Friday, April 1, 2011

Supreme Court fails, again!

John Thompson:

This is more of a political rant than a religious one.

John Thompson was wrongfully convicted. That is not in dispute.

That the Prosecution willfully and deliberately withheld potentially acquitting evidence is not in dispute. (Blood samples of a different type – not just different DNA, eyewitness accounts of the killer that describe someone significantly different from Mr. Thompson)

That Mr. Thompson spent 18 years in prison, 14 of them on death row is not in dispute.

That Mr. Thompson came within less of a months of execution is not in dispute.

What was in dispute was if the state owed him the $14 Million he was originally awarded for having his life taken (almost literally) away from him.

In comes the Supreme Court. Do they uphold the states responsibility to compensate him? Do they reduce the amount? No. They give him nothing. He is entitled to nothing.

I read the Supreme Court's ruling and the opinion, and the dissent. I get the majority of the court felt their was no evidence of "a pattern of similar Brady violations" and so there was no "deliberate indifference to an obvious need for more or different Brady training". I still think that the lower court's ruling make much more sense. "The court had concluded that a pattern of violations is not necessary to prove deliberate indifference when the need for training is “so obvious.”

The dissention opinion (Written by Justice Ginsburg) seems to think that I'm not too way off, and also contends that a real systemic issue (a pattern) was clearly there.

So I know that it's not as simple as the conservatives of the Supreme Court did something they shouldn't have by leaving a man without anything after he was put through a hell didn't deserve by the unethical conduct of the state.

So it's not a simple issue, but it is a clear one none-the-less.

Someone PLEASE explain to me how this isn’t officially a corrupt and power-elite supporting institution?

I give up - again.