Too Late for Luck: A Comparison of Post-Furman Exonerations and Executions of the Innocent

Abstract

This study is a quantitative analysis designed to compare two groups of factually innocent capital defendants: those who were exonerated and those who were executed. There are a total of 97 cases in the sample, including 81 exonerations and 16 executions. The primary objective of the authors is to identify factors that may predict case outcomes among capital defendants with strong claims of factual innocence. Through the use of a logistic regression model, the following variables were significant predictors of case outcome (exoneration vs. execution): allegations of perjury, multiple types of evidence, prior felony record, type of attorney at trial, and race of the defendant. These results point toward significant problems with the administration of capital punishment deriving primarily from the quality of the case record created at trial.

Race, Wrongful Conviction & Exoneration

“…The literature that does exist has been produced primarily by legal scholars, including Gross, and focuses almost exclusively on the role that various flaws in the legal system play in wrongful conviction (Gross 2008;Harmon and Lofquist 2005). Harmon and Lofquist (2005) compare exonerations and executions and find that the same factors that produce wrongful convictions are present in executions including faulty eyewitness testimony, perjury, and the presence of a prior felony conviction. As with our study, the analysis is based on a relatively small sample size that is constrained by the size of the population of exonerees.…”

Justice, Juries, and Convictions: The Relevance of Race in Jury Verdicts

“…Measuring the weight of the evidence can be rather subjective, however; having more witnesses or exhibits during a trial does not necessarily imply that the quality of the evidence is strong. Harmon and Lofquist (2005) posit that the use of multiple types of evidence by the prosecutor increases the likelihood of conviction, as jurors may be persuaded by quantity instead of quality. To measure this variable, two variables were utilized; the first was a ratio variable that gauged the quantity of evidence at trial -the number of prosecution witnesses and exhibits during the trial.…”

Taking Stock of Innocence

“…They have occurred during the colonial period (e.g., the Salem witch trials; Huff, Rattner, & Sagarin, 1996) and early statehood (Center on Wrongful Convictions, 2016). They have been chronicled in numerous more recent accounts (Harmon & Lofquist, 2005; Leo, 2005; Leo & Gould, 2009).…”

“…They have occurred during the colonial period (e.g., the Salem witch trials; Huff, Rattner, & Sagarin, 1996) and early statehood (Center on Wrongful Convictions, 2016). They have been chronicled in numerous more recent accounts (Harmon & Lofquist, 2005;Leo, 2005;Leo & Gould, 2009). Survey respondents have speculated that anywhere between 0% and 20% of criminal convictions ensnare innocents, with criminal justice officials (police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges) generally offering estimates that range, on average, between 0.5% and 3% (Ramsey & Frank, 2007;Smith, Zalman, & Kiger, 2011;Zalman, Smith, & Kiger, 2008).…”