First post of the month, time for another letter to the D.A.; please write your own, copy this one, or just send in one of the flyers to your right. Wrongful convictions and ramifications thereof are on a lot of lawmaker's minds at the moment, let's make sure our voices are heard!
D.A. Mike Anderson
1201 Franklin
Houston, TX
77002
Sir,
I’m writing to you today about the
case of Carlos Coy, #908426.
As you probably already know, the
Texas legislature recently passed SB 344, which dictates guidelines to allow a
prisoner to file a habeas appeal based on science that is now known to be
faulty; hundreds of arson cases are currently being reviewed by the Innocence Project.
Mr. Coy was convicted on
testimonial evidence, not physical. Empirically, there was no evidence that a
crime had occurred; there was no physical evidence, or even an attempt to
collect any. The ‘symptoms’ named by the state had been with the child for
months, perhaps years before the date of the supposed assault.
The scientists that testified for
the state accused Coy of grooming his daughter to be his next victim, but when
confronted about it, they admitted that they had no evidence of it. It was an
opinion, no more.
While I sincerely hope that
everyone wrongfully convicted using bad science is freed, I also wonder how
those who were convicted without even a pretense of scientific evidence can
have their cases reconsidered. How can we refute an opinion, offered with no
proof and accepted as fact?
Sir, I urge you to review this
conviction; I firmly believe that it will eventually be called into question,
and I hope to see that happen sooner rather than later. Carlos Coy, like every
citizen, deserves a fair trial; given the state of the District Attorney’s
office under Chuck Rosenthal, any case not based on firm evidence should be
questioned.
11 comments:
can he get bailed out of prison? If he can, how much? and can we start fund raisers to get him out? this man was robbed from life from a greedy bitch that made her kid lie. Can we do something for him? We need him back as a person and an artist. FREE SPM!!
-Dun Dee, Richmond,Tx.
Hey thank you so much for keeping us close to LOS! And what if we talk with the girl? Juan gotti said shes been saying she lied in court and all that, i know that Texas has tendency of ignoring stuff like that but if we had the interview we could show it to a lawyer or and post it on youtube so that if we are ignored we have proof of his innocense meaning alot of people would open uptheir eyes and support the movement. I think LOS would trust u with the name the most because WE could do alot of crazy things if we knew her name
That's not a bad idea of we could have someone fb her and ask her thos questions then take screen shots of the convocation and brint it out and mail it to da or somthing
Dun Dee:
Right now, I believe the problem is finding new evidence. He has to have new evidence to file another appeal.
Anon 11:53:
Thanks for reading! Contacting Jane Doe could actually be counter-productive; if she recanted, probably the first thing the DA's office would do is to say that she was forced into it. To avoid that, it's important that whoever she talks to be a professional, like a lawyer or a psychiatrist.
Coy has mentioned that they have an private investigator working on turning up new evidence, so I'm sure that they're pursuing every avenue they can.
I think the best thing we can do is to keep spreading the word, letting people know that there *are* questions about his case, that it wasn't just a cut-and-dried, slam-dunk conviction.
There was evidence that a crime occurred, and it was through the young child's testimony. Then you put together the other pieces of the puzzle, such as testimony from family, and then you think logically about the events that surrounded that night. Her story made sense, and it wasn't contradicted. Also, they attempted to collect physical evidence, but they didn't find any. That doesn't mean the crime didn't occur though. I'm sure you remember the physical evidence statistics that I've shown you.
So Incandesio, about the transcripts. It has come to my attention that all you would have to do is contact Sylvia Coy to obtain the transcripts. If you request the transcripts, I'm sure she would send them to you for free. Shit, you could contact Carlos himself. Didn't he promise us he was going to show us the entire transcripts? For free? You can't use money as an excuse anymore.
"It has come to your attention"...So you're invested in this enough to look up my Facebook profile?
Dude, that is creepy as hell.
LOL, you're lucky I haven't posted on there yet.
As to be expected though, you're dodging the point of my post. I'm starting to notice a pattern here. A while ago, I asked why you don't ask Carlos hard-hitting questions, like why hasn't he given us a step by step account of what he was doing that night, what's his alibi, why couldn't his wife vouch for him, etc. You responded by saying that you don't care about those things, all you care about is the trial. So then I ask you why you haven't obtained the trial transcripts, and then you basically respond by saying you don't care about the transcripts.
Hmmm, something is amiss here. The pattern that I'm seeing is consistent with someone who is being pulled by puppet strings. That's the only logical explanation that I can see for your reluctance.
Well gee, Eric, what are you going to post?
"Hi, I'm that guy that gets so upset when someone disagrees with me that I creep around their Facebook page and wack off to it"?
I mean, do you think this makes you seem more like a reasonable human being who happens to disagree with me, or a possible axe-murderer?
Eric, I know Sylvia Coy personally. Why don't you give me your phone number so maybe she can give you a call? Transcripts are in the works. You seem to think that because Incandesio isn't so inclined to answer every question, she is hiding something or covering up some conspiracy. I too tend to ignore questions and rather not answer them if I feel a person just might not have the capability of comprehending or having an open mind to debate an issue.
Innocent? Dude is a serial child molester Gun to head bet you wouldn't leave your daughter with him alone
Anon 8:46
Gun to whose head? Mine, his, or the kid's?
Seriously, though, you're going to have to expound on that a little. Was there even one other pre-pubescent child who made an accusation? Or are you counting the changing testimony of various teenaged girls in your assessment?
Post a Comment