Wrongly convicted get $80,000 a year in Texas

[VC2]

Texas, which has the highest percentage of wrongly convicted in the country, has finally decided to make restitution mandatory. It is about time and i hope every state does the same.


Exonerees will get $80,000 for each year they spent behind bars. The compensation also includes lifetime annuity payments that for most of the wrongly convicted are worth between $40,000 and $50,000 a year — making it by far the nation's most generous package..................
Exonerees also receive an array of social services, including job training, tuition credits and access to medical and dental treatment. Though 27 other states have some form of compensation law for the wrongly convicted, none comes close to offering the social services and money Texas provides.

The annuity payments are especially popular among exonerees, who acknowledge their lack of experience in managing personal finances. A social worker who meets with the exonerees is setting them up with financial advisers and has led discussions alerting them to swindlers.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32692576/ns/us_news-life/

These men deserve every single penny, most of them can't get a proper job even if they are ready to due to being out of society for so long and even lingering doubts. Some don't want to work and shouldn't have to. The state took their lives away.

Next step is to start imprisoning the prosecutors and LE who helped convict them. There is never any, zero, zilch excuse for prosecuting an innocent man. No evidence could point to him because he was innocent. Its malfeasance at its most egregious.

I am just so thankful that these men will be able to live a comfortable life without worry about finances
imo

[Details]

That's wonderful! A well thought out package to compensate as much as is possible, for taking years of someone's life.

Any system that involves people will make mistakes - so there will always be some wrongly convicted. It's inevitable. But this is a great way to give them the support they need to try to remake a life.

[VC2]

That's wonderful! A well thought out package to compensate as much as is possible, for taking years of someone's life.

Any system that involves people will make mistakes - so there will always be some wrongly convicted. It's inevitable. But this is a great way to give them the support they need to try to remake a life.

yes it truly is well thought out, i especially like the annuity on top of the lump sum payments and financial advisors. Most of these men came from backgrounds that in no way prepared them to deal with a decent amount of money, certainly in terms of investment..let alone make sense of todays markets. College tuition on top of it for those who want to make use of it.

I have to say i am impressed, for once i can say kudos to texas.

[R~O~S]

yes it truly is well thought out, i especially like the annuity on top of the lump sum payments and financial advisors. Most of these men came from backgrounds that in no way prepared them to deal with a decent amount of money, certainly in terms of investment..let alone make sense of todays markets. College tuition on top of it for those who want to make use of it.

I have to say i am impressed, for once i can say kudos to texas.

Me too! But we really can't throw all of the prosecutors under the bus. DNA is fairly new, a lot of these men were convicted based on eye witness testimony.

I agree, if there was prosecutorial misconduct involved they should face charges with stiff penalties, if there was an intent to convict knowing there was exonerating evidence, they should face jail time themselves and a lot of it. But there are really cases where it was just a mistake. Eye witness testimony is the most unreliable even though it carries a lot of weight with a jury.

At any rate, kudos to TX on making a just and right decision regarding these unjustly convicted men & women.

[VC2]

Me too! But we really can't throw all of the prosecutors under the bus. DNA is fairly new, a lot of these men were convicted based on eye witness testimony.

I agree, if there was prosecutorial misconduct involved they should face charges with stiff penalties, if there was an intent to convict knowing there was exonerating evidence, they should face jail time themselves and a lot of it. But there are really cases where it was just a mistake. Eye witness testimony is the most unreliable even though it carries a lot of weight with a jury.

At any rate, kudos to TX on making a just and right decision regarding these unjustly convicted men & women.

ROS i have to disagree with "just a mistake". We have all heard prosecutors use emotion to get a conviction in their closing arguments. They spin what they THINK happened when it was really made up of whole cloth because it turns out they were wrong.

if the prosecutors have the slightest doubt, if there is anything that does not fit then they should not take it to trial. They know eyewitness testimony is the worst there is.

If a prosecutor deviates from actual cold fact in any words then they need to be held accountable. Then it is not a mistake, they actively worked to put an innocent man in prison using every bit of power the state gives them. I don't care if they "thought" he was guilty, that is not good enough. They should be precluded from using closings that will sway the jury based on emotions and they should be punished if they convict an innocent man.

God knows how many innocent have been executed. It is a disgrace.

[R~O~S]

VC, I don't think we disagree at all. I agree, if the prosecutor toys with the jury, if he tampers with the evidence, if he has three opinions and discards two because they don't conclude what he wants to project, he's wrong.

But I do think there are cases where the prosecution believes the prosecution is just and right & science proves them wrong years later.

I agree, prosecutions of today have a huge advantage over those done 20 years or more ago. I really do remember when DNA just didn't exist, it wasn't accepted, they had nothing but the witness, the lack of an alibi, circumstances pointing to the defendant, a fingerprint that might have been left before the crime somehow.

Perhaps I'm just prone to give the lawmakers and upholders the benefit of the doubt, but I believe there have been prosecutions taken up with all confidence they were correct only to be found years later to be wrong.

I've seen the interview of the rape victim who was floored & unconvinced, when DNA proved the man her testimony convicted wasn't her assailant. She was certain she identified the right man. I'm sure she was a very convincing witness on the stand, and before DNA how were they to know she was wrong? & then there are the cases of fabricated evidence turned over by over zealous cops to prosecutors who don't have a clue they've been had, or confessions that were extracted by force & intimidation.

I just don't believe prosecutors go into public service to put innocent men behind bars. Let's face it, they could make a lot more money working in the private sector. These guys may become jaded with time and deviate from their ideals, but they didn't go into the business to but innocent men behind bars. I just can't bring myself to believe that.

[VC2]

VC, I don't think we disagree at all. I agree, if the prosecutor toys with the jury, if he tampers with the evidence, if he has three opinions and discards two because they don't conclude what he wants to project, he's wrong.

But I do think there are cases where the prosecution believes the prosecution is just and right & science proves them wrong years later.

I agree, prosecutions of today have a huge advantage over those done 20 years or more ago. I really do remember when DNA just didn't exist, it wasn't accepted, they had nothing but the witness, the lack of an alibi, circumstances pointing to the defendant, a fingerprint that might have been left before the crime somehow.

Perhaps I'm just prone to give the lawmakers and upholders the benefit of the doubt, but I believe there have been prosecutions taken up with all confidence they were correct only to be found years later to be wrong.

I've seen the interview of the rape victim who was floored & unconvinced, when DNA proved the man her testimony convicted wasn't her assailant. She was certain she identified the right man. I'm sure she was a very convincing witness on the stand, and before DNA how were they to know she was wrong? & then there are the cases of fabricated evidence turned over by over zealous cops to prosecutors who don't have a clue they've been had, or confessions that were extracted by force & intimidation.

I just don't believe prosecutors go into public service to put innocent men behind bars. Let's face it, they could make a lot more money working in the private sector. These guys may become jaded with time and deviate from their ideals, but they didn't go into the business to but innocent men behind bars. I just can't bring myself to believe that.

we agree on a lot, but the biggest problem i find with prosecutors and especially DA's is that its normally their vehicle to higher office such as a governor. It is common imo not unusual for them to prosecute to the highest degree possible whether or not the crime meets the legal criteria to look "tough on crime" or during an election season.

Cops overall i agree, they try to do what is right. Prosecutors..not so much. They try to do what they think will get them re elected. The Nifong case was an extreme example but it happens every day in jurisdictions around the country that a prosecutor takes in the political climate rather than the facts and justice...and knows they can likely get a conviction even if the facts are not overwhelming. Just the circumstantial evidence combined with their theory told to a jury who thinks LE does not lie

A good example is the woman who was floored re the DNA evidence. I remember her if its the same one, she went on to meet the person she put in prison, asked for forgiveness and now does talks around the country to fight against just using eye witness accounts.

