Jury just found a man guilty of a crime that DNA proves he didn't commit

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/24-7/1565253,juan-rivera-guilty-verdict-050809.article

Rivera found guilty in third trial for 1992 rape, murder
Comments

May 8, 2009

BY DAN ROZEK Staff Reporter
Juan Rivera’s third trial for the notorious 1992 rape and murder of Holly Staker ended Friday the same way as his first two — with a guilty verdict.

A Lake County jury deliberated for nearly 35 hours over four days before convicting Rivera of raping, stabbing and strangling the 11-year-old Waukegan girl.

Rivera faces a sentence of 20 years to life in prison. snip

Rivera, who was 19 at the time of the murder and lived in the neighborhood where it occurred, became a suspect a few months after the slaying while serving a prison term for an unrelated burglary. During days of intensive questioning by police, Rivera — who has a low-function IQ of about 79 — allegedly confessed to the girl’s murder. snip

In 2006, Lake County Judge Christopher Starck ordered the new trial after advanced DNA testing showed Rivera couldn’t have left semen found in the girl’s body after she was slain. snip

Prosecutors, though, still insisted Rivera killed the girl, contending she may have had sex with someone else before she was raped and murdered by Rivera.

[Chulanowa]

1. Of course, what they're not going to say...

Is that they just plain need someone to lock up for this crime, and they figure they might as well keep the one they've got.

[WolverineDG]

2. Did the prosecutors realize they insinuated an 11 year old was a tramp?

I guess they sold their souls just to get a conviction in this case.

dg

[noamnety]

6. What???

First off, they didn't use the word "tramp" which is a sexist slur, in the article. You made that insinuation and I'm not sure why.

Second, if their first sexual experience was at such a young age, they couldn't have legally consented and it's possible it was incest, and in addition to sexist slurs it's pretty crappy for anyone to be insinuating that underage rape victims are tramps.

The article said she had had a sexual experience, which was factually correct.

I'm not on that jury, I haven't seen all the evidence, but if the girls were victims of incest, it's entirely possible that DNA evidence of incest/child molestation by another adult they knew was unrelated to the murder - and I'm guessing that's the conclusion the jury came to.

That doesn't necessarily make it a correct verdict, like I said I haven't seen the evidence - but jumping to "they implied she was a tramp" seems really offensive to me.

[WolverineDG]

14. Because they said she had sex before she was murdered

and it was done so they could get a conviction. They didn't give a damn about that little girl.

dg

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

20. The prosecution was indeed trying to prove the girl was sexually active and to use

that to their advantage by making her look like a "tramp" in the eyes of the jury. Why else would they have her twin testify that she was sexually active since the age of 8? They had to make their case and it's disgusting that the prosecution chose to take that route.

[noamnety]

26. They were making the case

that there was a likelihood that semen in her belonged to another man, which is relevant to the case.

You on the other hand seemed determined to use sexual slurs in describing an underage rape victim as "a tramp." I am surprised you don't see why folks here might find that offensive.

[LisaL]

41. Another man? If a man had sex with an 11 years old, that man

would be guilty of statutory rape.

[dem629]

7. It was based on her twin sister's testimony.

[Badgerman]

16. noamnety -Your analysis makes sense! kudos n/t

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

31. that is pretty common tactic,

If the DNA doesn't match, the victim must have been a slut. A man spent years in prison in Texas for a rape and murder he was innocent of. He too was cleared by DNA evidence but the state ignored it. The parents of the victim acknowledged their daughter had been sexually active so they state just turned the victim into a whore to justify ignoring the DNA evidence. It doesn't mater that the DNA doesn't match she probably had sex with a dozen guys the day she was murdered.

This case was so absurd that Roy Criner was actually pardoned by Gov. G.W. Fucktard, over the objections of the Worst Judge In America: Sharon Keller.

[alarimer]

3. Bunch of morons on that jury.

It makes me question whether a jury system is really the best for justice, when most people are too stupid to judge a case based on evidence and not whether the prosecutor talks better than the defense attorney.

Grounds for appeal.

[kath]

21. "Most people are too stupid to judge a case based on evidence and not whether the prosecutor talks

better than the defense attorney."

Sad but true - the jury system only works if you have jurors capable of critical analysis,rational thought, and logic, plus often times the ability to comprehend scientific evidence. It doesn't work w/ jurors who are total fuckin' morans - which, sadly, many Murkans are.

[alarimer]

29. I have heard (though I don't know how true it is) that attorneys do not want analytical people

on juries. So if you have critical thinking skills, you are likely not to be chosen. Instead, they (both sides to one degree or another) want people who will be swayed by appeals to emotion

[GA_ArmyVet]

30. It goes back to the old joke

YOu will be judged by 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty.
Sadly that is often the case, I have even seen it here that no one wants to serve on the jury. So if no one is willing, then you only have the few remaining people who cant find an excuse.

