Convicted rapist wins day in court

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Paul Hammel

LINCOLN — A state appeals court has provided an Omaha man, who was convicted of raping two sisters 38 years ago, another chance to prove his innocence.

Tuesday’s order by the Nebraska Court of Appeals means that Juneal Pratt will be allowed to test, for a second time and with newer DNA technology, stains left on the victims’ clothing from the 1975 case in hopes of exonerating himself of the crime.

“I’m so happy that we can finally put this to rest,” said Pratt’s attorney, Tracy Hightower-Henne of Omaha.

A spokeswoman for the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office said that the office will file an appeal of the ruling with the Nebraska Supreme Court.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://www.omaha.com/article/20130108/NEWS/701089923/1685#convicted-rapist-wins-day-in-court

---

Why will the Nebraska Attorney General’s Office fight something that could free an innocent man? I'm not saying he is innocent. I'm just wondering why fight something that could find he is innocent?

[azurnoir]

1. This si Juneal Pratt any questions?

[eggplant]

2. the argument (which I don't agree with, btw) is that it costs the state money. n/t

[Kelvin Mace]

7. It is costing the state money to keep them in prison

so that argument doesn't wash. A comprehensive DNA test is a few thousand dollars, which the defendant pays for. The only reason their is a lot of legal costs involved is that the DA fight against it.

[eggplant]

9. As I said, I don't agree with the DA's standard argument. n/t

[TahitiNut]

3. Thank God (and Barry Scheck) for the Innocence Project!

It's unconscionable that the "authorities" commingled the evidence allowing the claim of DNA transfer!

[uppityperson]

4. He might have gotten out on parole if only he said he did it?

[SkyDaddy7]

5. WHY?

Because DAs think they are never ever wrong!! Just the act of wanting to retest DNA is an insult to most DAs...The money thing is simply an excuse. IMHO.♠

[Ash_F]

8. This. Sick people are allowed to hold office.

Vote!

[Kelvin Mace]

6. Simple.

Once they prove an innocent man is in jail, the public starts wondering about other convictions. The more convictions they look at, the more shoddy/illegal police work/DA misconduct comes to light.

Prosecutors/Police also fight VERY hard attempts to review death penalty convictions, doubly so if the person has been executed.

[Coyote_Tan]

10. At what point do you stop?

Once the trial is complete, do you just keep having trial after trial until an innocent decision comes up?

There absolutely should be a process to revisit new evidence or deal with rights that have been violated but it can't be whoever wants it for whatever reason they feel is good to go.