Innocent man serving life in prison

He has been cleared by DNA evidence, but that does not matter to the powers that be.

www.freeclarence.com

1) He's not actually been "cleared" bu DNA evidence. His DNA just wasn't collected at the scene.

2) His own niece (also raped and beaten during the crime) said that he did it.


From what I've read, there's definitely enough evidence to warrant reopening the case, but his niece's testimony is really damaging...

(Yes, I know she's recanted but have you READ her new statement? It might be true, but it definitely sounds coached to me.)

"No physical evidence pointed to Clarence, and recent DNA testing has cast extreme doubt. In fact, not only is Clarence's DNA not found at the scene, another man's DNA was found at the scene."

There's still eyewitness testimony.

at getting 6 year olds to testify to whatever they need at the time.

I wouldn't trust the kid's initial testimony. I SURE as HELL don't trust cops and D.A.s

Did anyone see 48 Hours Mystery the other night? It was about
the brutal murder of a Michigan college coed back in 1969.

There was little evidence, but a small drop of blood was found
on her arm. Once the technology was available, it was tested
for DNA, and a match was found. The man it belonged to was in
prison for another murder, but here's the kicker...he was only
6 years old in 1969, and it was determined that he had nothing
to do with it. The forensics lab claims there was no mix up.

Another man's DNA "from an unknown origin" also was found. He
is serving life without parole for the crime. He swears that
he didn't do it.

They say DNA doesn't lie, so how in the world did a drop of the
kid's blood show up on her body?