Wrongful Convictions And The Presumption Of Innocence

On Monday, January 3, 2011, prosecutors declared a Texas man innocent of a rape and robbery that put him in prison for 30 years, longer than any other DNA exoneree in Texas.  DNA test results excluded Cornelius Dupree as the person who attacked a Dallas woman in 1979.  DNA testing is able to conclusively show whether a defendant’s DNA matches the DNA found at the crime scene.  Thus, Dupree was exonerated because he simply did not commit the crime.  Dupree was just 20 years old when he was sentenced to 75 years in prison in 1980.  Now, at the age of 51, Dupree has spent more time wrongly imprisoned than any other DNA exoneree in Texas.  

Interestingly, Texas has freed 41 wrongfully convicted inmates with the use of DNA testing since 2001 – more than any other state.  In Dallas, Texas alone, there have been 21 DNA exonerations since 2001.  The Dallas crime lab maintains biological evidence decades after a conviction, which leaves samples available to test decades after the alleged crime occurred.  Nationally, only two other DNA exonerees have spent more time in prison: one man spent 35 years in Florida, and another spent 31 years in Tennessee. 

It is nearly impossible to imagine how difficult it would be to be forced to spend three decades of your life in prison for a crime you did not commit.  Little can likely be done now to give this man back his lost years, but that should not be the end of the story.  The important lesson to glean from this unfortunate event is simply that just because a person is accused of a crime, it does not mean they are guilty. 
Suspects are presumed innocent for a reason. The government has the heavy burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of any individual accused of a crime.  Without DNA evidence, many prosecutors are forced to rely on eyewitness identification, which can be notoriously unreliable.  Numerous studies have shown that photo arrays and lineups can be untrustworthy. 

The moral of the story here is simply to always remember that suspects are presumed innocent, not guilty.  The burden always remains on the government to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty as charged.  There is a reason for that.  It is because human beings can be wrong and make mistakes.  Our Constitution is designed to make sure the evidence is overwhelming before someone is convicted of a crime and deprived of their liberty.  Wrongful convictions are simply a sad example that the criminal justice system does not always get it right.