DNA Frees Man Convicted of Murder

LMD1010

01:03 AMAug 21 2009

For those of you who post so many 'hate police' comments. How about 'hate the jury' ? No, 'hate the states attorney'...Hey...'hate the judge'!!!Next time you need help, don't call the police, call your mom and dad....

Jmcmahon69

01:01 AMAug 21 2009

OMG WHAT A WASTE...THIS POOR MAN SPENT 21 YEARS IN PRISON..HOW HORRIBLE IS THAT. EVERY DAY KNOWING YOU ARE INNOCENT...THAT FEELING OF HOPELESSNESS...ITS AMAZING HE DIDNT COMMITT SUICIDE. THIS MAN DESERVES TO BE COMPENSATED FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE...3 MILION SHOULD DO IT AND IT SHOULD COME FROM THE DA'S OFFICE BUDGET WHO WRONGFULLY CONVICTED HIM....I STILL CANT BELIEVE THIS...SOME PUNK ASS OVERZEALOUS PROSECUTER LOOKING TO MAKE A CAREER FOR HIMSELF COOKED THE EVIDENCE AND SOLD A BUNCH OF CLUELESS AND BRAINDEAD MORONS WHO WANTED REVENGE TO PUT THIS GUY AWAY ON SUCH FLIMSY EVIDENCE.....UNBELIEVEABLE...21 FREEKIN YEARS.....GIVE HIM THE MONEY AND JUST SHUT UP

Rkmac560

01:00 AMAug 21 2009

DRosent288 12:22 AMAug 21 2009 What do advocates of the death penalty say about cases like this?How many innocent people have been executed for crimes they didn'tcommit? The only reason that he did not get the death penalty was thathe was a minor when he committed the crime--and some of the right wingersthink the death penalty should be extended to minors.The state of Connecticut is going to owe him some big bucks for what he hasbeen through and no doubt some of the right wing Republican types aregoing to say that he should have been executed anyway just to save thestate of Connecticut those big bucks.***********You think "rightwing Republicans" advocate executing innocent people? That sounds like a liberal Democrat. They are the people supporting abortion. You are an ignoramus...

LMD1010

12:58 AMAug 21 2009

My there are so many intellegent people out there that believe what they read in the Newspaper. Kenneth Ireland was not found innocent. Do to incomplete DNA results it was agreed by the police and States Attorneys Office not to re-try Mr. Ireland. The DNA issue simply proves he did not leave any DNA at the crime scene if he participated. Is he Innocent??? Only he knows....

PubliusMax

12:58 AMAug 21 2009

...who were released because of DNA evidence were guilty, and given the fact that they CONFESSED to raping that woman, I tend to agree with the prosecuters. I'd have to hear a lot more evidence about this case before I'd want to decide if this guy is guilty, innocent, or not guilty by a reasonable doubt.

Rwl131313

12:56 AMAug 21 2009

I'm so happy you've been cleared...and so sad it took so long. I hope your future is a hell of alot better than your past.This is why Einstein was against the death penalty. Too much room for error. Hopefully, DNA will reduce the odds of errors in the future and keep this thing from happening again. There will, unfortunately, continue to be crime, but DNA is a great scientific improvement over the archaic ways of the past. Except for, clean, fingerprints, all else is inconclusive...including polygraph.DNA takes much of the guesswork out of it. Also, unfortunately, I can see it being a pre-requisite to drivers license approval. Good and Bad, as all is.Self incrimination comes to mind, but they allow blood tests, and or breathalizers tests, which also self incriminate, so it seems more than likely. Bye Bye 5th. I never got to use you, but it was nice knowing you were there to help protect our rights as Law Abiding Citizens.

Garteesantafe

12:56 AMAug 21 2009

Most of all the problem is with the police they are the worst kind of scum they hide behind their badges to lie and take part in crimes what a bunch of ******* mabey one day they will grow a pair and become men

PubliusMax

12:55 AMAug 21 2009

GR8Xs 12:27 AMAug 21 2009 Type your own comment herePubliusMax 12:22 AMAug 21 2009 Just because his DNA was not found at the scene of the crime does not prove that he's innocent. DNA evidence is not always present after a rape. If this DNA evidence was used to convict him, these new tests might raise reasonable doubt, but they do not prove innocence.<<<<<<<<<The article said that the new tests conclusive proved his innocence. Presumedly the DNA was from bodily fluids left in or around the victim. It must point to somebody else as having commited the crime.-----------Articles also said thet the DNA evidence conclusively proved the innocence of the men who confessed to the Central Park raes innocence. DNA can be used to prove that somebody was there (if planting the evidence can be ruled out. it cannot be used to prove that somebody wasn't there. The last time I saw them, the prosecuters were adamant that the central park rape suspects who were released...

Kkpeter1831

12:55 AMAug 21 2009

I THOUGHT JUVENILE RECORDS WERE SUPOSSED TO BE SEALED! THIS MANS RECORDS HAVE BEEN PUT ON THE INTERNET FOR HEAVENS SAKE. THE OFFICIALS OWE HIM MORE THAN THEY CAN EVEN IMAGINE.

polishpower1111

12:55 AMAug 21 2009

Do yourself a favor and make/save a few hundred dollars by visiting $$ -- WWW.SLICKBUDGET.COM/CREDITSCORES.HTML --$$ and going to the free money section and taking advantage of it. They also have many other sections that will help a person save thousands. It is definitely a worthwhile read to say the least.