Quote:

wannabuyamonkey said:
Quote:

magicjay38 said:
Better that a guilty man goes free than an innocent should die. Once in a while the defence hits a homerun despite the odds being stacked in the state's favour.



I agree with you in theory, but this guy wasn't found innocent. He was found "retarded".



It would be nice to know more details of the case. A few things spring to mind from what the article does say.

First, the crime took place in 1979. It was shortly after death penalty laws had been restored after their suspension in the late 60s. The state's attorneys may not have wanted this to be the test case for their new death penalty law.

Second, prosecuting minors as adults was not common back then and possibly raised concerns about the appellate courts sustaining a death penalty against a criminal that was a minor when the crime was committed.

27 years in prison is not exactly a light sentence and perhaps they accepted that instead of a weak death penalty case. Afterall, they never disputed the defense allegations of mental impairment.