The case in which I picked for my Case Report was Robert Clark was convicted in 1982 of rape, abduction, and armed robbery. He has vehemently maintained his innocence for 24 years, contending that an incorrect eyewitness identification led to his conviction. Postconviction DNA testing revealed in November 2005 that Clark was not the criminal. In light of this fresh information, Clark was freed from prison on December 8th, 2005, and his conviction was overturned. Moreover, The victim was kidnapped from a parking lot in East Atlanta, Georgia, on July 30, 1981. She was threatened with death by a man who barged into her car brandishing a gun. He took her to two isolated places in Cobb County, chained her hands and feet, beat her, and committed …show more content…
Therefore, "DNA has established the innocence of a Georgia man who was unfairly convicted due to a misidentification by an eyewitness for the fifth time," said Vanessa Potkin, a staff attorney for the Innocence Project. "This is a mistake that careful police work twenty-four years ago could and could have avoided. “The evidence in which led to the conviction was that the victim stated throughout her testimony that she was certain that Clark was the attacker. Serological proof was offered by the prosecution. According to testimony from a forensic scientist from the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, spermatozoa were found on the vaginal slides from the rape kit after being examined under a microscope. What factors contributed to the wrongful conviction? The victim was attacked and threatened to get killed. He then took her to two isolated places in Cobb County, chained her hands and feet, beat her, and committed three rapes on her. As he left in her car, he also robbed her, gagged her, and left her unclothed. The woman was able to free herself in part and call for assistance from a passing motorist. After calling the police, the victim was brought to the hospital, where a rape kit was