Question of the day: Has an innocent person ever been executed?: Anumta Ali, of The Death Penalty Information Center notes that: "An unde­ni­able truth of the death penal­ty is that it car­ries the inher­ent risk of exe­cut­ing inno­cent indi­vid­u­als. Many may believe that the exe­cu­tion of an inno­cent per­son is an anom­aly and that the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem has ade­quate safe­guards in place to rec­ti­fy wrong­ful con­vic­tions. Unfortunately, this is often not the case," as she provides a number of facts about the death penalty including this one: "Most innocence cases are not based on DNA evidence", and lays out other interesting death penalty facts.

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The Equal Justice Initiative notes many fac­tors can lead to wrong­ful con­vic­tions, includ­ing erro­neous eye­wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, false or coerced con­fes­sions, inad­e­quate legal defense, and false or mis­lead­ing foren­sic evi­dence. There are also oppor­tu­ni­ties for bias against the defen­dant to affect legal pro­ceed­ings and impact the views of juries, judges, and gov­er­nors. Politicization and arbi­trari­ness of crim­i­nal pro­ceed­ings, espe­cial­ly in cap­i­tal cas­es, also influ­ence sentencing outcomes."

-------------------------------------------------- 

ENTRY: "Facts About the Death Penalty – Has an Innocent Person Ever Been Executed?," by Anumta Ali, published by The Death Penalty Information Center on August 6, 2025.

An unde­ni­able truth of the death penal­ty is that it car­ries the inher­ent risk of exe­cut­ing inno­cent indi­vid­u­als. Many may believe that the exe­cu­tion of an inno­cent per­son is an anom­aly and that the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem has ade­quate safe­guards in place to rec­ti­fy wrong­ful con­vic­tions. Unfortunately, this is often not the case. 

Fact: For Every 8 Individuals Executed in the Modern Era, One Other Death-Sentenced Person has been Found Innocent. 

Since 1973, 200 death-sen­tenced peo­ple have been for­mal­ly exon­er­at­ed, while over 1,630 indi­vid­u­als have been exe­cut­ed. Others have been posthu­mous­ly exon­er­at­ed after their exe­cu­tions. In a land­mark 2014 study, the National Academy of Sciences found that 4.1% of con­demned indi­vid­u­als in the United States are like­ly inno­cent, which they remind is a con­ser­v­a­tive esti­mate. DPI track­ing indi­cates that from 2000 to 2020, there were an aver­age of 4.29 exon­er­a­tions per year. 

Fact: Most Innocence Cases are Not Based on DNA Evidence. 

It is a com­mon mis­con­cep­tion that DNA evi­dence is wide­ly avail­able, and that it is even cen­tral to exon­er­a­tions. The real­i­ty is that DNA exon­er­a­tions in cap­i­tal cas­es are sur­pris­ing­ly rare. According to the Genetic Science Learning Center at the University of Utah, DNA test­ing is used in less than 1% of all crim­i­nal cas­es. 

A review of the 200 cap­i­tal exon­er­a­tions to date by DPI found 34 cas­es were attrib­ut­able to DNA evi­dence. Before 2000, only a hand­ful of states even allowed post-con­vic­tion DNA test­ing. The 2004 Innocence Protection Act amend­ed the Federal crim­i­nal code to estab­lish pro­ce­dures for post-con­vic­tion DNA test­ing in Federal court if “the pro­posed DNA test­ing would pro­duce new mate­r­i­al evi­dence to sup­port the defense the­o­ry and raise a rea­son­able prob­a­bil­i­ty that the appli­cant did not com­mit the offense.” The Act also includes fund­ing for DNA analy­sis for con­vict­ed indi­vid­u­als. Today, all fifty states have enact­ed statutes allow­ing for post-con­vic­tion DNA analy­sis, though the pro­ce­dur­al require­ments in some states some­times act to prevent testing. 

The Equal Justice Initiative notes many fac­tors can lead to wrong­ful con­vic­tions, includ­ing erro­neous eye­wit­ness iden­ti­fi­ca­tion, false or coerced con­fes­sions, inad­e­quate legal defense, and false or mis­lead­ing foren­sic evi­dence. There are also oppor­tu­ni­ties for bias against the defen­dant to affect legal pro­ceed­ings and impact the views of juries, judges, and gov­er­nors. Politicization and arbi­trari­ness of crim­i­nal pro­ceed­ings, espe­cial­ly in cap­i­tal cas­es, also influ­ence sentencing outcomes. 

Fact: Race Plays a Substantial Role in Wrongful Sentencing and Executions. 

The National Registry of Exonerations (NRE) reports that in 2024, 78% of all exonerees were peo­ple of col­or, and near­ly 60% were Black. Black peo­ple con­vict­ed of mur­der were 80% more like­ly to be inno­cent than those of oth­er races. Additionally, exonerees accused of mur­der who are Black spent three years longer in prison before release com­pared to white mur­der exonerees. When con­sid­er­ing those who had death sen­tences imposed in the mod­ern death penal­ty era, and were lat­er exon­er­at­ed, DPI found 64% were peo­ple of col­or, 54% Black and 10% Latino. 

According to DPI data, 75% of indi­vid­u­als exe­cut­ed in the mod­ern era were sen­tenced to death for mur­ders involv­ing white indi­vid­u­als, even though around half of all homi­cide vic­tims are Black. According to the NRE, while only 13% of mur­ders com­mit­ted by Black indi­vid­u­als have white vic­tims, 26% of inno­cent Black mur­der exonerees were for­mer­ly con­vict­ed of killing white individuals. 

Official mis­con­duct occurred in 71% of all exon­er­a­tions in 2024, accord­ing to the NRE. Official mis­con­duct includes per­jury, wit­ness tam­per­ing, and taint­ed iden­ti­fi­ca­tion pro­ce­dures com­mit­ted by offi­cials like police or the pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al team. Black exonerees for­mer­ly sen­tenced to death were vic­tims of offi­cial mis­con­duct at a rate of 87%, com­pared to 68% for white condemned exonerees,"

The entire story can be read at: 

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-the-death-penalty-has-an-innocent-person-ever-been-executed

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;