Two life terms plus 10 years = 21 years????

This is a discussion on Two life terms plus 10 years = 21 years???? within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; If he is INNOCENT , prove it in court, win it on appeal, get a pardon, etc. OTHO, his 21 yr "excellent record" as an ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Two life terms plus 10 years = 21 years????

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036

    Thumbs down Two life terms plus 10 years = 21 years????

    If he is INNOCENT, prove it in court, win it on appeal, get a pardon, etc.

    OTHO, his 21 yr "excellent record" as an inmate, the low likelihood that he would re-offend and the support of family members who wanted him free does NOT equal two life terms plus 10 years.

    Man wins freedom, seeks clemency - Roanoke.com

    Man wins freedom, seeks clemency
    Davey Reedy wants his name cleared of his conviction in the death of his two children.
    By Laurence Hammack
    981-3239

    Twenty-one years after he was sent to prison for starting a house fire that killed his two small children, Davey Reedy is still maintaining his innocence.

    Only now, he's doing it as a free man.

    Reedy was recently paroled and is living with his mother in Vinton.

    Convicted on circumstantial evidence in 1988, Reedy has been trying ever since to clear his name. He filed dozens of jailhouse petitions before getting help from a local attorney and, later, a large law firm based in Philadelphia. Reedy's supporters over the years include his prison warden, the bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond and an ex-police detective who looked into the case.

    Although the Virginia Parole Board was aware of the long-standing innocence claim, one member said that was not a factor in its decision to release Reedy after he served 21 years of a sentence of two life terms plus 10 years.

    "What the court found is what the court found," board member Michael Hawes said, referring to Reedy's convictions by a Roanoke jury of arson and two counts of felony murder. "We're not in the business of being an appeals court."

    Yet the board continues to review information presented by Reedy's attorneys as part of a separate request for clemency. The board may make a recommendation later this year to Gov. Tim Kaine, who has the power to exonerate the 54-year-old Reedy.

    Hawes cited a number of reasons the board granted parole: the amount of time Reedy has served, his "excellent record" as an inmate, the low likelihood that he would re-offend and the support of family members who wanted him free -- despite their loss of the two victims, 4-year-old Tina Marie and 2-year-old Michael Edward Reedy.

    The two children died of smoke inhalation from a fire that gutted their Southeast Roanoke home the morning of Aug. 10, 1987. Reedy, who said he tried to save the children but wound up severely burned himself, was charged with setting the fire.

    Prosecutors argued that Reedy torched his house while the children slept, then jumped out of a window, for one of two reasons: Either he bailed out of an intended murder-suicide, or he set the fire with the hope of rescuing his children and looking like a hero.

    A key piece of evidence was gasoline traces found on Reedy's shirt. A prosecution witness also said Reedy had threatened to burn down his house, with himself and the children inside, before letting his ex-wife get custody of Tina and Michael.

    But the case against him was circumstantial, and a relatively weak one at that, according to a Washington and Lee University law professor who in 1999 reviewed the trial transcript for The Roanoke Times.

    The following year, a Roanoke judge took the unusual step of giving Reedy a chance to prove his innocence. Reedy argued that his ex-wife could have set the fire after becoming angry with him when he obtained custody of their children.

    But after hearing two days of testimony, Circuit Court Judge Clifford Weckstein ruled that Reedy had "utterly failed to demonstrate that he is actually innocent."

    Undeterred, Reedy filed a petition for clemency in 2003, asking then-Gov. Mark Warner to consider the same evidence Weckstein had rejected, along with some new points. The 65-page request, which Warner passed along to Kaine, cited a number of witness statements and arguments not made during Reedy's trial.

    A forensic toxicologist questioned the methodology of tests that found a trace of gasoline on Reedy's shirt. Two witnesses recounted hearing the ex-wife make incriminating statements on at least three occasions. A third witness said she saw a car similar to the ex-wife's speed away from the burning house.

    And in an effort to focus more suspicion on his ex-wife, Reedy pointed out that two other people close to the woman -- the father of her first child and her mother -- also had died in house fires.

    Several years ago, after insisting for years that someone else set the fire, Reedy reversed course and began to argue that the blaze could have started accidentally, perhaps from a smoldering cigarette.

    The change in strategy came after his attorney, Roberta Bondurant, enlisted the help of Cozen O'Connor, a law firm that specializes in arson investigations. In a letter to the parole board, attorneys Lawrence Bowman and Donald Waltz of the firm's Dallas office based their argument on an expert examination of the case that used scientific methods not available two decades ago.

