7 ms·

> In an effort to prevent his execution, Lee's attorney sought in the post-conviction appeals process to finally have the DNA evidence in the case tested for th

> In an effort to prevent his execution, Lee's attorney sought in the post-conviction appeals process to finally have the DNA evidence in the case tested for the first time. [...] Their request was denied. "The reasoning given by the judge was it wouldn't matter, that there were three people who saw him at or near that neighborhood on that day and time and honestly the DNA just wouldn't matter," Short said. Wow. Like, I completely fail to comprehend how it's legal in the US judiciary system to ignore any piece of available hard evidence in a case that is punishable by execution? Then again, if execution itself is still legal, I can answer part of that question myself, even if I don't like the answer.

gbrown 5y ago
Especially when the current result is based on eyewitness testimony, which is known to be crap.
- GavinMcG 5y ago
  Well that kind of depends on the actual testimony, doesn't it? Here, the defendant was neighbors with the victim, and the witnesses were other neighbors. So there's not much reason to doubt their identification, at least.
  - mikeryan 5y ago
    the witnesses were other neighbors. So there's not much reason to doubt their identification, at least. Sure there is, if you seem someone leaving a house that resembles another neighbor you’re going to assume its the neighbor and not a stranger. Context is huge.
    - beerandt 5y ago
      The neighbor witness followed the suspect to a place where he was known/recognized.
      - gbrown 5y ago
        I didn’t see that in the article, but it’s still trivial to come up with reasonable doubts: 1. What does known/recognized mean? It’s perfectly possible for additional people to make a mistake in identification, especially if prompted by others. 2. Even if it was him, the crime wasn’t witnessed; he’d be agitated just by having seen the scene, I imagine The big thing that adds to number 2 is that people often forget that reality is messier than neat stories. The defendant could very well have been doing something else illegal or furtive, and been agitated for that reason. They might have been involved in related criminal activity but not responsible for the actual attack. They might have had an innocent reason to be there and not expected to be believed. It may really not have been the suspect there to begin with. That’s why the death penalty is bad, and it’s why eyewitness testimony is crap by itself, especially when it’s circumstantial.
        beerandt 5y ago
        The point is that the article is completely one sided propaganda. It didn't mention anything about any contradictory evidence, except to say the judge felt enough existed. Debating the death penalty is one thing, but advocates for abolishing it aren't helping themselves by relying on this type of propaganda. This was and is a solid conviction of a guilty man. There are enough legitimate concerns to debate without taking the word of the click bait.
        beerandt 5y ago
        As for your what-if's: that's what a jury is for. Determining matters-of-fact from presented evidence. They convicted. If they could (and did!) do that without needing DNA evidence, the presence of someone else's trace DNA, or absence of the suspect's on one specific piece of evidence isn't likely to change that, even if it's the murder weapon. All evidence is imperfect, and I personally think we'll start to publicly realize that DNA evidence is just as malleable as eye-witness testimony. Just run more PCR iterations until some other DNA is amplified above the signal/noise floor! (If people knew the amount of analytical probability that goes into PCR/ matching DNA samples, they'd have a lot less faith in the technology, but that's another topic.) Same thing for manipulated/edited video and even deep-fakes. Which, isn't too say all evidence is crap and therefore no convictions are valid. It's why we put faith in the system and in our peers serving on petit-juries... and why it's up to a them and the judge to evaluate the evidence, and decide whether or not to convict... And why we don't have a computer run a PCR and automatically say: "Positive dna-sample: go directly to jail".
awb 5y ago
For context, here’s the other evidence the judge is referring to: > Asked about the new DNA evidence, Rutledge repeatedly insisted Lee was "lawfully executed" and pointed to the testimony of an eyewitness who purportedly saw Lee enter Reese's home that day and then leave, "erratically," 20 minutes later. There’s also more context here for anyone interested in the case: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledell_Lee https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledell_Lee As for the DNA findings: > In April 2021, new DNA testing found "unknown male" DNA on the murder weapon and bloody clothes found at the scene. However, the test also "found moderate support" that blood on Lee's left shoe could have belonged to Reese. EDIT: Apparently, a “tire thumper” looks a lot like a small wooden bat, so there’s not as much confusion as I thought about the murder weapon. I mistakenly thought the prosecution was alleging a “tire iron” was the murder weapon. https://www.thv11.com/mobile/article/news/crime/ledell-lee-dna-testing-results-debra-reese/91-781451b1-4820-47c5-86a9-52099d7ed00f https://www.thv11.com/mobile/article/news/crime/ledell-lee-d...
- tyingq 5y ago
