wrongful convictions

September 11, 2017 By Emilio 7 Comments

Review of Confession Tapes True East

Confession Tapes episode one True East
Rating *****

The new Netflix documentary series Confession Tapes is an eye opener for anyone who does not believe in false confessions. The first episode tells the story of Atif Rafy and Sebastian Burns, two young men tricked into confessing and who remain in prison.

The filmmakers allow the story to develop without spinning it to a particular viewpoint. Viewers get to listen to the rationale of lead detective Bob Thompson and prosecutor Roger Davidheiser try to defend how they put two innocent people in prison for the rest of their lives.

As you listen to these two men tell in great detail how they went about setting Atif and Sebastian up for murder, you want to scream at the TV. Okay, I admit it, I screamed at the TV. Detective Thompson can’t hide his dishonesty. He admits to leaking details of the investigation to the press. Like the time when he told the press that Atif Rafy and Sebastian Burns had fled the country. The truth is they were free to leave the country and they told the police where they were going. If you were to look up the definition of tunnel vision, you would see pictures of Bob Thompson and Roger Davidheiser.

I won’t get into the dirty tricks these two men played to get their supposed confessions, but I will mention a few of the more despicable acts they undertook. One that stands out was the move Roger Davidheiser made by personally calling the employer of a person whose testimony he wanted. What he got was a perjured statement, made under threat, that sealed the fate of the two defendants. Next, we have detective Thompson explain away his unwillingness to follow a lead that was hand delivered to him, a lead that pointed to the best suspects.

Let’s not forget trial judge Charles Mertel, who allowed in the confessions, gathered through illegal means (in the U.S.), and denied the defendants every opportunity to put up a defense.

This case is disturbing on so many levels, from the juror whose only comment was on how well dressed the prosecutor was, to the judge who made questionable rulings that prevented a fair trial, to the lead detective and prosecutor who pursued their suspects even after learning the identity of the people most likely responsible for the crime.

Atif and Sebastian have exhausted their appeals. I pray that the right people will view this film and allow the truth to set them free. I’ll comment on the other episodes in this excellent documentary series as I see them.

Read my review of Season two here.

December 7, 2016 By Emilio 1 Comment

Review of Who Killed These Girls?

Review of Who Killed These Girls? by Beverly Lowry
Rating *****

How is it that so many supposed professionals can look at a confession that has every indication of being coerced continue with a prosecution? It’s unbelievable to me that so many detectives, prosecutors, district attorneys, judges, and jurors can be so incompetent that they can’t use common sense when deciding someone’s life. If a detective has to feed details of the crime to a person making a confession so that his confession matches the evidence, that is not a confession. If there is not one shred of physical evidence to back up that confession, it’s a false confession.

The same pattern repeats over and over again. One or more individuals is tried and convicted based on nothing more than a false confession. Years later, most often through DNA testing, it is discovered that DNA found at the scene doesn’t match any of the people convicted of the crime. So what do the prosecutors and detectives and judges responsible for the mistake do? They claim that there must have been another individual involved and it doesn’t necessarily mean that they made a mistake. They’re still guilty because twelve jurors said they were guilty. What about the appeal system? A complete waste of time. Those judges are just as incompetent as the people who made the original mistake.

A story like this takes years to run its course. Author Beverly Lowry spent eight years working on this book. She examines the crime, the murder and rape of four young girls in Austin, Texas on December 6, 1991, from every possible perspective. Through a very careful review of the record, she paints a clear picture of how so many people got so much wrong. If you stick with the evidence, it is almost certain that the two men responsible for this heinous crime were in the yogurt shop as the girls were closing up. They committed the crime, started the fire on the shelves where there were combustibles, and fled out the back door.

As of right now, those two men are still at large. But they made a big mistake. They left their DNA. It wasn’t mentioned in the book whether or not that unknown DNA was run through the CODIS database. Anyone searching for the truth would take this step. People who commit crimes like this don’t lead exemplary lives afterward.

