Skinner Case

The death penalty is one of the most contested debates in America, with people deeply entrenched on either side. Modern technology such as DNA has caused a number of death row inmates to have verdicts reversed and to be found innocent. Additionally, the use of the death penalty statistically is more likely in certain types of crimes, namely violence to whites. As a society that upholds the death penalty as the proper and necessary reaction to truly violent and terrible crimes, it is imperative that we ensure it is only given to the worst of the worst and that it is applied without bias in these situations.

Hank Skinner, a Texan on death row for the violent murder of his girlfriend and her two sons, is an example of difficult it is to fairly apply the death penalty. Skinner believes that DNA evidence from the scene of the crime could at least prove the murder scenario created by police is not complete. However, DNA testing has never been done. The state of Texas refuses to allow Skinner to test the evidence, stating even with new information he still couldn’t prove his innocence. While the murders committed were truly horrific and tragic, it is unjust for the State of Texas to railroad Skinner into the execution chamber. Not only is this a potential killing of an innocent man, this refusal to examine evidence shows lack of respect for the victim by potentially allowing the true killer to walk free. He should not be released from prison unless there is evidence of his innocence; however this time from the stay of execution should be used to reexamine the case. Additionally, Texas has spent so much time and money fighting something they claim will not change the outcome of the case—wouldn’t it have been quicker and cheaper to allow the DNA testing?

This debate is framed by 2 visually identical websites: one for Skinner and one against him. I honestly don’t know what to think of either website. I am confused to the foreign contacts on the pro-Skinner site; it almost seems like it could be some sort of scam. On the other hand, the negative site relies on inflammatory and derogatory statements to make its case. I would not use either one as accurate information.

I think the media seems biased against the application of the death penalty in this case, hence the continued high level of media coverage. The articles all seem to focus on the gross injustices that have occurred in Texas: I would not say they are pro-Skinner, but they do seem to be highly skeptical of Texas prosecutors and government, making Texas seem like an almost blood hungry state. 

Hank Skinner

I do think injustice was averted by issuing a stay of execution in November.  No matter what decision was made during the trial, with today’s technology, the untested DNA evidence should be tested.  It would be ethically wrong to not test the evidence at this point.  First, the prosecution should have had a more moral agenda during the trial and should have pushed to test the DNA then.  Instead, it went along with the defense’s decision to ignore the evidence, just so they could be sure to convict Skinner.  While the case is closed and it might set a dangerous precedent to allow the evidence to be tested, it would be morally wrong to ignore evidence that could potentially prove a man innocent, and therefore save a life.  I don’t think that the evidence should be ignored any further and it would be unjust to execute Skinner without thoroughly examining all of the evidence and being sure he is a guilty man.

The dueling websites are interesting in my opinion.  I find it very interesting how fascinated the public can become with a case, and even end up mocking another side’s opinion.  While some people feel strongly about the death penalty and cases regarding it, I think these sites are extreme.  It doesn’t seem that the sites really have much factual evidence to support their claims and they only display the information that solely support their arguments.  They are incredibly biased and should not be used as a resource for people who want information about the case.  Ultimately these websites are great examples of how obsessed our society is with crime and trials.

Aside from the very biased dueling websites, I think that the media coverage of the case is ultimately to benefit the media companies and such, but the reports still seem to be supporting a just outcome.  The media latched on to the case because it involved Rick Perry during his campaign and a controversial case and issued about the death penalty; two things that attract the attention of the public.  By covering this case in depth, the media benefits, of course.  So one could say the media has an agenda to make money.  But it also seems that the media is pushing for the DNA testing, and therefore wants to find justice.

