I understood that when someone is charged with a crime in this great democracy of ours, the burden of proof is with the prosecution. Maybe you can clarify how a person can be at the scene of a crime and leave no trace of their DNA there?

[sudopod]

13. k n r

[FunkyLeprechaun]

16. What the hell is wrong with these states?

It's time for the death penalty to be abolished!

[Joe Chi Minh]

29. Nothing some good crossbow archers couldn't mend.

[KamaAina]

18. Wouldn't the wife's conviction at least get him a new trial?

:wtf:

[arthritisR_US]

25. couldn't the President intervene? n/t

[Joe Chi Minh]

30. Why wouldn't he?

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!