The individual pictured to the left is Luis Diaz. Eight women identified him as the man who raped them.
At his trial, his lawyers put on a weak defense. First, his co-workers testified that he was at work as a cook when the rapes occurred. Obviously, they are all lying, because people who work with rapists lie like that. And they said that if the rapist had left work and committed the rapes like the prosecution contended, he would smell strongly of the grease and onions of the kitchen, and none of the victims had noticed such a smell. Obviously, Mr. Diaz, who is believed to be not white, had learned in non-white rapist school how to remove the smell from himself while on the way home from his job. Finally, the lying liar defense lawyers pointed out that Mr. Diaz was shorter and weighed less than the person in the descriptions of the rapist provided by all of the victims. Obviously, Diaz could also control his height and weight with his mind. Diabolical.
Fortunately, the court did not believe the rapist Diaz and his lying lawyers and witnesses and evidence. The judge said, "I've never seen a case where I was more convinced of a man's guilt." Heh. Indeed.
Instead of being put to death, like sex offenders should, he was put in prison for the last 25 years, until today, when liberals have now succeeded in getting him released using a bogus, "scientific" "DNA test." Using physical evidence from one of the rapes that was tragically preserved from the time of his crimes, the "test" "proves" that Diaz "could not possibly be" the person who committed the rapes.
This is the same kind of science that says humans "evolved" from monkeys. I've never even seen "DNA" - have you? It probably doesn't even exist. And even if it does exist, they can't prove that it does what they say it does. It's just a theory. But no one can watch this DNA do this stuff they say it does, or at least, I don't know if anyone can, and that's the same thing.
The lying liberal New York Times then prints this:
One victim, whose identification of Mr. Diaz led to his arrest, said she had originally thought none of the men in the nine photographs she was shown resembled her attacker. She had asked to see more pictures, she said, but settled on Mr. Diaz after the police twice told her to keep looking at the first batch. He was the only one who remotely looked like the attacker, she said.
"They told me to look closer at the ones I had," she told a state prosecutor in 1993, adding that the police were watching her study the photos "almost like people holding their breath."
So, the police were just being helpful. The police are always helpful in identifying the guilty, and witnesses should listen to them. If a police officer says he thinks someone did it, then they probably did it. The fact that Diaz got convicted after the police did this proves they were right.
This victim said she grew more convinced that Mr. Diaz was her attacker when she "shook like a leaf" upon seeing him in a live lineup.
"All these girls couldn't be wrong, the detectives couldn't be wrong, it couldn't go this far," she recalled thinking.
See??? Once the police had corrected the victim's faulty memory, she became more and more sure Diaz was the one. They cleared up her doubts for her. They smiled and patted her on the back when she picked the right guy. They're the good guys.
Individual prosecutors want to keep the rapist Diaz in jail:
Katherine Fernandez Rundle, the Miami-Dade state attorney, said the fact that DNA absolved Mr. Diaz of one crime did not necessarily absolve him of the rest. The state could attempt to retry him on the other cases, Ms. Rundle said, but some victims do not want to testify again, some cannot be found, and the evidence absolving him of one rape could be introduced by the defense.
So, overwhelmed by the decadent energy of the rapist-lovers, the state has given up on keeping a dangerous man like the erstwhile cook in jail until he dies.
Who is responsible for this travesty?
Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, a nonprofit group that fights for DNA exonerations, said most - about 120 of 160 exonerations since the advent of forensic DNA testing in 1989 - hinged on mistaken witness identification. But none involved as many mistaken witnesses as the Diaz case, he said.
"It's a landmark case for that reason," Mr. Scheck said. "These were crimes that upset people in the community, there was pressure to solve them, and there were, I think, unfortunate eyewitness techniques used that, in light of what we know now, were the kind that lead to error."
The only error is that the community's peace of mind and sense of safety will be shattered by the re-emergence of the raper who had been tagged and bagged years ago. This will undermine the public's faith in the power of the police to guess at who the guilty are. It will even allow liberal liars to raise doubts in cases of strong eyewitness identification with some police guidance when there is no "physical evidence" that can be subjected to "DNA testing." It is believed that Mr. Scheck is a non-Christian.