Skwinty
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2008
- Messages
- 5,593
The derail stems from the attempt to equate Willingham's failed appeals to Knox.
Not my doing, merely questioning the logic.
My name is Skwinty, not Squinty.
It is apparent that neither do you have any idea of what happened.
Please read the link below.
It sure does, based on the court testimony.
Please read the link and comments below.
BS, there was nothing wrong with the scumbag other than singed eyebrows and a burn on his shoulder.
If he loved and wanted to save his kids, his flesh would have been hanging from his body due to the heat exposure
Please read the link and comments below.
What disgusts me beyond description is the attempt by people to excuse murderers on a technicality of the law.
Would you prefer to see guilty people free on the streets instead of in prison or executed.
Please read the following facts below
The Willingham trial has become a sort of cause celebre by anti-death penalty proponents because it seems to be an example of outmoded scientific techniques which led to a miscarriage of justice. In fact, the trial testimony you reported in 1991 contains overwhelming evidence of guilt completely independent of the undeniably flawed forensic report.
Always omitted from any examination of the actual trial are the following facts:
1. The event which caused the three childrens' deaths was the third attempt by Todd Willingham to kill his children established by the evidence. He had attempted to abort pregnancy by vicious attacks on his wife in which he beat and kicked his wife with the specific intent to trigger miscarriage;
2. The “well-established burns” suffered by Willingham were so superficial as to suggest that the same were self-inflicted in an attempt to divert suspicion from himself;
3. Blood-gas analysis at Navarro Regional Hospital shortly after the homicide revealed that Willingham had not inhaled any smoke, contrary to his statement which detailed “rescue attempts;”
4. Consistent with typical Navarro County death penalty practice, Willingham was offered the opportunity to eliminate himself as a suspect by polygraph examination. Such opportunity was rejected in the most vulgar and insulting manner;
5. Willingham was a serial wife abuser, both physically and emotionally. His violent nature was further established by evidence of his vicious attacks on animals which is common to violent sociopaths;
6. Witness statements established that Willingham was overheard whispering to his deceased older daughter at the funeral home, “You're not the one who was supposed to die.” (The origin of the fire occured in the infant twins bedroom) and;
7. Any escape or rescue route from the burning house was blocked by a refrigerator which had been pushed against the back door, requring any person attempting escape to run through the conflagration at the front of the house.
8. The witness further testified that this igniting of the floors and thresholds is typically employed to impede firemen in their rescue attempts. The testimony at trial demonstrates that Willingham neither showed remorse for his actions nor grieved the loss of his three children. Willingham’s neighbors testified that when the fire “blew out” the windows, Willingham “hollered about his car” and ran to move it away from the fire to avoid its being damaged. A fire fighter also testified that Willingham was upset that his dart board was burned.
9. One of appellant's neighbors testified that the morning following the house *355 fire, Christmas Eve, appellant and his wife were at the burned house going through the debris while playing music and laughing. At the punishment phase of trial, testimony was presented that appellant has a history of violence. He has been convicted of numerous felonies and misdemeanors, both as an adult and as a juvenile, and attempts at various forms of rehabilitation have proven unsuccessful
The Willingham case was charged as a multiple child murder, and not an arson-murder to achieve capital status. I am convinced that in the absence of any arson testimony, the outcome of the trial would have been unchanged, a fact that did not escape the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. While anti-death penalty advocates can muster some remarkably good arguments, Todd Willingham should not be anyone's poster child.
http://www.clarkprosecutor.org/html/death/US/willingham899.htm
Last edited by a moderator:
