In what can only be described as judicial horror, the Supreme Court today, in a 5-4 decision, has stripped prisoners of the right to have post-conviction DNA evidence submitted to clear their name.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
The inmate in question, William Osborne, was convicted in 1994 of rape, based in part on DNA evidence taken from a condom. However, apparently the DNA testing method used at the time is outmoded and fraught with errors.
UPDATE
An additional link from Taylormattd. Thanks much!
http://www.boston.com/...
The prosecution and defense both agree that the new DNA testing methods today would in fact clear or confirm William's guilt. Thanks to the Supreme Court, with help from the Obama Administration's DOJ, William Osborne has lost his chance to clear his name.
The inmate at the center of the case, William G. Osborne, is in prison in Alaska after a 1994 rape conviction based in part on a DNA test of semen from a condom recovered at the scene.
The state used an old method, known as DQ-alpha testing, that could not identify, with great specificity, the person to whom the DNA belonged. The high court sided with Alaska in its refusal to grant Mr. Osborne access to the physical evidence, the semen. His intent was to obtain a more advanced DNA test that was not available at the time of his trial and that prosecutors agreed could almost definitively prove his guilt or innocence.
What's even scarier is John Roberts' "reasoning" in denying Osborne his proper due-process rights:
Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. noted the "unparalleled ability" to prove guilt or innocence using DNA evidence. But he treated that breakthrough more as an irritant than an opportunity.
The availability of conclusive DNA testing, he wrote, "cannot mean that every criminal conviction, or even every criminal conviction involving biological evidence, is suddenly in doubt."
Well, just why the hell can't it??!! Aren't we a country of laws and due process that considers "innocent until proven guilty" as a foundational principle? Don't we owe it to ourselves and our laws to do everything within our power to ensure that we only jail the proper people, and give those who could in fact be innocent their just rights?
Or are we the country of Gitmo rules and Abu-Ghraib treatment? According to Justice Roberts and this 5-4 decision, we are unfortunately the latter.
More from the article:
The chief justice further worried that establishing a "freestanding and far-reaching constitutional right of access" to DNA evidence would short-circuit efforts underway by federal and state governments to develop rules to control access to such evidence. Yet Alaska is one of four states that does not have laws giving prisoners access to DNA evidence that could establish their innocence — a dismal reality underscoring the need for Supreme Court intervention.
Of course, there is a value to finality of verdicts and not allowing prisoners to endlessly challenge their convictions. But the chief justice and his concurring colleagues have their priorities all wrong.
Much as the four dissenters — Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer and David H. Souter — saw, Alaska was wrong to block testing when DNA technology is available that may prove someone is unjustly being kept behind bars. Overturning Alaska’s denial of due process should have been an easy call.
Unfortunately, the most disturbing part of this is the Obama Administration's support of this ruling, a position originated by the Bush DOJ:
We are also puzzled and disturbed by the Obama administration’s decision to side with Alaska in this case — continuing the Bush administration’s opposition to recognizing a right to access physical evidence for post-conviction DNA testing.
Thursday’s ruling will inevitably allow some innocent people to languish in prison without having the chance to definitively prove their innocence and with the state never being completely certain of their guilt.
Here I was in anguish over the Obama Administration's betrayal on DOMA and DADT.
This position, however, has put me into full-on rage. I simply cannot imagine the torment that William Osborne has suffered over the past 15 years as a potentially innocent man. A torment that he has no further recourse to address, thanks to the defense by the Obama DOJ and the judgment of the US Supreme Court.
This is a horrific blow to all of us.