April 3, 2012

  • Another Angry Article: Arizona and Abortion

    We interrupt this silence to bring you the latest round of legislative horrors:
    http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/arizona-outdoes-everyone-new-anti-abortion-bill
    http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/04/01/arizona-legislators-trying-to-declare-pregnancy-two-weeks-prior-to-conception

    As far as I can tell, the law, like many others passed recently, will ban abortions after 20 weeks of development. Exceptions vary from state to state, but in Arizona, there is no exception for nonviable fetuses.

    Back up a moment. At 20 weeks, the average fetus is 6.5 inches long. It sometimes happens that perhaps the brain is not forming, or the lungs are growing outside the fetus’s body, which means it cannot survive, and then a woman will want to abort it. But because it’s so small at 20 weeks, the doctors can’t tell until later. There’s no exception for that! If a doctor says to a woman at 22 weeks, your baby can’t survive because its brain is not developing, then the woman has to carry out the pregnancy anyways, even though it’s impossible for the baby to survive!

    But it’s worse. Doctors usually count pregnancy as starting on the day the last period ended. The actual date of conception is usually about halfway through the cycle, when ovulation happens, and not more than five days earlier. The Arizona bill defines the pregnancy as starting on the day the last period began.

    Now isn’t that cute. Some stupid legislator deciding that he can go and legislate that women are pregnant during their last period, about two weeks before they conceive at all.

    As any middle-school schoolchild knows, women who are having a period are not pregnant.

    That is not the way biology works; legislating it isn’t going to make it so.

    Doctors are also to be required to perform an ultrasound and then show photographs of the fetus to the woman. People who don’t know medicine telling doctors what procedures to perform. The Blind leading the Sighted.

    I really didn’t care much about the whole issue beforehand, but now I care a great deal. If there were institutions set up to care for unwanted children, then we can talk about whether abortions are ethical or moral or whatever. This though, this is too much. Sometimes things are just not reasonable, and defining a woman to be pregnant during her period is not it.

March 17, 2012

  • A Logistical Nightmare

    Problem:
    We begin with four points, at 18:30 last evening. The points are labeled EAR, CodeNinja, Discord, and wobster109. At 18:30, all four points are in the Davenport dining hall. EAR has a card with access to JE. CodeNinja’s accesses Morse, and wobster109′s grants entrance to Davenport. EAR wants to walk as little as possible. All three cards can access the Zoo. At the end of the night, each card must be returned to its owner.

    EAR, CodeNinja, and Discord want to spend the evening playing board games in Davenport, but CodeNinja first needs to retrieve the board games from JE. Meanwhile, wobster109 wants to be in the Zoo from 19:20 to 21:00, and after that she wants to study from the Representation of Finite Groups text. However, wobster109′s computer is broken, and the text is a .djvu file. Wobster109 cannot install the reader on the Zoo computers, and therefore has been studying from Discord’s computer. At the end of the night, Discord, and wobster109 want to be in Davenport, but CodeNinja is leaving for Boston. EAR has an injured foot and is reluctant to climb to her third-floor room in JE without CodeNinja’s help.

    Solution 1:
    EAR spends the night in Davenport, in wobster109′s first-floor room. CodeNinja takes EAR’s card and wobster109′s card, and wobster109 takes CodeNinja’s card. Now, CodeNinja can use EAR’s card to get the board games and use wobster109′s card to return to Davenport, while wobster109 can access the Zoo. Afterwards, wobster109 will return to Davenport, where cards will be returned. CodeNinja goes to Boston, and wobster109 studies on Discord’s computer.

    However, a problem arises:
    Discord would like to study also and needs his computer. He prefers to study in the Zoo.

    Solution 2:
    Discord and wobster109 convert the Representation text to pdf, which wobster109 then emails to herself. Discord plans to join wobster109 in the Zoo after board games are played. Discord will call wobster109 to be let into the Zoo. Discord and wobster109 will stay in the Zoo until late. EAR takes wobster109′s card and uses it to access Davenport until Discord and wobster109 return.

    But this causes a whole new conundrum:
    CodeNinja and wobster109 are not likely to meet again before CodeNinja leaves for Boston, and so cards cannot be re-exchanged.

