Exoneree+Compensation+2011-4


 * What Is Exoneree Compensation?**

When a person is sent to jail, they are without any source of steady income. They lose their jobs and any source of outside income. In the case of a persons innocence, they have unfairly lost income that they could have made, if they had not been sent to prison. If a person is found to be innocent in a court of law, and have remained in prison for longer than a year*, they are able to claim Exoneree Compensation in most states*. This Exoneree Compensation is different amounts, according to separate states. Exoneree Compensation is to aid in the income lost over the years the inmate spent in prison. Exoneree Compensation also pays for any job training for up to one year, educational, health and legal services after an innocent persons release.

Year*: California is the only state that does not pay a sum yearly. A wrongfully convicted inmate is able to claim up to 100 dollars per day of wrongful conviction. In New York, the judge and courts decide how much the wrongfully convicted inmate is eligible to receive.


 * Which States Do NOT Have Exoneree Compensation?**

Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Kansas, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Arkansas, Kentucky, Indiana, Michigan, Georgia, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Hawaii and Delaware are the states that currently have no law regarding Exoneree Compensation.


 * Which States Do Have Exoneree Compensation? States and what they do.**


 * George Rahsaan Brooks**:

On September 30, 1975 George Brooks was at a hospital for neck injuries. While at the hospital Brooks talked to Michael Miller and Dale Harris. After his treatment Brooks left the hospital alone. Later that evening Michael Miller was found in a state of distress in a nearby alleyway. When questioned by police, Michael told them that he was drinking with some friends earlier and one of them punched him in the stomach and took his money. Michael was then hospitalized. At no time did he ever mention Brooks or that Brooks did anything to him. The next day (Oct. 1, 1975) Brooks was arrested for the robbery of Schwartz Supermarket. This arrest had nothing to do with Michael Miller. Detective Spozarski informed Brooks of his charges, read him his rights, and had Brooks waive his rights to a lawyer. Then Spozarski asked Brooks about the robbery of Michael Miller and Brooks told him he had no idea what the detective was talking about since he was supposed to be arrested for a different robbery. George was then put in jail for the robbery of the Supermarket. On Nov. 18 1975, Brooks was informed that his was ill and he could make a phone call, by a jail guard. When arriving to the office to make his call Detective Spozarski hand cuffed him and took him to the coroner's office. George had no clue what was going on. His public defender informed Mr. Brooks that he had been charged with murder on November 11, 1975 when Michael Miller died in the hospital. Without further information or preparation Brooks was escorted to the hearing room. Detective Spozarski gave evidence in the preliminary hearing that Mr. Brooks was arrested on October 1, 1975 for the assault of Michael Miller and gave an inculpatory statement after being read his rights. However, this fact of the statement was never recorded by Spozarski or told to anyone until six weeks later when he learned of Michael Miller's death. Under Pennsylvania law you must be taken before a city magistrate within six hours after giving a statement. When Brooks challenged it, they said that the Detective forgot to take notes, record it, or put it in any form of writing. At this hearing Detective Spozarski perjured himself and testified that he did not place Mr. Brooks under arrest on Oct. 1, 1975, nor read him his rights to the charge of assaulting Michael Miller but instead read him his rights to a separate charge of a robbery of Schwartz Supermarket. The coroner issued the criminal complaint and arrest warrant. When Brooks' attorney tried to obtain the coroners inquest transcript he was told by the prosecutor that it was non-existent. 25 years later Brooks was able to obtain this document and with the police perjury he could prove his innocence. With the false testimony they could hold Brooks. Brooks was told by the detective, that if he did not provide a statement saying Dale Harris did this to Michael Miller he would remain locked up. Brooks told the detective that he was not going to falsely accuse someone. However, Brooks is out of appeals where these documents can prove useful in court. So, he remains in prison.