Texas man wrongly put away for 18 years denied compensation after legal glitch

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Years
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the case of Anthony Graves, a Texas man who was wrongfully imprisoned for 18 years and subsequently denied compensation due to a legal technicality. Participants explore the implications of this situation within the legal system, the potential for appeals, and the broader issues of wrongful convictions and compensation laws.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that a simple court order could rectify the omission of the phrase "actual innocence" from Graves's release order, which is crucial for his compensation.
  • Others suggest that a lawyer could potentially benefit financially from taking on Graves's case, indicating a concern about the motivations of legal representation.
  • There is speculation about the possibility of an appeal or a new trial, with some expressing doubt about the likelihood of success given the current legal barriers.
  • Participants discuss the limitations imposed by the wording of the law, which caps compensation at $200,000 despite the potential for a larger sum if the situation were different.
  • Some express skepticism about the legal system, suggesting that it can be a gamble and that avoiding it is preferable.
  • There are calls for accountability regarding wrongful convictions, with some participants suggesting that those responsible for such errors should face consequences.
  • The financial implications of wrongful imprisonment are highlighted, with references to the costs incurred by the state and the inadequacy of compensation for the affected individuals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express a shared concern about the injustice faced by Graves, but there is no consensus on the best course of action or the likelihood of achieving compensation. Multiple competing views on the effectiveness and fairness of the legal system are present.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexities of the legal situation, including the dismissal of charges against Graves, which complicates the possibility of a new trial and affects his eligibility for compensation. The discussion reflects a range of opinions on the legal processes involved and the implications for wrongful convictions.

Who May Find This Useful

Individuals interested in legal issues, wrongful convictions, and the implications of compensation laws may find this discussion relevant.

  • #31
Sorry, was replying to:
You western state do NOT mess around when it comes to finishing off the condemned

As in nope, we do not mess around compared to other states lol.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Drakkith said:
Sorry, was replying to:


As in nope, we do not mess around compared to other states lol.

Oh Ok... I was a little shocked... you seem very grounded!... because you are... and I'm not apparently. :-p
 
  • #33
pallidin said:
How can he move on?
He has no money, and has been wrongfully incarcerated for so many years.

In the past, and in many parts of the world the answer which I do not endorse would be the concept of a blood feud. This is variously called "Vendetta", which is now a borrowed word in English, Blutrache (lit. Blood-Revenge), or to really go back to the Hebrew you have the concept of a Go'el Haddam; the "Redeemer of Blood".

I would find it profoundly difficult to continue with my life after such trauma, and in the context of this final grotesque injustice. It's times like this that the ancient concept of blood avengers, balanced by cities of refuge begins to look pleasant by comparison.

If we can't make our legal system work for someone who was placed in what most would consider HELL, for 17 years... then tossed out to... what?... Maybe there's something fundamentally askew.
 
  • #34
Evo said:
The problem is that due to the wording, even if he wins an appeal, his compensation will be capped at $200,000, he will never have the chance to be awarded the 1.4 million he's rightfully due.

True, but he can also appeal that by claiming its denying the right to a jury trial. Is 18 years considered punitive? That's so sad people in this country need to wake up.
 
  • #35
SolidGold said:
True, but he can also appeal that by claiming its denying the right to a jury trial. Is 18 years considered punitive? That's so sad people in this country need to wake up.

I'm not sure what you mean by the 18 years comment, could you clarify? In addition, and I've already admitted ignorance here, CAN he bring a new case? Tort law, and generally any attempt to sue the state is complex. I'd LOVE references, because I'm curious about just what his rescourse is, if any.
 
  • #36
nismaratwork said:
I'm not sure what you mean by the 18 years comment, could you clarify? In addition, and I've already admitted ignorance here, CAN he bring a new case? Tort law, and generally any attempt to sue the state is complex. I'd LOVE references, because I'm curious about just what his rescourse is, if any.

I was saying stealing 18 years of a mans life should be beyond just punitive. Punitive damages are quasi-criminal, but this court did more than "penalize", they stole this man's life. The courts should be treated more or less as criminals, and this should fall under theft of life, well if I was god anyways... The experience of one's life should be treated as a solid real thing, as in, they actually stole something that is solid and belonged to him. They stole something of value. If I was god or superman, I'd make that a law.

