NEWS: Man Executed Protesting His Innocence

Jimmy Ray Slaughter protested his innocence as he was being lethally injected in McAlester, Oklahoma. The native Oklahoman attempted to prove his innocence through "brain-fingerprinting". Brain fingerprinting is a little known procedure introduced by Harvard educated Larry Farwell.
Jimmy Ray Slaughter passed the little known procedure but the parole board and the United States Supreme Court reject his appeal & the results of the procedure.



If he had commited the murders he'd probably given in and asked for forgiveness. If he was a sociopathical liar he'd said nothing, but he proclaimed his innocence even as he was dying which convinces me that he is innocent by that alone. Other than that his attempts to prove his innocence through all types of procedures and going to the Supreme Court.

That's quite a sad story and really maks me question Capital Punishment. Reminds me of the character from the Green Mile.

Some background on the murders and the lack of evidence used to convict Slaughter:

The state of Oklahoma is scheduled to execute Jimmie Ray Slaughter, a white man, March 15 for the 1994 murder of Melody Wuertz and his 11-month-old daughter Jessica Wuertz in Oklahoma County. Post-conviction developments now undermine the key evidence which was presented at trial. Slaughter maintains his innocence. He was convicted largely on what now consists of circumstantial evidence, and the testimony of prison informants and unreliable eye witness testimony.

Dennis Dill, a retired Edmond police office and initial lead investigator on the case,also concedes Slaughter may be innocent. He reportedly stated if the state were to carry out the execution, they will be killing an innocent man. “If they do this, they might just as well take him out and lynch him” Dill stated. He contends he was taken off the case because he didn’t feel the investigation was being conducted properly and that police had wrongly focused on Slaughter to the exclusion of other suspects.

An FBI scientist testified the manner the murder was carried out suggested the crime was an act of domestic violence. There was another suspect who had both a sexual history with the victim and a history of domestic violence. His alibi was shown to be false and he disappeared a few days after the crime. This lead was not further investigated.

The physical evidence which may have pointed to Slaughter at trial has since been refuted or called into question. During the trial, the prosecution argued that a hair found at the crime scene belonged to Vicki Mosley. However, DNA testing of the hair conducted by Mitotyping Techonologies, an independent lab hired by the defense, has shown it did not belong to her. The state appeals court did not allow this new DNA evidence to be added to Slaughter’s latest appeal because the deadline had passed.

Similarly, the technology used to establish that the bullets located at the crime scene came from the same batch found in Slaughter’s possession is now unreliable. The state used a process known as Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis to determine the origin of the bullet. Experts have called this type of analysis into question citing it as unreliable.

Slaughter also presented an alibi at his trial. He was stationed in Fort Riley, Kansas in the U.S. Army Reserve approximately a four hour drive from Edmond Oklahoma. Slaughter’s ex-wife, Nicki Bonner and her two daughters testified he was with them all day. A salesperson at a nearby shopping mall recalled seeing Slaughter buy a T-shirt. A receipt verified the purchase.

This man never should have been convicted, let alone been executed.

B.

Good job, Bleys. I am voting for you on the above top secret thingy. Thanks for contributing that information.

Damn, although I am for capital punishment, cases like these bring it into question, this man should not have been executed if the information I see is correct, he still could be guilty but there is doubt.

I have always been for capitol punishment but I would be willing to put a end to it just because I have seen how things happen. There are cases every day in every state where innocent people are convicted with little or no evidence because it is easier to just look at one person and figure out how to pin a crime on them than it is to investigate it further. Prosicuters are just a bunch of egotistical up and comers looking to advance their career and if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time your screwd. Conviction rates and crime stats are all a lie because of plea bargining and the more money you have the better your chance of the new type of justice.

Originally posted by edsinger
Damn, although I am for capital punishment, cases like these bring it into question, this man should not have been executed if the information I see is correct, he still could be guilty but there is doubt.

I agree ed - something is very wrong when you look at the evidence in this case. Could this man have done it - of course, but there is so much in doubt and in question about this case. How would justice have not been served simply by giving this man a new trial.

