Texas Forensic Science Commission

Dogbert said:
So wait, some in-law is saying that Cameron admitted to his wife that he set the fire because he was afraid she was going to leave her?

- Where is the wife, and why isn't she saying the same thing?

- Why did he still maintain his innocence with everyone else?

- Isn't this, by definition, hearsay?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't know the answer to your (very good) questions. Just providing the update since I saw it.
 
Bradley has pledged to state lawmakers that the Willingham investigation "absolutely" will continue -- but said the panel needs better rules to guide its work, and could not say when the Willingham issue would move forward.

Thursday, he told CNN that concerns of Willingham's supporters were based on "a lot of misinformation."
Click to expand...
So they're not killing it, but just pigeonholing it until it's more convenient.


Are any Texas papers making a big deal about this, that you've seen?
 
Another update on this...

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/10/15/texas.willingham.execution/

(CNN) -- An advocate for the family of Cameron Todd Willingham, executed six years ago after a fire killed three of his daughters, is sharply questioning the objectivity of the head of the Texas commission looking into whether the man was rightly convicted.

Stephen Saloom, the policy director of the nonprofit legal advocacy group the Innocence Project, brought up a comment attributed last week to John Bradley, chairman of the Texas Forensic Science Commission, during the public comments portion of that panel's meeting Friday.

According to the published report, Bradley said that anti-death penalty groups wanted to hold up Willingham -- convicted in 1992 after a jury determined he deliberately set the fire that killed his three girls -- as a "poster boy" for their cause. Bradley questioned that approach, calling Willingham "a guilty monster."

"This is a very clear statement, 'Willingham is a guilty monster,' that brings into question the reliability of your chairman," said Saloom.

Bradley downplayed the criticism as "New York lawyers" making "personal attacks, rather than legal arguments."
Click to expand...

Continues at link.

Looks like Perry is trying to keep any findings from being released till after the election.
 
That's just disgraceful.
 
British_Rover said:
Looks like Perry is trying to keep any findings from being released till after the election.
Click to expand...
Disgraceful, but not at all surprising.

The level of corruption in this case is becoming pretty hard to ignore. If the media isn't having a field day with it, they're doing a disservice to the community.
 
From the article above:

Attorney General Greg Abbott's ruling, which has the same effect as a supreme court ruling in other states, effectively ends the commission's inquiry into the evidence that convicted Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed for the arson death of his three children. Arson experts hired by the commission determined the evidence used to gain Willingham's conviction does not meet scientific standards and that the fire was most likely accidental.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top