Dear FRONTLINE,

Having seen all four cases, I can only say that I am appalled and incensed. We MUST take some of the power out of the hands of people in law enforcement by enacting laws that will not allow these persons to make the decisions in these cases.

We should have a constitutional right to have DNA tests performed if we have been convicted of a crime--and a negative result should definitely result in a new trial or outright release. Prisoners should still have rights. The Washington case was especially frustrating. I could not believe that he had to say that he would not sue them before they would even grant the test to be done. This is WRONG. I am white, so this is not a black/white thing. It's a right/wrong thing. It is very tempting at times to lose faith in this country. But i still say, "God Bless America."

janie holt
mobile, al

Dear FRONTLINE,

While watching this show, I felt nausea and fear upon listening to these officials who represent the people in court.

I understand that the courts need to limit the number of appeals, but if the defense is willing to pay for DNA testing, then I don't see how an appeal on the basis of clearly exonerating evidence is a poor use of our resources. The body politic is weakened by refusals to do justice.

It is time the culture of our legal system changed from being a high-stakes game to be won by adversaries in the courtroom, and instead returned to the classical definition of justice: "rendering to a man what is his due."

What I would like to know is how can average citizens such as myself can make a difference? Are these issues to be tackled at the state level or at the federal level? How? Which organizations are working to improve our system?

Our country was founded by "we the people in order to form a more perfect union." Perfection requires continual work.

Beth Bernatowicz
Charlottesville, Virginia

Dear FRONTLINE,

I am a 15 year old high school student, and tonight i acutally spent a night home, watching Frontline. This story made me feel so unsafe. I have been raised to belive that you are innocent until proven guilty, and that our system of Government is superb. I want to know that if i am wrongly convicted of a crime, that the government will do whatever possible to see that the right person is paying the price.

Since i brought up the subject of price, I think one of the the main reasons that the prosecuters do not want to seek out DNA evidence is due to the price. The price of appeals, paying the judges, the lawyers and doing the nessasary paperwork, but what about the price of keeping a innocent man in jail.which definately adds up throughout the years I am not a direct tax payer, but if i were i would gladly pay taxes knowing that my money was being used to keep murders, and rapests in jail, but since when has the government decided to be prudent with money? The excuese that these tests cost too much is not good enough for me.

When i saw this story, i kept thinking about what if the convicted person was me, it could be anyone, it could be you, your mother, your fater, brother, cousin. In school i am taught to be proud of my system of government. Tonight i was ashamed.I would like to thank those tireless defense attorneys who so persestently surch for true justice.

And i would like to say to those DA's and Judges, that i am disgusted. If it were you in the position of these people i am sure you would want the new evidence made aparent in a new tiral. Every day you hold people's lives in the palm of your hand, you have the choice to justly do the right thing, or protect the government's precious money, and your reputation. To those people in Jail now serving time for something they didn't do, with evidence to prove it, and no one to listen, i am sorry.

Because of this i have choosen to become a lawyer, I am a young person who instead of complaing like adults am going to do someting about this, if i don't who will?

Ashley Riehm
Perrysburg, Ohio

Dear FRONTLINE,

I am outraged ....

many of your program subjects have touched a nerve or at least invoked comment in the past ... this evenings offering was one of the most thought provoking pieces Iíve ever seen.

It aroused such emotion in me, that i found it difficult to watch the ending.

This blatant miscarriage of justice, perpetuated to protect the incompetent and unlawful acts of people who themselves should take the place of those theyíve put away ..... is an indictment of our entire criminal system.

I find it inconceivable that such attitudes and opinions actually exist within the halls of what we used to consider "the justice system."

My eyes have been opened to what our minorities have been telling us for years ... our system of criminal law and justice is corrupt ... filled with corrupt people filling their pockets with public money through subterfuge and privilege.

William Hulse
Richardson, Texas

Dear FRONTLINE,

I am a lawyer who saw a presentation by Mr. Neufeld in my Evidence class at Harvard Law School and I was profoundly disappointed with the imbalanced nature of your reporting on this issue.