[Thothmes]

36. Would you rather stand trial infront of a Bush appointed Judge?

[BlooInBloo]

4. All white jury?

[dem629]

8. Can't find anything, but 7-woman, 5-man jury.

[nichomachus]

24. Why do you assume that?

That's kind of racist.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. This a travesty of Justice...

Plenty of reasonable doubt in my mind

[dem629]

9. Based on a news story?

How can any of us know what the jury saw and heard?

[NNN0LHI]

12. Keep in mind this was the third jury

The first two convictions were overturned on appeal. As I expect this one will be.

Don

[dem629]

22. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

I mean, other than all three juries saw more evidence than we'll ever see.

[nichomachus]

25. Actually, juries see less evidence than the public sees

This is why jurors are forbidden to read or watch news accounts. A lot of what we would consider "evidence" is not shown to juries.

[dem629]

32. Wait. You're assuming that those of us participating in this thread

have more information than all three juries.

Is that correct? You know this for a fact in this case?

[nichomachus]

34. Wait. I didn't say that.

I just said that it was mistake to think that juries have access to more information than the general public.

[GA_ArmyVet]

46. Three diffeent juries convicted

each usng different evidence I am assuming since they would have to exclude anything thrown out on the appeals.
Strange... either they have a lot of evidence or they really dont like this guy.

[noamnety]

10. Especially based on this:

"And his lawyers had an alternative narrative to argue when the man whom authorities now believe is the real killer, Brian Dugan, was arrested in a similar case and, authorities say, admitted to murdering Jeanine."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-zorn-16-apr16,0,3670143.column

[Gabi Hayes]

18. and the saddest thing in the Nicarico case is the parents, last I read,

still think the guys convicted/released, did it, thanks to the criminally culpable police/prosecutors in the case (one of whom ran for governor, instead of being jailed)

Dugan, I believe is on trial/about to be tried, finally, for the Nicarico murder, to which he offered to confess, if the govt promised not to go for the death penalty

they KNEW Dugan killed this girl, yet cared more about quickly clearing the docket than anything else, as is their wont

[liberalpragmatist]

11. "DNA Evidence Frees Black Man Convicted of Bear Attack"

Onion video that, while hilarious, is sadly a little too true.

> http://www.theonion.com/content/video/dna_evidence_frees_black_man

[John1956PA]

13. Sometimes, fear of a civil suit for wrongful conviction causes prosecutors to redouble their effort.

DISCLAIMER: I no nothing about the facts of this case or the motives of the prosecutors. I am merely making a general point. Sometimes, prosecutors who are less than honorable will not ease off of a case wherein subsequently discovered exculpatory evidence comes to light. Such prosecutors are afraid that they may be sued for misconduct in pursuing the original conviction. Again, I know nothing about the facts of this case, and I have no opinion as to whether the prosecutors have acted in good faith in retrying the case despite the emergence of the subsequently-discovered exculpatory DNA evidence.

[Patchuli]

15. It sounds like the cops just want to wrap it up

regardless of innocence and DNA evidence to the contrary. I too doubt highly that an 11 year old girl was actively sexual. Not to mention, the poor man has an IQ of 79??? Scary cops could have probably gotten him to admit he killed Jimmy Hoffa. Disgusting.

[theoldman]

19. An IQ of 79 is higher than Bush's IQ.

[Patchuli]

40. I heard he was at least a hunnert...nt

[dem629]

23. What are you basing all of that on?

[Fumesucker]

27. Exculpatory DNA evidence..

Semen that was not the defendant's was found on the girl..

Unless it was shown conclusively that the girl had sex with another man then logically that should be sufficient to show the defendant innocent.

I wonder if DNA tests were done on males in the family or close to the family, molesters are extremely often close to the victim somehow.

[dem629]

33. No, I mean the statement about the cops and the assumption about the girl.

What information?

[Fumesucker]

35. Why else would the prosecutor and cops pursue a case that had exculpatory evidence?

Other than a desire to just wrap the case up?

I'm not sure I understand your other question.. Could you clarify a bit.

[Patchuli]

39. Lack of DNA evidence is a good basis

...

[SmileyRose]

17. Ya - so who's ass is going to jail for raping an 11 yr old before Rivera got there?

Sounds like Rivera was the smarted one in the room.......

[GA_ArmyVet]

28. I would love to remaining evidence

that was used to convict.

Having worked on numerous rape investigations and seen people rightly and wrongly judged not guilty. I have some experience in this field.

1. DNA cannot prove you did not commit the crime. It can convict you. DNA is not always present in even if a condom was not used, and quite often is present even when one is used. And in a murder case, DNA from the Subject not as prevalent as is shown in CSI and other crime dramas.

