Many readers know or believe they know that Patrick Swiney is innocent of the crime for which he was convicted.  This introduction is for people who want an update or are not familiar with Patrick's case of innocence and how it developed.

THE STATE:  Alabama
THE CRIME:  Capital Murder 1987
THE CONVICTION:  Trial by jury, sentenced to Live without the possibility of parole 1989
THE VICTIMS:  Betty Snow Swiney and Ronald Pate

PAYTON PLACE:  Betty and Patrick were married only 5 months when she and Ronnie were shot and killed in Patrick and Betty's marriage home.  Ronnie was Betty's ex-husband.

NATURAL CONCLUSION:  Patrick came home one night, saw Ronnie and Betty having an adulterous engagement, and he shot them both in a "sudden heat of passion."

PROBLEM WITH THE CONVICTION:  Assuming Patrick was the shooter, would the shootings be Premeditated Murder?  No.  The trial judge had already told the lawyers for defense and prosecution that the most they had was a case of Manslaughter.

WHAT PATRICK CAN TELL US ABOUT THE CRIME:  Patrick was hit in the back of the head as he approached the house that night.  The last thing he remembers seeing was his wife and a man through the window, performing adulterous acts.  The next thing he remembers is being at his sister's house telling her to call 911.  Patrick does not know who the shooter is.  He does not know what happened that night.

EVIDENCE OF INNOCENCE:  There are mounds of evidence pointing to innocence even without Patrick's forensic investigation team finding scientific evidence that Patrick did not and could not have fired the alleged murder weapon.
 

1.     Patrick was convicted on hearsay from the grave.  It is impossible to defend against 3rd and 4th hand hearsay when the alleged 1st hand party is deceased and buried and unable to collaborate the testimony.

2.     Patrick was convicted on circumstantial evidence.  It is impossible to defend against misrepresentations by the police - his former colleagues in previous years - and witnesses for the prosecution when there are no witnesses for the defense being asked to testify who could have discredited the prosecution's witnesses.

3.     The State of Alabama had an alibi for Patrick but tried him anyway.  According to police reports, Patrick was at his sister's house at the time 911 was called, 9:30 p.m.  According to the prosecution, Patrick was at the crime scene at 9:30 p.m. answering the telephone call made by Ronnie's other ex-wife.

4.     The Alabama forensic lab found no gunshot residue on Patrick.  This report was withheld from the jury.

5.     The Alabama forensic lab found no blood on Patrick.  This report was also withheld from the jury.

SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE OF INNOCENCE: See Dr. Nordby's report at:
http://www.patrickswiney.com/intro.html (either in HTML or PDF).

      View Dr. Nordby's qualifications at http://www.finalanalysisforensics.com/
 

PATRICK'S BACKGROUND HISTORY:  See www.patrickswiney.com
Until the scientific evidence of innocence was presented in 2004, Patrick did not know if he was the shooter or not.  Now he knows for sure that he did not shoot anyone.  His wonderings of whether or not he was responsible for their deaths are over.
 
 

FOLLOW PATRICK'S CASE THROUGH THE COURTS IN ALABAMA:  The table at:
http://www.patrickswiney.com/intro.html
is a listing of the pleadings to the courts and their responses.  As new pleadings and responses become available, they will be added at the bottom of the table.  As of this date (July 1st 2004) Patrick's lawyer is preparing an appeal brief that is due in the court on July 9th 2004.  Please return often to read the updates.