They said when he sues for cruel and unusual punishment his reward would be capped at $200,000. The most common argument against punitive damage "caps" is that caps violate the right to a jury trial. By the jury's decision being stepped on by the judge, the final decision wasn't made by the jury, but by the judge, when in fact you so called have the right to a decision by a jury (right to a jury trial).

Here's a couple punitive damage cap battles...

This first one is only for medical malpractice cases, http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/378/conchalstatecap.pdf

Texas upheld it as it applied to wrongful death cases. That just shows you what sons of bitches those Texas judges are.

This one isn't from Texas and has no bearing on Texas, but it just shows you why the right to a jury trial is a solid argument that is usually tossed to the side by these gangster thug judges. Scroll down to the dissent (made by Justice Pfeiffer).

http://www.bricker.com/publications-and-resources/publications-and-resources-details.aspx?publicationid=1556

This argument would probably not work in Texas, but its an argument I can think of anyway. I probably thought about it because its the most common for punitive damages. Just my two cents...

By the way, is mental anguish punitive? I would sue them, then have my wife and my kids each sue them separately. Then I would hire a panel of neuroscientists to show that this mental anguish caused by me being locked away caused real physical damage to my brain, and would constitute as assault and battery on my brain.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #37
Idk if I lived in texas I might consider being taken off the streets for 18 years and put into a steel bared hotel a good thing. JK but actually idk depends on what type of life I had to live before going into jail I guess. I'v been to that state once and man it had a lot of people in the city's who almost all carried guns.
 
  • #38
SolidGold said:
I was saying stealing 18 years of a mans life should be beyond just punitive. Punitive damages are quasi-criminal, but this court did more than "penalize", they stole this man's life. The courts should be treated more or less as criminals, and this should fall under theft of life, well if I was god anyways... The experience of one's life should be treated as a solid real thing, as in, they actually stole something that is solid and belonged to him. They stole something of value. If I was god or superman, I'd make that a law.

They said when he sues for cruel and unusual punishment his reward would be capped at $200,000. The most common argument against punitive damage "caps" is that caps violate the right to a jury trial. By the jury's decision being stepped on by the judge, the final decision wasn't made by the jury, but by the judge, when in fact you so called have the right to a decision by a jury (right to a jury trial).

Here's a couple punitive damage cap battles...

This first one is only for medical malpractice cases, http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/378/conchalstatecap.pdf

Texas upheld it as it applied to wrongful death cases. That just shows you what sons of bitches those Texas judges are.

This one isn't from Texas and has no bearing on Texas, but it just shows you why the right to a jury trial is a solid argument that is usually tossed to the side by these gangster thug judges. Scroll down to the dissent (made by Justice Pfeiffer).

http://www.bricker.com/publications-and-resources/publications-and-resources-details.aspx?publicationid=1556

This argument would probably not work in Texas, but its an argument I can think of anyway. I probably thought about it because its the most common for punitive damages. Just my two cents...

By the way, is mental anguish punitive? I would sue them, then have my wife and my kids each sue them separately. Then I would hire a panel of neuroscientists to show that this mental anguish caused by me being locked away caused real physical damage to my brain, and would constitute as assault and battery on my brain.

I agree with you completely, and yes, mental anguish can count towards punitive damages and material damages for medical/psyhcological care.

How 18 years on death row doesn't break you completely is beyond me, but you're right... it's hard to imagine coming out of that without PTSD. If there is such a thing as neurological assault and battery, PTSD is the scar left behind.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #39
Containment said:
Idk if I lived in texas I might consider being taken off the streets for 18 years and put into a steel bared hotel a good thing. JK but actually idk depends on what type of life I had to live before going into jail I guess. I'v been to that state once and man it had a lot of people in the city's who almost all carried guns.

Texas is very "wild west", but it's also extremely urban... it's HUGE. Death row is small... I can't imagine a life much worse than being caged and condemned for something you didnt do. I know you're kidding around, but it's worth noting anyway that this wad Death he was facing; death for a crime he KNEW he didn't commit.