Free After 17 Years for a Rape That He Did Not Commit

[aNoodle]

"El Paso, TX--Shown by DNA testing to have been wrongly convicted of rape in 1988, Mr. Moon was released from prison at a court hearing here on Tuesday afternoon - the latest among 154 men and women in the United States exonerated by such tests....

"Mr. Moon, a four-year Army veteran, was a sophomore at the University of Texas at El Paso in 1987 when he was arrested on the rape charge. A member of the Air Force R.O.T.C., he had hoped to become a "lifer" in the Air Force and to fly fighter jets after his graduation....

"Mr. Moon and his parents were in the packed courtroom to hear the El Paso district attorney, Jaime Esparza, apologize for the wrongful conviction, for himself and for the State of Texas. With them were Barry Scheck, a lawyer from New York whose 12-year-old Innocence Project has accounted for more than half of those exonerated, and another lawyer from Mr. Scheck's office, Nina Morrison.

"I know we can't give you back your years," Mr. Esparza said, "and for that I'm extremely sorry."

"Mr. Moon responded, "I accept your apology." ...

"In Mr. Moon's case, the prosecution presented eyewitness testimony from the rape victim herself and three other women whose rapes followed a similar pattern. The rape victim picked out Mr. Moon from a photograph and police lineup, in which he was the only blue-eyed white male, a full 18 months after the attack....

David Dow, a law professor at the University of Houston, said that reforms were particularly urgent in Texas because "the pace of executions here is so much greater than in any other state."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/national/22release.html

 

[selavia]

I cannot imagine how Mr. Moon accepted that apology. I could never forgive anyone that took 17 years of my life, put my family through immense grief, and dragged my name through the mud. I have a great deal of respect for this man. And for some reason I do not get the impression that the apology was sincere; it kind of sounds to me like, 'oops, we made a mistake. sorry." I would be so mad, and after 17 years of thinking about it I don't know if I could ever speak to another human being ever again.

Sean

 

[Bryan330i]

Just imagine how many more there are that have been either killed or are still in prison that we don't know about, those without resources or motivation to keep fighting. At least he did get out but WHAT DOES SOCIETY OWE HIM???? A hell of a lot!!!


Some people are so friggin destructive, they love to see harm and kill and could care less about truth. And WTF is the point if the right person is not caught?

 

[Section_8]

Mr. Moon is owed something, but it's impossible to return.. Time.

We have to just go forward, and try to make fixes to the system so things like this don't happen. Easy to find a problem with the system, the fix is the hard part.

What can we do to improve how juries decide verdicts? Or how juries are selected? Should their be juries? Maybe full time paid juries? Less restriction on evidence?

Just trying to sponsor a positive response to this thread, I think we all see the guy got a bad shake - and then some. We're all responsible if we don't act to change the problem?

 

[gizzy]

FYI, he's only eligible for up to $25,000 (according to cnn) in compensation for each year that he was in prison.

 

[poboyis]

$25,000/yr X 17yrs = $425,000. not much if ya think about it

 

[Big Daddy]

Mr. Moon is owed something, but it's impossible to return.. Time.

We have to just go forward, and try to make fixes to the system so things like this don't happen. Easy to find a problem with the system, the fix is the hard part.

What can we do to improve how juries decide verdicts? Or how juries are selected? Should their be juries? Maybe full time paid juries? Less restriction on evidence?

Just trying to sponsor a positive response to this thread, I think we all see the guy got a bad shake - and then some. We're all responsible if we don't act to change the problem?

Very well said Section_8, I agree. I think part of the problem is attorneys. We/they are too interested in making a name for themselves, and or big bucks and they forget that a human life may hang in the balance.

 

[Section_8]

Very well said Section_8, I agree. I think part of the problem is attorneys. We/they are too interested in making a name for themselves, and or big bucks and they forget that a human life may hang in the balance.

dankas sir.

Attorneys are part of it, I'd have to agree. It used to be a respected field, now it's like a dirty word sort of like policeman (bad rap, for a tough job that no one else wants..). In the case of lawyers though - somewhat deserved these days. We have more lawyers than taxi drivers! Sue, sue, sue, that's all people want to do these days. Supply and demand I guess?