    The attorneys wrote that Reedy "has already been in jail for twenty years because of nothing more than bad science."

    Bondurant is now asking Kaine to consider the possibility that the fire was an accident, along with the arguments raised in the initial clemency petition.

    In 2006, three years after the parole board began to consider his clemency petition, Reedy became eligible for parole. At a hearing earlier this year, the board heard from witnesses including Waltz -- even though his comments went more to clemency than parole.

    Asked if Reedy's innocence claim might have been a factor in the board's decision to release him, Bondurant said: "I'm not going to second guess the parole board's thinking on that. I'm just glad they did what they did."

    Reedy was released in late April. Through his attorney, he declined to be interviewed.

    Virginia abolished parole in 1995, but about 8,000 inmates convicted before then are still subject to the old laws.

    Parole is becoming more rare in Virginia, as most of the remaining eligible inmates are serving long terms for serious crimes. The board granted parole in just 4 percent of the cases it heard in the most recent fiscal year. That compares with a rate of 40 percent in the years before parole was abolished.

    Had the parole board kept Reedy in prison, his only hope would have been an absolute pardon from Kaine. He still hopes to clear his name through the clemency process, Bondurant said, or at least have his civil rights restored.

    Botetourt County Commonwealth's Attorney Joel Branscom, who handled Reedy's case as an assistant prosecutor in Roanoke, was not surprised by Reedy's release.

    "The way Virginia sees it, he's paid his debt to society," Branscom said. "I hope he uses this to his advantage."

    In most cases, the parole board expects to hear petitioners accept responsibility before letting them go.

    That never happened in this case.

    "We told them that Mr. Reedy would not be accepting responsibility," Bondurant said. "He would have died in prison before he admitted criminal responsibility for the death of his children."
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,008
    This kind of stuff happens in every state of the US. State legislatures pass all kinds of feel good sentencing laws and then fill those laws with loopholes. In OK there is a way to wiggle out of a "life without parole" sentence.

    Recently, an OK prosecutor made a plea deal with a scumbag who raped a four old girl. The predator got one year in jail and 19 years probation. There is a move afoot to fire the judge who allowed that plea bargain.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Carolina - LKN
    Posts
    1,384
    I am personally sickened. He killed his 2 and 4 year old children? His own children? And because he hasn't done anything bad in prison since KILLING HIS SMALL CHILDREN, he's free to go?

    Part of me hopes and prays that he was innocent because the thought of someone with a monstrous heart like this being allowed to live free in society just nauseates me. But yeah, like you said -- if he is innocent, let him prove that first.

    And the family wants him out? Does this ring a Casey Anthony bell for anyone? As in the tiny victim's family wants the accused murderer to be free?

    Has the world gone mad? Maybe it's just me?
    Don't frisk me, I am the weapon.


    Sig Sauer P239 DAK (9mm)
    NRA Member & Pistol Instructor

    www.vanguardnc.com

  5. #4
    Distinguished Member Array Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    North Carolina - LKN
    Posts
    1,384
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig 210 View Post

    Recently, an OK prosecutor made a plea deal with a scumbag who raped a four old girl. The predator got one year in jail and 19 years probation. There is a move afoot to fire the judge who allowed that plea bargain.
    I hope he gets torn apart in jail so he's not available for the 19 years probation.
    Don't frisk me, I am the weapon.


    Sig Sauer P239 DAK (9mm)
    NRA Member & Pistol Instructor

    www.vanguardnc.com

  6. #5
    VIP Member
    Array ccman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    CT, USA
    Posts
    2,015
    I don't know if He set the fire I was not there. I would like to talk with the X-Wife and find out where She was at the time of the fire.

    Bunny on OK.
    I hope he gets torn apart in jail so he's not available for the 19 years probation.

    I agree with this. 100%.

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    3,107
    If he was convicted on circumstantial evidence, it seems he may have provided enough other circumstantial evidence to support reasonable doubt. Since when is one required to prove innocence? - and that coming from a judge.

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array Tom G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    2,375
    He sure set himself up with the threat he made. Then there was the gas traces on his shirt. I feel sorry for the kids.

  9. #8
    Member Array fogish's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tri-Cities, Washington
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by nedrgr21 View Post
    If he was convicted on circumstantial evidence, it seems he may have provided enough other circumstantial evidence to support reasonable doubt. Since when is one required to prove innocence? - and that coming from a judge.
    I honestly have no clue on this but isn't it innocent until proven guilty? Once you are "proven" guilty wouldn't that mean now you are guilty until proven innocent? I really really don't know on that, just not sure what rights as far as innocence are given to those who are still serving time for a crime they have been convicted of.
    Is this going back more future than we were?