Hank Skinner case

After reading the news articles and the accompanying websites that go along with the Hank Skinner case, I believe that injustice was averted by the issuance of a stay last November.  In my opinion, it is up to the law enforcement who investigate the crime and the legal system that deals with the actual trial to fully analyze all evidence that can be provided, whether that evidence is believed to support the defense or not.  In the readings, a lot of Skinner biased reports say that the police did not thoroughly complete their investigation and in some areas, did not even investigate at all.  The DNA testing has been given a lot of criticism on both sides.  I believe this to be the focal point of where injustice was averted.  Had a stay not been issued, Skinner would have been executed without the legal system fully investigating all angles and evidence of the case.  Skinner himself said that he wants the DNA tested so that if he is innocent he can be set free and if he is proven guilty, he can be put to death.  This statement in itself is a whole other debate, but for this purpose it shows that all he wants is a fair and thorough trial.  I do not necessarily agree with Skinner's version of what happened, but I do believe that all evidence should be looked at and everything should be done to defend what little innocence a man may have.

The two contrasting websites regarding the Hank Skinner case were very confusing at first because of their appearance.  I think that the website arguing against Skinner wanted to make their looks like the other because it would show people how easy it is to make something look legitimate and that you must really pay attention to the kinds of things you are reading.  The first website is pro-Skinner and most of it is "Skinner's opinion" or "Skinner's story" or "Skinner claims...".  When I read through it, I felt like I was reading a very wordy and inconsistent story.  There were facts, but they were almost just thrown into the telling of Skinner's side of the case.  This differed greatly from the second website, which focused solely on the facts.  It continues to refute the claims made by Skinner and uses evidence from the actual case and proceedings to support its defense. The videos work against Skinner showing him in a deceitful light.  These two websites really show how much controversy is surrounding the case and how little twists in the story can effect how the case plays out.

The agenda of the media seems to be just like the legal system in this case: to figure out exactly what should be done from this point on.  Some articles try to pick apart the story (or should i say, stories) that Skinner tells and others stay with the facts of the case.  They lay out all the information that they have and still come to the same conclusion...what should be done?   Is it right to postpone the execution to test the DNA?  If so, what happens if the DNA helps prove that he is guilty?  This would open up a way for other criminals to avoid or lengthen their time spent on death row.  But if they do not test the DNA, they will never know with as much certainty as they can get whether or not he is innocent or not.  The media tries to open up the case to the public in a way that they can make up their own minds about what happened.  There are those who are biased on both sides, but they play a sort of tug-o-war game with each other.  The media is not one-sided in this case.

Hank Skinner Case

                In the case of Harry Skinner I believe that staying his execution was a firm way of averting injustice.  This may not be true in the utilitarian sense of justice, in which the man should have been punished in which to deter and show others that the actions of murdering three people, regardless of whether it was him who committed the actions or not, is wrong.  Instead I am referring to the retributive theory that states a person should be punished based on the actions and wrong doings they commit.  Based on this theory, if Hank Skinner can be confirmed guilty, he should be punished severely for his wrongdoings.  However it should be noted that all the facts have not yet been presented in determining his guilt, even if the courts have said he is guilty.  Based on testimony and evidence at the scene a case is made that DNA testing is very important in this case while determining guilt or innocence.  An injustice was averted by not executing the man before all the facts that could officially determine guilt or innocence were put into consideration.

                The two rivaling websites, in my opinion, only use the same facts and distort them to serve their own agenda.  The websites also emphasize parts of the stories that help their cause, and downplay the information that might refute their stance.  For instance, the Hank Skinner is guilty site tries to disregard the high levels of alcohol and codeine in Skinner’s system and instead chooses to say he came in and out of some lucid stupor, making it possible for him to have committed the crime.  The Hank Skinner is innocent site plays up information that says one of the victims was sexually molested prior to her murder, while the guilty site tries to downplay that information and asserts that there is evidence to even say the woman wasn’t molested at all.  Both sides have come into the case with strong bias’s that aren’t based on evidence in the case.  Because of this they both distort or misrepresent the true evidence and facts that are there and this can lead to serious confusion to what the truth of the matter may be.  This may distract those trying to find more information about the case from what the true facts and details are about the case and only hurt the cause that leads towards true justice.

                The news articles present a condensed version of the case and some of its key facts.  This may be important for an uninformed reader to make somewhat of an informed opinion on what happened and what should result from the trial, as well as getting an idea of what may be necessary to see true justice come out.  Not to say that the news articles themselves may not be biased, the information from the paper The Nation seems to be more sympathetic towards the cause that Skinner should be given a reprieve until the new DNA evidence is presented in the case.  In any case the news articles are very useful when it comes to informing the public of the current situation and help convince others what it may or may not take for true justice to come to light.

Hank Skinner in the Media

In the Hank Skinner murder case, the courts in Texas have denied Skinner the right to a DNA test based on their belief that he does not have enough reason to be given a DNA test. Skinner was at the scene of the crime when the murders of his girlfriend and her two mature sons happened, but he insisted that he had passed out from a mix of alcohol and pain medicine. There were several articles left at the scene of the crime with DNA of the assailant, yet the court would not let Skinner prove his innocence by providing his own DNA. The first set of articles make Skinner look like a victim to our justice system because of their denial to give him a fair trial.

Yet, some of the articles lead the reader to believe that Skinner is simply playing this loophole to his advantage. A few of the articles point out how guilty Skinner really is, and that he and his lawyer are using this DNA test as a means to prolong the court’s decision.  The most interesting piece of information that is used in the second group of articles is that they point out how Skinner and his lawyer did not ask for a DNA test in the first court trial. In my mind, if he knew he did not do it, and knew that there were articles that could prove his innocence through a DNA test, he would use it! Media does a great job of creating a scene that the writer wants the reader to believe even if it is not true. Readers need to see multiple perspectives, and make their own assumptions based on all of the readings. 

In my mind, postponing the execution date for Hank Skinner has not averted injustice. The injustice in this case has been stretched out over a longer period of time, creating an unimaginable amount of chaos in the justice system in Texas. The court is restricting Skinner’s freedom to prove his innocence, making the trial biased. Even if he truly is guilty, he still has the right and the freedom to a fair and complete trial. I really do not care about how this would change the precedent set in the justice system. The court should analyze every crime completely. I do think that Skinner is guilty, but by giving him the DNA test it allows for the decision to be unbiased.

Skinner Case

My thoughts on Hank Skinner’s trial are a bit confusing, even to me. At some moments, I feel like he is simply buying himself time by playing the system. Yet at other times, I feel like he truly may be innocent, and is simply seeking a fair trial. My opinions are greatly affected by what media coverage or website I am reading at the time. This goes to show the impact that the way a story is portrayed in the media can really affect the public’s opinion. It is frustrating that the simple usage of words can sway opinions, and that we are indeed so heavily affected by the media’s opinion, and not the facts. The “dueling” websites make it so hard to really determine the real facts. They have such opposing arguments with such different evidence that it leaves me wondering where the real truth is. Clearly, there is bias in the way both websites are written. The only equivalence is their aesthetic layout. When reading each website separately, I find myself leaning the way they want me to…because the writing is very persuasive. Then I read the opposing story and again, my opinion is swayed. Now I’m in a state of limbo. I find it very disheartening that both websites are only exaggerating the evidence that helps their case and suppressing all arguments that go against theirs. In the mean time, the truth is lost. Beyond just the skinner case, I think this is a prime example of how the media affects our opinion of law cases everyday. The public is at a big disadvantage because its almost as if, no matter what we do, we will never know the pure facts without any type of bias. We can read opposing articles all day, yet we are being lied to and manipulated by the beautiful English language. Beyond the opposing websites, is the rest of the media coverage. The coverage of the case is extremely bias in favor of Skinner’s innocence. All  three of the articles make is seem as if the state is the bad guy, refusing to let Skinner have a fair and complete trial. They make is sound like the fault of this case is in the Texas law, and that the state just wants to execute Skinner.  The media focuses on the fact that the lawmakers are denying Skinner’s requests and that they consistently side with Switzer. This bias is easily noticed until the last paragraph on article three where for the first time, the idea the Skinner is simply playing his cards to buy extra time surfaces. The fact that letting Skinner have access to DNA testing will set a negative precedent is finally brought up in the last few paragraphs of one article. The rest of the three articles mainly focus on his innocence and all his supporters that believe he is being denied a fair trial.

In the end, I would have to say that averting the execution was an act of injustice. After reading all of the articles and websites, I do believe Skinner is guilty and should have been executed. The reason I say this is due to the fact that he wants DNA testing to prove his guilt or innocence. A truly innocent man would have said that the testing will confirm his innocence. He doesn’t even truly believe he is innocent, so how should we as a jury believe that. His altered state of consciousness due to the drugs and alcohol make the situation a bit sketchy and make his recounts of the evening unreliable. And the other thing, why did he wait so long? How come his lawyer did not use the DNA testing in the very first trial. It is clear that the lawyer thought that was the best thing to do at the time. So why cause all this commotion now? To avoid an executing and buy time. Skinner’s life is already ruined. He has spent most of life in jail, and his name will be forever tainted…the fact that he is avoiding an executing by using the legal system against itself is just his way of getting a bit of satisfaction out of this situation. By averting the execution, injustice was done not only to the victims of the crime, but to all of the other criminals who were executed despite having access to evidence. Executions should all have the same implication, the same standards, and the same processing. The fact that Skinner avoided his, is unjust to all of the criminals previously executed without a second trial with more evidence. They were denied this right, and so the fact that he wasn’t is not fair. The injustice is also done to the opposing party. The lawyers who prosecuted Skinner did their job. They followed the law and provided the evidence needed. It is unjust to avoid the execution because it is almost like saying their case had no value. Delaying the execution is giving Skinner a second chance, and this is basically portraying that the jury’s decision was not sufficient. Skinner and his lawyer are playing the courts by using their own inconsistencies against themselves. Skinner has nothing else to lose, so why not just make the lawyers who prosecuted him suffer a little before he leaves this world.

Hank Skinner Case

The Hank Skinner case is an interesting one to say the least.  The stay of execution issued last November by the Texas Court of Criminal appeals is just the latest in a series of near death experiences by inmate Hank Skinner in which a court had to issue a last minute stay.  With Hank’s actual guilty in doubt, the issue of justice looms large over this case.  To be clear, had Hank been executed a grave injustice would have occurred, but that is not the only level of justice at stake here.  Judging from the news links on blackboard as well as my own brief research it seems like there are serious questions about the fairness of the trial, the procedural/investigatory work done by law enforcement, the efficacy of the criminal defense, as well as problems concerning the interpretation of a Texas DNA testing law.  Taking all of these issues in to consideration it seems that justice may be best served by a full blown retrial, but that may be impossible due to legal procedural code as well as logistical issues.  That being the case, the state of Texas can at the very least thoroughly test the DNA and take that into consideration.  I understand that Skinner has failed to offer substantiation for his innocence, and it may very well be that the DNA evidence condemns Skinner to the electric chair, but that does not nullify the state’s responsibility to investigate and pursue justice to the fullest extent possible. In sum, the injustice of killing a potentially innocent man was averted on November 7, 2011, but injustice will still contaminate this case until the state reviews the case and fully exhausts the evidence and testimony collected. 

            To me, the dueling websites are perplexing.  They are both poorly run and use the same elementary lay out leading me to believe that the same person or persons are behind both.  I think they are a manifestation of people’s tendency to polarize issues rather than take a rational calculated review of the facts at hand.  Whether or not Hank committed the triple murder, I think the state has failed in its duty to give citizens a fair trial.  It is hard for me to understand why they are so against testing and analyzing the DNA. 

            In the media that I saw, I did not notice a particular bias either for or against Skinner.  The Texas Tribune seemed to a slight slant against Skinner, but not enough to undermine their reporting nor was it enough to make the paper sound like it was out to get Skinner.  The national reporting was probably the least biased, but in this case the media seems to be concerned with the facts and progress of the case rather than trying to vilify or patronize a particular side.