As we approach the first anniversary of the execution of Troy Davis, another man on death row urgently needs our help. If Reggie Clemons’ hearing on September 17th goes poorly, then Missouri could join Georgia by executing a man convicted amid a great cloud of doubt.
Check out the shocking similarities and facts about the two cases below and then take action to stop the execution of Reggie Clemons.
While I agree completely that the death penalty is barbaric, inhuman, and needs to be abolished, the "shocking similarities" of the Davis and Clemons cases do not seem that shocking or similar to me.
That said, I am fully on board with your efforts to stop another unjust execution by a so-called civilized society. Thanks for bringing it to people's attention.
3 out of the 5 are identical or nearly identical…
While I oppose the death penalty, I actually think its weakens our position to try to spin two cases where the men committed horrible crimes and try to make them innocent. Both could be guilty and the death penalty still wrong
Is the death penalty an economic solution, a revenge punishment or deterrent? If it's the latter then it obviously isn't working if the figures are any guide. Surely an ongoing, longterm punishment could be an economic success &,given some original thought, It could satisfy those looking for revenge.
Does it really matter? There is a fine line separating the US from Islamic Republics, such as Saudi Arabia. Much of the civilized world regards the death penalty as a serious human rights issue. I never really grasped the significance when I lived in a non-death penalty state in the US— until I moved to Europe. People here ask me what it was like living in a country where the government kills its own people. Furthermore, there is no real effort made to rehabilitate prisoners in the US. I was shocked at how humane prisons were here, until I did some consulting work for the prison system (in IT), and learned their true mission was to take even the worst offender, and make him someone you would want as your next door neighbor.
It does make for a confusing public campaign when the two fundamentals of being against a miscarriage of justice and being against the death penalty in any case are conflated.
Clemons is not innocent. He had plenty of opportunity to argue his case through the appeals process but failed at each step. The special master is now enacted because some attempt to make a martyr out of a triple killer. Examine the facts here and fight the good fight by concentrating on real human rights issues (US education, healthcare and immigration reform stand out for me) for once, instead of pleading clemency for murderers. Shame on AIUSA.!!!
It is clear from documented evidence that the errors were made in the Clemons case and that discrimination was involved. There is evidence of possible conspiracies by the police to cover up key information. Clemons was sentenced to death although no physical evidence tied him to the murder, and confessions given by a key initial suspect were improperly assessed and dismissed. A failure to gain a reduction of his sentence from previous appeals does not determine that he is guilty.
Thomas Cummins, the initial prime suspect, had testified that 4 youths (including Clemons) robbed and raped his cousins before pushing them off the bridge into the river and ordering him to jump in. A strong current and debris in the river were reported on the night of the incident and it is a 30-foot drop from the bridge. It took 3 weeks to find the body of 1 victim and the other was never found. It was therefore odd that Cummins could have survived unharmed, as was documented by the police. A polygraphy test confirmed that his statement was deceptive. He later confessed to trying to have sex with one of the victims, and pushing both off the bridge after having an argument with the victim on which he tried to enforce his sexual acts. Why would he confess to murder and rape after already accusing the 4 others of committing the crimes? In this statement he did not mention the 4 youths. Why? He later retracted his statement AGAIN and denied having killed the victims, identifying the 4 youths (who according to Clemons’ testimony had simply had a conversation with Cummins and the victims on the bridge and parted ways) as suspects. As soon as they were arrested, he was dropped as a murder suspect, as if his confession and ever-changing stories had been of no significance.
