zlacker

>>YeGobl+(OP)
The way death row inmates are treated is arguably a reason to be against death row. There was also a case where a person on death row couldn’t present exculpatory evidence to prove his innocence because his last appeals lawyer didn’t do it. The Supreme Court literally decided you can prove you have evidence that proves your innocence, that you were done dirty by an incompetent lawyer, it doesn’t matter, you should still be killed.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinn_v._Ramirez

>>Samoye+Eg
One of the other death row inmates mentioned in the article as having failed the junk science law, Kosoul Chanthakoummane, was partly convicted for hypnosis induced testimony. The appeal response on calling it junk science was, paraphrased, "hypnosis induced testimony was known to be bogus in ~2005, when your trial was. You should have argued it then."

That alone is terrible. But to make that bullshit even worse, Texas continued to use hypnosis induced testimony until 2021.

It makes me wonder when the last death penalty sentence for "shaken baby syndrome" was in Texas.

>>boombo+8j
Why? Shaken Baby Syndrome is a real thing.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/shaken-baby-s...

[UPDATE] To those of you downvoting me, would you kindly explain why? It seems like a reasonable question to me.

>>lisper+cE
lisper, it sounds like the only source you've consulted on Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS) is the Mayo Clinic website. SBS is a subject with a very long history and surrounded by great controversy [1]. I urge you to look a bit further and make an effort to understand why there is controversy.

For example, the Wikipedia article on SBS has a section on "Legal Issues" that gives some details. Or you may find informative Wikipedia's article about Waney Squier, a doctor who was involved in SBS cases as an expert witness:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waney_Squier

The "Legal Issues" section on the SBS also mentions Waney Squire's case.

____________________

[1] Btw, this is a "controversy" in the sense of often acrimonious debate between experts and not in the sense of the "controversy" that Young Earth Creationists demand be taught in schools. It's a controversy about methodology and medical and science ethics; the kind of thing that gets up some scientists' noses.