In January 1969 a 16-year old boy took a trip across Canada with a few friends. While their time in Saskatoon a 20-year old nursing student Gail Miller was found dead in a snow bank. Mr. Milgaard’s friends turned against him as soon as they heard that there was a reward being offered to whoever turns the killer in. They found false evidence which got Milgaard convicted for life on something he did not even do. Mr. Milgaard was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to life in prison in a false accusation that he raped and murdered the nursing student. After spending 23 years in prison, he was released since they finally found out that Mr. Milgaard did not commit the crime. This case was an extremely controversial one, but also an extremely
…show more content…
Miller. This is a huge issue for innocent people accused of a crime just because they look similar to the actual person who committed the crime or if they were just near the scene of the crime at the bad time. False accusations by untrustworthy witnesses are a really big problem. A lot of people do anything for money and this was the case with Mr. Milgaard’s so called “friends”. A reward was being offered for the people who brought this murderer in. So in Milgaard’s friends bright minds they thought that just because they saw him with a supposedly bloody shirt and he was supposedly near the crime scene they put two and two together like anyone else would and they turned him in. But unlike anyone else they did not even bother to ask Mr. Milgaard about any of this, if he actually murdered Mrs. Miller which of course he did not. And on top of all that they were his friends. But immediately they put their friendship aside when money came in between it and turned Milgaard in for something he did not even do. The main point of this first aspect is basically police need to further investigate and not just go on some tip off that a random person committed the crime just because they want the case closed. You are putting innocent people in prison for nothing they do not at all deserve to be
Miller. This is a huge issue for innocent people accused of a crime just because they look similar to the actual person who committed the crime or if they were just near the scene of the crime at the bad time. False accusations by untrustworthy witnesses are a really big problem. A lot of people do anything for money and this was the case with Mr. Milgaard’s so called “friends”. A reward was being offered for the people who brought this murderer in. So in Milgaard’s friends bright minds they thought that just because they saw him with a supposedly bloody shirt and he was supposedly near the crime scene they put two and two together like anyone else would and they turned him in. But unlike anyone else they did not even bother to ask Mr. Milgaard about any of this, if he actually murdered Mrs. Miller which of course he did not. And on top of all that they were his friends. But immediately they put their friendship aside when money came in between it and turned Milgaard in for something he did not even do. The main point of this first aspect is basically police need to further investigate and not just go on some tip off that a random person committed the crime just because they want the case closed. You are putting innocent people in prison for nothing they do not at all deserve to be