Pantagraph.com | News | Yoder will not appeal Supreme Court decision in Beaman case

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

BackfromGAafter5yrsSameB-N wrote on Jun 13, 2008 2:12 PM:

" to "who are you people": Nobody deserves to be murdered. What happened to Jennifer was horrible. The murderer should be punished. But I disagree with your comments comparing Jennifer/Alan. You make Jennifer sound perfect/innocent and Alan sound horrible. Alan was always pleasant/smiling when I saw him. Your negative words don't paint a FULL picture of him. Similarly, your description of Jennifer's incomplete. I didn't know Jennifer, but she kept company with drug dealers/users. The two guys I know she dated, including Alan, were both into drugs. I didn't run with that crowd. We simply attended Wesleyan together. But before you try painting contrasting pictures of these two, realize that at some point they were in love, sharing some of the same activities. Neither is/was all bad and neither is/was all good. That's true for all of us. We are humans. Humans aren't perfect. No human deserves to be murdered. But our country believes in giving everyone a fair trial. Alan didn't receive one. Opinions on his guilt/innocence are simply opinions. It's true only the murderer will ever know the truth, but unless there's a fair trial, nobody should do time for this murder, either. "

Voice of Reason2 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 2:06 PM:

" To Summerh2o: They do have that right I agree. But I don’t agree that it gives them the right to imprison a possibly innocent man. Nor does it take away everyone else’s right of freedom of speech. Beaman might deserve a second chance, that has yet to be proven. If he’s innocent shouldn’t he be given back his life? If you have facts he did it beyond a reasonable doubt contact the State Attorney’s office, sounds like they could use some evidence. Since the matter is understandably painful for those involved, I'd suggest avoiding places where opinions on both sides will be discussed, such as here. "

Voice of Reason2 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:15 PM:

" To OriginalMJ: It's doesn't mean he did either. I don't want to see a murderer go free, and if he did it I hope they toast him, but I don't want an innocent man in prison either. Our justice system is set up to err on the side of letting a guilty person walk rather than convict an innocent one. Hard to take sometimes but it's better than the opposite. I hope they find who did this and put this all to rest. "

Summerh2o wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:49 PM:

" To everyone attacking Bomotronic - back off! The people who knew Jennifer have every right to feel whatever emotions they need to feel. The lapse in the justice system, whether Beaman is actually guilty or not....dredges up the emotion of the trial experience. I knew the victim. Thank your higher power that this did not happen to your loved one. Alan has a second chance at life, Jennifer doesn't.
Wherever 'John Doe' is, I hope that you are hunted down and pay for every ounce of pain that you have caused everyone involved in this whole horrible ordeal.
My thoughts are with the Lockmiller's. "

el duderino wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:48 PM:

" I was unaware that are actually people who still think OJ is innocent. I can't imagine what it would be like to try and have an intelligent conversation with one of you. "

OriginalMJ wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Just because the evidence was weak doesn't mean he didn't do it. As for Beaman spending 13 years behind bars, I feel the same way about Beaman that I feel about David Hendricks: he got off easy. "

dwarf wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:14 PM:

" cat55ire - No, we don't have law degrees. Do you? Do you need a law degree to agree with the original court's decision? Do you need one to agree with the supreme court's decision? I mean, which one of these do we need a law degree to evaluate? "

who are you people wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:01 PM:

" The Supreme Court didn't clear him of anything and no one in the justice system has declared Beaman innocent. The supreme court said that his right to due process of law was violated. There's a giant difference between that and a declaration of innocence. He still stands accused of the charges. Anyone in town, and especially on either campus at the time of the murder will remember 2 things...Jennifer was a sweet young woman who deserved better than to be murdered in her room just as her adult life was beginning and Alan Beaman was a highly suspect, weird, angry, defiant young man who definitely fit the profile. Only Alan and the real muderer (if a different person) know if he's innocent or not. We'll probably never know. "

cats55ire wrote on Jun 13, 2008 11:04 AM:

" Jennifer Lockmiller was murdered!!!!
The murderer knows who he is and should be punished!
End of comment!!!!!
I think the majority of comment writers on this article think they're experts!!!!! What don't you all get law degrees and make some changes! "

7777777 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 10:18 AM:

" About time.Were in the world did they get a jury to convict this guy?Maybe they should start putting the prosecutors in jail who put innocent people in prison!!!!!!! "

windycity2 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 9:30 AM:

" What should happen is that Prosecutors that hide evidence, create false evidence and use tactics that send innocent people to prison should receive a mandatory 10 years in prison. maybe that will stop false prosecution of these innocent people! "

dwarf wrote on Jun 13, 2008 9:15 AM:

" Ha! Nope, I have no evidence whatsoever that Beaman didn't do this.