Particularly troubling is the strong desire to retest contaminated DNA in the Virginia case in the hope of creating a public relations victory for the anti-death penalty movement. It seems that Mr. Scheck who is co-founder of the Innocence Project with Mr. Neufeld profoundly distrusted contaminated DNA evidence back in 1995, claiming to the Simpson jury that the DNA evidence was useless and doing his best to make them believe that there was a great likelihood of false positives. But in this situation, with nothing to lose, the contamination doesn't matter.

Mr. Scheck's and all criminal defense attorneys respond to this, of course, by saying that DNA may only exclude, but cannot conclusively include or prove a suspect's guilt. If the DNA matches, then its unreliable, tainted, the chain of custody wasn't reliable or the lab testing is run by the state and cannot be trusted. Defense attorneys will also argue that such evidence should not get to the jury for all of the above reasons and any others they can think of. If the DNA does not match, then the suspect MUST be innocent, EVEN if there exist other explanations for his DNA not being present.

It is remarkable to see criminal defense attorneys suddenly become so terribly interested in "justice" and "factual innocence" when "factual guilt" has no meaning for them whatsoever. I would urge viewers to do follow-up research to find out how often these same defense attorneys attempt to suppress DNA evidence that is unfavorable to them even though they will claim that any DNA evidence supporting them is, BY ITSELF, conclusive proof of innocence regardless of whether other explanations for the lack of a positive result exist.

Mike Lewis
Durham, NC
mwlulu@aol.com

Mike Lewis
Durham, NC

Dear FRONTLINE,

Once again, Ofra Bikel has presented a superbly researched--and extremely troubling--portrait of our criminal justice system.

In a mad rush to get tough on crime, American politicians and judges have turned a blind eye toward justice. With the eager cooperation of a majority of the Supreme Court, Congress has drastically curtailed federal review of state criminal convictions. Such "reforms" we are told, are necessary to prevent criminals from "manipulating" the system by filing "frivolous" appeals.

But as your program points out, this approach is costly: we have created a system that tolerates appalling miscarriages of justice. Unfortunately, there are quite a few jurors in the United States who share Judge Sharon Keller's shocking disregard for the plight of the wrongfully convicted.

By exposing her backward worldview to the light of day, Frontline has provided an invaluable public service. If we are ever going to fix the mess we have created, people need to know about Roy Criner, Earl Washington and others like them.

Justin Sizemore
Charlottesville, Virginia

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a lawyer in Washington state, I don't have to be a defense attorney or prosecutor to hear the horror stories. This program simply reinforced what I already knew about the justice system in this country: You are guilty until proven innocent. This is not a random thing or an isolated incident! There are innocent people all around this country serving time for crimes they did not commit! The saddest part for me is the fact that no one seems to care.

I've been urging my law school to come up with a program like the Innocence Project at Cardoza to help our community and society right the wrongs done to citizens of our country in the name of justice. It hasn't happened yet. And what about the people who were convicted of crimes they did not commit who cannot be exonerated through DNA evidence? Don't they also deserve a chance at the truth?

This issue is so near and dear to my heart because of a man I learned of in Washington state who was wrongly convicted of murder and has been incarcerated for 6 years. He is serving a 33 year sentence in the state penitentiary. This conviction was based largely on jailhouse informants' perjured testimonies. What most people in this area don't know is that he is one of two men that have been convicted for the same murder! I'm sure he is not the only innocent person in Washington state doing time.

How can people sleep at night knowing that innocent lives are being ruined? If people are wrongly convicted and they happen to be poor, there is no-one who will fight on their behalf. What we must do is stop talking about what a shame this is and start doing something to change it! If one person is wrongly convicted of a crime in this country, even that is too many!

