2 more “Norfolk Four” cases tossed
The Associated Press reports that two sailors who had been convicted of rape and murder in a 1997 case have been exonerated by a judge. Danial Williams and Joseph Dick have been out of jail since 2009, but they were still serving parole for the rape and murder of Michelle Moore-Bosko. U.S. District Judge John A. Gibney Jr. threw out the rape and murder convictions of the two former sailors giving prosecutors 60 days to decide whether or not they want to re-try the case;
Derek Tice, another member of the Norfolk Four, had his conviction overturned in 2009. Eric Wilson, who was convicted only of the rape, has been unable to convince courts to do the same because he already completed his sentence. Williams, Dick and Tice were still on parole when they challenged their convictions.
DNA evidence in the case matched a fifth man, Omar Ballard, who confessed to committing the crime alone. He is serving a life sentence.
[…]
That detective, Robert Glenn Ford, was convicted in 2011 of extortion and lying to the FBI in unrelated cases. He is serving 121/2 years in prison for taking tens of thousands of dollars from drug dealers in exchange for getting them favorable treatment at sentencing.
Category: Legal
Those NCIS t.v shows make this stuff look so simple.
That and CSI.
They could have just pulled up a Sailor Dick and tennis shoe data base in 5 minutes.
Yup, that Sailor Dick database just matches up the lands and grooves, just like matching a bullet to a gun…
Well, it is a move in the right direction. Hoping these men can get their names cleared.
justice? Blind, Deaf and Stoopid! Those guys should have been cleared a decade ago!
A crooked Detective, who knew…. they’ll hire any stiff these days it looks like.
Here’s hoping they sue the shit out of the state and collect…rat bastard corrupt cop piece of shit should die miserable in prison…
I’m sure he’s having a great time in prison, VOV.
As he should, Hondo. I’d bet that he really dreads the approaching sundown every day.
Agreed.
His sentence was 12 1/2 years. I’m kinda wondering what his chances are of making it out alive, given how “wonderfully” dirty cops reputedly are treated when they get sent to prison.
Wilson should be able to get someone to demand that his conviction be expunged. Doesn’t matter if he served the sentence. He was wrongfully convicted.
And the detective? I hope he rots for what he did.
I think these guys should be able to stone the cop. Sometimes enough is enough.
You’d be very surprised. Even when exonerating evidence is presented, those who are wrongfully convicted face an incredibly uphill battle.
Unfortunately, some wrongs cannot be undone. How do you compensate someone for lost years, lost relationships, lost careers, and the lifelong stigma and shame of having been convicted of a crime they did not commit?
Or a stretched neck.
Which is why I would advocate that those – such as this cop – who intentionally work to wrongfully convict someone not only be thrown in jail but forfeit all their possessions – money, stocks, retirement, property – to the victim(s) of their perfidy.
Yes, the cop’s and his ilk families may suffer. But so did the victims’ families. The cop’s family can blame him for their plight.
Correct. The fact is that if the process was sound, the result is usually sacrosanct. What’s more, after-acquired evidence isn’t accepted in many states or, I should say, wasn’t just a handful of years ago. DNA helped to change that.
B.S. I wouldn’t consider the sentence served if he still has to register as a sex offender.
http://www.norfolkfour.com/index.php?/norfolk/realkiller/
Have a read at that link. You may wonder how someone could ever confess to a crime he didn’t commit. Well, after 11 hrs of in-terror-gation and threat of the death penalty, we might take that out, too. The reputations of these men is ruined, their personal relationships ruined and no amount of money can repair this. I hope that a prosecution team takes a look at that dirty cop and finds enough to bury him under the prison he now calls home.
I’ve personally witnessed a couple of detectives badger a suspect into confessing, after an extensively long interrogation. I had my suspicions at the time that the suspect was innocent (I was a brand new cop and wrongfully held my tongue). It was later proven that he was, in fact, innocent.
Fortunately the wrong suspect wasn’t convicted, and the correct person was eventually found, tried, and found guilty. I was both relieved that he was innocent, and that I was right; and I was ashamed that I didn’t speak up when I had the chance. At that point I vowed never again … and it sometimes got me into hot-water, but my conscience is clear.
The point I’m trying to make is that people do confess to crimes that they didn’t commit, for a variety of reasons.
And an even bigger problem is that cops get hung up on “gut feelings” and disregard facts and/or lack of facts. Time and again I’ve seen detectives go after someone they strongly suspected, to the detriment of a case.
The dirty cop should serve their sentences; consecutively. Thou shall not bear false witness.
A dirty cop? Whodathunkit? I hope he’s in the general pop. His ass doesn’t deserve protection.
“Officer/Detective, I plan to be fully cooperative after consulting an attorney.”
Any LEOs/Legal Eagles want to chime in here and let us know what we are REQUIRED to answer? I’m thinking maybe name, dob, address. Is that true and what other information are we required to supply? I wouldn’t disrespect anyone, but neither would I tolerate an hours-long interrogation.
Some insight, please. Thanks in advance.
HMC Ret. “Did you hear or see what happened here?” “Who are you? Lemme see some ID.” That sort of thing is the stuff of a field interview where no custody or reasonable perception of custody is in play. No Miranda warning is needed and none is given. All of that changes when an arrest is effected or a person is in a custodial setting and being questioned as a possible suspect. In this circumstance, Miranda warnings must be given or everything that the person says and evidence that was obtained as a result of what he says (“The gun I used I dropped in a dumpster behind the 7-11 on Main Street”) will be ruled inadmissible. So, why do people talk when it’s in their best interest to shut up? Well, some people, knowing they are innocent, waive their rights and start talking, figuring that the police will eliminate them quickly and, usually, that’s true. In other instances, the person is guilty, thinks he can outsmart the police and voluntarily talks, figuring he’ll look guilty if he doesn’t talk. The first example is the most troublesome. “I have nothing to hide. I had nothing to do with this.” is a normal reaction. And that’s usually true and eliminates the person as a suspect. But, in some instances, it’s a mistake there is no recovering from, as in the Norfolk horror. The best bet is always to say, “Thanks for the warning, detective. Yeah, it would be best for me to speak with an atty and have him present.” No matter how guiltless a person may be, request that an atty be present and never, ever agree to prove your innocence by submitting to a polygraph exam. Again, this applies when one is in custody or reasonably believes he isn’t free to walk away.