Clemons has always claimed he did not murder the victims, although initially confessing to raping 1 of the victims. He later testified that he had not committed the rape, explaining that he had been coerced into saying it by abusive police. Also consider the compensation given to Cummins after he reported abuse during police interrogation. Clemons and Gray (then one of the 4 co-defendants) also reported abuse (there is visual evidence of abuse from Clemons’ mug shot), but police denied the accusations. The court had conceded that Mr Clemons had neither carried out nor planned the murder, but was an accomplice. Why, then, was a death sentence deemed an appropriate level of punishment? There are still many questions that need to be answered. I am sorry for the victims who were tragically killed and their family. However, with so much evidence that was improperly assessed, there can be no closure to the case. The fact that a special hearing has gone underway reflects this understanding. If the wrong person is severely punished, is this okay? Furthermore, the nature of the crime can never justify this level of punishment if it were seen to be such a condemnable act in the first place. Do you believe that putting somebody to death by lethal injection is not a real human rights issue? It is cruel and inhumane. A removal of Clemons’ death sentence would seem the right thing to do.
Lee – one thing that bothers me about AIUSA approach, is the constant intervention in court-related matters. The issues you speak of were reviewed DE NOVO many times these past 20 years at all stages of the appeals, with the final result of the Federal Appeals Court reinstating Clemons' death sentence in 2004. Now the SCOTUS is refusing to hear the case simply because it is meritless. Do you think that there is some conspiracy at the State/Federal (including SCOTUS) levels to keep Clemons on death row?
One-sided claim of innocence by Clemons without sufficient (concrete and verifiable) information should not be considered by AIUSA.
To answer a question you posited to me – NO I do not hink that fighting for murderers can be placed on the same pedestal as the human rights issues I identified. They are qualitatively incongruent. There is no doubt in my mind that AIUSA is wasting valuable time/resources to object to constitutionally sound and SCOTUS-approved punishment for murderers unless the organization can produce clear and convincing proof of innocents, while US education/ healthcare/immigration laws are ripe with human rights violations. In other words, pick your fights wisely…
Thomas A. Rykala
Lee – one thing that bothers me about AIUSA's approach is the attempt to intervene in court-related matters. The issues you speak of were reviewed DE NOVO during the appeals many times with one result, the Federal Appeals Court's reinstatement of Clemons' death sentence in 2004. The SCOTUS refuses to hear the case simply because it is meritless.
AIUSA has no evidence other than insinuations and guesses without sufficient information and one-sided (Clemons') claims of innocence. Clemons' had plenty of opportunity to argue his innocence at all levels of the appeals process. Do you suppose that there is all this conspiracy at the State/Federal (including the SCOTUS) levels to keep Clemons on death row?
To answer a question you posited to me: NO, I do not think that fighting for murderers can be placed on the same pedestal as the human rights issues I identified. AIUSA is instrumental in excusing murderers from constitutionally-supported and the SCOTUS-approved punishment.
Probably old Yoko is also a fan of Viennese Actionism as Tolokonnikova (Pussy Riot). For her, perhaps, will tear the body of Beslan children in a sea of blood, also art. It is to this “art” Tolokonnikova teaches his four-year daughter. Can you imagine what the monster will grow out of this girl when she was 4 years old show dismembered corpses in the sea of blood and call it art.
In order to receive the Peace Prize to:
1) To thrust between a chicken leg
2) put on a show with hanging gays
3) Arrange a dance in the temple
4) take a public sex
5) That the body is torn of Beslan children in a sea of blood art.
etc., will be worse than your actions, the more probable that the Peace Prize!
I don't know whether Clemmons is innocent – which would be afundamental HR issue, just like the potential wrongful executions of Troy Davis amd Cameron Willingham, and there is so much conflicting evidence that I do not have an opinion on it.
I have major reservations about the cousin who was able to swim the currents of the Missippi river and defy a 70ft jump – with no visible injuries, being dry, with no sign of wet or dirty hair. I don't know the circumstances of the case, but even if he was picked up by Police after a relatively long time lapse – it doesn't seem reasonable to me that he would go home to shower and dry after the event. Indeed, it would be in his best interests not to do so. And why change his story, not once or twice but SIX times? Perhaps there's much more to this case, but I definitely think that Cummins has some serious questions to answer – his final story failed a polygraph.
But then again, the victims' DNA was apparently found on the clothes of one of the defendants – when they initially met on the bridge, were they in close proximity? Despite apparent evidence linking Gray to the rape, it has been suggested that as a man of 6ft 5in, he could not have accessed the manhole where the victims were allegedly raped and thrown off the bridge. I have also read that despite claims of being forced to strip, one of the victims was recovered from the river CLOTHED.