Mary Gistarb
Seattle, WA

Dear FRONTLINE,

This is one of several documentaries I have seen bringing unbelievable situations to light within the justice system. You're doing excellent work in this area--with the program on DNA cases, and the one on the too-hard-to-comprehend severity of drug sentencing. I sent several e-mails after that program. But what I really feel is missing is some resource for viewers to follow up. What's the address/phone number/e-mail of the Governor of Texas? Is he the best person to contact for the release of Roy Criner? What else can we do? What can be done to get rid of insensitive/corrupt prosecutors and judges? Surely the people keeping Roy Criner in jail have taken leave of their senses. Please start providing suggestions and resources to allow follow-up after these excellent programs. Many thanks.

Paul Williams
Pasadena, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I watched your program "The case for innocence" last night, and I'm filled with troubling questions about Roy Criner. I went to high school in Pasadena with Deanna Ogg, and remember her well.

The assertion by the Criminal Appeals Court Judge that Deanna was promiscuous is absolutely absurd--while I didn't socialize much with Deanna, I knew her well enough to say that she didn't sleep around. A girl who did would have had enough of a reputation to gain notice--Pasadena was a somewhat puritanical place back then.

But for Judge Keller to use this baseless characterization of Deanna as a slut as a means to deny Roy Criner justice stands the world on its head. Not only was Deanna brutally murdered, and her boyfriend wrongfully imprisoned, but now her name is coldly slandered by the only people who are empowered to enact a remedy. I might add that every one of the judges on Texas Court of Criminal Appeals are popularly elected politicians--which may explain the craven cowardice and intellectual dishonesty we all saw in the interview.

Deanna moved away in 85 or 86, and we were all stunned to hear of her murder. I don't know if Roy Criner did the crime, but what I heard last night is enough to make me think the man who did rape and murder my classmate might still be free while an innocent man is imprisoned. "The Case for Innocence" isn't just about the wrongfully accused and convicted; it's about ensuring that we are catching wrongdoers and punishing them, for the sake of both society and for the victims of crime.

Jay Maguire
washington, DC

Dear FRONTLINE,

Dear Frontline,

Your program, "The Case for Innocence" was eye-opening, compelling and superbly done. Although I have never been one to champion the causes of people claiming wrongful conviction, I have to say that your program has made me think twice and reconsider my own ideas.

I am a journalist myself, so I have read and written about many criminal cases, usually with skepticism toward the convicted party. However, I now also have a healthy skepticism about our system of prosecution. I am also currently a law student and was seriously considering becomming a criminal prosecutor. Once again, this program has given me plenty of food for thought.

I watch Frontline often and am a longtime supporter of public television. This program is an example of the fine programming that is unmatched on the networks and cable and keeps me coming back for more. Keep up the good work.

Sandy L.

Sandy Lovell
Elizabeth, NJ

Dear FRONTLINE,

This is the first Frontline program that I have been disappointed about. Honest debate doesn't take a premise and find arguments to support one's view.

I find it disturbing that we categorize individuals and assign validity to their views instanteously. People are not as uni-dimensional as that. I echo the concern to provide analysis concerning those who were found "not guilty" but DNA pointed an accusitory finger...

We seem as a society to engage in hyperbole without justification. Throughout the postings we want to condemn those whose views we don't agree with. We need to objectively analyze all points of view.

I was disappointed after seeing the cases used for the program. I was expecting the most egregious examples to be portrayed. If these were those cases, then where is the beef. While I may not agree with the assessment of the prosecution, we must admit that just like the defense they must be allowed to change the arguments to fit the facts. Be wary of those on either side who have an agenda. Either side is not interested in the truth but supporting their view of the world.

Now for a callous comment, we as a society have to realize that the world has limited resources. All the interest of the society vie for these resources. It is much more cost effective not to find and prosecute law breakers. We must also recognize that we will never have perfect knowledge...

No system will ever be perfect and we must recognize and accept that fact. We are comforted in the fact that we according to our birth may not ever be confronted with the inequities of the justice system.

Why do we never discuss the legal distinction that a defense attorney must to the best of his/her ability defend sometimes guilty people. We don't seem to care that guilty people are found not guilty.

