Todd Willingham's "Defense" Attorney Explains Why His Client Was Guilty

[Are_grits_groceries]

Run time: 10:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5cFKpjRnXE   Posted on YouTube: October 16, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: October 16, 2009 By DU Member: Are_grits_groceries Views on DU: 1899

 
This clip is long, but worth watching. Willingham never had a chance.

This attorney is the most arrogant, ignorant SOB I have ever heard. He probably never put forth a real defense of his client at trial. He was probably handpicked as the defense attorney.

He no more understands those new reports he is reading than Perry does. He probably believes the world is flat.

"Me and Joe Dunn got us a piece of carpet and poured lighter fluid own it and burned it. It looked just like the carpet in the house." (paraphrasing)

God help us all.

Everyone involved in that case should be investigated closely.

While the science of arson was not very advanced when this happened, the people who investigated the fire were still not unbiased investigators. "Vasquez testified that of the 1,200 to 1,500 fires he had investigated, nearly all had been arson, and he had never been wrong." Never wrong?? That reeks of someone who fits the evidence to a foregone conclusion.

A groundbreaking document in fire investigation, the National Fire Protection Association's NFPA 921, was published on Feb. 10, 1992, less than two months after the fatal fire at the Willingham house.

Filled with the new revelations about fire science, NFPA 921 was developed by 30 fire experts, including Lentini and DeHaan, and was written as a guideline for fire investigators. It is considered the standard on fire investigation and is a key reference text for the Texas fire marshal's office. Some investigators, however, have refused to acknowledge it, preferring to stick to the old ways.

The scientific advances played a role in the exoneration of another Texas Death Row inmate, Ernest Willis, earlier this year.
http://www.truthinjustice.org/willingham.htm

This information was available at the time of Willingham's first trial.

Perry and everybody are now talking about all the crimes and bad actions Willingham committed months before the fire. They want people to think he should have been executed anyway because of those acts whether he started the fire or not.

[democracy1st]

1. Wow! no wonder the guy got fried.

[ET Awful]

2. So let me get this right . .. he hired no experts, used a visual inspection of

burned carpet, and thereby determined guilt?

Is he REALLY so backwards that he's never heard of chemical accelerants and the methods for testing for same?

Disbar this bastard. Hell,

[Are_grits_groceries]

3. The real investigation was bad enough.

He and Dunn take the cake. They spent time doing their own "scientific" experiment to determine whether their client was innocent.

[curiousdemo]

4. When he made the comment "Excuse me for

how I look, I've been in the fields" I knew this hillbilly cowboy was a poor defense lawyer. Listening and looking at this guy tell you all you need to know about this case. The scary thing is he been an attorney for 24 years. This has the smells of cowboy justice.

[snake in the grass]

5. Sad, isn't it?

I don't get him excusing his appearance. By simply taking his hat off, he could have looked like more than the pathetic hayseed he is. Of course it's another story as soon as he opens his mouth. He's just like the rest of these dimwits, ignorant and proud of it.

Edit: he was convicted in less than 30 minutes by the jury. I wonder if they, too, consulted the Bible.

[curiousdemo]

7. It's very sad....

This Hillbilly said "I'm the expert, I got light fluid and pour it in the carpet, and the blaze happen, So I knew he did, and that why he got the death penalty". Wow! No shit Sherlock....Now this is the defend attorney talking about his client! He also said the guy told him he did it, which violate attorney client privilege. I saw the prosecutor on the show the previous night and he was worst than this guy. I guarantee you, these bozo's was at the tea party rallies with Perry, the separatist. I live in Arlington, Texas, which is an hour south of Corsicana. Let me tell you, that town is redneck USA. As I've said before, this case was cowboy justice.

[ej510]

9. District Attorneys and Public Defenders are usually on the same team.

[curiousdemo]

15. He wasn't a public defender,

he was a hired attorney.

[Thornleylv]

6. With friends like that.....

Wow! First of all he said his client did not have a conscience, or was it, maybe that he did not do it therefore did not feel any guilt! I have never heard a defense lawyer talk about his client that way. Usually defense lawyers will defend their client without end.
Just because you have been a lawyer for 25 years does not make you a good lawyer or a good arson investigator, it just makes you an experienced attorney who is lousy at his job. If I was on trial and they gave me him to be my attorney it would take me about five minutes of talking to him before I ran screaming.


:kick:

[hmorehead]

8. That was his lawyer??? Isn't a lawyer supposed to advocate for his client?????

[Are_grits_groceries]

11. I thought so.

I was listening to that while lying in bed. It made me so mad that I had to get up and walk around the house.

[MajorChode]

14. Yes, but they don't have to believe they are innocent

There's nothing inherently wrong with a lawyer who says his client was guilty after the guy was executed, but in this particular case the guy is obviously an asshole. He has a vested interest in saying Willingham was guilty because otherwise it makes it appear as if he didn't put up a strong enough defense (which he obviously didn't). You don't have to watch the video for very long to figure out the guy is an asshole as well as an idiot.

[sasquatch]

10. Texas

[BREMPRO]

12. looks like this cowboy was hired with the intent of giving him no defense

cowboy justice in the raw. I kept thinking through the interview- "this guy was HIS DEFENSE attorney?" No wonder he got convicted and executed. I read the whole New Yorker article on the case- and the science is not in dispute now- the damage caused by the fire was almost certainly caused without any accelerant, and most likely caused by a space heater. That Willingham was a bad dude has no bearing. His kids were killed in an accidental fire and he was executed for it. Think about that. Cowtorney is just trying to cover his ass for being at the center of this groundbreaking case of irrevocable execution of an innocent man. This interview and the whole case was an anecdote of stubborn subjective faith vs. objective science and reason. I hope science and reason wins from now on.

[xocet]

13. Wow...

David Martin is clearly a complete idiot. He should be the poster boy for elimination of the death penalty.