This should get interesting.
Admittedly, the guy confessed. And while not all confessions are genuine, the circumstances of his particular confession will have to be investigated before it can be dismissed. He was also seen jumping over the victim's fence the night she was killed, which adds to the evidence against him, although eyewitness identifications (especially at night, across a yard...) can be suspect.
Still, the guy confessed, and I just don't understand how someone not guilty of murder could confess to it. Or why he was sent to death row despite a confession--usually that gets you a plea. I can see confessing to theft to get out of jail time, but murder? Of killing a small, frail, woman?
The guy also sounds like he had a history, and while that makes him suspect it also makes him the perfect person at whom to point the finger.
It will be interesting to see how the state explains the new DNA results and if their theory at trial was that he acted alone this may be just enough evidence for a new trial--or at least it would be if the CCA didn't allow new theories to be brought up on appeal, which they do in cases like this.
Right now the only conclusion that can be made is that there is at least enough evidence to commute his death sentence, if not grant a new trial. I wonder how Rosenthal overlooked his evidence in his "destroy it all before they discover we made a mistake" rampage a while back.
There Goes a Man
1 year ago