Again, this case is far from clear cut – it appears as something of a mystery but where there is doubt, it would surely be unwise to proceed with this execution.
Moving on, though as Terrance Williams and Reggie Clemons have at least been granted evidentiary hearings, does anyone know what Amnesty is doing about the potential wrongful execution of Preston Hughes in Texas? He has not been granted nearly as much coverage as Reggie and with an execution date of 15th November, I think it is high time he was given some focus – I have hardly seen him mentioned n this website despite writing to Amnesty several times.
There are very few similarities between the Davis and Clemons cases. Yes, physical evidence does link Clemons and his associates to the scene of the crime, including DNA evidence found on the pants of one of the victims. Clemons's associate, Marlin Gray, admitted that he had in his possession the watch of one of the victims, which Clemons and his associates robbed from the victims, and that watch was found at Gray's friend's house, where Gray admitted he stashed it. Most important, hugely important–remember that Clemons admitted to rape and murder in a signed, taped confession to detectives. Four people corroborated that admission (three of the perpetrators and the one surviving victim). And Clemons claimed police brutality and that his confession was coerced, but several witnesses, including a Clemons family friend, maintained in court that Clemons did not show signs of injury after the confession. Read that confession yourself and you will see it is not coerced. All this information is all in the case file, and the jury made decisions on this information.
Troy Davis did not admit to murder; Clemons admitted to rape and murder. That is one huge fact that Amnesty is not telling you. Anyone who says that "Clemons has always maintained his innocence" is lying or is severely misguided by people or groups like Amnesty–no, Clemons admitted to rape and murder. There are several friends and acquaintances of the perpetrators who witnessed Gray and Clemons together and Gray by himself admit to the murders in the weekend following the murders. This happened at social gatherings–parties / hanging out with friends. Amnesty says nothing about that.
Look into the case yourself. Look into the case testimony before jumping on this Amnesty bandwagon. Amnesty should feel free to voice its stance against capital punishment, and Amnesty does some good work nationally and especially internationally on issues like freedom of political dissidents, but for Amnesty to distort the facts on this case is shameful. And for Amnesty to suggest that the Kerry sisters' cousin is the murderer . . . that is slanderous.
Michael-
Could you possibly provide me with details on the source of the case file you mentioned in your post?
With regards to what you said about Clemons’ alleged confession to both rape and murder: If I am not mistaken, Thomas Cummins confessed to pushing the 2 victims off of the bridge, as well as claiming he had tried to have sex with one the victims. When he gave his initial statement at the police station, his clean appearance and absence of any injuries were documented by the police. Do you think that he could have survived a massive drop from the bridge unharmed, given that both of his cousins had drowned in the rough conditions described by a lifeguard, and that forensic teams were never able to recover the body of one of them?
On the first day of the hearing that went underway this week, Clemons’ legal team provided evidence that key information from a police report of Cummins’ initial testimony had been omitted by the prosecutor. This coverage was given by the Death Penalty Abolition Campaign Director for Amnesty International, who has been attending the hearing. You can also find details here: http://www.stlamerican.com/news/political_eye/art…
Had it not been for the appeal by Clemons’ lawyers for another hearing, this evidence would not have come to light. So, even with the case file you refer to, it is not definite that all of the information examined by the jury was truthful.
To my knowledge, the reason for the dismissal of Cummins’ confession was never explained by the police. This will always remain a huge flaw in the case. How much investigating was done around his confession before he was dropped as a suspect of murder and rape? Wasn’t Clemons’ rape charge dropped once he had been convicted as an accessory to murder? If the rape he had confessed to had been an integral part of the crime, why drop the charge if they had believed he had committed it?