I think some of it is that juries are not held to their responsibilities - to render a verdict based on evidence given by the prosecutor and defense teams. That, and the fact that evidence can be so easily ruled out - I think there should be greater scrutiny given to 'any' supposed evidence, vs tossing it out for some archaic ruling/law..

You're right $425k is beans compared to 17 years of your life. It'd take some SERIOUS hard cash and heavy living for a few years for 'me' to feel caught up..

just mho's.

 

[aNoodle]

Well, it's fashionable to rag on lawyers and I suppose horrible prosecutors like this one make them/us an easy target. But let's not forget "Barry Scheck, a lawyer from New York whose 12-year-old Innocence Project....and Nina Morrison." They are lawyers too.

I think the system by and large works. I blame the jury here most...18 month old line up where he was the only blue eyed guy? Juries need to take their jobs seriously and really question what the prosecutor is saying and make sure they're convinced to the level of the burden of proof. When the public gets a 'lock em up and throw away the key' mentality (or a 'one appeal, then fry the bastard' myopia) then the system goes down the tubes.

I hadn't heard of the tort law limiting damages to $25,000 a year. Wow. So there is little to no check on the prosecutor just throwing cases at the fan and seeing what sticks. He doesn't have to worry about the cost when the wrongfully-convicted seek compensation? It's a measly $25,000 a year!!! I guess 'tort reform' isn't all it's made out to be. Here's a guy who's being screwed twice. Sounds nice to limit other people's ability to seek compensation, until it's you...or this poor guy.

 

[Big Daddy]

"18 month old line up where he was the only blue eyed guy?". I would not blame a jury for missing this, I'd blame the prosecutor, defense and judge, all lawyers! I am not saying that juries do not hold some blame, but the bigger picture is who makes the laws, who interrupts the laws, who defends and or prosecutes the laws....all lawyers. We have a commercial that airs here many times a day, have you lost in the stock market, do you have cancer from abestos, etc, then call the law office of James Sockolve 1-800........Ambulance chaser who only benefits himself.

 

[MrElussive]

$25,000/yr X 17yrs = $425,000. not much if ya think about it

Yeah, that's almost nothing. I think in the end, they will pay him MUCH MUCH more. 17 years is a LOOONG time.

 

[aNoodle]

Here's a question....obviously he'll sue the jurisdiction that wrongfully incarcerated him for 17 years (the county, state, whatever). And the tort law is gonna limit him to $25,000/yr against the government. But can he sue the prosecutor personally? If it's shown the prosecutor acted negligently can this poor guy take the prosecutor's house? And what about the victim....she went to a line up 18 months after the fact and said, yep he's the one blue eyed guy here. Then she sat in the courtroom and pointed her finger at him and said, without doubt, he's the bastard. Can he sue her...or is she 'tort reformed' free of any responsibility?

 

[selavia]

Here's a question....obviously he'll sue the jurisdiction that wrongfully incarcerated him for 17 years (the county, state, whatever). And the tort law is gonna limit him to $25,000/yr against the government. But can he sue the prosecutor personally? If it's shown the prosecutor acted negligently can this poor guy take the prosecutor's house? And what about the victim....she went to a line up 18 months after the fact and said, yep he's the one blue eyed guy here. Then she sat in the courtroom and pointed her finger at him and said, without doubt, he's the bastard. Can he sue her...or is she 'tort reformed' free of any responsibility?

He can sue, but here's the problem with winning his case: he has to prove their negligence...and trying to rpove that after 17 years is not easy. The victim is pretty off the hook, he cannot sue her; however, he can sue the prosecutor, but demonstrating his negligence would be a mamouth of an activity. I believe "tort reform" does protect the victim...makes one think the Greeks had it right (if you wrongfuly accused the person of a crime you were made to suffer penalities.

At least he got out and his name is somehwhat being cleaned...however I doubt the media will pay half as much attention to his innocence as they paid to his 'guilt.' This kind of stuff really bothers me.