Talk:Cameron Willingham

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0504200146apr20,1,1265821.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

I do not have the time to follow this up, but it's hit the news that this man may in fact have been innocent. The alleged murders were the result of a fire, supposedly arson. Experts testified at his trial that it was arson, and it (presumably) followed that Willingham was the only one who could have said it. This scientific testimony was the primary basis of his conviction.

However, it now turns out that the theories these experts used have been discredited, and the fire may not have been arson at all.

A very similar case involving one Ernest Willis, also on death row, resulted in the prisoner being exonerated.

Commitees are being set up and fingers are being pointed. I don't have the patience for detail hunting, but certainly this man's wiki writeup deserves a little more--and perhaps a link in the capital punishment entry under "arguments against."

[edit] Other evidence

Youve ignored most of the evidence. His abuse, lack of emotion after the death of his children, deciding not to call firefighters after the fire started and sitting in the yard watching the house burn.

I've edited the page to show the other info. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smb2a (talk • contribs) 01:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC) --smb2a

I think this article gives too much weight to Willingham's alleged lack of emotion. Typically the prosecution in cases similar to this can find witnesses willing to testify that the defendant could have been sadder or done more. Some may be willing to lie after being told that there was clear evidence of arson. At any rate, alleged emotional reactions are very unreliable as proof of anything. Not everyone jumps up and down, shouting with glee, when told they won a million dollars. Nor does everyone cry hysterically when faced with some tragedy.

The fact is that there is no credible evidence of arson. Had false evidence not been used, nobody would be discussing Willingham's emotional reactions. --Danras (talk) 11:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

What about the eye witness testimony? Mainly that he crouched in his front yard and watched the house burn rather than run to his neighbors for help. How could his emotional state not be relevent in light of this behavior?

--smb2a 1:12, 18 December 2007

[edit] POV info at the bottom of the page

Whoever keeps doing that, childing insults and swears do not belong here and only weaken your position. Smb2a (talk) 15:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)smb2a