  A "tire thumper" is often a wooden bat. https://www.amazon.com/RoadPro-RPTT-1-Thumper-19-Inches-Assorted/dp/B001JT5CFY https://www.amazon.com/RoadPro-RPTT-1-Thumper-19-Inches-Asso...
  - awb 5y ago
    Ah, OK. I got it mixed up with “tire iron”.
  - bananapear 5y ago
    > This 19 wooden tire thumper lets you know if your tires are fully pressurized by making a thump as it hits the rubber. Just swing the thumper and listen for the sound. If your tires are low in pressure it makes a different sound. Save time checking tire pressure on your rig with this wooden tire thumper. Is this some kind of nonsense to avoid marketing it as a weapon, or do people really use these to check tyre pressures instead of… looking at or kicking the tyre? Or even a tyre pressure gauge?
    - 5y ago
rhino369 5y ago
I don’t know anything about the specific case, but often DNA from someone else would be totally irrelevant. If I murder someone with my kitchen knife, my wife and her fathers DNA will be on the murder weapon. If you buy a gun from someone and then go shoot someone with it, it might have the sellers DNA on it. So it’s sometimes the case that DNA can’t really create reasonable doubt.
- causality0 5y ago
  Not just the seller, workers at the manufacturing plant, and any person who walked in the shop and asked to hold it.
  - Turing_Machine 5y ago
    Right. There was an incident in Europe, I believe, where law enforcement thought they'd identified an individual responsible for a massive international crime spree. What they'd actually identified was the factory worker who packaged the DNA collection swabs.
    - chrisandchris 5y ago
      You believe right but forgot 1 thing: these DNA collection swabs were supposed to be DNA-free (or at least sold as that) but some problem while manufacturing put DNA on them. It‘s known as „Heilbronner Phantom“ (phantom of heilbronn). Source: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heilbronner_Phantom https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heilbronner_Phantom
- hwillis 5y ago
  The presumption was that the items would have Lee's DNA on them and they did not.
  - awb 5y ago
    Would wearing gloves prevent DNA from appearing on a wooden handle?
ransom1538 5y ago
"However, the test also "found moderate support" that blood on Lee's left shoe could have belonged to Reese.[17]" They did find the victims DNA on Lee's shoe. That would need to be admitted as well.
dlhavema 5y ago
While I agree with you seems like this was a sketchy case to go forward with the execution, like me, you already had a strong opinion about capital punishment before you read the article.
newacct583 5y ago
> Wow. Like, I completely fail to comprehend how it's legal in the US judiciary system to ignore any piece of available hard evidence in a case that is punishable by execution? It wasn't "completely ignored". It was presented to the court and the test was requested, and the request was denied. Evidentiary rules are complicated and subject to abuse, yes, but they protect all of us. It's not like we'd be better off if discovery was unlimited. Your complaint isn't about the way courts treat evidence, it's with the punishment. Death is final and not subject to appeal. And fundamentally that's an argument for why it shouldn't be available to courts at all. But really, there's nothing especially wrong with evidentiary process in US criminal law. There are problems with it like any bureaucracy, but on the whole it does pretty well.
- g8oz 5y ago
  When the death penalty is involved I would argue that discovery should in fact be unlimited
  - btown 5y ago
    More generally there should be more legal paths towards stays of execution even if new evidence does not yet on its own reach the standard necessary for an appeal or retrial. Not having these paths to me seems cruel and unusual.
  - carlmr 5y ago
    Even for a life sentence, evidence like this shouldn't be ignored. Eyewitness evidence is one of the most fallible types of evidence.
- Buttons840 5y ago
  > It's not like we'd be better off if discovery was unlimited. Why not? Why shouldn't the defense be able to present all evidence in their possession?
  - NikolaeVarius 5y ago
    Because evidence could literally be anything in the universe and no limits on what is able to be presented opens up abuse via random shit
intricatedetail 5y ago
As if judge was interested in closing the case and moving onto the next one rather than serving justice. In many countries judges are unsackable, is it true in the US?
- hedora 5y ago
  Many judges in the US have lifetime appointments. This is one reason it was so damaging (depending on your point of view) when congress refused to confirm Obama’s judicial nominees, then rammed through a record number under Trump. It led to Trump boasting that the judges would just tilt the scales on the election for him if the count said he lost (that didn’t work out), and the current large crop of new abortion bans working their way up to the (in his words), “Trump judge” federal courts.
chmod600 5y ago
It's interesting that a "fail to comprehend" post is voted more highly than an informative post that at least partially answers the question: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27246831 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27246831
- Koshkin 5y ago
  But note that your remark falls into the same category.
slver 5y ago
Being surprised at any travesty of justice means you still believe "justice the meme", and "justice the reality" have any hope of being similar to each other.

gbrown 5y ago

Especially when the current result is based on eyewitness testimony, which is known to be crap.

