6 ms·

There's a ton of media interest. I'm only going to appear on Dateline if I have some assurance that the new piece will be fairer than the original one that got

There's a ton of media interest. I'm only going to appear on Dateline if I have some assurance that the new piece will be fairer than the original one that got my attention.

danso 10y ago
What did you find unfair about the original piece? I haven't seen it but I had assumed it would be relatively favorable if Dateline had chosen to publicize the case 15 years after the murder and 6 years after the conviction.
- ClintEhrlich 10y ago
  The Dateline piece came out right after Ray's conviction. I just happened to see it 5 years later. It portrayed him as a craven killer who was brought to justice only through the Herculean efforts of police and prosecutors who wouldn't let the absence of any physical evidence stop them from getting a conviction.
  - danso 10y ago
    Goddamn that's scary that this man's exoneration depended on a chance viewing of Dateline...Props to you...my initial reaction to this post (I hadn't seen your other appeals to HN) were that this sounded too good to be true, but even the stories and accounts about Mr. Jennings that were pro-status-quo were alarmingly flimsy. I don't have faith that the justice system will naturally get things right, but I do have a general faith that the bureaucracy and motivations of the system would prevent such a conviction from ever happening in the current day...e.g. DA's not wanting to screw up their conviction rate by bringing such a weak case to trial. My faith is pretty shaken now...if this is the kind of case that can make its way to a murder conviction and rejection of review by the state Supreme Court, it most definitely leaves me unsettled about all the kinds of cases that don't receive media attention. This frequently posted video ("Don't talk to police") now looks much more naive than cynical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
    - ClintEhrlich 10y ago
      Sadly, this case has deeply shaken my confidence in the criminal-justice system.
      - Casseres 10y ago
        "(T)his is a court of law and not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (Associate Justice for the United States Supreme Court)
        btilly 10y ago
        In Holmes' defense, the job of a Supreme Court justice is to establish common law precedent for the future, not to get the right decision for the case at hand. So, for instance, if an illegal search turns up clear evidence that a company is evading taxes, justice for the case at hand says that the company should be punished. But the principle of law says that precedent must be set that the police can't violate the 4th amendment. This is not a hypothetical example. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._Uni....
      - jacquesm 10y ago
        What's really sad is that it took this long and what's even sadder is that there are many people who feel that it is working just fine. Congratulations on your achievement though, that was really good of you and your dad to do.
  - jean_claude 10y ago
    Well, people are often convicted based on circumstantial evidence. That's why there is a jury, to weigh the available evidence. Personally, I wouldn't give this guy any help based on what I've read, and certainly not without reading the entire record of each trial. Also, the prosecutor should have definitely sought a lower charge of manslaughter after the 2nd hung jury. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/TESTIMONY+IN+2000+SLAYING+CO-WORKER+SAYS+HE+OVERHEARD+SUSPECT+TELL...-a0146287222 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/TESTIMONY+IN+2000+SLAYING+CO-W... Edit: added the following Yeah, down-voting doesn't invalidate my my feelings on the matter, and looking at the appelate court's decision to uphold the verdict [1] just affirms that I would need a whole lot more convincing this guy is innocent. [1] http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20CACO%2020111219009/PEOPLE%20v.%20JENNINGS http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20CACO%2020111219009/PEOPL...
    - zaroth 10y ago
      Why don't you try reading the letter OP wrote which got this man released instead of shody reports of hearsay "evidence" from a 2-bit not-even-cop trying to impress the detectives on the case?!
    - fsloth 10y ago
      Can you point out any inconsistencies or errors in the original letter reframing the case based on known facts that got him free?

There's a ton of media interest. I'm only going to appear on Dateline if I have some assurance that the new piece will be fairer than the original one that got my attention.

danso 10y ago

What did you find unfair about the original piece? I haven't seen it but I had assumed it would be relatively favorable if Dateline had chosen to publicize the case 15 years after the murder and 6 years after the conviction.

ClintEhrlich 10y ago
The Dateline piece came out right after Ray's conviction. I just happened to see it 5 years later. It portrayed him as a craven killer who was brought to justice only through the Herculean efforts of police and prosecutors who wouldn't let the absence of any physical evidence stop them from getting a conviction.
- danso 10y ago
  Goddamn that's scary that this man's exoneration depended on a chance viewing of Dateline...Props to you...my initial reaction to this post (I hadn't seen your other appeals to HN) were that this sounded too good to be true, but even the stories and accounts about Mr. Jennings that were pro-status-quo were alarmingly flimsy. I don't have faith that the justice system will naturally get things right, but I do have a general faith that the bureaucracy and motivations of the system would prevent such a conviction from ever happening in the current day...e.g. DA's not wanting to screw up their conviction rate by bringing such a weak case to trial. My faith is pretty shaken now...if this is the kind of case that can make its way to a murder conviction and rejection of review by the state Supreme Court, it most definitely leaves me unsettled about all the kinds of cases that don't receive media attention. This frequently posted video ("Don't talk to police") now looks much more naive than cynical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
  - ClintEhrlich 10y ago
    Sadly, this case has deeply shaken my confidence in the criminal-justice system.
    - Casseres 10y ago
      "(T)his is a court of law and not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (Associate Justice for the United States Supreme Court)
      - btilly 10y ago
        In Holmes' defense, the job of a Supreme Court justice is to establish common law precedent for the future, not to get the right decision for the case at hand. So, for instance, if an illegal search turns up clear evidence that a company is evading taxes, justice for the case at hand says that the company should be punished. But the principle of law says that precedent must be set that the police can't violate the 4th amendment. This is not a hypothetical example. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._Uni....
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      What's really sad is that it took this long and what's even sadder is that there are many people who feel that it is working just fine. Congratulations on your achievement though, that was really good of you and your dad to do.
- jean_claude 10y ago
  Well, people are often convicted based on circumstantial evidence. That's why there is a jury, to weigh the available evidence. Personally, I wouldn't give this guy any help based on what I've read, and certainly not without reading the entire record of each trial. Also, the prosecutor should have definitely sought a lower charge of manslaughter after the 2nd hung jury. http://www.thefreelibrary.com/TESTIMONY+IN+2000+SLAYING+CO-WORKER+SAYS+HE+OVERHEARD+SUSPECT+TELL...-a0146287222 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/TESTIMONY+IN+2000+SLAYING+CO-W... Edit: added the following Yeah, down-voting doesn't invalidate my my feelings on the matter, and looking at the appelate court's decision to uphold the verdict [1] just affirms that I would need a whole lot more convincing this guy is innocent. [1] http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20CACO%2020111219009/PEOPLE%20v.%20JENNINGS http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20CACO%2020111219009/PEOPL...
  - zaroth 10y ago
    Why don't you try reading the letter OP wrote which got this man released instead of shody reports of hearsay "evidence" from a 2-bit not-even-cop trying to impress the detectives on the case?!
  - fsloth 10y ago
    Can you point out any inconsistencies or errors in the original letter reframing the case based on known facts that got him free?