Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Wrongful Conviction of David Thorne


redshoes

Recommended Posts

This is not a high profile case, but I would be QUITE interested in hearing other people's thoughts. I've written a blog on the case. I am not sure I am allowed to post the link here so please (moderators) delete this if it is not allowable. https://spottedcouchartcrimeblog.com/2014/11/05/house-of-mirrors-and-hidden-truths-the-wrongful-conviction-of-david-thorne-2/. The intention is not to advertise (although it is my blog so it could be viewed as such). The piece does give a fairly extensive overview of the case (including extensive links), however, if it is construed as advertising "my wares", please feel free to delete.

The case is a disturbing one. It’s a textbook example of sloppy crime scene processing, tunnel vision, police corruption, unreliable and contradictory witnesses, suppressed evidence, unqualified experts and an incompetent defense. In fact, forensic scientist and criminal profiler, Brent E. Turvey, M.S. uses it to teach investigators and lawyers how NOT to handle a murder case.

Here is the official site on David's case: http://www.wcodt.org/index.html

The only evidence in play was the coerced confession of a mentally challenged “hit man” who could not give any facts of the murder and gave contradictory statements during his interviews. In fact, none of the physical (blood) evidence supports the confession. I am confounded that someone can actually be convicted based on a confession with no corroborating evidence (although Ryan Ferguson was also convicted on a false confession so there you go).

I don't want to say more at this point but I am very interested in hearing other people's thoughts after they have reviewed the material. 

 

Edited by redshoes
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, redshoes said:

I thought this was a place where people were engaged? Or not. 

Some of us do sleep. . .and work. . .and have that rare thing. . .oh what's it called?  lives?   Still a confession that doesn't match the crime is basically a false confession.   And should be thrown out.  

 

Yeah I killed her. . .skinned her alive with my pocket knife  I did. . .wait. . .what's that. .. the victim is male?  crap. . .okay. . .let's start over. . .

Edited by timewarrior
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, redshoes said:

This is not a high profile case, but I would be QUITE interested in hearing other people's thoughts. I've written a blog on the case. I am not sure I am allowed to post the link here so please (moderators) delete this if it is not allowable. https://spottedcouchartcrimeblog.com/2014/11/05/house-of-mirrors-and-hidden-truths-the-wrongful-conviction-of-david-thorne-2/. The intention is not to advertise (although it is my blog so it could be viewed as such). The piece does give a fairly extensive overview of the case (including extensive links), however, if it is construed as advertising "my wares", please feel free to delete.

The case is a disturbing one. It’s a textbook example of sloppy crime scene processing, tunnel vision, police corruption, unreliable and contradictory witnesses, suppressed evidence, unqualified experts and an incompetent defense. In fact, forensic scientist and criminal profiler, Brent E. Turvey, M.S. uses it to teach investigators and lawyers how NOT to handle a murder case.

Here is the official site on David's case: http://www.wcodt.org/index.html

The only evidence in play was the coerced confession of a mentally challenged “hit man” who could not give any facts of the murder and gave contradictory statements during his interviews. In fact, none of the physical (blood) evidence supports the confession. I am confounded that someone can actually be convicted based on a confession with no corroborating evidence (although Ryan Ferguson was also convicted on a false confession so there you go).

I don't want to say more at this point but I am very interested in hearing other people's thoughts after they have reviewed the material. 

 

Wow ... just wow.

I just shake my head at this awful story and wonder who else is in jail on wrongful convictions?  A suspect has an airtight alibi so investigators change the theory to fit the suspect (murder for hire) ... then coerce a confession, stage a murder weapon, but Thorne is the one in jail?  You're right, this is very much like the Peterson case.  Obviously not the specifics, but the general theme (e.g., incompetent defense, suppressed evidence, unqualified experts).

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank God dude isnt on death row. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Thank God dude isnt on death row. 

No doubt.  Has anyone heard of a case where someone on death row was released because of a wrongful conviction?  Probably, I just don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aftermath said:

No doubt.  Has anyone heard of a case where someone on death row was released because of a wrongful conviction?  Probably, I just don't know.

Ironically I just posted somewhere on here about this yesterday. I was pro death penalty until I wrote a paper about it in college and absolutely people on death row are released . Check this list out its kinda nuts :

The Innocence List  

For Inclusion on DPIC's Innocence List:
 

Defendants must have been convicted, sentenced to death and subsequently either-
 
a. Been acquitted of all charges related to the crime that placed them on death row, or

b. Had all charges related to the crime that placed them on death row dismissed by the prosecution or the courts, or

c. Been granted a complete pardon based on evidence of innocence.

