New evi­dence in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham sug­gests Texas may have exe­cut­ed an inno­cent man in 2004. The key evi­dence pre­sent­ed against Willingham at tri­al was from an arson ​“expert,” who said the fire that killed Willingham’s chil­dren was inten­tion­al­ly set. That evi­dence has since been dis­cred­it­ed by a series of oth­er experts who con­clud­ed the evi­dence did not sup­port arson. Now attor­neys for the Innocence Project have uncov­ered a pros­e­cu­tor’s note imply­ing that a jail­house infor­mant – who tes­ti­fied Willingham admit­ted to the crime – was giv­en pref­er­en­tial treat­ment in exchange for his tes­ti­mo­ny. The note indi­cat­ed charges against the infor­mant should be reduced ​“based on coop in Willingham.” Prosecutors had explic­it­ly denied that a deal had been made with the wit­ness. Barry Scheck, founder of the Innocence Project, called the new evi­dence a ​“smok­ing pis­tol,” and added, ​“We’re reach­ing out to the prin­ci­pals to see if there is an inno­cent expla­na­tion for this. I don’t see one.”

(J. Schwartz, ​“Evidence of Concealed Jailhouse Deal Raises Questions About a Texas Execution,” New York Times, February 27, 2014). See Innocence and Arbitrariness.

Citation Guide