Thing is the prosecutor should not have taken the case to trial if that is all they had. Often the photo lineup is often geared to push their favorite to the victim. Its sadly true that if it is a black man then its even easier for an eyewitness even the victim themself to make an error. Not because blacks "all look alike" but because they do not have as many variations in eye and hair color as caucasians. It is hard to confuse a blonde with blue eyes and a brunette with gray eyes for example

prosecutors KNOW THIS and LE does too. Yet they go ahead and try these people based on insufficient evidence.

The lucky ones are arrested for rape or rape/murder where there is dna to be tested later. The unlucky ones are executed or in prison for life. Often so a prosecutor can get more votes.

Our system is not meant to be based on "belief" but proof. Obviously there is no proof against an innocent man. none.

imo

[Biscuit]

Sorry to be disagreeable here, but any prosecutor or LE officer who has been found to have wrongfully convicted someone, based on either false testimony or withheld evidence, NEEDS to be sent to the license plate factory!

Screwups I can live with, but fraudulent convictions? NEVER!!!! And, Texas has a long standing reputation of just that--about one inch short of Mexican Justice, IMO

Biscuit

[Details]

Going to trial with eyewitness testimony, especially when the witness is sure - that is a good thing. We should not tell criminals that if they can avoid leaving DNA, they are off scot free.

[oxfordfox2]

Good for Texas! Those poor people deserve every dime of it!

[GentleBreeze]

Ok, maybe I am just cynical but does that mean the wrongly convicted has no right to sue. I have seen high awards given out. I don't know if that was from a settlement through a lawsuit.

So if the wrongly accused could obtain more funds through a lawsuit than the 80K x how many years they live is this really a win for them or for the state.:confused:

In the fine print does it also say that anyone partaking of the 80K per year gives up their legal rights to sue for compensatory damages and pain and suffering?

Just wondering if it was to deter lawsuits.

imo

[R~O~S]

Ok, maybe I am just cynical but does that mean the wrongly convicted has no right to sue. I have seen high awards given out. I don't know if that was from a settlement through a lawsuit.

So if the wrongly accused could obtain more funds through a lawsuit than the 80K x how many years they live is this really a win for them or for the state.:confused:

In the fine print does it also say that anyone partaking of the 80K per year gives up their legal rights to sue for compensatory damages and pain and suffering?

Just wondering if it was to deter lawsuits.

imo


From the OP article:

The drumbeat of DNA exonerations caused lawmakers this year to increase the compensation for the wrongly convicted, which had been $50,000 for each year of prison. Glasheen, the attorney, advised his clients to drop their federal civil rights lawsuits and then led the lobbying efforts for the bill.

(skip)

Exonerees who collected lump sum payments under the old compensation law are ineligible for the new lump sums but will receive the annuities. Whether the money will be subject to taxes remains unsettled, Glasheen said.

So, if they accepted the previous offer from the state, they're SOL for the lump sum, but they get the annuity payments. Those who didn't accept the previous offer had to drop their civil rights suits against the state.

I don't see where it prohibits anyone from filing some type of slander or libel suit against someone other than authorities. It only prevents them from filing against the state if they accept the payment as offered.

I don't see where it prevents them from filing charges against another private citizen if there's cause. I just can't think of any situation that would justify cause atm.

[GentleBreeze]

Thank you, ROS!

Have a great weekend.

imo

[porchlight]

Sorry to be disagreeable here, but any prosecutor or LE officer who has been found to have wrongfully convicted someone, based on either false testimony or withheld evidence, NEEDS to be sent to the license plate factory!

Screwups I can live with, but fraudulent convictions? NEVER!!!! And, Texas has a long standing reputation of just that--about one inch short of Mexican Justice, IMO

Biscuit
I completely agree. Texas has a Criminal Justice System...in every sense of the word criminal.

