Dear FRONTLINE,

A superb program, as usual. Thoughtful analysis and a wonderful discussion of the issues. Bravo! One problem that was missing from the discussion in this post-OJ age was the exoneration of perpetrators specifically O.J. Simpson in the "trial of the century" in spite of DNA evidence which points to their guilt with statistical "certainty."

George Geis
Elmhurst, IL

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a minority I am scared and heartbroken. Scared because it could have been me hitchhiking down that road that night in Louisiana. Heartbroken because there are so many such stories in my community that didn't get any press at all.

As a citizen I am ashamed to be part of a system that has foreclosed the opportunities of such persons simply for the sake of political expedience. . .
How is it that conservatives, who claim to believe that "big government" is a bad thing and can only screw things up with it's bureaucratic meddling seem to take a polar opposite stance when it comes to law enforcement. Cops are bureaucrats. Police departments are government institutions. There is waste, there is corruption and there are MISTAKES! Just like in any other type of government institution. Only difference is, when it's another department we as taxpayers want "accountability". . .

Finally, as a law student at South Texas College of Law, this story has inspired me to work even harder so I can get out and try to do some good. . .

Eddie Cortes
Houston, Texas

Dear FRONTLINE,

I just finished watching. I am unable to comprehend the reasoning of our judicial system. I am weary of the helpless feeling I am left with every time I am faced with our judicial system's failures. I refuse to swallow the idea that our judicial system should be allowed to live according to its own rules. Our "rights" are taking a beating and I am tired of it. The politics behind their reasoning is unabearable.

vicki kuphall
watertown, wi.

Dear FRONTLINE,

Ofra Bikel's documentary was not an eye opener. It only confirmed what I already knew but never actually wanted to confront. How can we as a nation boast about our freedom when we allow such injustice to prosper and then sleep under that same cloak created by corrupted politicians and courts? It's no wonder that many veiw that our republic is in danger from within. The saving grace will be our wonderous free-press, the telling eyes of the People. Thank you.

Dennis Capolongo
Rockville, Maryland

Dear FRONTLINE,

Science has provided a more reliable method for truth to be determined. No doubt. Justice system implies there is one system when in fact, many different systems are involved, all having criminal procedures, each seeking finality to a crime and end results which can be politically beneficial for public consumption. DNA cannot put a face to the criminal who was never arrested. DNA may eliminate one who was wrongly convicted in our criminal justice system but unless we are, as a society, able to welcome our discoverable mistakes and correct our own injustices, what claim can we have as moral? Punishment within a moral society is based on a just and proper result, not on a punishment as an end to a criminal case determined in a court of law which bases it's foundation on moral conduct. Crumble the foundation and there is no justice system, just political expedience. Morality necessarily means we are able to admit and correct our mistakes.

Ann Anderson
Flower Mound, Texas

Dear FRONTLINE,

Jim Liebman's comments on how the death penalty distorts our view of criminals that have not been sentenced to death really struck home. I have long been a proponent of the death penalty, but the utter finality of the death penalty is simply frightening in light of the fact that our system of justice seems unwilling to consider its own fallibity. Even more frightening is the fact that most D.A.'s and judges are elected officials.

Glenn Tiede

Dear FRONTLINE,

Once again, Frontline has outdone itself. A superb, thought provoking documentary which should be a topic for discussion for all. I am sad to say that we here in Canada have had our own similar cases, the recent Milgard case being an example. In all cases where DNA provides doubt as to the guilt of the prisoner, totally INDEPENDENT judicial review should be both mandatory and welcomed by the system.

Kerry Allen

Dear FRONTLINE,

The criminal justice system is so lost within their own maze of reasoning that they have forgotten the perspective of common sense.

If there are a million innocent men in prison, well, I guess we better get started on getting them out. I do not mind paying for this in my taxes because this country was founded and based on freedom from persecution. Even persecution from the criminal justice system.

D. Blake
Albuquerque, NM

Dear FRONTLINE,

As a lawyer, I'm dismayed by Judge Keller's intellectual dishonesty in defending the Texas Supreme Court's decision in the Kriner case. To say that the uncontroverted DNA evidence in that case raises few, if any, doubts about Kriner's actual guilt, especially when considered in light of the paltry inculpatory evidence offered at trial, amounts to a willful disregard of the truth. Unfortunately, in the case of the Texas Supreme Court it seems that justice truly is blind.

Peter Sloane
New York, NY

Dear FRONTLINE,

I love Frontline and I am more than convinced that this show is the best show on earth.
I could not imagine how Gov. Douglas Wilder could go to bed at night and not think about poor Earl Washington. As an African American I am totally disappointed that Gov. Wilder is no different from the other politicians.. selfish..power drunk and he is going to tell people that he is a God fearing.. I do not know how he could face God and live with himself about his decison on Earl Washington. Does he know the difference between right and wrong? I do not think so!!!

Adeyemo Sodipo

Dear FRONTLINE,

Once again the criminal justice system in this so called free country sickens me. Prosecutors that feel that they must win at all costs should be held accountable for the new victims that they have created.
Your report is further evidence that state supreme court justices should not be elected. When they become polititions, justices are unwilling to make unpopular decisions, regardless of right or wrong.
The law will be respected by all only when it is fair to all, regardless of economic means.

Kemel Kulick
Novi, MI

Dear FRONTLINE,

Your program has destroyed one of the few naive assumptions about the criminal justice system I have clung to: that if only the poor and indigent had a good lawyer and could be properly heard, justice would be done. When our courts disregard the presumption of innocence of defendants, they erode confidence in an institution that is central to republican government. Why can't prosecutors rejoice when an innocent man or woman is released from prison? Isn't that justice? And isn't justice the whole point of our legal system?

Thomas Sobottke
Pewaukee, Wisconsin

Dear FRONTLINE,

I hope that those members of the legal community shown on your program tonight who displayed such indifference towards keeping innocent people behind bars sleep well tonight...I know that I won't be able to after having just viewed your program on the use of D.N.A. evidence in the criminal justice system. For people in their positions to deny others the opportunity to prove their innocence with conclusive scientific evidence is itself criminal.

Daniel Ben-Ari
Wheatley Heights, New York

Dear FRONTLINE,

Frightening and nauseating. My God, to hear Sharon Keller sit there without blinking an eye and make stone-cold statements about how an obviusly innocent man must prove himself innocent to her satisfaction, and then have the gall to admit that she hasn't got a clue how that might be done. What arrogance and stupidity. I pray she never runs for public office, for hers is one name I will make it a point to remember.

Betty Fields

Dear FRONTLINE,

One thing I didn't understand was the other
evidence not presented at his first trials, like the fact of his fellow worker's comment that he could not have slipped away from the job on the day of the crime, plus the DNA evidence were not presented at the same time to those being interviewed. You only asked why they did not believe the DNA proved he was not guilty. To me it was the sum of the whole that proves to me he is not guilty. Thank you for this sad but important programing.

Steve Babine
Jefferson, Maine