Evidence has recently surfaced that a man who was executed by the state of Texas a dozen years ago was innocent.
Reuben Cantu was arrested for capital murder and attempted murder, charged, found guilty and executed. Others said he wasn't present at the crime scene.
The survivor recently recanted his story, saying that Cantu didn't shoot him and that he was pressured by authorities to finger Cantu. The prosecutor then expressed regrets at going for a death penalty conviction based on the weak evidence.
Cantu's co-defendent also filed an affidavit that said he allowed his friend to be accused, though he had nothing to do with the crime.
Cantu had previously been accused of hurting a police officer. Those charges had been dropped for lack of evidence.
There was enough reasonable doubt that the death penalty should not have been applied in this case. Prosecutors erred badly.
This was no saint that they executed, but based on the retractions and new statements, they killed a man who didn't do the crime he had been convicted of.
Why do we tolerate a faulty system that imposes the ultimate penalty on the wrong people? Why do we tolerate even the remote possibility of something like this happening? Has justice been served?
Here's the story.
No comments:
Post a Comment