However, I think it safe to say that a unanimous decision by the court shows that they think there was insufficient evidence for that conviction.

One of the chief foundations of our justice system is that innocent people shouldn't be in prison. Another is that the police & prosecutors need to present a case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court determined that the latter did not happen, and therefore the risk was too great that an innocent person was in prison. "

Voice of Reason2 wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:55 AM:

" Biometric: We are all sorry for your loss. But do you want this guy in prison for a crime he may not have committed? It does seem the evidence is a bit weak. Hope justice is served to whoever did this. "

soothsayer wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:54 AM:

" This case is a good example of the perverse incentives that drive much of our legal system. Prosecutors build a name for themselves by the number and type of convictions they get, regardless of whether those convictions were justifiable or not. "

isunormalil wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:52 AM:

" Bomotronic, you want closure I am sure! But, "CLOSURE" isn't an innocent man sitting behind bars because the police was too lazy to do their jobs. "

Pastafarian wrote on Jun 13, 2008 8:48 AM:

" So What: Keep ringing that Chicago bell all you want. We are no where near the condition of Chicago. As for why go to the expense of convicting someone, exactly. Maybe the question should be, Why go to the trouble and expense of prosecuting someone who is obviously guilty while ignoring other suspects. As for your question about reasonable doubt, perhaps that is where you are mixed up. The burden of proof is GUILT, not INNOCENCE beyond a reasonable doubt. "

Pastafarian wrote on Jun 13, 2008 7:29 AM:

" finally justice has prevailed. Alan may have been cocky and a bit of a hippie but he did not commit this crime. There are two other prime suspects that both fled the state, I wonder if the police and the State's attorney are going to do their job correctly and unbiased now.

This is yet another reason to abolish the death penalty. What if Alan had been executed? You can't reverse that decision. "

earthling wrote on Jun 13, 2008 7:26 AM:

" To BookLover: If you are a booklover maybe you should read some. Read some books without pictures. Maybe you could find old articles about this case and become less ignorant. Bill Yoder had NOTHING to do with this mess created by Charley Reynard and James Souk. "

floyd wrote on Jun 13, 2008 7:10 AM:

" Would be interesting to know who John Doe is and if maybe he's kin to some prominent person in the area or is that person himself. Also OJ wasn't set up and any moron would know that a cop wouldn't plant evidence and have it backfire in his face if the person winds up with an air tight alibi of being miles away with witnesses. "

The Peanut Gallery wrote on Jun 13, 2008 6:52 AM:

" The real question will be if the S.A.'s Office opts to re-try the case. It will be a rather momentous decision, involving enormous County resources. Not only will the S.A.'s staff be heavily burdened - again - but probably the Public Defender's, as well [Beaman's family MUST be tapped out by now]. "

so what wrote on Jun 13, 2008 6:36 AM:

" Hey dwarf: You know something that most others don't? Do you proof beyond doubt that this guy is innocent? "

so what wrote on Jun 13, 2008 6:35 AM:

" This just makes me sick. Why do we go to the trouble and all the expense to convict someone, if all we are going to do several years down the road is let the person go? David Hendricks, Alan Beaman...and now I have a feeling that Pelo is going to get off too! Doesn't make me feel too safe in this town anymore!! It's going down hill FAST....mark my words. I a few years we are going to rival some areas in Chicago. Doesn't help that Chicago is trucking all their "undesireables" down here. "

dancinggirl wrote on Jun 13, 2008 4:47 AM:

" dwarf: you need to read the whole court opinion. the court had to find some way to reverse the case because they thought it was weak even though they didn't see Beaman on the stand and didn't have the chance to measure his credibility. prosecutors did nothing wrong. Here's a question about fairness..... why do prosecutors have to turn over everything that may not even be admissible but if the defendant got a polygraph result that was bad for him,he doens't have to show it to anyone? If Beaman has a polygraph result somewhere that shows he is a liar, and was involved in the killing, he doesn't have to let anyone know that. I guess we'll never know. "

dwarf wrote on Jun 13, 2008 1:06 AM:

" Bomotronic - Yes, you deserve closure. But does an innocent guy deserve to stay in prison for you to get false closure?

