TheAgitator.com
The More Things Change…
Sunday, July 27th, 2008Man wrongfully convicted of murdering his wife, then executed, based on testimony from a corrupt and/or incompetent forensic pathologist and the suppression of evidence by police and prosecutors.
Mississippi? No. Great Britain, 1910.
Just a minute. It’s an awfully long leap to state without equivocation that Crippen was ‘wrongfully convicted’ of murdering his wife, or that Sir Bernard Spilsbury was ‘corrupt and/or incompetent’, or that there was ’suppression of evidence’.
The entire theory of Crippen’s innocence is being put forward by his surviving family, and is based on some very tenuous evidence plus a very large dollop of pure speculation. Let’s have a little more evidence, shall we, before we simply state all these things as though they were proven beyond doubt?
llater,
llamas