[Bill Justice]

Good for Texas! Those poor people deserve every dime of it!



Since you feel that way why don't you send them a few bucks.

Where do you think this money comes from?? ..those who pay taxes in that state. Will not cost you or me a dime, so we can afford to be self righteous ..big deal..seems like a lot of folks get that feel good feeling when other peoples' money is spent for their worthwhile cause.

[porchlight]

Since you feel that way why don't you send them a few bucks.

Where do you think this money comes from?? ..those who pay taxes in that state. Will not cost you or me a dime, so we can afford to be self righteous ..big deal..seems like a lot of folks get that feel good feeling when other peoples' money is spent for their worthwhile cause.

A very small price to pay for some semblance of justice, though.

[javakritter]

Since you feel that way why don't you send them a few bucks.

Where do you think this money comes from?? ..those who pay taxes in that state. Will not cost you or me a dime, so we can afford to be self righteous ..big deal..seems like a lot of folks get that feel good feeling when other peoples' money is spent for their worthwhile cause.

No it won't as long as we don't live in Texas. However it may set a precedence in other states and I for one hope that it does. This has gone on in our justice system way too long.

With all due respect - If you yourself or you haven't had a family member or friend who has been wrongly convicted, it is probably beyond your comprehension to understand the loss of not only your freedom but much, much more.

We have put our head in the sand for so long that we have accepted the fact that it is OK for our law enforcement to commit crimes themselves. And yes I do feel those responsible should be held accountable. Only then will law enforcement make sure that they do get it right.

[porchlight]

No it won't as long as we don't live in Texas. However it may set a precedence in other states and I for one hope that it does. This has gone on in our justice system way too long.

With all due respect - If you yourself or you haven't had a family member or friend who has been wrongly convicted, it is probably beyond your comprehension to understand the loss of not only your freedom but much, much more.

We have put our head in the sand for so long that we have accepted the fact that it is OK for our law enforcement to commit crimes themselves. And yes I do feel those responsible should be held accountable. Only then will law enforcement make sure that they do get it right.

Hear Hear! Even when no one commits a crime, anytime someone is wrongfully convicted we need to compensate them in the only way we can...which is a leg up into the outside world. We cannot give them back lost years but perhaps by giving them back some of the wages they lost, we can at least help a new beginning get off to a better start.
I, as a taxpayer, pay for many things I have never had to use. I never had kids, yet have paid years and years of school taxes (And I was educated in private schools so never even used public schools as a child myself) but I am happy to pay those taxes because an educated society is always a better society. Just as a just society is always better than an injust one. I for one would gladly pay into any fund they want to establish to assist the wrongfully convicted start anew. It would be as worthy a charity as any other.

[♫Rock*Star♫]

Since you feel that way why don't you send them a few bucks.

Where do you think this money comes from?? ..those who pay taxes in that state.

snipped

Where do you think the money came from to investigate, arrest, prosecute, convict, and incarcerate these wrongfully convicted people?

[porchlight]

Where do you think the money came from to investigate, arrest, prosecute, convict, and incarcerate these wrongfully convicted people?
excellent point

[Details]

Since you feel that way why don't you send them a few bucks.

Where do you think this money comes from?? ..those who pay taxes in that state. Will not cost you or me a dime, so we can afford to be self righteous ..big deal..seems like a lot of folks get that feel good feeling when other peoples' money is spent for their worthwhile cause.It's our money. All of ours. And when our money is spent to incarcerate an innocent man, it is only right we compensate them for what was stolen from them.


Or does justice and right and wrong not matter if it is expensive?

Not that this is, compared to what a lawsuit costs to defend against, let alone the damages that a good case can bring.

[gnm109]

Whatever they give them, it's not enough for stealing their lives from them.

The case stands as a testament to the low value of many so-called "eye witness" identifications in general.

It also shows the zealousness of prosecutors intent on getting convictions to bolster their record come election time.