I hope that the truth is discerned. . .

I read nothing about Mr. Noling's defense counsel having him submit to a current polygraph. While not admissible into a court of law for prosecution purposes, if the polygraph results show reasonable doubt re: the purported facts of the case, you can bet his defense counsel would be publicizing that.

For the same reason polygraphs aren't admissable in court, they shouldn't be used in the court of public opinion: they simply aren't accurate enough.

Sorry Tyrone. You have light skin and if they said you did it, then it is true. Only when they blame a brother or sister do they have a chance of being wrong.

I have read much about this case through the years. This is what is not shared by Mr Noling.

trial proceedings from the case page 851

Noling - "the old man wouldn't stop, that he kept coming at him"

trial proceedings from the case
page 923 and 926
Wolcott confided in a female friend and at the trial she testified that Wolcott came to her house implicating Noling in the murders.

Wolcott - " Noling, had a gun, he pulled the trigger" "everything went wrong we killed them"

That is a little of the evidence that placed this man where he is today. There is more evidence than this, but this is what stuck out clearly in the case to me. Maybe Mr. Noling would like to spend time to explain these two facts now.

There is another piece that he and his accomplices admit to and that is that they were actively seeking and robbing ederly people in the area. They would pretend to break down and need to use a phone to try to get help. Then they would rob the people. The admitted to 2 other robberies in the area.

@RealJoker - whatever.

In my opinion, Noling should be locked up for life regardless of his guilt in this particular crime. He had a history of beating up old people -- he should suffer. One problem here is there is just as much chance Noling did this as there is he did not. If his punishment for this crime would have been limited to life without parole, justice would be served either way and his story would have drawn little or no attention from outside parties or the media. The way it is, we continue to spend money trying to execute him and the family of the victims, and all others involved, continue to have to see him try to avoid that fate.

If the glove doesn't fit, then you must acquit. Even if all other evidence points to the guilt of the person. Right? Someone could have been "stressed" into telling a little "white lie" to help get a conviction on him. Nah, the police only do that kind of stuff to the brothers and sisters.

If he is innocent, and is eventually executed, he wouldn't be the first.

Oh he was just a good model citizen in society and not worthy of punishment.

He was robbing other elderly people in and around at the area at the time, by gun point, but didn't do this one.

And finally, he was concerned about the lady in the other robbery, when his gun ACCIDENTALLY went off.

YA RIGHT!

Tyrone Noling had nothing to do with this crime.

There are "others" out there that KNOW who committed the crime and it wasn't Tyrone and his punk friends.

Is Tyrone guilty of other crimes, yes, but not of killing the Hartigs.

There are similarites between Tyrone's case and Resh/Gondor (wrongfully incarcerated for 16 yrs).

1) Same corrupt prosecutor - David Norris

2) Overzealous investigator - Ron Craig

3) Took almost 2 yrs to "build" a case against them - or should I say build a house of cards?

4) Evidence that wasn't tested/presented to the jury.

Vigluicci and anyone else in Portage County still tied to the case will NEVER admit they did anything wrong or continue to do anything wrong. They would rather have an innocent person die than to admit they screwed up.

They are all about the "wins" instead of justice.

You know what scares me? That there are forces clearly at work in our legal system with every interest in suppressing pivotal evidence. I think somewhere along the way an important idea got lost, that exoneration of the innocent should be everyone's goal in the courtroom. I'm not saying that's true in this case, but it has been true in many, many others. Thankfully we have DNA these days to assist in cases of wrongful imprisonment, but states need to adopt a repayment program like that in Texas... if nothing else, the state owes a wrongfully imprisoned inmate a just compensation for the loss, plus an ongoing stipend to supplement.

Crime of the Century,

I agree with you whole heartedly. If even one innocent person is wrongly convicted and punished, it casts doubt on the credibility of the entire justice system.

In the case that an innocent person is wrongly convicted and is later exonerated, he/she should be handsomly compensated financially. The larger the compensation, the greater the incentive for the justice system to get it right the first time.

I'd rather see 1,000 guilty men go free than one innocent person behind bars.

@Johnsmith2009, I definitely would take one innocent man for the sake of locking up 1000 guilty. I think my line is drawn at 4. I would have to think twice at 4 guilty men for 1 innocent. If you think about it, the number of innocents that get locked up probably don't even come close to the number of guilty that walk the streets free because of the ease of beating our justice system.

The Americam Justice System = Where a jury of twelve strangers can convict you, a judge can impose the death sentence, and strangely enough you can be completely innocent.

It has happened before and as long as there is a chance of it happeneing again, Capital Punishment has no place in our justice system. You can turn a wrongly convicted man free and reimburse him but if he is dead, how do you correct that?

Noling isn't innocent. Even if he didn't do this, he's far from innocent. That said, our justice system is likely the best in the world. It is, however, designed and implemented by human beings, every one of whom, no matter how well intended, carries prejudices and assumptions in to each and every decision. The system will never be perfect and for that reason, the death penalty should be removed as an option. It's not about the number of guilty folks we are willing to set free in order to protect a innocent one, it's about the fundamental reality that human beings are not capable of treating everyone equally and, since they are not, society must do what it can to minimize the effect of that on even ONE innocent person. That means no death penalty.

all for death penalty removal ... also all for hard labor in place of it

all for death penalty removal ... also all for hard labor in plaace of it

Michael - what if you were the 1 in 1000?

