CONVICTED OF MURDER 20 YEARS AGO

[thelma]

www.uticaod.com/news/x1838794814

How many here remember this case? This young man was convicted of murdering (she was beaten to death) Kimberly Simon almost 20 years ago?

I remember this case very well and was friends with a woman whose husband was a State Trooper at the time and investigating this case. I can remember him telling us the day after her body was discovered that they knew who beat her to death - but had to come up with enough evidence in order to arrest him.

Personally, I never thought he was guilty as many other people also thought an innocent man had been wrongfully convicted and sent to jail.

I hope the new DNA tests will put this matter to a final conclusion once and for all.

[Swimmy]

Just another reason why we should not invoke the death penalty.

[bobbbiez]

Yes, Swimmy I agree with you fully.

I remember Kimberly's murder like it was yesterday. I worked with her Mom, Cheryl, at Faxton Hospital at the time. Very, very sad and horrible for her and the family.

I also remember all the rumors going around by the kids saying that he wasn't the one who killed Kimberly. Some were even bragging that they knew who the real killer was.

Just hope as they open this case again, that if he didn't kill Kimberly, they do find the right killer. Hate to see her family having to deal with this all over again after so many years.

[Disgusted-Daily]

I do remember this happening, but not much more. I have to ask, with todays DNA and other crime technology do you really believe one could be sentenced to death with doubt?

I can't see harboring a man in a cage for the rest of his life either. A death sentence in it's self. You don't feel good about the death penalty, but yet you feel fine about putting him away for life. I thought it was either guilty or not guilty? But I guess we have now included I'm really not sure so lets give him life.

[thelma]

Todd - I believe in the Death Penalty when there is DNA evidence that proves beyond a doubt that the defendant committed the murder. With today's knowledge and use of DNA evidence, any doubts should be able to be completely erased.

However, I do agree that when there is any doubt at all (regardless of what "proof" they have), the Death Penalty should NOT be so quickly inforced.

In this case, the testimony that really convicted Mr. Barnes was that a retired or off duty Policeman happened to be driving by the scene and placed Mr. Barnes at the scene of the crime stating he was talking to someone. The victim, Kimberly Simon, was walking down this road around 6PM to go over to Whitesboro to meet some of her friends.

It was a horrible crime as this girl was savagely beaten before she died. Mr. Barnes parents mortgaged their home in order to hire a top notch defense lawyer to defend their son. No one came out the "winner" in this case.

I'm glad I didn't have to set on this Jury as from what I read, there was too much doubt about Mrl Barnes guilt and I would have had to Vote a No Guilty verdict.

[Swimmy]

EDIT: forgot to change the quoted text size for those who can't see (or have extreme difficulty in viewing) the tinier print.

May 1, 2008 0:35:30 GMT -5 Disgusted-Daily said:

I do remember this happening, but not much more. I have to ask, with todays DNA and other crime technology do you really believe one could be sentenced to death with doubt?

I can't see harboring a man in a cage for the rest of his life either. A death sentence in it's self. You don't feel good about the death penalty, but yet you feel fine about putting him away for life. I thought it was either guilty or not guilty? But I guess we have now included I'm really not sure so lets give him life.

Yes I do believe someone could be sentenced to death with doubt. What about an instance where there is no DNA evidence, just eye witness testimony (direct evidence) and 20 years from now the defendant is executed DNA evidence (circumstantial evidence) that was too scarce to study today ends up exonerating him? What about the scenario of an over-zealous prosecution or police force that plants the DNA evidence? That would be acceptable? You can always release a lifer back to society for a wrongful conviction, but you can't breath life into a dead body. There are fates far worse than death.

Look at the Desire Case case. That man should have never been prosecuted, let alone convicted. Imagine if we had sentenced him to death and the evidence didn't surface until 20 years later? Losing one life is unacceptable, losing another innocent life is plain lunacy.

What if the Duke Lacrosse players were further accused of a crime that put them in jeopardy of being executed? You want to be the one to explain to those families that a lying tramp and an unethical and over-zealous da are the reason their sons were executed by the state? It's illegal for a private citizen to commit murder, but when the state does it, we change the label to capital punishment?

Yes there is guilty or not guilty, but as these cases demonstrate, there is plenty of room for error. Twenty years ago, people were crass enough to think that DNA evidence would prove beyond all doubt a person's guilt. Today, as this case demonstrates, that was an arrogant assumption. You would think we could learn from history and avoid repeating the same mistakes...

[Swimmy]

As it is, this man was convicted while people admitted to knowing there was another man who was actually guilty. Where was the DA?! If I heard those rumors and none of those bragging people came forward, I would have charged each and every one of them with obstruction of justice, making false police reports, and intentional interference with a criminal investigation.

[bobbbiez]

Swimmy, couldn't agree with you more!!

