An editorial in yesterday’s
called for DNA testing in the 1996 murder case for which Innocence Project client Belynda Goff was convicted. Goff has been behind bars for nearly two decades after she was sentenced to life in prison for the bludgeoning death of her husband, despite the fact that a murder weapon was never found.
Although the Innocence Project has agreed to pay for the test, but the Carroll County Attorney’s Office has opposed testing.
Our first impression—and it may be widely shared—is that the prosecutors in this case are using a technicality to keep a do-gooder outfit like the Innocence Project from paying for a DNA test that might, just might, cast more light on this case.
Talk to any reporter who’s covered the legal system for a number of years, and he or she will tell you about gungho prosecutors who are more interested in getting convictions than in getting at the truth. And will do what it takes to get those convictions, and to make them stick on appeal.
If the prosecutors in Carroll County don’t want to be lumped in with that unsavory group, then they should answer this one question about doing some DNA tests in the case of Belynda Goff:
How could it hurt?