Just because Cummins and the 3 other co-defendants corroborated Clemons’ admission, that does not determine that this was the truth. In his initial testimony, Marlin Gray allegedly denied having being involved in the events on the bridge, and there was no mention of Clemons. He claimed that upon returning to the bridge 30 minutes after the co-defendants had parted with Cummins and the 2 victims, they were gone. In the testimony he later gave in court, Gray implicated Clemons in the crime. He again denied having being involved in the events on the bridge, although it is said that DNA was found linking Gray to rape. He claimed that Clemons had told him that he had robbed Cummins and pushed all three off the bridge. It is documented that Antonio Richardson had told police that Cummins had told him that the victims had slipped off the bridge, but thought that the police would not buy the story. Marlon Gray was convicted of 1st degree murder, although Daniel Winfrey had testified that Clemons and Richardson had pushed the victims. Richardson’s death sentence was commuted but Clemons’ remains. If Winfrey plead guilty to second-degree murder and rape, why was he sentenced to just 15 years in prison? Had the court not conceded that Clemons had not carried out the crime, nor planned it?
I have read multiple documents claiming, and not just by Amnesty, that both Cummins and Gray altered their testimonies multiple times. If Cummins had had no involvement in the crime whatsoever, there would have been no reason for him to confess to murder, or for the prosecutor to omit evidence from his report in order to make a more convincing case. There were so many conflicting testimonies and little physical evidence.
You said that DNA found links Clemons and his associates to the crime. Could you elaborate upon this?
You say that several friends and acquaintances of the perpetrators witnessed Gray and Clemons together and Gray by himself admit to the murders in the weekend following the murders. What is your source? Did they testify in court?
There IS visual evidence of abuse on Clemons’ mug shot – that is, the swelling that was described by Judge Michael David who ordered for Clemons to be sent to the hospital, and by family members who claimed that his face was lopsided and swollen. Take a look at Clemons’ mug shot from the interview with the Guardian at 02:24, as well as the picture of Clemons in the Amnesty report, and notice the difference. Clemons also claimed that police had beaten him in the chest. Such injuries would not have been visible to any of the witnesses. Also remember Clemons’ claim that during the interrogation he had told police he would be confessing because they were beating him and not because it was the truth, at which point the tape used to record was allegedly taken out of the recorder and out of the room. According to Clemons, an officer came back with a tape (information could have been wiped off or a new one to replace the old), and the police allegedly continued to beat Clemons. Clemons would have had nothing to gain from lying about police brutality. I have not read any documents stating that Clemons had given any deceptive statements. Remember that Clemons, Cummins and Gray independently testified that their confessions to the crimes had been coerced out of them.
The true circumstances of the crime scene remain unclear, so the case must go on. Clemons certainly does not deserve to be put to death.
Lee, I appreciate your reply. You said that "If Cummins had had no involvement in the crime whatsoever, there would have been no reason for him to confess to murder." Point number one I’d like to make on your statement: I curious why you don’t apply the same rationale to Clemons, Gray, Richardson, and Winfrey, who all admitted to either rape and murder or rape alone in signed, taped confessions. There would have been no reason for them to confess. No police brutality. Several witnesses at last week's hearing and previously nearly twenty years ago testified that Clemons did not show signs of having been beaten. You say that Clemons's face is swollen. While I trust the several witnesses’ testimony, including a fingerprint technician and a Clemons family friend, I also looked at the photo presented at the hearing (video of it is linked to in the Guardian story at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/22/reggi…. I see no swelling there. If there is swelling it is minor enough to not be immediately visible to me, and I think a reasonable person would agree that one would not confess to rape and murder without being subject to serious, brutal coercion. The man wasn’t waterboarded or something. Even Gray’s claims of abuse amount to claims only of his being smacked upside the head with a notebook.