    Now, it is 19:00. Discord, and wobster109 are in wobster109′s room. EAR and CodeNinja are presumed to be in the Davenport common room. CodeNinja has EAR’s card and wobster109′s card, and wobster109 has CodeNinja’s card. And then:

    wobster109: “I won’t get back in time to return CodeNinja’s card.”
    Discord: “Then take your card.”
    wobster109: “But EAR needs my card to get into the room afterwards.”
    Discord: “Then take EAR’s card.”
    wobster109: “But CodeNinja needs EAR’s card to get the board games from JE!”
    Discord: “Oh. . . ” [sigh]
    wobster109: “Oh bother?”
    Discord: “There are too many constraints.”

    So wobster109 runs off to consult EAR and CodeNinja.

    Solution 3:
    CodeNinja has already left to retrieve board games. Wobster109 waits until CodeNinja returns. CodeNinja reclaims his card, EAR takes wobster109′s card, and wobster109 takes EAR’s card. Discord packs his computer bag. After board games, EAR returns to wobster109′s room, while Discord heads to the Zoo and calls wobster109 to be let in. Discord and wobster109 return late at night.

    Unforeseen problem: Discord and wobster109 are likely to return after EAR has gone to bed, and will have a hard time getting back into wobster109′s room.

    Smaller problem: It is discovered after wobster109 leaves that she forgot to bring EAR something from the room.

    Small patch: Discord takes wobster109′s card to return to her room where he fetches EAR’s ibuprofen.

    And what happened after: Board games took much longer than anticipated. Board games are finished around 2:00, and by then, wobster109 is nearly ready to return. Discord decides to remain in Davenport. Wobster109 calls Discord to be let into Davenport. Cards are re-exchanged.

March 12, 2012

  • http://xkcd.com/1027/

    Pick-Up Artistry is pretty silly, and Less Wrong’s anti-procrastination techniques are not as effective as they think.

    There, I said it. I’ve wanted to say each of those things for quite awhiles.

    In order then. I’ve only barely visited Pick-Up Artistry (PUA) forums, and they looked harmless enough, so this is in response to something a friend said: that women were attracted to men who overruled them in disagreements because they demonstrated dominance, or something to that effect.

    Perhaps what I mean to say is, I think PUA is pretty silly. Not being taken seriously is one of a handful of things that makes me angry for real! And then I end up spending the next few months trying really hard not to resent the person. I still resent Michael Vassar, even though his judgment might have been reasonable based on the information he had. Maybe that’s not how it works for everyone, but it certainly seems pretty silly to me. And, no matter where someone ranks, they’re still wrong if they try to tell me I’m attracted to something I’m not.

    I should be more charitable towards Less Wrong. Much of its posts are actually good, or at least interesting and meaningful. However! I’ve since come to believe that being effective is an ongoing battle that never ceases. To be effective, you have to make the right decision over and over again, and if you make the wrong decision, it becomes easier to do so again. There are tactics, covered on Less Wrong, that make it easier to make the effective choice, and when one makes the wrong choice, I feel like the appropriate response is to dust oneself off, make a renewed commitment, and try again. One doesn’t abandon a course the first time one misses a lecture.

    But sometimes, one comes across incredibly specific posts like this one, and I must say I’m a bit skeptical. Certainly everything sounds plausible. But if it were tried on many many people, would it actually show results?

    . . . Upon reflection, I find that I have little to quibble about in that specific article, except the big, unsupported equation presented in LaTeX. I feel like I’ve become old and cynical of things presented as the great big fix-all to procrastination. I don’t know if I believe in a great big fix-all. Just an urge to play one more game of Set that must be fought down over and over again.

March 2, 2012

  • Upcoming Week

    I’m afraid I must take a week’s time away from the Internets. Today, the carillonneurs are flying straight into the heart of the volcano for a busy busy week. During this week, I’m not likely to be very regularly online, and so I shall not be updating for a few days.

    The last 24 hours were a big straight nonstop rush! Wake up, study, take midterm, buy supplies, shower, dinner, handbells, filling forms, visiting bank, photocopying, retrieving things, doing homework, programming, planning, and now here. Still to be done in the next 5 hours: prepare all the postcards I should have sent out months ago, order a hard drive, meet with advisor, visit post office, pack.

    Get on the shuttle at 13:30, and then, sleep. All the Red Bull is wearing off.

    Good merry spring break to you all!

March 1, 2012

  • Lauren and Victoria

    Lauren was in my preschool class. She was very sociable, and she had many friends. We girls all wanted to be like her.

