Parole sought by black man convicted in 1964 rape

Parole Sought in 1964 Murder With Racial Backdrop
Parole sought by black man convicted in 1964 rape, murder of white woman in Alabama
By BOB JOHNSON Associated Press Writer
MONTGOMERY, Ala. June 29, 2008 (AP)
The Associated Press


The crime — a pregnant white newlywed raped and murdered, the chief suspect a black escapee from a chain gang — jolted residents of north Alabama's Jackson County in 1964.

The wanted man, Johnnie Daniel Beecher, lost his leg and his freedom in the aftermath of a furious manhunt.

Now 75, Beecher is up for parole again Tuesday.

Time, however, hasn't faded the feelings in the case, which evokes an era of powerful racial tension in Alabama. Relatives of the victim, Martha Jane Chisenhall, and the local prosecutor are urging the board not to release Beecher.

"From my perspective as prosecutor and a citizen, there are certain crimes so horrendous and heinous that a life sentence ought to mean just that, that those people never get out of jail," said Jackson County's current district attorney, Charlie Rhodes.


Chisenhall, 21, was kidnapped from her home near Stevenson in northern Alabama, raped and strangled, her body hidden beneath a pile of uprooted trees. Relatives said the young woman, married for seven months, had just learned she was pregnant.

A posse of several hundred outraged white men hunted the accused across the mountain and caught him in a field in Tennessee. Beecher was shot in the leg and forced at gunpoint to confess. Later, his gangrenous leg was amputated at a prison hospital. Injected with morphine after the surgery, he signed a confession.

The mishandling of the case by law enforcement and prosecutors led to three convictions being reversed, including two death sentences. Beecher did plead guilty later to murder and received a life sentence, avoiding the electric chair. He is incarcerated at the Bullock Correctional Center.

David E. Kendall, an attorney who represented Beecher in the 1970s, said he hopes the parole board will consider Beecher's age and how long he has been in prison. Beecher, whose case is going to the board for a seventh time, is not expected to attend the hearing.


Comments

The convict was in jail for more than forty years. The punishment is for correction and deterrence. What ever be the crime, even if he is the real culprit, it is time to rethink, of his punishment. It has served the purpose of punishment more than enough. Hope th eParole board would make sensible decision.Molemax
Posted by:
jacthanni 7:42 PM
Mark As Violation

Admin Link: 8
"From my perspective as prosecutor and a citizen, there are certain crimes so horrendous and heinous that a life sentence ought to mean just that, that those people never get out of jail," said Jackson County's current district attorney, Charlie Rhodes.While I am not suggesting that this man be paroled ,I am suggesting that these DA's know the difference between life with the possibility of parloe and life without parole.It is not the inmates fault that the State offers parole and it is entirely up to the indepedent parole board to see fit that the inmate is freed or not.Thank goodness it is not up to the DA's office alone or no inmate would ever be freed from prison.
Posted by:
35Steve 7:15 PM
Mark As Violation

Admin Link: 7
It would be interesting to see how some of you posters would be reacting right now if the man was white instead of being black. Suddenly the concept of fair justice is ruled out, doesn't apply. This man never received a fair trial. Now as inhuman as this actual crime was, he was never convicted of this crime. Instead, he had a confession tortured out of him. True, the guy was a convicted rapist at the time of the crime (No Saint), but that in and of itself, doesn't automatically make him guilty. Where was his day in court? Here we have a guy who was tortured into confessing to a crime that he may not have committed. Then maybe some good ole boys thought it would make their jobs easier to simply pin it on a black guy and be done with it. Lords knows they got a double whammy and hit the jackpot with this fella. But while they were busy depriving him of his constitutional rights, the actual killer - may have gotten away scott free to kill again another day. And as we have become accustomed to learning from little tidbits of modern day forensic science, in all likelihood this woman may have been killed by SOMEONE SHE ACTUALLY KNEW. Though knowing all of this, most of you posters would still like nothing more than to see this guy burning in hell just because of who he is - black. So he's gotta' be guilty - right? Is that how it still goes in America circa 2008? What about the law? What about being innocent until proven guilty?
Posted by:
UoosierBrain 6:04 PM
Mark As Violation

Admin Link: 4
If there are legitimate questions about this man's guilt, then re-examine the evidence and see if the case holds. If so, then he should not be released. A life sentence should be just that - behind bars until breath and spirit leave the body. If there is truly reasonable doubt about his guilt, re-open the case and work on sealing it up tight in a legitimate manner. But don't take his word for it because most of these people ALWAYS say they're innocent, even when the evidence nails them to the wall. My condolences to the family for the loss of two lives - the woman and her unborn baby. It's hard to have the wound reopened again and again by parole hearings.
Posted by:
MsKittyMom 5:44 PM
Mark As Violation

Admin Link: 3
Next Page | View: First to Last