They do the crime, then they whine when it's time for their punishment! Wuss! Take your punishment and deal with it! If it wasn't you it was one of your friends and since the other suspect is already dead...oh well!!!

If the facts prove beyond a reasonable doubt then he is guilty. Take what is coming to you.

This story doesn't cite much to raise doubt, only
that other sources wrote info about "raising
doubts about his involvement"... WELL, what did
they write about?? This staff writer obviously wants this to look questionable, but doesn't give
us anything.

The ciggy could only implicate him further...
I hope they're not trying to convince anyone that
if his DNA isn't on it, it means he's innocent.

What "evidence" are they saying was kept from
the defense?

marshall pierson, even before I read your post I
was thinking the same thing... have him and all
his "friends" take polygraphs, if they all pass -
then we have something here. Dan, investigators
use lie detector tests all the time do narrow
down/eliminate suspects. Even in some areas,
they can be used in court if both sides of the
case, the defense and prosecution, agree
beforehand. If all the people involved either
passed or flunked, it would decrease the small %
of unreliability. If I were on death row and not
guilty, I sure would be screaming to take one.

I'm not writing a novel here, so I'll just ask about one more piece of omitted info... were his
"friends" convicted of something? Apparently they claimed to take in the crimes (but later
recanted). Serve time, etc?

crazy story... but who can you believe? i hope that if he is innocent that he will be set free and given a second chance

Noling took and passed a polygraph. There was DNA at the scene that did not match Noling or any of his accomplices. Noling never ever beat up elderly people. There is no evidence to that whatsoever, but evidence to the contrary. Noling did not target the elderly. His crimes at eighteen years old, were all random and committed within blocks from his home. The murders were committed fifteen miles away in an area that would be hard to find with a map. There were three accomplices, one who only knew Noling two days before the murders; the only one of the four who got total immunity of not only the murders, but all of the petty crimes they were committing in Alliance in that time frame. That was not a bad deal for a scared fourteen year old runaway who had nothing to lose by lying about being involved in the murders and fingering Noling. Butch Wolcott and Noling did not get along and the Prosecutor played on that fact. All three of the accomplices have recanted their stories. Two were Noling's friends which is understandable. But what about Butch Wolcott, the fourteen year old? What incentive does he have to recant? He lives in Hawaii and is enjoying the surf. He got to walk free. Butch has been telling anyone who will listen that he lied. Why would he make his whereabouts known to Noling's if he were afraid of Noling? Butch knows he sold his soul to the Devil and he cannot live with himself knowing that his actions helped to kill an innocent man! I hope that the Beacon will interview Butch Wolcott and you will see the prosecutions case unravel. Please also read the story and see actual documents from the case that were never presented to the defense. The Cleveland Plain Dealer conducted an unbiased thorough investigation of their own and concluded that Noling was innocent. You can read about it and view the documents at http://www.cleveland.com/doubts/

County Persecutor Vic Vigluicci argues, according to the story, that Mr. Noling should be executed because "a jury found him guilty based on the evidence."

How did this persecutor ever persuade a jury to convict Mr. Noling?

Countless innocent people are convicted by juries every day. Hardly a day goes by that a wrongfully convicted person isn't freed. And a pretty big number of wrongfully convicted death row inmates have been freed.

Why, weren't Randy Resh and Bob Gondor wrongfully persecuted by this same persecutor, Vic Vigluicci, and set free on appeal after the truth came out?

How is it, then, that Vigluicci argues that we should be satisfied that Mr. Noling is guilty because a jury convicted him?

Something is rotten in Denmark, as the saying goes.

Vigluicci's argument persuades ME that Mr. Noling is INNOCENT!!!

CELIE, thanks. (If what you typed is true.) Do you have any other interest in this case, besides just a casual observer?

"Then, authorities put the teenage Noling, who had a lengthy rap sheet as a neighborhood th.ug, and his friends from Alliance at the home for the robbery. They had been busted before for robbing elderly victims, and Noling was in state prison at the time."

This is oblique: Are "they" Noling and the friends, or just the friends? How did they place him at the robbery... just from statements? When and what for was he in state prison? I guess the writer means that the "friends" robbed elderly victims while Noling was in prison? This is unclear, but if you want to persuade to believe he's clean, you've gotta be precise.

Geeze... the ABJ is blockin' "th.ug"

CELIE, ok I read the first five articles from that link (the most important, probably), and I'll read the others, later. However, none of the 6 total articles I read mentioned anything about a polygraph. Where did you get this from? It seems the writers would mention this compelling tidbit. One story even mentioned that the other suspect refused to take one, but no mention about Noling taking one. Hmmm.

Also, you said, "Noling did not target the elderly." However, the article that you use as a source states, "The same week the Hartigs were killed, Noling was robbing old people in nearby Alliance" ...as in multiple robberies. One of you two are wrong, either you or your source. Which one is it?