    Lauren did not like me, so no one liked me.

    I remember the scene, but not my thoughts. Only one scene. The class was sitting in a circle, and Lauren was in the middle. Other girls were hugging her. I wanted to hug her too, so I did, quickly while her back was turned, but she saw me. I sat back right away and acted like I hadn’t done anything, but she looked annoyed and said, “not you!”

    So that was it. There wasn’t a chance in the world of her ever liking me. I wasn’t even worthy to admire her.

    Victoria was the same age as me, and I was now a year or two older. Sometimes it seemed to me like she and I were friends. She was unreserved and confident. At reading time, she’d urge me to go through the Where’s Waldo books with her. I never understood why she liked them. They were boring.

    Sometimes though, we’d fight. I’ve forgotten why. Maybe I started them. It was too long ago for me to remember.

    We all liked to make potholders back then. We’d take loops of fabric and weave them onto a frame to make little squares of cloth. I had a partially finished one in my cubbyhole. After a fight with Victoria, it was gone. I found it in her cubbyhole, next to mine, so I took it back. I never stole. Is it stealing if I take back my own things?

    Later on, Victoria angrily accused me of taking things from her cubbyhole. I thought it was very unfair that she could take my things from mine, but get angry when I took my own things from hers.

    The next day, we were friends again. She asked if she could have the potholder when I was done making it. I ended up giving it to her.

    I recently read Frans de Waal’s book Chimpanzee Politics, and there was one particularly striking phrase that appeared: “dominant children”. I bristled right away at the idea of watching preschoolers on a playground and labeling some as alphas, and then I realized the root of my discomfort: I had not been an alpha. I had been the lowest-ranking creature.

    But after 200 pages of social purpose and tactics among chimpanzees, it was suddenly painfully easy to study my own behaviors, and to wonder about them. Lower ranking apes will submissively greet and relinquish food to higher-ranking ones. They will not mate if a higher-ranking peer does not tolerate it, and they sit quietly in the background while more dominant apes roam.

    These are all too reminiscent of my own behaviors. Why do I feel like I’ve done wrong whenever I walk in front of someone? How come whenever I share something with someone, the other person has to have the bigger part? Why do I keep telling people I’m not hungry for another slice when I really am? I don’t even feel right taking Terraria equipment unless everyone else in the world already has something at least as good. I don’t feel right if I ever have more than someone else.

    A few days ago, as I went entering a gate, I saw a boy walk up to exit. I automatically stepped back and held the gate for him. He strolled leisurely by, never bothering to look at me.

    For many years, I thought I wanted to be nice. I thought I wanted people to be happy. I honestly believed it. I don’t know if I believe it anymore. Rather than a personality trait or a planned behavior, perhaps it’s a conditioned response. Maybe I’m not actually nice; maybe I’m just low-ranking.

February 29, 2012

  • Little Life Lessons Lately Learned

    It’s silly to demonize people. Of course I knew that! But when I found that former president George W. Bush was a supporter of DNA testing as court evidence, I felt resentful of it. I found that I didn’t want him to have that bit of virtue. I wanted to keep thinking of him as a big bad villain! But I didn’t realize this at the time. I just remember reading that Bush supported DNA testing, and feeling bitter about it. That was confusing! Finding out that someone supports DNA testing ought to be a happy thing.

    I still think Bush was wrong about many many things. It was hard to admit that he didn’t have to be wrong about every single thing, that he could be reasonable about something and believe DNA testing is important in criminal courts. I think he seems more like a human to me now.

    When my computer broke, I anticipated that the world would chuckle in irony. Ha, the computer scientist has computer troubles, trolololol. So when I took the creature to Student Tech today, I asked how computers are usually fixed. The student techs were very nice and helpful. Things felt very different from when I’d gone to the Apple store last summer. It felt like Yale’s student techs wanted to help me, rather than wanting to get this over with. They told me that student tech had diagnostic equipment that they’d run first, and that it wasn’t available to most people. Oh. So there actually isn’t anything I could’ve done from my room. Ok.

