|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
MI: Man wrongly sent to prison for rape blames police
Submitted by:
Anonymous
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
... "Carter was almost 17 when he was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct against a 10-year-old girl. He was steadfast in declaring his innocence and refused sex offender therapy, which hurt his chances for an earlier parole. He was released from prison in 2008."
"Police in recent months learned that a man had coerced the girl and her mother to blame Carter for the 1991 assault because of an unpaid debt."
"'Grand Rapids Police Department — they are to blame, not me, not the victims,' Carter said. '... It was your job to figure out did I do it or not, but you didn’t do your job.'" ... |
| Comment by:
mickey
(6/29/2015)
|
Why is it so hard to report simply and accurately?
If he was "almost 17" when wrongly convicted, that means he was 16. Why can't you just say:
"Carter was 16 when he was convicted of first-degree criminal sexual conduct against a 10-year-old girl." |
| Comment by:
teebonicus
(6/29/2015)
|
This man is due 17 years' worth of grief and denied liberty, in the form of BEAUCOUP bucks.
I hope he sues and gets a multi-million dollar settlement. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| For, in principle, there is no difference between a law prohibiting the wearing of concealed arms, and a law forbidding the wearing such as are exposed; and if the former be unconstitutional, the latter must be so likewise. But it should not be forgotten, that it is not only a part of the right that is secured by the constitution; it is the right entire and complete, as it existed at the adoption of the constitution; and if any portion of that right be impaired, immaterial how small the part may be, and immaterial the order of time at which it be done, it is equally forbidden by the constitution. [Bliss vs. Commonwealth, 12 Ky. (2 Litt.) 90, at 92, and 93, 13 Am. Dec. 251 (1822) |
|
|