Trying to insinuate that only one part of the justice system is dishonest belays the larger issue. We have to get past the issue of a game for intellectuals and back to a search for truth that affects the lives of "humans".

gary robertson
tucson, az

Dear FRONTLINE,

I watched in absolute horror the segement tonight entitled "Innocence Lost." Tears welled up in my eyes as the Roy Criner story unfolded before my very eyes.

I was shocked and appalled while viewing the "results-oriented" comments of sitting Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Sharon Keller. To justify her position and go completely outside the courtroom record and postulate her deliberate deception upon the public at large simply to deny justice to an obvious innocent man was heart-rending.

I can say I was not surprised. Texas is extolled for it's well-oiled killing machine. As an innocent man that spent well over two decades on Texas Death Row for a crime I did not commit -- also having been victimized by the legal wisdom and logic of Appeals Court Justice Sharon Keller I can say from experience that there is no justice in Texas for the poor, the black and/or the minorities.

Accolades and kudos to FRONTLINE for having the courage to tell it like they saw it -- like it really is.

Kerry Cook
Plano, Texas

Dear FRONTLINE,

Your program was extra special to me and I found it to be very accurate and an example of excellent journalism. My name is Mark Bravo and 10 years ago I was in the same place as the men you profiled. One big difference though, DNA helped in releasing me from prison. I was incarcerated for over three years after I was convicted for the rape of a mental patient where I worked in 1990. The same scanty blood analysis work was over emphasized and used to convict me rather then conduct DNA. I was released in 1994 after Cellmark conducted DNA analysis and reporting that I was EXCLUDED from as a possible donor. As a result I was released forthwith. I sued the County of Los Angeles and The State of California and have prevailed against them. Today the case is on appeal before the 2nd Appelate District where the State of California is asserting a defense of Qualified Immunity. Should they prevail they will avoid a multi-milloon dollar judgement against them. I feel that prevailing is more important then just the money. Without the judgement I have already rebuilt my life. I graduated from an ABA law school in 1998 and I returned to work as a Registered Nurse for the State of California. I never had the desire to practice law, my motivation was simply to avail myself of all the knowledge possible to assist me in proclaiming my innocence and punishing those who used the law for bad reasons.

After viewing your show I see the possibility to assist others and now have a new found motivation to take the California Bar and try to assist the cause. It was a long road and continues to be. The States are not above the law,and if states are held accountable and subject to civil liability and monetary compensation such as the amounts in my case, perhaps they the states will begin to see the reason to do things right. Thank you for producing your program.

Mark Bravo
Diamond Bar, CA

Dear FRONTLINE,

When "factual innocence" is regarded as irrelevant to "legal guilt," the Law has abandoned all pretense to substantive justice. Many conservative critics of our criminal law system, including several of our sitting Supreme Court justices, have accused liberal courts of being more concerned with procedural technicalities than with substantive guilt. But, which is more unjust: a system that ignores substantive guilt to ensure prodecural correctness or a system that ignores substantive
innocence under the cover of procedural correctness? That the Supreme Court has agressively limited procedural protections strips the concepts of truth and justice of any remaining meaning.

It is a terrible and dark irony that the criminal justice system in Texas is both renowned for the indifference of its criminal justice system to genuine innocence and admired, by some, for its fast-track approach to capital punishment.
Here is a litmus test for Governor George W. Bush as a presidential candidate: will he nominate for the Court only those who agree to the immediate release and compensation of all wrongly imprisoned persons? Will he nominate only those who fear wrongful execution of U.S. citizens more than they dislike procedural protections for defendants in capital cases?

Christine Sistare
Allentown, PA

Dear FRONTLINE,

I am utterly appalled at the gross negligence that some members of our criminal justice system are facilitating. I take the most exception however with the case of Clyde Charles, in which the prosecutor's office, after having been found wrong, made it conditional to Mr. Charles release that he must not sue. My question is how then can the prosecutors office be held responsible for the clearly incompetent and incomprehensible ways in which they handled this case?

Suzanne McGee
Lititz, Pennsylvania