The state of Arkansas murdered a man.

[FBaggins]

26. How can that be? Perhaps because your selection of articles is biased

(whether intentionally or not). The real question would be what would make you question it? Do you think some long-time DU poster just makes that stuff up?

The current reporting is obviously driven by the fight over getting access to this DNA evidence and the claims that it calls his conviction into question. We're obviously not going to hear the ACLU tell us that there's plenty of reason to belive that he was guilty anyway.

Your first source is presented as though it's an archive of relevant stories, but it just goes back to his execution (over two decades after the crime was committed). They're almost exclusively blog posts and you have to subscribe in order to read them... so we don't really know what they do or don't say.

Just as a hint for future "research". When you want to evaluate the facts of a case... there are better sources than articles 20+ years later that are really just about the death penalty. Some quick results:


https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ar-supreme-court/1322909.html

https://law.justia.com/cases/arkansas/supreme-court/1996/cr96-590.html

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/354/846/576014/