Before I make point number two about your statement, let me repeat what you wrote. You wrote, “If Cummins had had no involvement in the crime whatsoever, there would have been no reason for him to confess to murder.” Point number two: Cummins never confessed to murder. Your claim that he did is misguided. Cummins always maintained that the four convicted murdered the sisters. When you mistakenly say that Cummins "confess[ed]," you are referring to a supposed statement made to detectives that Cummins accidentally knocked Julie off the side railing of the bridge when he went to hug her. That's not even murder, a moot point because it didn't happen. Cummins has always maintained that he never said that scenario happened and that detectives suggested that scenario to him, and that he denied that scenario when it was suggested to him–and yet detectives added it to the police statement anyway. Cummins won a settlement over this–that the police fabricated such statements and added them to the report. The police's fabrications about Cummins do not mean that Clemons and his cohorts are innocent.
The case file I referred to is court testimony in the Gray case from several people. Much of it can be read at, of all places, http://www.marlin-gray.com/?id=legal_papers, which is a website for Marlin Gray's supposed innocence but which makes available some truly damning testimony of Gray.
You say, “Wasn’t Clemons’ rape charge dropped once he had been convicted as an accessory to murder? If the rape he had confessed to had been an integral part of the crime, why drop the charge if they had believed he had committed it?” Probably because the body of Robin Kerry, the woman Clemons raped, was never recovered. Probably also because the body of Julie Kerry, recovered after three weeks in the Mississippi River a couple hundred miles downriver, was decomposed so that administration of a rape kit would be inconclusive. Perhaps because Cummins could only testify that rape occurred but could not see who raped whom, and thus could not corroborate Winfrey’s specific testimony of who raped whom. But I can only speculate. I don’t know why the charges were dropped. I would trust the murderers’ signed and taped confessions on this and say they are guilty of rape.
[Lee, my comment was too long and I have to post as separate comments.]
You say, “When [Cummins] gave his initial statement at the police station, his clean appearance and absence of any injuries were documented by the police.” No, that is incorrect in part. True he did not show significant injuries, but police never said he was clean. Rather, he was said to be clean from the neck up. A forensics person combed his hair for river silt and none or not a significant amount (it is unclear which) was found. People have twisted that to mean that Cummins was “clean.” Untrue.
You say, “Do you think that he could have survived a massive drop from the bridge unharmed, given that both of his cousins had drowned in the rough conditions described by a lifeguard, and that forensic teams were never able to recover the body of one of them?” Point number one on this quote: The height from the water level was said to be 90 feet. But it likely wasn't a 90-foot drop. It was more likely 67 feet. Your claim of a “massive drop” highlights one of the problems in the police's treatment of Cummins. The police asked the opinion of several "experts" regarding the bridge height and the water depth and the current, etc. And these "experts" in turn gave offhand approximations to the detectives. So what was really a drop of something like 67 feet became 90 feet and an impossible feat to survive (despite the fact that people survive even 90-foot falls into water). And the expert's opinion that Cummins would be unable to swim against the powerful intake valves of the water treatment plant downstream? That "fact" was used against Cummins, too, when the detectives questioned him, and it is used against him to this day in forums such as these. But it turns out that that water treatment plant wasn't even pumping water that night. Thus “facts” that were actually nonfactual were stacked against Cummins and were the basis for the suggested scenarios that police made to him.
Point number two on your above quote: Yes, I absolutely believe that the Kerry sisters would not have been able to swim to safety. Do you think they should have been able to? Google map the Chain of Rocks Bridge so you can see the width of the Mississippi at that location. The crime happened just west of the bend in the bridge. Cummins was a firefighter and had completed some water rescue training, which to me means he was a capable swimmer. The fact that he was able to survive but unable to save his cousins despite this training is not evidence against him.
Lee, you asked, “You said that DNA found links Clemons and his associates to the crime. Could you elaborate upon this?” Sure. I got this information per the September 20, 2012, “Saint Louis Post-Dispatch” coverage of the hearing: “There was male DNA from at least two individuals on Gray's boxers and from at least three individuals on his pants. Clemons could not be eliminated as a source of it, [Stacey Bolinger, of the Missouri State Highway Patrol Crime Lab] said. Also on the clothing was the same female DNA that was found on the condom [that was found at the crime scene]. Kim Gorman, formerly of the St. Louis police crime lab, testified that DNA had ‘a very high likelihood’ of belonging to one of the Kerry sisters." Lee, the story is published in the “Saint Louis Post-Dispatch” at http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-cour….
