A Taping of 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' Saved an Innocent Man from Death Row (2017)

> "The discovery seemed a home run for Juan, who by then had been in jail over a month. Still, the prosecutor argued that the footage was from 9:10 p.m. — and the murder had occurred at 10:32. Juan ostensibly could have left early, driven to the scene of the crime, and still had time to kill Puebla."

There are real cases that have made it to trial where your argument is better suited. He was in jail for a month, but not prison (there is a difference here) and nowhere near death row. I didn't see where the reason was, my guess is he could not afford bail (a separate problem altogether from this story). Prosecutors had reason to believe it was him; not only from an eye witness but because he had a record and had motive.

>> "..Martha Puebla, who had recently testified at a preliminary hearing about a gang murder in which Juan’s brother Mario was charged as an accessory. (Mario was convicted and is currently serving time.) Authorities argued that Juan — who had been in the courtroom during the hearing — had killed Puebla in retaliation for cooperating with police."

The NYPost article hints all the drama over this case is for a Netflix documentary:

>> "As covered in the Netflix documentary “Long Shot,” out Friday, Juan’s innocence would ultimately rest on a near brush with fame — more specifically, with Larry David and “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

If not for the involvement of Curb Your Enthusiasm and a documentary, this would simply be another case that got dismissed from an alibi checking out and never making so much as a local community newsletter. Thus, the title is dramatic as it does not accurately summarize the truth of the story.

That aside, people are notoriously uninformed, and notoriously lack basic critical reasoning skills. Look at the sheer number of people who voted the way they did in the last US election because they incorrectly correlated cheaper prices with the guy who was president at the time.

Odds are a jury is unreliable because they aren't going to put in the effort to properly evaluate the evidence and lack the knowledge and motivation to make a truly impartial and educated conclusion.

Not to mention the way a judge will deliberately limit the information a Jury has access to, and not always ethically, such as barring mention or education about jury nullification being an option.

And full disclosure, I have donated to The Innocence Project

He also had a strong motive as the victim testified against his brother in an unrelated gang murder in which he attended and his brother is serving time for. He also had a record and an eye witness (found later to be wrong) giving a description that could have been him. Add it all together and it was not about a poor minority being targeted by the system. The due process worked here. There is nothing extraordinary about this particular case--except--as promotion for a Netflix documentary that was promoted in the NYPost article:

"As covered in the Netflix documentary “Long Shot,” out Friday, Juan’s innocence would ultimately rest on a near brush with fame — more specifically, with Larry David and “Curb Your Enthusiasm.”

The real injustice is how “Curb Your Enthusiasm" is taking the spot light from a very real problem that was exposed here. The "clerical error" that had him sit in jail for 2 weeks after being cleared of charges. He won a settlement, but it never should have happened and is a larger problem facing the poor, drug addicts, and minorities, wrt the system.

I am somewhat surprised so many are skipping over this very real issue present in this very story for virtue signaling over death row that has nothing to do with this story other than unfounded speculation.