Texas Executes Man for Arson Murders. Experts Say Fire Wasn’t Arson.

In a case that’s sure to fire up the debate about the use of the death penalty again (if not buried by news on the recession and the IG report), the Chicago Tribune reports that the state of Texas is reviewing the case of a man that was convicted of murder by way of arson. He was executed in 2004. Since that time, the case has been looked at by nine fire experts, and all have concluded that the arson conviction was based on outdated theories. This new testimony was done for a state panel, and it doesn’t mince words:

Among Beyler’s key findings: that investigators failed to examine all of the electrical outlets and appliances in the Willinghams’ house in the small Texas town of Corsicana, did not consider other potential causes for the fire, came to conclusions that contradicted witnesses at the scene, and wrongly concluded Willingham’s injuries could not have been caused as he said they were.

The state fire marshal on the case, Beyler concluded in his report, had “limited understanding” of fire science. The fire marshal “seems to be wholly without any realistic understanding of fires and how fire injuries are created,” he wrote.

The panel has yet to file its own report on the investigation, but if it sides with the experts, I think it will be a severe blow to death penalty supporters. Surely, if Willingham was unjustly executed, it begs the question of how many people have been as well, and not just in Texas, but all over the country? The situation was already looking dire, with a string of exonerations of death row inmates over the past few years, including five just in 2009. Those people weren’t even dead yet. What happens if it turns out an innocent man was actually executed. What is to be done then? Learn from our mistakes and go on? Or scrap the system altogether?

I mean, I guess you could still make a case for the guy killing the two daughters that were lost in the fire, but according to the Tribune, the only other evidence of significance was a confession from a fellow inmate. I’m inclined to view that with skepticism, as is apparently the Tribune.

I am highly interested in seeing what the panel will report, so I’ll keep following and update once we know. In the meantime: what say you all to these developments?