Reporters are very often not experts in the things they report on. You don’t want them injecting their own personal thoughts into every article. Picture an anti-vax reporter reporting on a CDC briefing.

They’re reporting on what the guy said so that you know what was said. You can make the determination on whether it has merits or not and, in fact, you have. There are times where you need press to push back - that’s Journalism. But your average on-the-street reporter who isn’t an expert in everything isn’t equipped to do more than “observe and report” which is fine.

This is exactly the kind of law enforcement message that reporters should examine and challenge, rather than mindlessly repeat.

I hate this sort of criticism. 90% of reporting is … reporting. It’s not editorializing.

You’re being non-chalant about killing someone.

I’m absolutely not. I don’t believe in the death penalty - and I’m not defending it. But you can’t throw out every case because somebody makes a new claim. Everybody in this thread is believing the new information unquestionably. The trial would have presented other corroborating evidence as well.

It’s like how you still need to determine if somebody committed a crime even if they confess.

So just our entire system of law is meaningless then?

that’s been proven to be lying under oath.

That’s a very big assumption you’re making. They could be lying now.

Or are they lying now? You can’t know. Do you reevaluate every case when somebody says something other than their sworn testimony?

Guess innocence isn’t as important as the death penalty. They should have known that someone lied under oath at the time, right?

Don’t be obtuse. Multiple lines of evidence were presented to convince 12 people that he was guilty.

Guess we should just release everybody from prison because we can never know with 100% certainty that anyone ever did anything.

Anybody can say anything. They held a trial. Testimonies were given under oath. Other witnesses testified.

You can’t throw out every conviction after-the-fact because somebody says something new. It would be trivial to overturn sentences and lock up the courts for decades.

First execution in nearly 10 years.