Regarding your question of “You say that several friends and acquaintances of the perpetrators witnessed Gray and Clemons together and Gray by himself admit to the murders in the weekend following the murders. What is your source? Did they testify in court?” My source is Gray’s own testimony, which can be read at http://www.marlin-gray.com/?id=legal_papers. In that questioning you’ll see that testimonies from several witnesses are referred to. The prosecutor asks Gray why these people would lie to say that Gray said he did it, and in response Gray says those people were either mistaken or that he (Gray) was joking around.
I guarantee you that if you read Gray’s testimony you will deem him guilty. A lot of the Gray defense is actually to claim that Clemons played a larger role in the crimes than Gray did. There is no question as to their guilt, only to the degree they all played in the crimes. In Missouri, though, it does not matter if Richardson pushed the girls and Clemons did not. In Missouri, Clemons aided in the murder and is just as guilty because he was blocking their escape. Likewise, when Winfrey admitted that he held down one of the girls while one of the convicted (either Gray or Clemons, I don’t recall) raped her, Winfrey is just as guilty as the one who had intercourse even though Winfrey did not have intercourse. This is not only my opinion but is Missouri state law.
[continued]
Lee, you ask about the commuting of Antonio Richardson’s sentencing from the death penalty to life in prison. In part you ask, “Richardson’s death sentence was commuted but Clemons’ remains. . . . Had the court not conceded that Clemons had not carried out the crime, nor planned it?” No, the commuting of Richardson’s sentence is not a concession at all. The commuting of Richardson’s sentence does not mean Clemons is innocent, nor does it mean Richardson is innocent. Richardson’s sentence was commuted because he was sixteen at the time of the crimes and because he was said to be mildly retarded. You also say, “If Winfrey plead guilty to second-degree murder and rape, why was he sentenced to just 15 years in prison?” Lee, Winfrey was not originally sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Winfrey was sentenced to thirty years in prison. Sadly, he served only fifteen years. Winfrey was the youngest of the criminals, at fifteen years old, and made a plea bargain. The fact that Winfrey’s sentence was the mildest does not mean he is innocent, nor does it mean the others are innocent.
Finally, you mention Gray’s contradictions, and the other convicteds’ contradictions, and Gray’s implicating of Clemons. . . . Okay, the fact that the three convicted contradict one another’s stories in testimony does not mean there is reasonable doubt about their innocence. It simply means that they’re liars, and murderers, and I believe rapists and thieves–all of which are judgments I make based partly on their own legally obtained, uncoerced confessions.
My opinion–and this is my opinion only–is that Clemons in his signed, taped confession did not realize he was admitting to murder, only that he was admitting to rape, because he didn’t realize that Missouri state law defines “murder” as aiding in the murder of another. In that confession Clemons says that Richardson pushed Julie Kerry. I think Clemons did not understand that he himself was guilty, too. When Clemons says today, “I know I am innocent,” I believe it is because he probably has a different definition in his mind of murder than the state does. That to me means he has a twisted mind. He aided in the murders and so is guilty of them. That is the important point.
[continued]
Finally, finally, if you and Amnesty would like to argue that Clemons should not be executed because he aided in the murders, that capital punishment should not be applied to those who aid in murder, then that is your prerogative. But such an opinion has nothing at all to do with the facts of this case, and you must not confuse such an opinion with innocence of the convicted.
I believe Reginald Clemons is guilty. Not based on my feelings about what happened on that bridge , but actual conversations that were conducted in my presence. Reginald Clemons ,Marlin Gray ,and Antonio Richardson were in my custody during their pretrial detainment.They would often meet in the law library to discuss their pending trial which would often break down into arguments between them.Blaming one another for their role in the crime, "Why'd you keep the damn flashlight and watch."etc. One day stands out to this day the three co-defendents took great delight in what they believed to be the best joke told in eons.A.Richardson stated "We should just tell them it was'nt murder we was just trying to clean all our jizz off of them by throwing them in the river".Are these the type of people AIUSA ARE WASTING RESOURCES ON. NO THANKS.
