The case of Christopher Dunn marks the second time Attorney General Andrew Bailey has appealed the swift release of a person whose murder conviction was overturned.

For more than 30 years, Christopher Dunn has been incarcerated in Missouri, accused of a murder he insisted he did not commit. Freedom seemed within his grasp when a circuit judge overturned his conviction and ordered for his release Wednesday — only to be overruled when the state Supreme Court granted the attorney general’s request for a stay.

The legal showdown over Dunn’s release marks the second time in a matter of weeks that Missouri’s Republican Attorney General Andrew Bailey has fought a court order to release an inmate who was found to be wrongly convicted.

Last month, Sandra Hemme, 64, the longest-held wrongly incarcerated woman known in the U.S., had her conviction overturned, only to have Bailey appeal her release, keeping her behind bars. Ultimately, she was released July 19 after a judge threatened to hold the attorney general’s office in contempt of court.

  • Erasmus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    A quick Google search on the AG fighting Dunn’s release gives more light to this case.

    It turns out Andrew Bailey is in fact a total cockbag, not a partial cockbag but complete and total one. A line from his Wiki:

    During his tenure as attorney general, Bailey has adopted hardline conservative positions. He has refused to release prisoners after overturned convictions, attempted unsuccessfully to restrict gender-affirming care, battled initiatives to restore access to abortion in Missouri, and staunchly defended former President Donald Trump over his legal problems.

    He appears to just take any hardline right, douchebag, position he can and then almost troll with it.

    It’s amazing how the US has allowed so many of these assholes to get into power.

  • DirkMcCallahan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    “Cruelty is the point” is one of the most overused (and misused) phrases on the Internet, but it actually seems to apply here. What other reason could there possibly be for the AG and SC to act this way?