Florida: Undisclosed evidence may free man from death row

Gee, does this sound like what I've been arguing all week?:

More than 20 years ago, a jury took only about an hour to convict James Floyd of murdering an 86-year-old woman in her home. They took another hour to send him to death row.

The evidence seemed compelling. Police caught Floyd cashing the victim's stolen checks. A bloodied sock, a jailhouse snitch, tire tracks and some hairs also were presented at trial.

But on Thursday, the Florida Supreme Court tossed out Floyd's conviction and death sentence because prosecutors didn't share other important evidence with defense attorneys. The ruling called the new evidence "unsettling."

That evidence included statements from a neighbor who claimed to see two other men entering the old woman's St. Petersburg house about the time of her death, as well as inconsistent reports from detectives and information about how the snitch tried to leverage his testimony for a lighter sentence on his own charges.

"It's outrageous. It's important evidence," said Pam Izakowitz, Floyd's Tampa attorney. "It could exonerate Floyd. He didn't kill her."

And the blood-thirsty worshippers of the Culture of Death STILL insist that they're only concerned about "her wishes" being fulfilled.

Whose wishes again?