Supreme Court ignores polygraph success and refuses Death Penalty review : Houston Indymedia

Livingston, Texas, June 26, 2007 --

Friend and supporter, Peter Bellamy, says "Justice requires a process of review to ensure that the innocent are not trapped through error in a spiral leading to execution. Or at least, that is what the US public believe is the purpose of review. The reality is, that without significant proof of legal misdemeanor during the trial process or subsequent appeal, or significant new evidence such as provided by DNA testing, the process of review never extends to a re-examination of the trial evidence. The assumption is that it must be right; that it was properly presented and tested; and that it has been correctly interpreted by a lay jury. The Justice system reviews it's own procedures and legal interpretations, but in truth, the assessment of guilt or innocence is not routinely part of the process. With 56 exonerations in 10 years, 10 after DNA tests, it is surely time to change the focus of reviews at all levels of the appeal process."

So, Gregory Wright's life rests today on the outcome of DNA tests that may, at best, cast some doubt of his guilt, but which are unlikely to prove innocence. What his innocence claim is based on is that the circumstantial evidence used against him came from a self-serving statement made by a co-accused and wrongly admitted to the court, or at least made without the opportunity of confrontation - a disregard of Constitutional guidelines; bloodstained jeans, graphically used by the prosecution to paint a picture of horror, which were far too small to have been worn by Wright; a fingerprint identification which the State expert could not or would not explain by scientific analysis in front of the jury and whose findings were never subject to the rigors of verification; and the loss of 911 tapes by the State, prior to the trial, which would have put on record an admission of guilt by his co-accused. The victim, Donna Vick, was a friend of Wright's, and such circumstantial evidence as there is does no more than place him at the scene, not as a perpetrator of murder. The Supreme Court's refusal to review this case is shocking because without a full review, none of these issues will ever be tested - and thereby risks the further loss of an innocent life to a wrongful conviction.

Bente Hjortshøj, a high school teacher at a private high school for delinquent youth, ex-convicts and drop-outs from the Norwegian public school system, says "I know how to differentiate between the 'good guys and the bad guys', and I dare say that after 22 years of teaching those students I know if people are truthful or not. In 2003 I went to the USA to visit my daughter, and we both went to visit Greg on death row. It changed us both for life; not only did Greg convince us of his sincerity, we also deeply felt that he was all we had thought he was during the three years of corresponding with him; a gentleman, a good Christian and an intelligent man."

Greg Wright has strengthened this belief that he is both truthful and innocent by volunteering for a polygraph test, which he passed comfortably. His Texas State Licenced examiner, Joe D. Morris, states on the certificate, "After three test charts and a number of stimulus test were administered, an analysis of the polygraph charts were made, and in my opinion Mr Wright is being truthful in all his answers to the relevant test questions. Mr Wright's test charts were numerically graded to be a positive seven (+7). A score of positive seven (+7) is considered to indicated a test subject having "No Deception Indicated" or a truthful polygraph subject."

Connie Wright, Greg's wife, makes this appeal: "My husband has suffered 10 years on death row for a crime he did not commit. Donna Vick was a true friend to him at a time of difficulty in his life. His sworn statements, tested by polygraph, that he did not cause the death of the victim; that he did see the co-accused thrust a knife into the victim; and that he did take a knife from the co-accused which was used by him to stab the victim, have been tested to be truthful by polygraph examination. If Greg could somehow reverse that day and have not allowed the co-accused to join him at Donna Vick's house, he would. He made a terrible misjudgment and that is something that will haunt him forever. But he is not guilty of murder and does not deserve to die for the actions of another."

Connie concludes, "In spite of appeals at all levels of the legal process since his conviction, Greg has never had a single strand of the circumstantial evidence used against him tested in a court. The Supreme Court Justices are the latest to turn a blind eye to his appeal of innocence. This is not a defense of the Constitution but a denial of the Rights embraced by it, and a railroad to wrongful execution. Can and will the Legal Profession allow this to happen?”

All links to case and contact details can be found at http://www.freegregwright.com
Contact: Connie Wright, email: greg@freegregwright.com