It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


SHOCKING!!!: Juvenile teen sentenced for LIFE without parole based ONLY on murderer testimony!!!

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:14 PM
No, it did not happen in Iran or Pakistan, or some third world hole...

This recently happened in Michigan, United States of America!!


Dupure was a B average student before she was arrested. She had dreams of specialising in the treatment of heart defects as a medical lab tech. She wasn't a party girl. She hadn't ever committed a crime.

Then she met William Blevins while working at a grocery store. The nineteen year old charmed her and they began to date.

It didn't take long for Dupure to become pregnant. Blevins was thrown out of his home shortly after that. On April 23,2004 they were looking for a motel room to rent. That was a date that changed Dupure's life forever.
The couple went to Big Boy for a bite to eat. What happens next differs depending on who you talk to.

Shirley Perry, 89, lived close to the Big Boy. She was the best friend of Dupure's great-aunt. The pair had been to her place helping her out with odd jobs and shopping.

The official story is that Dupure and Blevins went to Perry's to kill her for her money. They took a mere $30 from the elderly woman after assaulting her with a cooking pot and stabbing her to death. Dupure is alleged to have fetched the knife from Perry's kitchen to give to Blevin's to stab the woman.
That's the official story.

Dupure's story is drastically different. she states that she was never at Perry's apartment to begin with. That Blevins acted alone and that she was sitting at the Big Boy's waiting for her boyfriend to return oblivious to the murder.

Blevin's version mirrored Dupure's for quite some time. That is until he went on trial. The prosecution gave him the lesser charge of second degree murder for 'ratting' Dupure out.

Under cross-examination, he conceded to the jury, "I never had intentions to pin it on her until I ran out of options."

The only certainty of the case is that the one with the lighter sentence was the one who committed the murder. There was NO forensic evidence tying Dupure to the scene of the crime. Just the word of a man who stabbed an elderly woman to death hoping for a lighter sentence.

During the trial the prosecution relied on Blevin's testimony. The defense may have thought they had an ace in their deck with the testimony of a fellow jail inmate of Blevins who stated on the stand that Blevins had ulterior motives for implicating Dupure.

It didn't matter, in the end jurors took between five and six hours in deliberation before finding Nicole Ann Dupure, 19, guilty as charged with first-degree murder in the stabbing and strangling death of Shirley Perry, 89.

Dupure learned her fate when she entered prison. For a time she was on Prozac for depression.
The prison doctor put her on Prozac but she stopped taking it; as she puts it, "I'm depressed because I'm in this place, not because I'm depressed."

And what is the most shocking:

Technically, a child of any age could be incarcerated for life in Michigan for first-degree murder. Above the age of 14, suspects can be placed directly into the adult court system. At that point, even the judges' hands are tied. If a child is convicted in an adult court of a range of serious offences - taking part in a robbery that leads to murder, say - they must automatically be given life without parole, even where the judge feels that is inappropriate.

That's correct, in the state of Michigan a child is sentenced more harshly than an adult. Had Dupure had been 18 at the time of the crime she would not be facing a life in prison.(!!!)

Under UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, sentencing minors to life imprisonment is prohibited. The ONLY two countries worldwide that had not ratified this convention are Somalia (probably only because there is no government to do so), and self-proclaimed bastion of human rights and fair-trial, USA.

So lets recapitulate: Juvenile teen gets sentenced for LIFE without parole based ONLY on the testimony of a MURDERER, who was MOTIVATED to do so because otherwise he would get much harsher punishment? And the murderer gets lighter sentence than she?

How can a witness testimony of a murderer be enough to convince someone of any crime without any supporting evidence?
How can a witness testimony unsupported by any evidence even be taken into consideration by a serious court, when testimoner can clearly gain very much by giving false statement?
How can a juvenile teen be convicted for life based ONLY on the above?

I cant believe this, people. If this kind of thing happened in my country, I would be bombarding my representatives with DDoSes worth of letters, and organizing protests in the streets immidiatelly. Anyone here from Michigan?! If I wont see tomorrow in the news that all american ATS members are out there in the streets protesting for IMMIDIATE release of this girl, I would be seriously disappointed!!!

edit on 11/1/11 by Maslo because: typos

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:18 PM
I had to read that twice to fathom it.

Still can't though...I am just confused. What kind of...person? think tank? came up with such a conclusion?

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:21 PM
Yeah, it's baloney. They've charged 11 and 12 year olds as adults before. I remember hearing about one study showed that over 50% of them couldn't pass a mental competency test. Mind you, this was an average of 2 years AFTER they'd been convicted and sent to prison.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:22 PM
1. She shouldnt have got in a relationship with an Obvious prat.