GavinMcG 5y ago
Well that kind of depends on the actual testimony, doesn't it? Here, the defendant was neighbors with the victim, and the witnesses were other neighbors. So there's not much reason to doubt their identification, at least.
- mikeryan 5y ago
  the witnesses were other neighbors. So there's not much reason to doubt their identification, at least. Sure there is, if you seem someone leaving a house that resembles another neighbor you’re going to assume its the neighbor and not a stranger. Context is huge.
  - beerandt 5y ago
    The neighbor witness followed the suspect to a place where he was known/recognized.
    - gbrown 5y ago
      I didn’t see that in the article, but it’s still trivial to come up with reasonable doubts: 1. What does known/recognized mean? It’s perfectly possible for additional people to make a mistake in identification, especially if prompted by others. 2. Even if it was him, the crime wasn’t witnessed; he’d be agitated just by having seen the scene, I imagine The big thing that adds to number 2 is that people often forget that reality is messier than neat stories. The defendant could very well have been doing something else illegal or furtive, and been agitated for that reason. They might have been involved in related criminal activity but not responsible for the actual attack. They might have had an innocent reason to be there and not expected to be believed. It may really not have been the suspect there to begin with. That’s why the death penalty is bad, and it’s why eyewitness testimony is crap by itself, especially when it’s circumstantial.
      - beerandt 5y ago
        The point is that the article is completely one sided propaganda. It didn't mention anything about any contradictory evidence, except to say the judge felt enough existed. Debating the death penalty is one thing, but advocates for abolishing it aren't helping themselves by relying on this type of propaganda. This was and is a solid conviction of a guilty man. There are enough legitimate concerns to debate without taking the word of the click bait.
      - beerandt 5y ago
        As for your what-if's: that's what a jury is for. Determining matters-of-fact from presented evidence. They convicted. If they could (and did!) do that without needing DNA evidence, the presence of someone else's trace DNA, or absence of the suspect's on one specific piece of evidence isn't likely to change that, even if it's the murder weapon. All evidence is imperfect, and I personally think we'll start to publicly realize that DNA evidence is just as malleable as eye-witness testimony. Just run more PCR iterations until some other DNA is amplified above the signal/noise floor! (If people knew the amount of analytical probability that goes into PCR/ matching DNA samples, they'd have a lot less faith in the technology, but that's another topic.) Same thing for manipulated/edited video and even deep-fakes. Which, isn't too say all evidence is crap and therefore no convictions are valid. It's why we put faith in the system and in our peers serving on petit-juries... and why it's up to a them and the judge to evaluate the evidence, and decide whether or not to convict... And why we don't have a computer run a PCR and automatically say: "Positive dna-sample: go directly to jail".

awb 5y ago

For context, here’s the other evidence the judge is referring to: > Asked about the new DNA evidence, Rutledge repeatedly insisted Lee was "lawfully executed" and pointed to the testimony of an eyewitness who purportedly saw Lee enter Reese's home that day and then leave, "erratically," 20 minutes later. There’s also more context here for anyone interested in the case: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledell_Lee https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledell_Lee As for the DNA findings: > In April 2021, new DNA testing found "unknown male" DNA on the murder weapon and bloody clothes found at the scene. However, the test also "found moderate support" that blood on Lee's left shoe could have belonged to Reese. EDIT: Apparently, a “tire thumper” looks a lot like a small wooden bat, so there’s not as much confusion as I thought about the murder weapon. I mistakenly thought the prosecution was alleging a “tire iron” was the murder weapon. https://www.thv11.com/mobile/article/news/crime/ledell-lee-dna-testing-results-debra-reese/91-781451b1-4820-47c5-86a9-52099d7ed00f https://www.thv11.com/mobile/article/news/crime/ledell-lee-d...

