Judge Brian Hill has issued another extension of time—until 9/14—for him to respond to a habeas corpus petition from convicted rapist Eric Frimpong, a former UCSB soccer player who is currently in the midst of a six-year prison term. In the habeas petition, which was filed on 1/5 in Santa Barbara, Frimpong’s attorneys argue that he is innocent and did not receive a fair trial, and that there is evidence exonerating him.
Frimpong Habeas Corpus Petition Waits Longer
Thursday, August 11, 2011


Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace




Previous Month



Comments
This is he hideous Judge that railroaded that poor African.
How could a woman be raped on the beach and yet not have one drop of sand on her...not one.
The trial was a disgrace and Judge Hill should be removed from the bench and prosecuted.
rstein9 (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 7:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Funny how when Casey Anthony is found not guilty by a jury, everyone says you have to respect the decision of the jury, but when this jury found Mr. Frimpong guilty there is no respect for their decision.
johnny123 (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They found him guilty because the Judge and the Prosecutor excluded all the evidence in his favor.
It all rested on eye witness...since there was no DNA or anything else that tied him to the rape.
eye witness accounts are the most unreliable of all
i repeat
judge hill should be impeached and prosecuted
rstein9 (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Funnier even is the fact that none of us were there in either case :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To an outside observer the evidence seems to weigh greatly in favor of a new trial. Why is the judge resisting? This should be handed to a different judge for the decision to retry, and if retried, to conduct the trial. Guilty or innocent, it seems justice has not been done. A new trial would serve justice, one way or the other.
neworion (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 1:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If new or better evidence is provided, that would be the way to go :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 1:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Neworion--you put it perfectly. "To an outside observer..."
If you weren't in the courtroom every single day of this trial (like the jury members), you really can't objectively decide whether or not the defendant is guilty. This is our justice system.
Rstein--Frimpong's DNA was found inside of the victim. Yet, when arrested the next morning, he claimed he had no idea who she was (very important part of the case).
Lastly, this case has already been appealed, and denied (by a higher court).
turningthepage (anonymous profile)
August 11, 2011 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Even if he had crawled through a stranger's window and raped them he would have been out already. There is something really wrong here.
Zevonfan (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2011 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let's hope that Judge Hill corrects this wrong. . .
The evidence in the HC petition is overwhelming and IF it was presented during the trail, Frimpong would have been found not guilty.
Too many facts have been ignored and misrepresented.
Turningthepage: Your statements on this article and previous ones are just wrong. If you are a juror as you imply, no wonder he was conviceted as you were drinking the koolaid.
"Rstein--Frimpong's DNA was found inside of the victim. Yet, when arrested the next morning, he claimed he had no idea who she was (very important part of the case)." Both of these statements are not truthful.
Let's wait on Judge Hills ruling in a few weeks. The evidence is overwhelming. I, for one, beleive that Frimpong will get a new trial or have this conviction overturned due to the new evidence of his actual innocence.
StayInvolved (anonymous profile)
August 29, 2011 at 7:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)