Glynn Simmons, 71, who was released in July after prosecutors agreed that key evidence in his case was not turned over to his defense lawyers, was ruled innocent Tuesday.
“This court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the offense for which Mr. Simmons was convicted, sentenced and imprisoned… was not committed by Mr. Simmons,” according to the ruling by Oklahoma County District Judge Amy Palumbo.
The ruling makes Simmons eligible for up to $175,000 in compensation from the state for wrongful conviction and opens the door for a federal lawsuit against Oklahoma City and law enforcement involved in Simmons’ arrest and conviction, defense attorney Joe Norwood said Wednesday.
Compensation, though, is likely years away, Norwood said and Simmons is currently living on donations while undergoing treatment for cancer that was detected after his release from prison.
“Glynn is having to live off of GoFundMe, that’s literally how the man is surviving right now, paying rent, buying food,” Norwood said. “Getting him compensation, and getting compensation is not for sure, is in the future and he has to sustain himself now.”
“Woopsie! Our bad lol”
- Oklahoma
So the prosecutor is going to be held liable for stealing 50 years of this man’s life, right?
Prosecutor is probably dead of old age. And if thats the case, I vote we dig them up
Worked for a pope.
175k for that is really sad.
One more reason capital punishment should not be allowed.
175k for 50 years it’s bullshit.
the fact that they’re gonna fight him on it until he dies is part of the fun, too. he’ll never see a nickel of the pittance he’s entitled to because the state arbitrarily stole and discarded most of his life.
$175,000 for 50 years? He’s 71 now so he went into prison at 21. That means he spent virtually his entire life in prison. He could have done so many things, but instead he needed to sit in a prison cell. All because he was wrongly convicted.
And because I’m a math geek and need to figure this stuff out, $175,000 over 50 years is $3,500 a year. If we calculate what he would have earned at the federal minimum wage over that time frame (ignoring bank account interest or inflation just to keep things simple), we’d get over $500,000.
They’re giving him a third of what he should have earned at bare minimum. (And that ignores all the other horrible things involved with being wrongfully imprisoned for 50 years.)
Holy crap. In this situation i would just burn the courthouse down.
State takes your freedom for the majority of your life on a mistake, the reparation is not even enough to buy a fucking house, and it has to wait years for it. If they wanted to make fun of him one last time, they should have just given him a “Get Well Soon” card for his cancer, that would have been less cruel.
Bastards could have done him the favor of just killing him. A life of suffering. Shame.
That sum is way too low, way too late and way too uncertain. What a fucking shame. He should spend the rest of his life in luxury with every wish fulfilled without even thinking about it. What a fucking shame!
If the state stole 50 years of my life and offered me 150k as an apology, I know what candles I’d be lighting.
Shit like this is Fucking disgusting.
[The district attorney] in September said there is no longer physical evidence in the case against Simmons and announced she would not retry him, though she opposed declaring him actually innocent.
Was he found innocent based on the new evidence or was he found innocent by default after the D.A. declined to retry him?
Glynn Simmons, 71, who was released in July after prosecutors agreed that key evidence in his case was not turned over to his defense lawyers, was ruled innocent Tuesday.
I saw that, but I don’t think it answers my question.
Not at all. And the term would technically be “not guilty,” as there is no such thing as “innocence” in our judgey-McJudgerson judicial system.
I’m wondering if the evidence that was not turned over was something that proved it couldn’t have been him. If it’s something that exonerated him, then I could see him being declared innocent. Usually the ruling is “not guilty” which I would take as “unable to prove it was him,” but still leaves room that he could have done it.
To me this sounds like someone intentionally fucked the wrong man, hiding what would prove his innocence just to get the conviction.
I don’t understand why cases like this aren’t the only rationale needed to abolish the death penalty.
Also, that poor man - I hope he is able to live as happy a life as can be expected given the injustice that he endured.
With just $175k? Not likely.