Kirk Bloodsworth was a former Marine, he was also the first person sentenced to death and then subsequent exonerated. Kirk was only 22 years old when he was wrongful convicted and severed nine years in prison before they released him. The reasoning for this was because in 1984 a young girl was found dead in a wooded area and she had been sexual assaulted, strangled, and beaten with a rock. The reason for why he was arrest was because he fit the description of the man that witness where identifying. The Case
On July 25, 1984 police had found the body of a young nine-year-old girl named Dawn Hamilton in a wooded area near a mall in Baltimore. She was found lying on her stomach with an eight-inch stick protruding from her vagina. She had suffered from a fractured and depressed skull, her neck had patterns of abrasion. When she was
…show more content…
“The admissibility of the evidence given at a former trial depends upon the question whether it was voluntary. To be admissible it must be voluntary, and where there is no evidence to the contrary, it will be presumed that the evidence so given was voluntary. The defendant at the former trial went upon the stand of his own volition, and the evidence there given is, we think, admissible in this case.” (Kirk Noble Bloodsworth v. State of Maryland, 1988)
After reviewing one of the witness testimony she had said she assumed she heard a comment that Bloodsworth had made. What helped Bloodsworth was the fact that there was no physical evidence to place him at the crime scene or tell whether he was just there watching what happened. Now when they try too rebuttal evidence it is using the evidence that was presented by the defense and you try to re analyze it. Bloodsworth was denied a motion for a new trial. Bloodsworth does argue that he was violated from his right of a fair trial since some evidence was basis. The Real