 

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Ironically I just posted somewhere on here about this yesterday. I was pro death penalty until I wrote a paper about it in college and absolutely people on death row are released . Check this list out its kinda nuts :

The Innocence List  

For Inclusion on DPIC's Innocence List:
 

Defendants must have been convicted, sentenced to death and subsequently either-
 
a. Been acquitted of all charges related to the crime that placed them on death row, or

b. Had all charges related to the crime that placed them on death row dismissed by the prosecution or the courts, or

c. Been granted a complete pardon based on evidence of innocence.

 

That's fascinating!  Thanks for posting it.  I copied the info to a spreadsheet and doing pivot tables to analyze the data.

Approximately 65% (102) had the charges outright dismissed.  The average number of years between being sentenced to death and exoneration: 11.3 years - wow!!  Predominately black males, not surprising (racial bias) ... mostly in Florida and Illinois.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Aftermath said:

That's fascinating!  Thanks for posting it.  I copied the info to a spreadsheet and doing pivot tables to analyze the data.

Approximately 65% (102) had the charges outright dismissed.  The average number of years between being sentenced to death and exoneration: 11.3 years - wow!!  Predominately black males, not surprising (racial bias) ... mostly in Florida and Illinois.

Man can you imagine spending 11 years waiting to die for something you didnt do? Absolutely terrifying. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Man can you imagine spending 11 years waiting to die for something you didnt do? Absolutely terrifying. 

I couldn't even begin to image that.  What about people not on death row?  In jail, innocent, going through who knows what ... some may not have made it (ya know).  Geez!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it's one thing to say the trial was a sham and their are a hundred holes in the prosecution's case.  But at the same time, if it wasn't him, then who was it?

The most troubling thing about this case is the behavior of the grandfather.  Why did he throw Thorne under the bus by demanding immunity?.  That cast the shadow upon Thorne.  I'd be looking at the grandfather a little more closely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, regi said:

I finally came across a site (linked below) where the trial transcripts are available to download.

(I'm just now starting to read through the court docs. and so far, it's appearing to me that both of these men are guilty.)

http://mamaphoenixherself.wixsite.com/justicedavidthorne/trial-transcripts

To the bolded, and not that you are wrong but merely curious, may I ask what has lead you to this conclusion?  Is there certain testimony or evidence?

I have just started researching this case and know little about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 8:44 AM, timewarrior said:

Some of us do sleep. . .and work. . .and have that rare thing. . .oh what's it called?  lives?   Still a confession that doesn't match the crime is basically a false confession.   And should be thrown out.  

 

Yeah I killed her. . .skinned her alive with my pocket knife  I did. . .wait. . .what's that. .. the victim is male?  crap. . .okay. . .let's start over. . .

Yeah, sorry, my comment was a bit rude in hindsight. I do also work and sleep! This case has just bothered me for quite a few years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 2:18 PM, regi said:

I finally came across a site (linked below) where the trial transcripts are available to download.

(I'm just now starting to read through the court docs. and so far, it's appearing to me that both of these men are guilty.)

http://mamaphoenixherself.wixsite.com/justicedavidthorne/trial-transcripts

You've got to be kidding??? David Thorne has an alibi. The only "evidence" that convicted him was the confession of someone who said that he was hired for $300 to do the deed -- yet none of that guy's testimony corroborates with any of the physical evidence -- in fact, much of his testimony contradicts it. There is also no physical evidence that ties the supposed "confessor" to the crimes. IMO, you're nuts.

Edited by redshoes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 11:21 AM, Aftermath said:

No doubt.  Has anyone heard of a case where someone on death row was released because of a wrongful conviction?  Probably, I just don't know.

I believe Arkansas has released at least 8 people who were on death row?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Aftermath said:

To the bolded, and not that you are wrong but merely curious, may I ask what has lead you to this conclusion?  Is there certain testimony or evidence?

I have just started researching this case and know little about it.

I will be VERY interested in your thoughts as you research, Aftermath. You are very thorough and logical. Looking forward to more comments/analysis.

Edited by redshoes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 11:01 AM, Aftermath said:

Wow ... just wow.

I just shake my head at this awful story and wonder who else is in jail on wrongful convictions?  A suspect has an airtight alibi so investigators change the theory to fit the suspect (murder for hire) ... then coerce a confession, stage a murder weapon, but Thorne is the one in jail?  You're right, this is very much like the Peterson case.  Obviously not the specifics, but the general theme (e.g., incompetent defense, suppressed evidence, unqualified experts).

 

Aftermath, this is what I find so disturbing about this case. Investigators create a narrative and then figure out how to make it come to life. Most disturbing? I believe a police officer may have been involved in the murder and the pursuit of David was based on a very conscious intention to cover that up. 

Edited by redshoes
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 11:46 AM, Farmer77 said:

Man can you imagine spending 11 years waiting to die for something you didnt do? Absolutely terrifying. 