tyingq 5y ago
A "tire thumper" is often a wooden bat. https://www.amazon.com/RoadPro-RPTT-1-Thumper-19-Inches-Assorted/dp/B001JT5CFY https://www.amazon.com/RoadPro-RPTT-1-Thumper-19-Inches-Asso...
- awb 5y ago
  Ah, OK. I got it mixed up with “tire iron”.
- bananapear 5y ago
  > This 19 wooden tire thumper lets you know if your tires are fully pressurized by making a thump as it hits the rubber. Just swing the thumper and listen for the sound. If your tires are low in pressure it makes a different sound. Save time checking tire pressure on your rig with this wooden tire thumper. Is this some kind of nonsense to avoid marketing it as a weapon, or do people really use these to check tyre pressures instead of… looking at or kicking the tyre? Or even a tyre pressure gauge?
  - 5y ago

rhino369 5y ago

I don’t know anything about the specific case, but often DNA from someone else would be totally irrelevant. If I murder someone with my kitchen knife, my wife and her fathers DNA will be on the murder weapon. If you buy a gun from someone and then go shoot someone with it, it might have the sellers DNA on it. So it’s sometimes the case that DNA can’t really create reasonable doubt.

causality0 5y ago
Not just the seller, workers at the manufacturing plant, and any person who walked in the shop and asked to hold it.
- Turing_Machine 5y ago
  Right. There was an incident in Europe, I believe, where law enforcement thought they'd identified an individual responsible for a massive international crime spree. What they'd actually identified was the factory worker who packaged the DNA collection swabs.
  - chrisandchris 5y ago
    You believe right but forgot 1 thing: these DNA collection swabs were supposed to be DNA-free (or at least sold as that) but some problem while manufacturing put DNA on them. It‘s known as „Heilbronner Phantom“ (phantom of heilbronn). Source: https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heilbronner_Phantom https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heilbronner_Phantom
hwillis 5y ago
The presumption was that the items would have Lee's DNA on them and they did not.
- awb 5y ago
  Would wearing gloves prevent DNA from appearing on a wooden handle?

ransom1538 5y ago

"However, the test also "found moderate support" that blood on Lee's left shoe could have belonged to Reese.[17]" They did find the victims DNA on Lee's shoe. That would need to be admitted as well.

dlhavema 5y ago

While I agree with you seems like this was a sketchy case to go forward with the execution, like me, you already had a strong opinion about capital punishment before you read the article.

newacct583 5y ago

> Wow. Like, I completely fail to comprehend how it's legal in the US judiciary system to ignore any piece of available hard evidence in a case that is punishable by execution? It wasn't "completely ignored". It was presented to the court and the test was requested, and the request was denied. Evidentiary rules are complicated and subject to abuse, yes, but they protect all of us. It's not like we'd be better off if discovery was unlimited. Your complaint isn't about the way courts treat evidence, it's with the punishment. Death is final and not subject to appeal. And fundamentally that's an argument for why it shouldn't be available to courts at all. But really, there's nothing especially wrong with evidentiary process in US criminal law. There are problems with it like any bureaucracy, but on the whole it does pretty well.

g8oz 5y ago
When the death penalty is involved I would argue that discovery should in fact be unlimited
- btown 5y ago
  More generally there should be more legal paths towards stays of execution even if new evidence does not yet on its own reach the standard necessary for an appeal or retrial. Not having these paths to me seems cruel and unusual.
- carlmr 5y ago
  Even for a life sentence, evidence like this shouldn't be ignored. Eyewitness evidence is one of the most fallible types of evidence.
Buttons840 5y ago
> It's not like we'd be better off if discovery was unlimited. Why not? Why shouldn't the defense be able to present all evidence in their possession?
- NikolaeVarius 5y ago
  Because evidence could literally be anything in the universe and no limits on what is able to be presented opens up abuse via random shit

intricatedetail 5y ago

As if judge was interested in closing the case and moving onto the next one rather than serving justice. In many countries judges are unsackable, is it true in the US?

hedora 5y ago
Many judges in the US have lifetime appointments. This is one reason it was so damaging (depending on your point of view) when congress refused to confirm Obama’s judicial nominees, then rammed through a record number under Trump. It led to Trump boasting that the judges would just tilt the scales on the election for him if the count said he lost (that didn’t work out), and the current large crop of new abortion bans working their way up to the (in his words), “Trump judge” federal courts.

chmod600 5y ago

It's interesting that a "fail to comprehend" post is voted more highly than an informative post that at least partially answers the question: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27246831 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27246831

Koshkin 5y ago
But note that your remark falls into the same category.

slver 5y ago

Being surprised at any travesty of justice means you still believe "justice the meme", and "justice the reality" have any hope of being similar to each other.