Legal Commentary

Probably Innocent, But Still Doing Time

By TChris

Two decades after being convicted of murder in Tennessee and sentenced to death, after losing an appeal, losing a habeas proceeding, and losing an appeal from the denial of his habeas petition, Paul House persuaded the Supreme Court that new DNA testing established his probable innocence. The Court therefore applied the "actual innocence" exception to the rule that a habeas proceeding must be commenced within a year after the state proceedings become final -- much to the dismay of the Tennessee prosecutors who can't admit they sent the wrong man to death row.

That might have been a happy ending, but the story isn't over. Two years later, House is still behind bars "while a prosecutor methodically battles every effort from the courts to have him retried." [More...]

[House] can't walk or stand and has trouble speaking because of the multiple sclerosis, an incurable nervous system disorder that he contracted 10 years ago. "It's taken me all these years to prove that I didn't do it. And I don't have another 20 years to invest," House said. "I didn't do the crime, but I've done the time."

Last Friday, a judge set House's bail at $500,000, twice the amount that had been set when House was first charged in 1986. Why? Confined to a wheelchair, House presents no flight risk. He isn't a threat to anyone, and the evidence against him is much weaker than it was in 1986. More importantly, why is the prosecutor trying to obtain a conviction when the evidence suggests that House is probably innocent?

Full post as published by TalkLeft on June 12, 2008 (boomark / email).