Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Is this Standard being met?

This is a reprint from the April 15, 2006 Constant Contact Newsletter.  Though it's not about Scott's case, it certainly speaks to the prevalent public attitude that contributes to wrongful convictions.  Time after time, when various aspects of the State's case have been proven to be wrong, people don't change their minds about Scott's innocence, they just change their theory on how he did it and thus got away with it.

Ray Krone was sentenced to death after being convicted for the 1991 killing of Kim Ancona, a bartender at a Phoenix lounge where he played darts. His conviction was based largely on expert testimony that supposedly matched his teeth with bite marks found on the victim.

That first conviction was overturned on technicality, including the failure of prosecutors to disclose that another dental expert said the bite marks did not match. A second trial resulted in a new conviction. But this time the judge refused to impose the death penalty, saying there were questions about whether Krone was the real killer.

Finally, in April 2002, Krone was freed through DNA evidence. He asked a question that haunts those who are concerned about the rising toll of wrongful convictions.

"I didn't do it, so how could there be unquestionable evidence that I did?"

His question demands an answer -- from those 24 Jurors and from the American people.

Whether we like it or not, the buck for these wrongful convictions stops with the jurors, fellow Americans. I fear that to most Americans, beyond reasonable doubt means the defendant is guilty if there is any doubt at all this he or she is innocent -- just the opposite of what it's supposed to be.

This attitude is not only unconstitutional, it is highly immoral. It's an attitude that must change.

The construction of the south breakwater

I've previously believed that the south and west breakwaters at the Conner Recovery Site were built to protect that wildlife refuge from wave erosion.  I've since learned that the breakwaters were built in 1931 when there was no tidal flat present -- where Conner was found was then an open water environment.  I've borrowed this topographic map from pg. 45 of the "Western Stege Marsh Restoration Project Year 5 Hydrologic Monitoring Report" prepared by the Kamman Hydrology and Engineering, Inc., and annotated it to indicate Conner's recovery location and to label open water environments.

To get a better perspective on how the area has changed in appearance, I've annotated a Google Earth map to show the previous layout.  The West set of breakwaters consists of A, B, C, and D.  The East section consists of E and F.  A is no longer visible; it was either removed or has been totally covered with landfill.  B is less than half as long as it used to be.

I've not been able to find literature that specifically identifies how these breakwaters were constructed, but during this last trip I did catch a good look at the west end of E, which continues to protrude into the open water environment.  It was obvious that this is a rubble mound structure, and the assumption is that the sections of the West breakwaters were built the same way.  

You can see how the land fill has covered up the rest of the northern side of the breakwater.  That is exactly what has happened with the south breakwater (C) on the Conner Site.  I did a little experiment on this visit.  At one point on the north side of the breakwater, I tried to drive a scredriver into the ground, and could not penetrate more than a couple of inches.  It wasn't just hard to penetrate, it was impossible. It definitely is rock under the mud.  

I borrowed a diagram of a rubble mound structure from 2-17-00, Breakwaters and Rubble Mound Structure Design, and annotated it to show the amount of land fill on the northern side.  The "sea side" is the southern slope of the breakwater. 

On this last trip, I tried to measure the "crest width," but was unable to do so because it is too short a distance for the range finder.  Instead I had to measure out to one of the rocks on the southern slope.  

This next photo shows the same rocks, but from the backside (or the southern, seaward slope).  In this photo, the black arrow points to the rock I was standing in front of to take the measurement, and the yellow arrow to the point of the rock point that I measured to.  That rock is 3'6" across at its longest point, and 1"10" tall.  The rock above it is 4'5" across its longest point.

In a few days I will post a YouTube video of numerous photos of the southern side of the breakwater, to give you a perspective of what the waves caused by gusty winds would be beating up against.