---

---

Throughout history, there have been cases where people were falsely accused of a crime and even ended up getting sentenced for years, only for new evidence to re-emerge which causes the whole case to be re examined and freeing the right person after years of torture in prison, possible rape etc.

---

---

A popular example is that of a former Kirk Bloodsworth, a former marine personnel who was falsely accused of murder and rape and if not for DNA upgrades, would have died in prison for a crime he didn't commit.
Imagine, dying for a crime you didn't even commit. Now we cannot blame the law court for such a verdict, but what about cases where the constituted authority actually neglected lack of evidence either way?

---

---

Exhibit one

---

---

Pardon the pun in the subtopic, there is a story of a man named Robert Dewey who was also accused of a crime he claimed he didn't commit, of course most guilty people prefer to plead innocence, but what made his case different was most of the results conducted pointed towards his innocence and rather than setting him free, the prosecutors were insistent that he committed the crime and got him imprisoned. It took a whooping seventeen years before his innocence was totally established for a crime he didn't commit.

---

---

So many arguments have traversed back and forth as to why the case was even built with circumstantial evidence, some believe the actual perpetrator of crime was well connected and paid a lot of people off, some believed that the lady who was thought to be raped was never raped and a host of other theories.

---

---

Back then when ladies involved in science were considered as witches and burnt at the stake, everyone thought it right, years later, some of them have been cleared of the false charge, but does that bring back the dead?
Those who have lost their lives, homes, identities as well as other things due to false verdicts, does the truth bring back the dead?

---

---

Just recently, a young man was shot dead by the police arm known as the Swift Action Response Squad (SARS), on the "suspicion" of being a cultist. The only proof they had was a gun they claimed they found on him and he was pronunced guilty and killed based on assumptions. They never asked the right questions like

• Does he have a concealed permit
• Who are his accomplices
• Who does he work for

---

---

This is simply barbaric and some even claimed the gun story to be a hoax and that piece of evidence (gun) was planted on the deceased.
In a saner clime, everyone is believed to be innocent until proven guilty and the more we are trying to ignore, facts, stats and evidence, the more problems we face.

---

---

Exhibit 2

---

---

Do you know most convictions for innocent people were done under duress. I believe most countries now invalidate confessions obtained under duress.
Sadly, in most police cases in some countries, evidence are not cross checked for the condition under which the "said" proof was acquired.

---

---

How do you expect a man who has never endured torture before not to squeal under torture, even to a crime he didn't commit, yet some authorities pay no heed to such. They'll rather slap a guilty verdict and retreat into a cloud of smoke.
So when an innocent man hangs and he is later found to be innocent, what is the purpose of the innocent verdict I ask?

---

---

You can follow me on twitter by clicking the icon

---

---

Thanks to @camzy/ @samstickkz and @elyaque for the animated art and badge

Support @curie, @ausbitbank, @teamsteem, @xeldal, @steemgigs for witness

You can help me boost my curation activities by following my curation trail on steemauto.com ( @ehiboss)

Images from pixabay

Article was referenced from youtube

---

---