Regardless of whether this man is guilty - justice was certainly not served today and it has really made me rethink my stand on capital punishment.

B.

Originally posted by National Security Agency
If he had commited the murders he'd probably given in and asked for forgiveness.

Says who?

If he was a sociopathical liar he'd said nothing, but he proclaimed his innocence even as he was dying which convinces me that he is innocent by that alone.

All that means is that you are easily convinced. I don't see why a murderer would ever admit to murder.

Other than that his attempts to prove his innocence through all types of procedures and going to the Supreme Court.

That can hardly be taken as a measure of innocence. Most people that are guilty are going to appeal at any chance.

And what of the brainprinting? Its a very very new technology. If it isn't good enough to convict someone of murder, then how can it be enough to get them off?

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by National Security Agency
If he had commited the murders he'd probably given in and asked for forgiveness.

Says who?

A Jewish Austrian Neurologist who smoked Churchill-style cigars til his death in 1939, even after his jaw was removed. Guess who.

Originally posted by National Security Agency
A Jewish Austrian Neurologist who smoked Churchill-style cigars til his death in 1939, even after his jaw was removed. Guess who.

Interesting. Where does he say this anyway?

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by National Security Agency
A Jewish Austrian Neurologist who smoked Churchill-style cigars til his death in 1939, even after his jaw was removed. Guess who.

Interesting. Where does he say this anyway?

I don't know. I just didn't have a good response so I improvised. I base my opinion on the man's actions not how a jury sentenced him. His actions speak louder than a court opinion.

Originally posted by Nygdan
Said something about murderers never admiting to their murders.....

Well it has happened. Wowsers, huh? Even the de-humanised murderous villain sometimes have feeling of guilty, remorse, sympathy, etc..

[edit on 16-3-2005 by National Security Agency]

Originally posted by Nygdan
And what of the brainprinting? Its a very very new technology. If it isn't good enough to convict someone of murder, then how can it be enough to get them off?

If there is a shadow of doubt than why lethally inject him?

I wonder if having the name SLAUGHTER could have made them think he was guilty

Croat, My very thought

There's way too much doubt in this case. Its sad.

There's a movie called The Life of David Gayle (sp?). It's an amazing movie regarding the death penalty. It stars Kevin Spacey and Kate Winslet... I highly recomend.

Originally posted by National Security Agency
[ I just didn't have a good response so I improvised.

Wait, so Freud said nothing of the sort?

Well it [murders admiting guilt] has happened[/qutoe]
That hardly means that it allways happens. You've been saying that this guy is innocent because he's been fighting his death sentence and hasn't admited to the murders.

If there is a shadow of doubt than why lethally inject him?

This tech is too new. As such, it doesn't even create a shadow of a doubt.

Nygdan your rationale is an enigma to me. An engima greater than that of phi.

Originally posted by ServoHahn
There's a movie called The Life of David Gayle (sp?). It's an amazing movie regarding the death penalty. It stars Kevin Spacey and Kate Winslet... I highly recomend.

This is an awesome movie. (By the way, it's David Gale.)

This topic is really sad. Why we're so eager to kill people is beyond me. I'm not exactly against it but not exactly for it either. I don't know what I think, but this seems too wrong.

.
Sick of arrogant of judges disallowing from jurors knowing when they are listening to a jailhouse stoolie testifying for a reduced/dropped sentence.

Hey Judges, "Get over yourself, If it is ok for you to know, the adult jurors should know the FULL facts too."

Jurors need to know when testimony is suspect and give it a more accurate weighting in the consideration of guilt and innocence and sentencing.

Robert Blake is walking.

Who thinks the American Justice system needs to be overhauled?

Anytime anyone is testifying the jurors should know about any compensation they are getting for it. That includes 'expert' witnesses getting sums of money as well as sentence adjustments for jailhouse stoolies.

Sick of politically motivated DAs and the stupid bloodthirsty public that doesn't want to take time to examine what facts there are and are not.

But Im gay. I know just how bent and hypocritical people's selective application of their moralities and biblical edicts are.
.