    I’ve found that when I blog with the intention of communicating, that I’m constantly reading over things and simplifying them. Sentences are as short and simple as possible. They’re restructured so that words are basic and the sentence is linear. This happened most often during Miscarriage of Justice Week, when I cared very deeply about reaching an audience. I wanted people to know things and be outraged by things, and so those posts were edited for simplicity until they read like Simple Wikipedia articles. It’s not that I thought little of my audience’s intelligence. It’s that I expected them to be skimming along quickly, perhaps directed there by Facebook or netsurfing between classes. It had to be easy to understand quickly. I have no doubt that if anyone sat down and read with their full attention, they’d understand everything easily, but here, every small layer of complexity, every little bit of resistance seemed an alarm to me. TL; DR, the alarms told me.

    Roses are red; violets are blue.

    It always seemed that the thing where colors are represented by nonsense such as #FF0000 was inherently logical. Simple colors like red and black were memorable strings, and hazier colors were more random. I always understood that there was some reason to it, but I never cared to figure it out until a few days ago.

    Roses are #FF0000; violets are #0000FF. It’s just RGB values in hexadecimal! #FF0000 -> 255 red, 0 green, 0 blue. How on Earth could I have missed that all these years?

February 26, 2012

  • The Tragedy of Cesar Fierro

    Cesar Fierro had no apparent connection to the 1979 murder of taxi driver Nicholas Castanon. Castanon was shot and his body dumped from a taxi. Eyewitnesses identified two men later leaving the taxi. The two men were arrested and then released. Fierro was not one of them.

    Five months later, Gerardo Olague, a 16-year-old, told police that Fierro was the killer. No physical evidence ever linked Fierro to the crime. Fierro was arrested.

    Police told Fierro that they had his mother and stepfather in custody. Fierro said in an interview, “he told me if I signed, then they’d let them go, and if not, they were going to torture them.”

    Fierro’s confession and Olague’s testimony were the only pieces of evidence presented at trial. Fierro was sentenced to the death penalty.

    In 1996, the Judge Sharon Keller wrote the majority opinion for the trial court denying Fierro a new trial. She agreed that the confession had been coerced, but she said the error was “harmless”. She said Fierro had failed to prove harm by a “preponderance of evidence”.

    “The Court of Criminal Appeals simply raised the standard for ‘harmless error’ analysis to animpossible height,” says the website devoted to Cesar Fierro, and that is exactly what happened.

    A confession is an incredibly strong piece of evidence. Without Fierro’s confession, the only evidence would have been Olague’s testimony. Police got the testimony by threatening to torture Fierro’s parents, and Judge Keller calls it “harmless”! A defendant has to meet such a high standard as to provide a “preponderance of evidence”! And the trial court makes it impossible. The trial court voted 5-4 that Fierro would have been found guilty even without his confession. Apparently, it believes Olague’s testimony alone is sufficient. How is that reasonable? Even the trial prosecutor says he would have dismissed the case, if he’d known how the confession was gotten.

    The case would have rested on one person’s testimony, it would have been incredibly shaky, and the trial prosecutor would have dismissed it. But that’s all “harmless”.

    5 out of 9 judges on the trial court denied him a new trial.

    That’s not just.

    But this story has no happy ending, nor even a sad ending. It continues to be written every single day.

    Cesar Fierro has spent 30 years on death row. He is still there today.

    He has been scheduled for execution 14 separate times. All of this has taken a toll on his mental state. Hearing voices and wanting to injure himself, he requested psychiatric help, but was denied it.

    A heartbreaking passage from the Texas Moratorium Network reads:
    David Dow says he had heard rumors from other condemned clients that Fierro had “gone stark raving mad.” During Fierro’s decades on death row, his mother had died, his brother had died, his wife had divorced him and his daughter had stopped visiting him.

    Dow goes on to say that Fierro refused to shower. His cell walls were smeared with feces, and he had become very thin. He believed his attorneys were conspiring against him.

    He has always maintained his innocence.

    It’s not fair. Maybe it seems like police can be tough with criminals, because after all, they’re criminals right? But sometimes, they are innocent people, and innocent people suffer.

    Cesar Fierro is still on death row! Each day that passes, he is still there in his cell, without family, driven mad waiting for execution.

    I beg you, please, help. Can we free him? Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

    What we can do now though, is share his story. Make it as widely known as possible, in the hopes that one day, a tide of outrage might reach the Texas courts.

February 24, 2012

  • All the World Hath Become My Enemy, and Recapitulation

    All the trouble started two days ago, when my computer abruptly froze and alerted me that something had gone wrong, and that it would restart itself in a minute.

