Covered here
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ns-2023-06-28/
and in this video
The SC ruled on partisan lines that a man wasn't allowed to challenge his conviction based on evidence he was innocent because he has previously appealed the conviction due to inadequate representation. Subsequent court rulings made on cases like his found that what he was convicted of wasn't even illegal and was a misinterpretation of the law.
[YT]pdS5VYUoXk8[/YT]
Last year the SC ruled a death row inmate couldn't bring forward new medical evidence that he was innocent. Fortunately in that case the Arizona attorney general stepped up and had the man released, but in cases where that doesn't happen people who can prove their innocence can be denied the right to present that proof and be executed.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ns-2023-06-28/
and in this video
The SC ruled on partisan lines that a man wasn't allowed to challenge his conviction based on evidence he was innocent because he has previously appealed the conviction due to inadequate representation. Subsequent court rulings made on cases like his found that what he was convicted of wasn't even illegal and was a misinterpretation of the law.
[YT]pdS5VYUoXk8[/YT]
Last year the SC ruled a death row inmate couldn't bring forward new medical evidence that he was innocent. Fortunately in that case the Arizona attorney general stepped up and had the man released, but in cases where that doesn't happen people who can prove their innocence can be denied the right to present that proof and be executed.
via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/9S7Ce4D
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire