*today https://t.co/5yVLWwde03 pic.twitter.com/p44V0DUVFM
— Dan Berger (@dnbrgr) September 24, 2024
Marcellus Williams
explained well here
You can read the final court decision here.
Williams was a violent, habitual criminal who had broken into other homes and businesses in the area where the murder/robbery occurred, he pawned the victim's laptop a day after the savage murder, and the victim's belongings were found in the trunk of his car.
An initial witness (H.C.) eventually came forward to police about Williams.
H.C. knew things that only the killer could know. H.C. knew the knife was jammed into F.G.'s neck, that the knife was twisted, and that the knife was left in F.G.'s neck when the murderer left the scene, details which were not public knowledge.
His report led them to interview the second witness (L.A.), Williams' girlfriend at the time who also provided details not publicly known.
She led police to where Williams pawned the computer taken from the residence of the murder scene, and that the person there identified Williams as the person who pawned it. L.A. also led police to items stolen in the burglary in the car Williams was driving at the time of the murder.
The man who purchased the laptop confirmed Williams sold it to him; and Williams, himself, admitted to pawning the laptop a day after the murder.
I oppose the death penalty, but there's no evidence supporting his actual innocence is this case.
despite all of this, people are claiming "no DNA evidence" exists.
go ahead an search is name, he's a perfect example of how the innocence project is now trying to let out guilty people for some reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This whole story makes my blood boil.
1. the The DNA evidence did not in any way shape or form exonerate him. it only proved investigators mishandled the DNA evidence.
2. they didn't need DNA evidence because they had a mountain of other evidence including
a) personal items in his possession he stole from her
b) testimony from two separate people including his girlfriend detailing how he confessed to them. These people knew details of the murder that were not public indicating they did not make it up.
3. Overturning jury verdicts is an extreme measure. The state AG was right to argue to enforce this verdict and absolute shame on the local prosecutor for trying to overturn the will of a jury.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
a lot of people just dont like the death sentence so they'll lawyer even real stuff into the ground
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's fine but sitting here and saying they killed an innocent man is a bold-faced lie.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context