2. She Obviously wasnt that sensible if she managed to get pregnant at that age,

3. The "Goody goody" analysis is probably from a relative/Stupid reporter who thought she was perfect.

4. The story doesnt Add up at-all, She sat in a restuarant whilst her boyfreind went to kill her Aunt?....No...

5. The news story is clearly biased.

However after looking through the whole story She should be allowed the Right of a Re-trial from a different jury and the case should be re-evaluated

edit on 11/1/11 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:22 PM
I can't say that I agree with the sentence, in fact I strongly disagree, but I am VERY glad that the U.S. hasn't adopted the UN law. As far as I am concerned, America is a sovereign nation with it's own laws and the U.N. can stick theirs where the sun don't shine.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:28 PM
the american justice system will run you over unless you have the money to afford a high profile lawyer with connections to have your case plastered all over the media.

it's seems that unless they are scrutinized publicly on every move they make , they will have no choice but to follow the letter of the law.

if it's some anonymous case in hicksville, a parrot can testify against you and you'll be convicted. this isn't new, if the cops thinks you're guilty they'll charge you anyways with little or no evidence and let the courts settle it.

edit on 11-1-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by TedHodgson

1. Since when is dating with bad guys used as an evidence to being an accomplice in their crimes, especially when there is no other evidence?
2. Since when is being pregnant as a teen enough to get you convinced for life inprisonment?
3. Assuming you are right, since when is being "imperfect" or even being a "bad girl" used as a evidence for murder, especially when there is no other evidence?
4. Why not? Unless you have DIRECT forensic evidence she was with him in the house at the time of the murder, you must assume she is innocent. What happened to "presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty?"
5. Here is another from Guardian saying exactly the same thing.
edit on 11/1/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/1/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

edit on 11/1/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:33 PM
reply to post by 2minutewarning

So the girl deserves to be in prison for life possibly for something she had no part of because the USA is a ´Soverign State´?.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:36 PM
What juvenile was charged? The article talks about a 19 year old she is a adult not a minor.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:38 PM
reply to post by buster2010

She was 17 years old at the time the incident took place.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:52 PM

Originally posted by linkshot1000
reply to post by 2minutewarning

So the girl deserves to be in prison for life possibly for something she had no part of because the USA is a ´Soverign State´?.

No, not at all. Did you miss the part where I said I strongly disagree with the sentence? Or did you just take that snippet out of context on purpose?

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 12:57 PM
Look at charles manson he never killed ANYONE and the people that actually did kill are out of prison now while charles manson rots away... This girl got what was coming to her, she probabally used her body as a way to seduce and provoke the guy into killing... Good ridance to her... Good ridance!!!

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:07 PM
reply to post by Maslo

important people steal,kill,and commit many other crimes and walk like nothing.(no crime should be), that being said for clarification , ill go on to ask, why or how is it that these entities go on unpunished and the pheasants pay ? when in comparison, there is a huge unbalance of justice.above or under the law, makes you think at times why should i even submit to it. the answer is simple,(force) no different from mobs,gangs,ext.. some would say for order in society or else it would be chaos.i say that is ignorance just look around,it is thing is for sure,if your above your ok if your under it be care full of were you stand. we are still in roman times
pertaining to law

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:41 PM
reply to post by Maslo

Thanks for bringing this topic to the boards, Maslo!

I wasn't aware of the existence of mandatory life-without-parole sentencing for juveniles tried in adult courts anywhere in the U.S. and am shocked that it exists, but a little internet research has showed that there are a handful of states with such laws.

I find it unbelievable that we would remove the discretion of a judge or jury to determine whether a child should be eligible for parole if found guilty of murder.

The good news is that the ACLU has apparently filed a lawsuit challenging these laws:

The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Michigan today filed a lawsuit on behalf of nine Michigan citizens who were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for crimes committed when they were minors. The lawsuit charges that a Michigan sentencing scheme that denies the now-adult plaintiffs an opportunity for parole and a fair hearing to demonstrate their growth, maturity and rehabilitation constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and violates their constitutional rights.

ACLU press release Nov. 17, 2010

There's also a lot of interesting information about the practice of sentencing children to life without the chance of parole at the website of the Campaign for the Fair Sentencing of Youth, including an interactive map of how many juvenile offenders are currently serving life-without-parole sentences by state.

posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 01:54 PM
reply to post by americandingbat

Glad to hear that someone is trying to do something about it.

From the article:

There are three slim chances of hope for a prisoner put away for life.
One is that they win an appeal proving that there was a flaw in their trial process.
Another is they are granted a pardon by the governor of Michigan. That has never happened.
The third is a bill that changes the law and is retroactive.

new topics

top topics


log in