    There was no “cancel” button.

    So it did that, and when it restarted, it froze and wouldn’t do anything at all. Not even start the ctrl+alt+delete task manager! I forced it off and restarted it again, and this time it worked as normal.

    Yesterday, it did it again. But this time, several restarts didn’t fix the issue. I put the thing aside and decided that maybe it would work tomorrow.

    So today, I restarted it over and over again, and each time, it froze after about a minute. I learned that if I used ctrl+alt+delete as quickly as possible when I first logged on, I could get to the task manager, and then if I forcibly stopped Steam, it wouldn’t crash right away. This time, it didn’t crash until a couple minutes later, when I tried to post on the SetMao forum. I used my couple minutes to hurriedly open file transfer and dump my senior project and my favorite game files into my Zoo account.

    It could be worse. At least I know I’m not going to lose my senior project.

    Anyways, I’ve moved back into the Zoo (with my toothbrush and my blanket), and I’m ready to start blogging again. Half of Miscarriage of Justice Week, I was out of town, and the other half I spent trying to compress a week’s work in half. Serious posts customarily take an hour or three to write, and so when I didn’t really have the time, I put out sub-optimal essays. At the end of it, I guess I was just tired of blogging, and then I didn’t think about it for a while.

    Life, life is terrible. I guess a computer breaking is probably among the worst of things that are reasonably likely to happen. Surely there are much more things, but they, I think, aren’t nearly so likely. My computer has been through a great deal, but it’s been pretty stable, so this comes as a great big surprise, and I’m not happy about it at all.

February 12, 2012

  • MoJW: Cameron Todd Willingham

    Cameron Todd Willingham’s house burned down in 1991, killing his three daughters. Fire investigators examined his burned house to determine the cause of the fire, and they identified twenty indicators of an intentional fire, such as puddle markings, burn patterns, and cracked glass. They said the fire had been very hot and likely set intentionally with a liquid accelerant, such as lighter fluid, poured over the house. Samples from the house were taken for testing, and one of them returned positive for lighter fluid.

    Willingham was arrested and charged with arson and multiple murder. At the 1992 trial, neighbors testified against him, saying that he had not appeared very concerned. Diane Barbee, a neighbor, said that he appeared unconcerned and had not tried to rescue his children. Johnny Webb, another prisoner, said that Willingham had confessed to him. Father Monaghan, a police chaplain, said that Willingham appeared to be in complete control. Tim Gregory, a psychiatrist, testified on Willingham’s Iron Maiden poster (a flaming skull) and Led Zeppelin poster (fallen angels), saying he was cultish, focused on death, and Satanic. James Grigson, another psychiatrist, testified that Willingham was an extremely severe sociopath who was beyond the help of any treatment.

    The prosecution presented Willingham as a sociopath who saw his daughters as an inhibition to a carefree, drunken lifestyle. Based on the evidence, and mostly on the results of the fire investigation, Willingham was convicted and sentenced to death. He refused a plea bargain. Prosecutors said it showed he was completely remorseless, and he was executed in 2004.

    The jury and both the prosecution lawyers and the defense lawyers had no doubt that he was guilty. The only thing that confused them was that lighter fluid had only been found on the sample near the front door. No lighter fluid was found on any other sample.

    On the surface, his tale is a classic criminal story: a murderer is discovered by capable forensics experts. Science triumphs and captures a dangerous criminal; society is safer as a result.

    But a proper story starts at the beginning. Let us return, then, to the afternoon of the fire, and let us start over.

    Eleven-year-old Buffie Barbee smelled smoke and called out her mother, Diane Barbee. They found Cameron Todd Willingham on the lawn before his burning house, hair and eyebrows singed, screaming “my babies are burning up!” While Diane ran inside to call the fire department, Buffie watched Willingham break several windows trying to return inside the house, but each time, flames shot through the broken window. The fire department arrived, and one firefighter had to restrain Willingham to keep him from returning to the house. Father Monaghan tried to calm him in the back of a fire truck. Willingham fought to return to the house, giving Monaghan a black eye, and firefighters handcuffed him for his own safety.

    After police decided Willingham was a suspect, as a result of the fire investigation, people’s testimonies changed. Diane Barbee changed later testified that Willingham could have gone back to rescue his children and did not, saying that there had not been a lot of smoke. Firefighters initially reported that Willingham had been “hysterical”, and Monaghan initially reported that Willingham was “devastated” and risked his life, but after the investigation, he suggested Willingham’s emotion was staged and expressed a “gut feeling” that he was responsible for the fire.