I read the eBook version and listened to the audio version using Whispersyn. My only complaint was the lack of images. There’s no excuse for that omission.

Watch the 48 Hours episode about this crime here.

January 10, 2016 By Emilio 1 Comment

Nancy Grace proves Steven Avery is innocent

I am not a fan of Nancy Grace. So when I heard that she was devoting an entire show to the Steven Avery case with the teaser that she was going to show the evidence the documentary left out, I thought I would watch with an open mind. Maybe there is important evidence that might help sway me one way or the other. What I got instead was another Nancy tirade where she gets her facts wrong and makes unsupported claims about evidence.

According to Nancy Grace, Netflix and the filmmakers were working for the defense and only showed one side of the story. If anyone showed only one side of the story, it was Nancy Grace. She continually made the claim that the film was done by a couple of film students. Considering that the film took ten years to make, it seems highly unlikely that they were film students for all of those ten years. So what was the evidence that was left out? She talked about Steven using *67 when calling to ask for Teresa Halbach. She said that Steven once answered the door in his robe. Those are interesting details, but they don’t sway me one way or the other. Nancy showed pictures of the police holding hand cuffs and ankle restraints. That is pretty damning evidence, especially if you were to believe the prosecutor’s original theory that Teresa was restrained on the bed in Steven’s trailer and raped and tortured. But there is no evidence to support that. Now if Teresa’s DNA was found on those handcuffs and restraints, he’s guilty. End of story. But I have not heard that. So now we know that Steven may be into bondage. The ankle restraints appeared to have a furry lining. I guess Steven wanted his torture victims to be comfortable.

Nancy brought up the fact that Steven’s DNA was found under the hood of Teresa’s vehicle. I don’t have enough information on that evidence to speak with any authority. But if you believe that evidence was planted, and I do, then that evidence is not persuasive. Next Nancy begins to lay out the prosecution case. The vehicle was found on the salvage lot. She did show the video of Steven asking about the rumor he had heard about a cop placing it there. I’ll give her that one. Next she talks about Teresa’s key that was found in Steven’s trailer with Steven’s DNA on it. What she failed to mention was that Teresa’s DNA was not found on the key. How does that happen? She talks about the blood in Teresa’s vehicle. She talks about the defense claim that the blood came from a vial of blood. But she doesn’t mention that Steven’s fingerprints were not found anywhere on or in the vehicle. She also doesn’t show the evidence room footage that shows that someone had tampered with that evidence. Next Nancy talks with disdain about how Teresa’s bones were found in a fire pit. What she fails to mention is that there were three different burn locations. I believe the defense theory that Teresa’s body was most likely burned in the large drum and then the bones were then poured onto the burn pit. The person who did that, however, did not get all of the bones out of the drum. Nancy does put on the footage of Steven’s girlfriend Jodi talking about phone records that show she called and talked with Steven when the crime was supposed to have been committed and made a second call later that evening, but she doesn’t play the audio recording of those two calls. You can’t listen to those recordings and envision any scenario that Steven was involved in a brutal crime and then talked so calmly to his girlfriend.

Lastly Nancy comes to the defense of fellow prosecutor Ken Kratz. She doesn’t mention the sexting scandal. She doesn’t mention anything about how Ken Kratz prosecuted two people on the same crime but told the jurors in each trial two different stories about how it happened. She doesn’t say anything about how Ken Kratz put an innocent sixteen-year-old in prison for forty years over a coerced confession.

Brendan Massey is innocent. Anyone with any common sense can see that. When Brendan’s fourteen-year-old cousin recanted her statements implicating Brendan, that should have been enough for Ken Kratz to drop all charges. When no evidence was found that backed up Brendan’s confession, that should have been enough. When Brendan got on the stand and told jurors that he made it all up, that should have been enough. When it was revealed that Brendan’s own public defender coerced another confession, that should have been enough. When Brendan’s mother denied police claims that she elected to not be present for Brendan’s interrogation, that should have made Ken Kratz think twice. If he simply watched the four-plus hours of Brendan trying to give the detectives what they wanted so he can go home to watch Wrestle Mania, that should have been enough for Ken Kratz to reverse course and save one child’s future. So no, Nancy, I have no sympathy for Ken Kratz.