2. IT IS Considerably more difficult to establish guilt without DNA though.

3. DNA is great for establishing a person was at the scene, and it is semen found in the vagina, it can establish sexual intercourse occurred. The lack of DNA evidence does not prove the person was not there. Just as a lack of fingerprint does not prove a person was not there. In the case of an adult woman, it does not establish or prove rape, non-consent has to be proven as well, and can not be assumed. It is very difficult to prove a person was not in a location without an alibi of some sort proving they were somewhere else, since by the law of physics, no one can be in two places at once.

4. An eyewitness is very difficult to overcome from a Defense side, despite numerous examples of eyewitness testimony being dis proven by physical evidence.

All that being said, I would have to see the totality of the remaining evidence to make a judgment that there was a miscarriage of justice. But I would love to see it, just so I would know.

[JonLP24]

44. I found another article they focused on untaped confessions and raised

possibility the 11 year old may have had sex with someone else contaminating the evidence. How familiar are you with advanced DNA techniques that completely ruled out JonBenet's family as suspects and even prompting the DA to write an apology letter?


Prosecutors downplayed that evidence, however, suggesting the girl might have had sex with someone else before she met Rivera or that the sample had been contaminated.

They focused on Rivera's confession, which has been the subject of fierce controversy since his first trial in 1993.

Rivera was in custody on a burglary charge when he became a suspect in Holly Staker's murder. Another inmate told authorities that Rivera said he had information about the case.

Detectives questioned him over four days before he signed two confessions, saying Holly had invited him into the home where she was baby-sitting and had sex with him. When she mocked his performance, according to the statements, he stabbed her to death. His lawyers have consistently argued that the confessions used words that were beyond the vocabulary of a defendant with an IQ of 79. They have also suggested that police hinted at the details they wanted to hear as they relentlessly questioned Rivera.

This time, the defense questioned why authorities did not retain the notes they used when writing the confessions signed by Rivera, and why the statements were not taped. That was not required then, but a series of high-profile false confessions later led Illinois to adopt rules mandating the recording of interrogations in murder cases.(You can credit Barack Obama for this change of policy)

Rivera's case had one element in common with some of those false confessions: DNA evidence that pointed elsewhere.

That had given Rivera's family hope that this time the jury would find him innocent. But the 12 jurors' decision appeared difficult, and on Thursday, after three days of deliberations, they told Judge Christopher Starck they were deadlocked. He told them to come back Friday.

Their deliberations appeared rockier still Friday afternoon, when one juror sent out a note telling the judge, "I'm concerned about being impartial."

The note, read in court, indicated that the juror's work experience led him or her to put far more stock in scientific evidence than human testimony. But after about 2 ½ hours, as the judge and attorneys hashed out what to do, the juror sent out a second message.

"I no longer need a response to my inquiry," it said. "I have reconciled my differences."

About 4:30 p.m., the jurors were led into the courtroom. Their not-guilty verdict on the first count -- a non-felony charge of murder -- caused Rivera's family to gasp.

But the family quickly fell silent when the verdict turned to guilty on the two felony charges of murder and rape. One of Rivera's attorneys held his head in his hands.

"I just don't understand how you can find him guilty when the science is irrefutable," the defendant's wife, Melissa Sanders-Rivera, said outside the courtroom.

Prosecutors declined to comment after the verdict. Jurors were escorted out of the courthouse and did not talk to the media.

Later, Rivera's family gathered at the Waukegan apartment of his parents. His mother sobbed and one of his lawyers cried too. The entire gathering appeared baffled by the verdict they had felt confident would go their way.

"I thought this was going to be justice here," said Miguel Diaz, Rivera's brother. "My question to jurors would be, 'You had a hung jury. What happened?' "
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rivera-09-may09,0,4435701.story

[Wednesdays]

37. K&R

:kick:

[MrSlayer]

38. Someone else may have had sex with her before she was killed.......

An 11 year old girl? Sure anything is possible but that seems really far fetched. They're letting the worst kind of killer walk free and scapegoating a mentally challenged person. That's the way it seems anyway.

[SoCalDem]

42. Scalia justice.. he will be proud.

“Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached”

Antonin Scalia quotes (American Supreme court justice , b.1936)

[JonLP24]

43. If advanced DNA testing completely ruled out JonBenet's parents or father

Then why not this one? I'm not sure how advanced DNA is different the regular DNA but if it is enough for the former prosecutor to apologize to JonBenet's father then surely this should be enough for me to cast reasonable doubt.

[Vinca]

45. Maybe there was some compelling evidence we don't know about

that indicated Rivera was the killer. I know there have been cases when semen from 2 different people have been found and 1 of them was the killer and the other wasn't. Somehow they need to track down the person who left the semen and investigate him as the killer.