The link posted
above describes how half-brothers Henry Lee McCollum and Leon Brown were
recently rewarded $750,000 each as compensation for spending three decades in
prison for a crime they were wrongfully convicted of. McCollum and Brown were
arrested on September 28th, 1983 for the rape and murder of
eleven-year-old Sabrina Buie. McCollum was only nineteen and Brown was only
fifteen when they were arrested. The article explains how there was no physical
evidence that either boy had been involved. After being arrested, the two boys
were questioned for hours by the police without a lawyer present and eventually
McCollum falsely confessed to the crime. They were then convicted and sentenced
to death. Lawyers with the Center for Death Penalty Litigation pressed for DNA
testing of evidence. A cigarette that was left near the murder scene was tested
and matched a different man named Roscoe Artis. Artis lived only a block from
where the body was found and he was serving a life sentence for raping and
murdering an eighteen-year-old. Judge Douglas B. Sasser vacated the conviction
on September 2nd, 2014 and the men were released the next morning.
This article mentions how McCollum and Brown’s compensation money was granted
exactly one year after being released as free men. It also mentions how the
two half-brother's lawyer does not believe that the money is enough for either of
them when the costs of living are factored in. Both McCollum and Brown suffer
from mental disabilities and do not have any skills or training to get jobs according to their lawyer.
I found that
this article relates to Plato’s Crito in the sense that McCollum and Brown were
both wrongfully imprisoned, just as Socrates was. Socrates dealt with his
punishment and remained in prison even though he was being wrongfully accused of
a crime. McCollum and Brown did the same. In the Crito, Socrates is faced with
the decision of whether or not he should leave his cell. His old friend Crito
believes that he should leave because he was wrongfully imprisoned, but
Socrates ends up staying. This then resulted in the question we discussed in
class: if you were placed in Socrates place would you try and fight your
sentence or remain in prison because it is justice? McCollum and Brown accepted
their punishment, just as Socrates did. In the end McCollum and Brown were
proven innocent and released. Although it took three decades for McCollum and
Brown to be set free, many would say that in the end justice was upheld. Others
would disagree and say that being wrongfully accused of a crime is unjust. How
would you interpret McCollum and Brown’s wrongful conviction? Would you have
acted in the same way if you were them?
I believe McCollum and Browns conviction was a product of elites having more power than middle/ lower class citizens. They were wrongfully convicted because the elites were trying to do what they thought was just.The court system didn't look at all the evidence and convicted two innocent men because they needed to convict somebody. Maybe they thought justice was served because they sent two people away for the rape and murder even though there was a chance that they were innocent. If I was in their position I would like to say I wouldn't stay in jail but I don't think I would have enough legal power to get my conviction overturned.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the fact that the court system did not do their job the best that they could by wrongfully convicting these two men. These two men were young boys when they were accused of being responsible for this crime. I would like to think that I would try and get out, but when I was fifteen the legal system was not something I had any knowledge on.
DeleteDid the men really not fight? While it appears that it was a death penalty advocacy group that provided the legal help, don't the men have to be a part of that effort?
ReplyDeleteA bigger question though is what this means for justice? You are right to draw some parallels but do you think this means working through the system is just? Was the outcome just (as you ask in your title)? Or are you saying that the actions of the two men were just?
The men did fight, but it was their lawyer that was the one doing the fighting. McCollum and Brown had disabilities and when they were accused of the crime they were only teenagers. I am sure the men wanted to fight more, but I assume they were not educated enough on the legal system to know how to fight.
DeleteI believe that the laws we have set in place are there to uphold justice. This certain case I think that there were some mistakes made during the process. Although the court can argue that they took the steps they needed to in order to uphold justice, regardless of how long it took, I believe that some things should have been done sooner. The fact that neither of the two men had any physical evidence on them for proving the crime is one example I believe should have been considered more heavily. The second issue I had while reading this, was how hard and long it took to get permission to test the DNA of the cigarette. The results speak for themselves for the cigarette in my opinion.
My title expresses my frustration with the money McCollum and Brown received. I do not think any amount of money could make up for being accused of a crime for 3 decades. I believe that the end outcome of this case was not just and that there should have been more effort in proving McCollum and Brown's innocence.
Even though I'm loyal to my country and I'm a just citizen, it does not mean that I would prefer to suffer the wrong treatment for 3 decades. I wouldn't have acted in the same way as McCollum and Browns if I had a lawyer to defend for me. Or in other words, if I had a right which allows me to leave the country freely, I would not stay in this state anymore. However, since we are not free to leave this country, there's no other choice for us other than submitting to the unfair ruling.
ReplyDeleteAlso, just like The Republic article had mentioned, if we are wrongly convicted, it is not the fault of neither our country nor the civil laws. We are actually the victim of the wrong done by our fellow. At the same time, I agree with Clem Rinaldi's comment: since our fellow has more power than us, we have to face the reality and suffer the pain of their wrong done.
I agree with you when you state how you would not have wanted to be held accountable for 3 decades for a crime that you did not commit. I don't know how I would have acted compared to McCollum and Brown. These two men were young teenagers when they were accused. I probably would have tried to prove my innocence, but I don't know if I would have known how to prove my innocence if I were as young as they were when they were accused.
DeleteIn regard to your statement about suffering the pain of something you did not do because of the legal system being considered a higher power, I do not know if I would agree. I believe that the laws are set in place to uphold justice and give room for people to prove their innocence. The laws may have finally worked out in McCollum and Brown's favor, but it took 3 decades. I believe that there were mistakes made along the way by legal system, one being there no evidence of the boys committing the crime.
In this scenario, compensation of $750,000 is not just for their time spent in prison. This is equal to that of $25,000 per year of incarceration. Without accounting for inflation, that is roughly what a retail sales associate would make per year. While this compensation was made in good faith, it is not enough to make up for their 30 years of lost time, not to mention their lack of marketable job skills which would have been developed in some sense if they were acquitted during the initial trial.
ReplyDeleteIf I was in their position, I would have escaped if the opportunity presented itself, as it did to Socrates, but I am skeptical that such an opportunity would arise.
I agree with you completely when you state how you do not think McCollum and Brown's compensation money is just. The money is not going to erase the memories of being in prison or being faced with the death penalty. There should have been something done a lot sooner to help these two innocent men. The fact that it took 3 decades to prove their innocence is hard enough for them to deal with, but being released into a world they have not been a part of for so long with not enough of money or skills or education is even harder. I also agree that their opportunities to escape or be released were very slim as well.
DeleteI see a lot of parallels to the Crito as well. However, in my opinion it could be considered unjust to not say anything and sit in prison. I feel this way because, in this case, it was letting the true guilty person go free. The actual rapist and murderer was out free, which allowed him to do it again to the 18 year old you mentioned. If the men had made more of an effort or their defense attorney's had, maybe they would have gotten out and the other girl would not have been murdered.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don't think I would have been able to sit back and wait in jail, especially for a crime as gruesome as that. Also, if I was an attorney, it would be very difficult for me to let two young, mentally disabled men take the fall for something I could prove they didn't do. It sounds like it was a rush to get the guy who did it and these two were easy to accuse. Finding someone to blame isn't really justice.
I agree with you about not being able to sit and do nothing about a crime you did not commit. I am not someone that can take the blame for something I did not do. These two men were young when they were accused though. At the time they did not know how to act, how to respond to difficult questions, or how to prove that they did not harm the girl. Their attorney was all that these two men had. I am sure their attorney expressed frustration numerous times throughout this case, but there was only so much he could do. I also agree that rushing to accuse someone is not justice and that this case seems as though that was done.
Delete