There is always room for error in the system. I guess I have witnessed it first hand with my son's friend who was accused of killing his parent 16 years ago and was recently found innocent and released because of the new evidence brought out by the "Innocence's Project."
His case had nothing to do with DNA evidence.

Could you image, being on a jury and voting for the death penalty and then years done the road finding out that person was innocent all along. How could you live with yourselves? I know I couldn't and don't want to find myself in that position by being on a jury for a death penalty.

We have to rely on our justice system because it's all we have, but I suggest, one not put ALL their faith into it. They have made plenty of mistakes and some major ones at that.
I refuse to be part of that and will never justify any reason for the death penalty.

[wilum47]

Bill Simon was a fireman with me in the Maynard Fire Department. That something like this could happen in the neighborhood was numbing and knowing Kimberly was tougher.

I was called up for the jury but, of course, I was immediately dismissed. They called in all 280? or the full jury compliment for that week and excused the first 100 that first morning.

[thelma]

I agree Wilum. Crimes like this one just don't happen over here in our neck of the woods.

Not only is this one of the safest areas, but Kimberly was such a young, vibrant and beautiful girl when she was alive. From what I was told, the beating she suffered before she died was vicious and her arm was even broken.

My heart goes out to Kim's family as well as the Barnes family. No one came out the winner in this tragedy.

[Disgusted-Daily]

I may not have explained myself correctly, so here it goes again. If it is a clear cut case with DNA and absolutely no doubt, then why not death? For instance like Cop Killers, the guy who shot all them people on the NY subway and many other serial killers. We have far more guilty prisoners than we do wrongly accused in the system.

If we need to worry about the Police planting DNA evidence than that Police Officer should also be tried for murder and given the death penalty. What happens to the Police now when the corruption comes out and we set a guy free after 20 yrs. Is anybody held liable? Do we just pay him a large sum of money (tax payers) and say were sorry and forget about it?

I am not saying the Death Penalty is for everyone but we certainly have crimes in our history that certainly meet the criteria of the Death Penalty that I think we all could agree on. After all if we kill them all I won't have a job. LOL.

[Swimmy]

Actually, Todd, that is what we do. When we exonerate someone or dismiss the charges against someone because the evidence doesn't add up, the system says, "sorry, better luck next time, you're free to go." But in the mean time, you're stuck with a forever tarnished reputation.

I missed the luncheon today, but at the Law Day luncheon at the Radisson on Genesee St., one of the speakers was a man who was exonerated after being in prison for 15 years for a crime he didn't commit. New evidence from an Innocence Project released him. According to my friends who were there, he explained how the state has done nothing for him and he still can't find a job because of the stigma against him, i.e. "well he may be innocent of this crime, but because he was associated with being a criminal defendant he must have done something wrong, or be too dangerous to trust and the state has done nothing.

The risk of losing one innocent life is worth NOT having a death penalty. The "clear cut" case you mention is so rare that it's not worth having. It also is counter to our constitution, proof beyond reasonable doubt. But we have an appeals process because our founding fathers knew that the system was not perfect and is subject to error. It always will. And if ONE innocent is put to death in your "clear cut" scenario, that's one too many!

In the Desiree Case case, Officer Smith was believed to be guilty beyond all doubt until the screw up at the DA's office was uncovered. I would think that example alone dispels the "clear cut" argument.

Are there cases where it is absolutely clear? yes. But it doesn't answer the, why is it legal to murder someone if it's state-sanctioned, but if I killed the same guy, I'd be prosecuted for murder argument. We are a civilized society and should start acting like one. It's murder no matter who does the killing. Don't bring up war because it's a different beast altogether.

[thelma]

In my opinion, the Death Penalty should remain on the books for cases of extreme violence and depravaty towards another human being. Remember Ted Bundy? If anyone deserved the Death Penalty, it was him.

How about that monster that buried little Jessica alive down in Florida a few years ago? There are many more that don't deserve to walk on this earth and are of no use to themselves, or to society.

I can see both sides of this argument BUT if I have to make a choice, I'm in favor of keeping the Death Penalty on the books.

Remember, the animal that was involved in the killing of Officer Corr in New Hartford and convicted of Murder? If anyone deserves the Dealth Penalty it is that bunch of savages that robbed Lennon Jewelers that night. BUT, since NYS is too "liberal" and despite pleadings of victims' families to reinstate the Dealth Penalty, it fell on deaf ears in Albany.

[Swimmy]

So we agree to disagree. It's not a matter of being too liberal, for me. It's a matter that there are worse things than death.

[frankcor]

The death penalty is not a liberal-conservative argument. People at either end of the political spectrum are on both sides of the argument.

I believe it is a perfectly conservative notion to believe that only the creator has the right to take a life and that government is not to be trusted to execute without error.