– In Mr. Skinner’s case it comes across as if the judicial system bent some rules in order to have him locked up. If the DNA tests were inconclusive what evidence did they have?
– In my opinion a blood and sweat stained jacket as well as a knife would serve as conclusive evidence if there was a DNA match, so why were no tests done?
– It seems as if though Mr. Skinner’s lawyer is not really morally ok with defending his client due to his unwillingness to fight for his requests.
– In my opinion Skinner’s want to have this evidence tested shows the possibility of him being innocent. If he knew he was guilty why would he wand additional proof to show his wrongdoing and possibly lead to capital punishment? He states “let the chips fall where they may” meaning let the truth reveal itself.
– Gregory Coleman, representing district attorney Switzer said this was an attack on the criminal proceeding however the Supreme Court decided to hear his case.
– The most simplistic thought that comes to mind when reading this is that Skinner is given a real unfair trial process just because there is evidence present that “should” be tested but for some reason is not. It’s never made clear as far as exact reasoning why the blood stained evidence is/was not tested.
– The author’s statement, “He is merely seeking the opportunity to test important pieces of evidence ignored by the prosecution” shows possible bias towards the defendant, Mr. Skinner. It’s coming across as if the author is making a case for Mr. Skinner to have his case looked at more in depth and “given a chance” in other words.
– The author especially shows bias towards Skinner in his last statement of his writing saying, “but he should not be punished for the maneuverings of his lawyer”.
– Overall the bias that is being presented by the author is almost taking away from his credibility because it makes the reader think twice about wanting to help or feel bad for the reader. Instead of using person opinions or stating ideas the author should present more facts to the reader and persuade them through convincing them that way.
– Skinner said that the blood on him came from examining the victims but if he was too drugged up to kill them, how was he in the right state of mind to examine and determine if they were alright? With that in mind why was he caught hiding in the closet with a weapon, and conscious? His story has too many contradictions for me to believe.
– Overall it makes sense to have the physical evidence tested for the court and prosecutions sake to end the case. They would more than likely find Skinner guilty and have conclusive evidence, and enough to give him the death penalty. This is why it does not make sense to me that Skinner wants these materials tested.
– I believe Skinner is guilty. There is too many details, and too much reasonable doubt playing against him.
Rickstarck21's Blog 