The proof we seek

The Holy Grail for opponents of the death penalty is to find someone who has been executed for a crime that something proves he did not commit. Of course the current fixation is DNA. We saw this a week or so ago with the testing of the late Roger Coleman in Virginia.

There's even a TV show about the idea. (Aapparently one not doing so well, since it doesn't seem to have a web site.)

But there's a little problem with the basic concept. Turns out, most people convicted of crimes are guilty of them. (Hooda thunk?) While liberals are salivating that DNA's going to finally prove what they've known all along, that the criminal justice system is railraoding the innocent, there's one angle they don't seem to have considered: It's also going to confirm the accuracy rate, and more.

Ohio's attorney general recently announced that DNA testing did indeed prove something startling about a man on death row: He murdered a woman whose murderer had not been found. Now he has.

And, 12 years ago, a coed disappeared walking down Pearl Alley, a local drunk colleges student landmark and was soon after found in a field, raped and murdered. Continuing his winning ways, her murderer was later convicted of felony non-child support, which in Ohio gets your DNA collected, and that was how they matched him.

If I were the prosecutor, I'd charge him capital, and then send a telegram to the Innocence Project.