The Innocence Project explains that “he was convicted based on the testimony of forensic experts who said they had determined that the fire was intentionally set and a jailhouse informant who said Willingham had confessed to him” (Case summary section, para. 2). He was later sentenced to death. Years later, his attorneys sent a report from a nationally recognized arson expert, stating that the conviction was based on false forensic analysis. “Documents obtained by the Innocence Project show that state officials received the report but apparently did not act on it” (Innocence Project case summary section, para. 3). Not long after, Willingham was executed by lethal injection. Due to this, the Innocence Project assembled a team of arson experts to analyze the evidence of the case, and they found that “none of the scientific analysis used to convict Willingham was valid” (Innocence Project case summary section, para. 4). However, nothing was actually set into place to acknowledge a wrong based on
The Innocence Project explains that “he was convicted based on the testimony of forensic experts who said they had determined that the fire was intentionally set and a jailhouse informant who said Willingham had confessed to him” (Case summary section, para. 2). He was later sentenced to death. Years later, his attorneys sent a report from a nationally recognized arson expert, stating that the conviction was based on false forensic analysis. “Documents obtained by the Innocence Project show that state officials received the report but apparently did not act on it” (Innocence Project case summary section, para. 3). Not long after, Willingham was executed by lethal injection. Due to this, the Innocence Project assembled a team of arson experts to analyze the evidence of the case, and they found that “none of the scientific analysis used to convict Willingham was valid” (Innocence Project case summary section, para. 4). However, nothing was actually set into place to acknowledge a wrong based on