Yeah, it's a ##$T%%#@@ travesty.

Here is an interesting thought about people who are wrongfully convicted. We always hear the song and dance about a supposed perpetrator showing no signs of remorse. How can someone who is innocent show remorse for a crime they never committed? They cannot. Secondly, people who are adamant about their innocence never (rightfully) take a plea deal (although innocent people do take plea deals, sadly). My point here is that once you are convicted, it is nearly impossible (or it takes a ridiculous number of years) to become unconvicted. Wrongful convictions are more common than the average person is willing to accept and they are a cancer on society. 

Edited by redshoes
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Robemcdo said:

I guess it's one thing to say the trial was a sham and their are a hundred holes in the prosecution's case.  But at the same time, if it wasn't him, then who was it?

The most troubling thing about this case is the behavior of the grandfather.  Why did he throw Thorne under the bus by demanding immunity?.  That cast the shadow upon Thorne.  I'd be looking at the grandfather a little more closely.

I suspect the grandfather was trying to help David, not throw him under the bus. I believe a cop murdered her. One she was close to. She had a number of relationships (mostly sexually with police officers). Again, look at the evidence and witness testimony. Very telling. There is a cover up (within the police department).

Edited by redshoes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, redshoes said:

Yeah, sorry, my comment was a bit rude in hindsight. I do also work and sleep! This case has just bothered me for quite a few years. 

Rule #6: Never apologize — Its a sign of weakness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, redshoes said:

You've got to be kidding??? David Thorne has an alibi. The only "evidence" that convicted him was the confession of someone who said that he was hired for $300 to do the deed -- yet none of that guy's testimony corroborates with any of the physical evidence -- in fact, much of his testimony contradicts it. There is also no physical evidence that ties the supposed "confessor" to the crimes. IMO, you're nuts.

regi tends to believe everyone is guilty.  I myself am also guilty. . .guilty of being hot as fu-----(What's that?  Irrelevant you say?  Not on topic. . .?   Antagonistic?   Possible suspension?). . .never mind. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 3:18 PM, regi said:

I finally came across a site (linked below) where the trial transcripts are available to download.

(I'm just now starting to read through the court docs. and so far, it's appearing to me that both of these men are guilty.)

http://mamaphoenixherself.wixsite.com/justicedavidthorne/trial-transcripts

11 hours ago, redshoes said:

You've got to be kidding??? David Thorne has an alibi. The only "evidence" that convicted him was the confession of someone who said that he was hired for $300 to do the deed -- yet none of that guy's testimony corroborates with any of the physical evidence -- in fact, much of his testimony contradicts it. There is also no physical evidence that ties the supposed "confessor" to the crimes. IMO, you're nuts.

I agree.  Joe Wilkes is purported to have been hired by David for $300 to kill Yvonne.  $100 before and $200 at the funeral ...  however, testimony from Jody Johnston (BankOne Employee) uncovered that no $300 withdraw ever took place from David's account.

All of Joe's confession and testimony contradict the physical evidence.  Yvonne's vocal cords were severed, but Joe says that after he sliced her neck Yvonne asked him "Why?".  Yvonne had a 8-inch gash in her neck and so deep that the knife made a mark on her spinal cord, blood was everywhere (see the crime scene photos) ... but there was no blood on the couch and adjacent wall where Joe said he did it and no blood on the clothes he was wearing.  Lastly, Joe didn't fit the description of the man a neighbor saw leave the residence that morning after the murder (more on that later).

Edited by Aftermath
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, redshoes said:

I suspect the grandfather was trying to help David, not throw him under the bus. I believe a cop murdered her. One she was close to. She had a number of relationships (mostly sexually with police officers). Again, look at the evidence and witness testimony. Very telling. There is a cover up (within the police department).

First off, redshoes, love the blog!

Second, I agree, the grandfather was merely protecting his grandson.

Third, I also agree that it was a cop.  George Hale, the neighbor who saw a man leave Yvonne's residence that morning was identified as an Alliance police officer in a line up.

Although your idea of a cover-up is compelling, I think I would need more evidence to convince me 100% ...  I'm almost there, just need a shove either way.  I just think the detectives were so inept in their investigation and trying to pin the murder on David that they didn't have to cover-up for one of their own ... ya know?

Edited by Aftermath
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, timewarrior said:

regi tends to believe everyone is guilty.  I myself am also guilty. . .guilty of being hot as fu-----(What's that?  Irrelevant you say?  Not on topic. . .?   Antagonistic?   Possible suspension?). . .never mind. . .

Well if speaking in generalities was a crime, yeah, I'd say you're guilty as... what you said. :lol:

Edit: Here's a generality: Regi doesn't jump on bandwagons.

Edited by regi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.