I'd blame the police and prosecutors who fouled this up in the first place. If you're going to be upset, be upset at them. "

Bomotronic wrote on Jun 13, 2008 12:28 AM:

" Curious?!? Alan Beaman, eh!?! You all seem verily cheerful, as to this development of this mans impending appeal. All I know is Jennifer Lockmiller was my auntie, I remember hearing her play the piano as a little boy. I remember her introducing me to Micheal Jackson and the Beatles. She was a beautiful person, and a real human being. She is more to me than words on a news page. I would like closure, if not Alan Beaman then "john Doe" D***it!! What is wrong with this picrure. Of course I expect nothing more but apathy from you 'oh-so-wise Pantagraphian commentators' . But to me, this is nothing but an open wound that as it appears, will never be healed. And more so for others than I. "

The Cats wrote on Jun 12, 2008 11:28 PM:

" To "dman"..."we all"? Than ks fro including me in your delusion but you are completely wrong. Why would it be up to the accused to find the guilty party? Take a high school civics class. To "Woo"...the court is not to blame and neither are the police. It was the States Attorney at fault. Please note that "the court system" set him free. BTW to those who say the judicial process should be faster and the appeals limited...this is but one of many examples why the system as it is right now is just fine. "

BackfromGAafter5yrsSameB-N wrote on Jun 12, 2008 10:45 PM:

" marlaj56: I am assuming dman is the one you are calling moron. I reread my posting, though, and I do want to clarify something. "dman" stated, this guy reminds me of what we all said about the OJ case.
"Ok, OJ..if you didn't do it..then just who the heck did". "

I just want to clarify that "we all" did not say that about the OJ case. SOME people said about OJ what they are now saying about Alan. I agree in that I see that parallel in public opinion of the two cases, but I do NOT agree with dman's point of view or logic. I may have just made things more confusing by trying to clarify, but I hope it is obvious that I feel many people think/thought both men are guilty of the crimes because they don't know who else might have committed them, while I feel they are both innocent and one was set up (OJ) and the other (Alan) took the hit and did time because other suspects were not pursued. "

michelle24 wrote on Jun 12, 2008 10:45 PM:

" May the person responsible be caught. Congrats, Alan. I hope you're home soon, where you belong. "

Woo wrote on Jun 12, 2008 10:39 PM:

" I dont and never did think he did it. I dont know the guy but the times just did.nt make since and the cops and the court hid evidents as they do often in Mclean county court and the blm police dept. "

paperdoll wrote on Jun 12, 2008 10:30 PM:

" I've been following this case since the start and watched the program about it on TV. I have felt all along that he was innocent. I am so happy for him and his family. He will never get the last 13 years back, but at least he is young enough to start over. I certainly hope IWU gives him an honorary diploma if he hasn't already graduated. The court systems STINKS. "

isunormalil wrote on Jun 12, 2008 9:47 PM:

" What is really sad is Allan has spent 13 years of his livelyhood behind bars for a crime he didn't committ. "

marlaj56 wrote on Jun 12, 2008 9:29 PM:

" Nothing like OJ you moron. Alan Beaman was the man they wanted and the man they convicted. Look back at the other suspect that should have been pursued. Funny isn't it, that as soon as the lead detective starts finding evidence pointing to someone besides Beaman, he is removed from the case. Corruption runs rampant in every community. "

BackfromGAafter5yrsSameB-N wrote on Jun 12, 2008 9:15 PM:

" dman: I agree with your statement, but I think our reasons are probably different. I think OJ was set up. Of course, I was out of the country when the murders were committed, so maybe I missed something. The Zimbabwean newspaper article describing what occurred was just one (run-on) sentence long. It was not biased like the articles in this country that basically accuse the innocent before they have their day in court. I went to Wesleyan with Alan and his brother. I never thought he was guilty. You cannot accuse someone just because it seems logical they would possibly commit a crime. We were not "friends" but he lived in the same 13 person dorm my boyfriend lived in. There are two other guys I have long suspected, though. Hopefully one day the truth will come out. I am glad that Alan might get a chance at freedom, though. "

Kevin wrote on Jun 12, 2008 9:12 PM:

" GREAT!!! i always thought he didn't do it. timeline just didn't fit "

Greed wrote on Jun 12, 2008 8:29 PM:

" I felt so at the time, and I still feel Alan Beaman was railroaded. A prosecutor, as a officer of the court, has the obligation to see that justice is carried out. This means revealing all the evidence, even if it means losing in court. With another suspect, there was reasonable doubt as to Beaman's guilt. "

BookLover wrote on Jun 12, 2008 6:52 PM:

" Way to lose yet another case Yoder! "

dman wrote on Jun 12, 2008 6:18 PM:

" this guy reminds me of what we all said about the OJ case.
"Ok, OJ..if you didn't do it..then just who the heck did". "

Ads by Yahoo!

Online Degrees

Weekly New Car Bargains

See Today's Mortgage Rates