    We don't react, we respond.

  10. #9
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    43,834
    If you have the money and/or the right attorney team..."is" doesn't always mean "is"...and anything can happen in our "Injustice System".

    I have always been disgusted by the ability to serve additional sentences concurrently rather than consecutively...WTH is the reason for that?


    No time off for good behavior, they didn't get in there for 'good behavior' and they shouldn't be getting out early for it either...good behavior is EXPECTED!
    Last edited by RETSUPT99; June 14th, 2009 at 09:34 PM.
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member Array mr.stuart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    usa-southeast texas
    Posts
    1,646
    A man won custody of his children,that is not common. Maybe his ex did it? If he is guilty he is just scum. But what if he is innocent?

  12. #11
    VIP Member Array Patti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Show Me State
    Posts
    2,542
    A key piece of evidence was gasoline traces found on Reedy's shirt. A prosecution witness also said Reedy had threatened to burn down his house, with himself and the children inside, before letting his ex-wife get custody of Tina and Michael
    It doesn't sound like he was innocent.
    Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Winston Churchill

  13. #12
    Member Array Tiny85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    141
    A key piece of evidence was gasoline traces found on Reedy's shirt. A prosecution witness also said Reedy had threatened to burn down his house, with himself and the children inside, before letting his ex-wife get custody of Tina and Michael
    Quote Originally Posted by Patti View Post
    It doesn't sound like he was innocent.
    Before letting his ex-wife get custody of the kids nullifies the threat as he had already won custody. Also a man winning custody instead of the mother says volumes about the mother. In regards to the gas trace found on his shirt thats an odd place to get gas on you as you prep for arson. Usually would expect to see gas trace on the pant legs and shoes not on your shirt.

    I don't know if he is guilty or not. I think for the most part we would all like to think he was guilty otherwise the real arsonist was never caught. On the other hand if he didn't do it then he just spent 21 years in prison for not being able to protect his family. all around I think this is very sad.
    There's nothing wrong with shooting so long as the right people get shot. -- Dirty Harry Calahan

  14. #13
    VIP Member Array nedrgr21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    KCMO
    Posts
    3,107
    "jury instructions in all criminal trials, in which the jurors are told that they can only find the defendant guilty if they are convinced "beyond a reason- able doubt" of his or her guilt. Sometimes referred to as "to a moral certainty," the phrase is fraught with uncertainty as to meaning, but try: "you better be damned sure."

    This is not the same as "proven" - especially if the evidence is circumstantial. Newer science apparently cast doubt on the gasoline evidence - seems to me damn near everyone has a gas can in their home, fills up their gas tank on a regular basis, etc.

    Even given his statement, he had custody so that kinda douses the flame for that motive.

  15. #14
    Member Array narcberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    64
    What irks me is the judge said the man "utterly failed to demonstrate that he is actually innocent." A circuit judge said that? That's not the role of the defendant, it's simply not how our legal system is supposed to work.

    And back to the OP's point, that's grounds for appeal and that's how he should be getting out of prison. Not on parole.
    Crime should be outlawed.

  16. #15
    Member Array tattooguru's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Tulsa,OK
    Posts
    62
    unfountrantely, "life" can vary from state to state. that sucks. "natural life" means u stay till u die. lets do the justice system a favor and exacute them and save the taxpayers a ton.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. GOOD: 76 years to life in state prison
    By DaveH in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: August 29th, 2010, 02:33 PM
  2. Only 4 1/2 years????
    By DaveH in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 2nd, 2010, 10:34 AM
  3. 25 years is not a life sentence...
    By DaveH in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 30th, 2010, 03:11 AM
  4. 20 years
    By DaveH in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 30th, 2008, 10:30 AM
  5. Add 14 Years Onto Your Life
    By QKShooter in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 11th, 2008, 07:21 PM

Search tags for this page

2 life terms plus 12 years in virginia
,
davey reedy
,
davey reedy granted parole
,
davey reedy is his wife innocent
,
davey reedy probation
,

davey reedy roanoke

,

davey reedy roanoke va

,
davey reedy trial
,
davey reedy vinton va
,
mother and children died in housefire in southwest roanoke
,
roberta bondurant
,
tina reedy roanoke va
Click on a term to search for related topics.