    The jailhouse informant Webb had testified that Willingham confessed burning his daughters to hide evidence of abuse on them. On close inspection, his testimony is questionable on several counts. The first is that he seemed unreliable and confused. He would later say of his testimony, “my memory is in bits and pieces. I was on a lot of medication at the time.” His testimony places the confession in a taped surveillance area. Willingham maintained his innocence to everyone else, including his own family, even refusing a plea bargain that would have spared his life, while Webb was a near-stranger. No other injuries apart from those caused by the fire were ever found on Willingham’s children.

    And the two psychiatrists? Willingham had an Iron Maiden poster and a Led Zeppelin poster; that is not so exceptional. Grigson had given near-identical testimony on the character of Randall Dale Adams, labeling him an untreatable sociopath. Adams was convicted of killing a police officer, serving twelve years (twelve years!) on death row before being exonerated by new evidence. Grigson was expelled from the American Psychiatric Association in 1995 for ethical violations.

    Neither psychiatrist had ever spoken so much as one word to Cameron Todd Willingham.

    But the strongest of the trial evidence was the fire investigators’ report, and that is the evidence that deserves a second look.

    In 1990, Gerald Wayne Lewis was charged with a very similar case of arson-murder as Willingham, based on very similar evidence: the same puddle shapes on the burned floor of his house, the same burn marks that indicated multiple points of fire’s origin, the same signs of liquid accelerant, the same witnesses’ testimony of unconcern. Prosecutors said Lewis had poured gasoline over his house and lit it aflame. But the case against Lewis was weakened by laboratory tests returning negative for gasoline and by a news camera that showed Lewis clearly upset and jumping in front of a moving car to contact the fire station.

    The prosecutors arranged an elaborate experiment with John Lentini and John DeHaan, their fire experts. They wanted to show that the patterns found in Lewis’s house were caused by an intentional fire, caused by pouring accelerant (such as gasoline or lighter fluid), and then lighting it on fire in several different places. The house right next to Lewis’s burned house was to be demolished, so they got permission to use it for experiment. It was near-identical, and prosecutors filled it with the same kind of carpeting and furniture that had been in Lewis’s house. They lit a couch on fire (as though by accident), and did not use any lighter fluid. They wanted to show that fires without lighter fluid looked different than what they found in Lewis’s home.

    Instead, they found the same burn marks and puddle patterns that had been in Lewis’s house. It burned much faster than they expected. They thought wood fires could not burn as quickly or as hotly as liquid accelerant fires. It turned out that wood fires burned just as fast. The room grew hot enough that everything in the room caught on fire. Lentini and DeHaan realized they had helped the defense, and charges against Lewis were dropped. Lentini was horrified. He said, “I almost sent a man to die based on theories that were a load of crap.”

    In 2004, a scientist named Gerald Hurst received and began to study Willingham’s court documents. He was immediately reminded of the Lewis case. He characterized the signs used to detect arson as “old wives’ tales”, saying that investigators were looking at fires with a “flat-Earth approach”.

    Hurst debunked every one of the twenty indicators of arson that the prosecuting investigators had given. All of them were based on outdated science. All of the signs they said showed lighter fluid and intentional fire were actually caused by natural fires as well. Even the lighter fluid they found by the porch came from the family grill, and not from arson.

    With his execution date looming, Willingham was applied for clemency from the Board of Pardons and Paroles. Hurst hurriedly wrote a report and sent it out without proofreading so that it would reach the Board in time. They received it, but nonetheless voted unanimously to deny Willingham’s request. Not one of the fifteen members read the report.

    Cameron Todd Willingham was put to irreversible death on February 17th, 2004. In his last statement, he said “The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man convicted of a crime I did not commit.” But that was not to be the end of it.

    Since then, five separate fire experts were commissioned to review the case, and every one of them ruled it a natural, accidental fire. One of them, Craig Beylor, was prepared to testify in 2009 to a commission that might have ruled Willingham the first officially-recognized wrongly-executed innocent. At the last minute, Governor of Texas Rick Perry abruptly replaced three of the commission’s members. He derided the fire experts, calling them a waste of taxpayers’ money and “latter-day supposed experts”. The new commission refused to comment on the Willingham case.

