Robert Miller Crime Essay

1097 Words3 Pages

In today’s society, it seems criminality runs rampant. The sheer number of people who become incarcerated each year is staggering, and growing. Aside from the outrageous costs for housing these offenders, it becomes increasingly difficult to decipher the true nature of the crime committed and whether or not the suspect in question is the culprit. This concept begs the question, are all of the people currently incarcerated actually guilty of the crimes they allegedly committed? This idea serves as the foundation for the structure of the book Actual Innocence, where it is found that people frequently become wrongly convicted of heinous crimes on the basis of illegitimate confession, white coat fraud, prosecutorial misconduct, snitch evidence …show more content…

At the time, the case began with his confession, where Miller relayed to police that he had a psychic connection to the person who had committed the crimes. Upon hearing this information, police subjected him to twelve hours of interviewing where Miller gave an inconsistent recount of the crimes he had witnessed through his “visions”. Shortly thereafter, it was quickly concluded that Miller was guilty of all the crimes despite the fact that his mind was most likely altered from overindulgence on drugs and his psychic visions cannot be counted as concrete evidence. It wasn’t until later in 1991-1993 that DNA testing proved that Miller was definitely not the rapist, as his DNA was not a match with the fluids consistent at the scene. This however, did not guarantee his immediate release from prison, because he did not become free until …show more content…

A woman in the Oklahoma jail nearby claimed to have eavesdropped on a conversation pertaining to the case. In this conversation it was speculated that both Williamson and Fritz had admitted to committing the heinous crimes and were promptly sentenced to death (Williamson) and a life sentence (Fritz). This type of snitch evidence accounts for 21% of the innocent project cases where no legitimate DNA evidence is founded. The only proof used in the case against these men was their hair, each being fairly “consistent” with the hair found at the scene of the crime. Updated testing for DNA later on had shown that none of the hairs found at the scene of the crime bore any resemblance to either Robert Williamson or Dennis Fritz dubbing the previously approved match a 100% error

Open Document