Firstly, I’d just say that this was a horrible, horrible crime and my sympathies go out to the victims’ families and whatever the outcome of this case, I hope they find closure. I’ll admit my earlier comment was not phrased correctly and I apologise that it was not, but all I meant to say was that all issues pertinent to the case should be addressed so that justice can be administered – WHATEVER its outcome. I just think ALL issues and potential in discrepancies should be asked and addressed so that justice, whatever course it takes, can move on – I didn’t say the cousin was guilty but said I had serious reservations about his changing stories etc and think all these issues should be finally settled before finally deciding Clemmons’ fate so that there can no longer be any doubt of his innocence or guilt when that final decision is made.
As I have also said too, I don’t know whether Clemmons is innocent and I never affirmed in my earlier comment that I believed him to do so but the Supreme Court ordered the hearing so surely they must have had issues, perhaps not necessarily due to his claims of innocence but perhaps due to accusations of Police brutality. Whatever the case, they clearly had reservations about the application of the law in this case but I accept that if he was there and didn’t at least leave to get help – he should be condemned with the rest of them. Again, all I’ll say is that whatever course, this decision takes – I hope it will be the right one and will deliver closure for all concerned – at the very least, no one will be able to claim that this latest decision was tainted in any way.
Anonymous, I appreciate your reply. Just to address a couple comments you made.
You said, "I just think ALL issues and potential in discrepancies should be asked and addressed so that justice, whatever course it takes, can move on." I think that happened twenty years ago and today we are going through the same details again. The several witnesses who maintained last week that Clemons did not show signs of having been abused maintained the same thing twenty years ago.
You said, "I had serious reservations about [Cummins] changing stories etc and think all these issues should be finally settled before finally deciding Clemmons' fate so that there can no longer be any doubt of his innocence or guilt when that final decision is made." But Cummins never changed his story. Cummins always maintained that the four convicted raped and murdered the sisters. Cummins always maintained that police created wild stories, much like the story of commentator "Julie" below, and inserted these wild stories into their police reports. Cummins won a settlement with the city of St. Louis over that. It's not like the police department "paid him off," as people insinuate. For one, the city of St. Louis was responsible for paying the settlement money, not the police department. Sadly, there will always be people who prefer to believe the wild stories and create unreasonable doubt over this case–that is the only doubt here, unreasonable doubt. Surprisingly, Amnesty is one of them.
I read Michael's comment and went to the newspaper article to read: "Also on the clothing was the same female DNA that was found on the condom. Kim Gorman, formerly of the St. Louis police crime lab, testified that DNA had "a very high likelihood" of belonging to one of the Kerry sisters." My question is why would a condom be used during a rape? Did one of the Kerry sisters consent to having sex? That would change the entire picture.
Julie, I'm sorry, but please, please do not comment without doing your own research. This is not the forum to spread wild guesses, and I'd add that it is not a forum where children should be commenting. There are such things as stupid questions. I will not dignify your second stupid question, but I'll answer you first stupid question. Rapists often use condoms to 1) attempt to leave little or no evidence of rape 2) protect themselves from diseases their victims might carry and 3) protect themselves from diseases their fellow rapists might carry. All four of the men admitted in signed, taped confessions that they raped the sisters.
Does anyone have a guess why Reggie Clemons took the 5th Amendment instead of telling his story of what happened on the bridge?
Because Clemons prefers that the focus of the hearing be about supposed police brutality. He does not wish the focus of the hearing to be about his having committed two rapes, two murders, the robbery of Cummins, and the attempted murder of Cummins.
no
We should do everything in our power to stop this and to eliminate the death penalty altogether.
He killed and rapeD my friends keep him in jail. He should be executed. I don't support rapists and killers just because they got brown skin like me.
Everybody had they on opinion of the case but at the end of the day we serve a God thay sits high and looks low