    Counting Hurst, six independent fire experts have agreed that the science in the case was “characteristic of mystics or psychics”. There was no arson. And rather than supporting Cameron Todd Willingham after he lost his children in an accidental fire, his community condemned him as a sociopath and locked him away before putting him to death.

    Rick Perry recently proudly announced his support for capital punishment during a televised interview and was applauded by the audience. He said he never struggled with the thought that any of the 234 people executed under his governance might have been innocent. Ignorance parading as confidence.

    Justice Antonin Scalia argues that there never was a proven innocent who was executed, and that if there was, there would be no need to search, for the innocent’s name would be “shouted from the rooftops”. But as in Kitzmiller v. Dover, those in power can and do ignore scientific consensus. We could have had Willingham’s name shouted from the rooftops, but Governor Rick Perry suppressed it.

    In suppressing inquiry, he does injustice to the citizens of Texas. If the evidence argues Willingham is innocent, keeping the public ignorant does not make him guilty. It simply does disservice to his name and his family.

    As Eugene Gendlin writes,

    What is true is already so.

    Owning up to it doesn’t make it worse.
    Not being open about it doesn’t make it go away.
    And because it’s true, it is what is there to be interacted with.
    Anything untrue isn’t there to be lived.
    People can stand what is true,

    for they are already enduring it.

    We desire (and rightfully so!) to believe the truth about someone’s guilt or innocence. If Willingham is truly guilty, then that is what we want to believe. And if it turns out that he is an innocent wrongly executed, then that is what we want to believe, even if it makes us feel bad. We know it is injustice otherwise.

    I have very sharply abridged Cameron Todd Willingham’s case to communicate the crux of it, but I hope it strikes you to the core. I hope it stirs you enough to read this comprehensive article detailing the case, from its very beginning to it’s yet-unfinished present day. I hope it troubles you as the nightmare that it is. And I hope your confidence in the sanctity of capital punishment in the U.S. is shattered forever.

February 11, 2012

  • Michael Morton was freed last October, just around four months ago. He had served 25 years in jail for a crime he did not commit.

    Christine Morton was found dead in her home in 1986, after a neighbor saw the Morton’s young child alone in their yard. Michael Morton was convicted after prosecutors presented him as a cruel, cold man who killed his wife in her bed for refusing to have sex with him, and then calmly went about his job as a grocer. A bandana was found near the house with bloodstains on it, but prosecutors argued that the bandana could not be linked to the crime. The couple’s young son told Christine Morton’s mother that a “monster” had hit her, and that no one was home except “mommy and Eric”, but Eric’s testimony had not been used in the trial. Michael Morton was convicted even as he screamed to the court that he was innocent.

    But last year, after several years of appeals, the bandana was tested using DNA technology unavailable at the time, and it was found to contain Christine Morton’s blood, as well as the DNA of another man serving prison time for another murder. The newly-freed Michael Morton joked, “colors seem real bright to me now, and the women are real good looking.”

    Beneath his cheerful dignity, there lies a great tragedy in his story. Michael Morton was 32 years old when he entered prison, and now he is 57, white-haired, with a third of a man’s expected lifetime lost. “Colors seem real bright to me now.” That is, upon second glance, heartbreaking: “colors seem real bright”. Perhaps the most disturbing, motives are as easily manufactured as “he killed her because she refused to have sex with him.” How ridiculous is that! Right up there with “it was a sex game gone wrong”.

    His case teaches us that wrongful convictions do happen, that not everyone found guilty by trial is actually guilty. Robert Owen, a law professor, says “one lesson that defense lawyers should draw from it is that you should never stop demanding exculpatory evidence.”

    Michael Morton himself is grateful and happy to be exonerated. He jokes he is lucky it is not a capital case: the average time between conviction and execution was 15 years as of 2010, but in this case, it did take 25 years for the truth to come out. He has never held a cell phone, but now, he will try to reintegrate into daily life after 25 years removed from society. Now that he is free, he can try to rebuild something of a life in his older years. He can collect $2000000 in damages. While we cannot correct for the injustice we have done him, we can at least give him the money and time to try to rebuild.

    But suppose, for a moment, that there was a single point of departure 25 years ago. Suppose that the case had been a capital offense, and a government acted in a way that admits no correction. . . .