home

Ill. Inmate Freed by DNA After Serving 32 Years

Andre Davis, now 50 years old, left a maximum security prison in Illinois today, after serving 32 years for a rape and murder that DNA evidence has proven he didn't commit.

A federal court overturned his conviction when DNA tests not available at the time of his trial came back with a finding that the blood and semen found at the crime scene were not those of Davis.

Prosecutors earlier today said they will not recharge him. Did the DNA tests sway them? Not much.

[Prosecutor] Reitz said that while she didn't doubt the results of the DNA tests, she decided not to retry Davis because of the difficulty in taking a 32-year-old case to trial — not because of those tests.

Davis requested the DNA testing in 2004. Why did it take 8 years to free him?

< George Zimmerman Released on Bail | Saturday Open Thread: Test Your Computers by Monday >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Yes, this is the question. (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 07:33:12 AM EST
    Davis requested the DNA testing in 2004. Why did it take 8 years to free him?

    With all the resources this country has, why aren't we reviewing all cases? Why should a prisoner even have to ask??

    gather all DNA (none / 0) (#19)
    by diogenes on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 10:43:28 PM EST
    I bet that if we gathered up DNA from all citizens, a lot more crimes would be solved and innocent people freed.

    Parent
    I didn't say that (none / 0) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jul 08, 2012 at 09:21:17 AM EST
    I'm just saying we should use DNA testing to test the current cases in which the test can tell us something.

    Parent
    Good news (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by friendofinnocence on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 10:04:26 AM EST
    It is always good news to see another innocent escape the belly of the beast.

    Just to show all DA's aren't the same, DA Craig Watkins of Dallas County has a conviction integrity unit that actively looks for wrongful convictions.

    http://dallasda.co/webdev/?page_id=73

    post conviction dna tests (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by Philly on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 11:37:40 AM EST
    Not only have DNA tests led to many exonerations, but approximately 50% of the cases have led to identification of the actual guilty party according to statistics at www.innocenceproject

    This type of testing should be embraced not just by people horrified at injustices in our system, but by people that want the truly guilty to be punished.

    It's disturbing how slowly the wheels of justice turn for the already-convicted - I can't imagine how it would feel to be in Andre Davis's shoes.

    DNA test everyone (none / 0) (#18)
    by diogenes on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 10:40:03 PM EST
    We need a DNA test base of all citizens to be on file.  We can thus catch the guilty.
    By the way, what's the denominator here?  How many people convicted of rape are currently in prison in Illinois?

    Parent
    Go right ahead and submit your DNA, honey (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by sj on Mon Jul 09, 2012 at 10:24:33 AM EST
    I'll keep mine, thank you very much.

    Parent
    Here's the state appellate court (none / 0) (#1)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 10:45:18 PM EST
    opinion with more information re the chronology:  
    link

    can't seem to open (none / 0) (#4)
    by cpinva on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:24:32 PM EST
    this link. i have W7 as my OS, could this be the problem?

    Parent
    I haven't a clue. Sorry. (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:26:30 PM EST
    Do you have Adobe Acrobat installled? (none / 0) (#11)
    by unitron on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 04:13:49 AM EST
    You have to have something that can open a .pdf (Portable Document Format) file, regardless of OS or browser.

    You have to pay for the software to create PDFs, but the reader software is free.

    http://get.adobe.com/reader/

    Parent

    inexcusable (none / 0) (#2)
    by desmoinesdem on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 10:54:02 PM EST
    and why can't a prosecutor apologize for a wrongful conviction like this one? I guess they are afraid of a civil lawsuit. I hope they get one.

    How about an apology from the (none / 0) (#3)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:02:29 PM EST
    two juries who returned guilty verdicts?

    Parent
    Why should the jury apologize? (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Slayersrezo on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:41:03 PM EST
    Unless they let prejudice of some sort guide their decisions, a jury can only deal with what evidence the state has for them and allows them to see.

    As far as it goes, if any of the original jurors are alive and aware of the DNA testing, I'm sure they feel rather sick right now. But it's not their fault. They weren't the ones who brought the charges.

    Heck, I'm willing to even give the original prosecutor a mulligan on this to an extent as they were operating with some evidence -albeit evidence from the very primitive forensics available at the time. I see no evidence they brought what they knew was a week case.

    No, the ones who should be ashamed and the ones who have me seeing red are those running the prosecutors/states legal offices since the DNA tests were done. They know the original theory of the case is a load of crap, they know this guy is almost certainly innocent, yet they have fought and fought to maintain the conviction on grounds other than what the guy was originally convicted on. Trying to deny him his freedom, his good name, and any compensation he may have coming. Meanwhile (unless he is dead) there exists a suspect whom the forensic DNA DOES implicate who goes uncharged.

    Clearly those in charge of the States case now do not care about justice.

    Parent

    Um (none / 0) (#21)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 09, 2012 at 06:39:11 AM EST
    If a prosecutor has exculpatory evidence, they are required to turn that over to the defense.  That does not mean, however, that they are required to do the defense's job for them.

    It's the judge who ultimately allows what evidence the jury sees.

    Parent

    What's any of that got to do with anything? (none / 0) (#22)
    by Slayersrezo on Mon Jul 09, 2012 at 09:01:10 AM EST
    My comment was specifically about the prosecution in this case trying to win the case over again using a different theory than the one they actually advanced at trial.

    None of what you replied to me with has any relevance to anything I said.

    Parent

    Yes, it really does (none / 0) (#24)
    by jbindc on Mon Jul 09, 2012 at 10:33:30 AM EST
    Unless they let prejudice of some sort guide their decisions, a jury can only deal with what evidence the state has for them and allows them to see.


    Parent
    that was a joke, right? (none / 0) (#5)
    by cpinva on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:25:29 PM EST
    juries never apologize, because juries are never wrong, no matter how wrong they are.

    Parent
    an apology won't have any (none / 0) (#7)
    by cpinva on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:27:32 PM EST
    bearing on a civil suit. prosecutors never apologize because prosecutors are never wrong, even when they're wrong. same thing with juries, as i noted elsewhere.

    Parent
    I think if there is a possibility (none / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:33:01 PM EST
    ofpossibility of a civil lawsuit the prosecutor should not apologize. Also, given two juries retuned guilty verdicts and DNA analysis was not yet possible, the prosecutor is blameless.  

    Parent
    the original prosecutor, probably (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Slayersrezo on Fri Jul 06, 2012 at 11:43:17 PM EST
    The original prosecutor probably was blameless. And the state didn't apparently conduct a shoddy investigation or railroad here, so most of the due process stuff and forensics (for the time) holds up rather well I would think.

    But whoever is running that office now? They deserve to be disbarred.

    Parent

    Another false Chicago cop conviction (none / 0) (#13)
    by 1Greensix on Sat Jul 07, 2012 at 08:35:13 AM EST
    When are the courts in Illinois going to overturn every Chicago murder case, since well over 50 convictions have been found to be false with DNA evidence testing?  The cops in Chicago are crooked as a dog's leg and everyone there knows it.  Why won't the courts begin doing their jobs, unless the judges are as dishonest as the police have been proven to be?