As for Steven, if I had been on the jury, I would have voted not guilty because I have reasonable doubt. Steven doesn’t act guilty. He spends every minute of every day going over his case looking for something that might free him. Would a guilty person do that? Nancy Grace does not have the best track record in pinning guilt on anyone.

The documentary series Making a Murderer is one of the best documentaries I have seen. It shows how unjust are justice system is. When Brendan asks that he be assigned a new public defender, the judge asks Brendan why he wants a new lawyer. “He thinks I’m guilty,” Brendan replies. “I’m innocent.” “Well, I don’t see any conflict,” the judge says while at the same time realizing that his automatic response makes no sense. “I’m going to deny your motion.” Here’s an idea, the judge, lawyers, and appeal judges who upheld this travesty should all be disbarred and sent packing.

Update

So Nancy has another show dedicated to the Steven Avery Case. This time she has shocking new details that proves Steven and Brendan’s guilt. So what is the shocking new evidence. Well, she puts on Brendan’s coerced confession. She shows Brendan on the witness stand being drilled by the assistant prosecutor. You know the one where he’s asking Brendan about what book talks about a woman being raped and tortured. If all you saw was Nancy’s show and her edited highlights, you would be just as disgusted as Nancy appears to be. But Nancy doesn’t show Brendan mentioning the book Kiss The Girls. She doesn’t show the cousin on the stand admitting that she made up the whole thing. She doesn’t show the police feeding Brendan the story he finally strings together. In the past, those who gave false confessions never had a chance because only the part Nancy showed would have been all they saw. This is different. Watch the video trying to get Brendan to admit that Teresa was shot in the head. “Something happened to her head, Brendan,” the police ask Brendan. “What happened? Tell us.” “He cut her hair,” Brendan replies, trying to come up with something to satisfy the police. Maybe Nancy still thinks the Central Park Five confessions are valid. Or how about the Memphis Three? Maybe Nancy should watch the Frontline special Confessions. Maybe then she’ll understand how false confessions happen. And by the way, there is not a single shred of evidence that supports Brendan’s confession. No blood evidence. No murder weapon. No DNA in the trailer where this all happened.

As for Jodi’s turn around. She’s obviously ticked off from that letter Steven sent her. How come Nancy didn’t play the audio of that fifteen minute phone call? The phone call that occurred at the very time Steven and Brendan were supposed to be raping and torturing Teresa? The phone call where Jodi is telling Steven how she expects him to be romantic when she gets out? Doesn’t sound like she’s talking to a monster then.

Update 2

I just saw all of part two of this docuseries. Read more here: Review-of-making-a-murderer-part-two

November 24, 2015 By Emilio 2 Comments

Review of Just Mercy

Review of Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson
Rating *****

At the center of this story is the wrongful conviction of Walter McMillian and the author’s attempts to free him. Interspersed between that story are other stories of wrongful convictions and sad accounts of a broken justice system. Along the way the author touches on a number of issues dealing with the justice system: mass incarceration, mandatory sentencing, racial bias, prison over crowding, cruel and unusual sentences for minors, the psychological impact of long term solitary confinement, the death penalty, and a host of other crime and punishment issues.

I am opposed to the death penalty. My feeling is that locking someone away for the rest of their lives is punishment enough. After reading this book, I am even more against the death penalty because of the unfair way that punishment is meted out. If you are poor, black or a minority, your chances are much greater of receiving the death penalty than a white person who can afford to put up a fight. The author talks about numerous cases wher defendants were convicted and sentenced to death simply because they couldn’t afford to hire experts to dispute the prosecutor’s theory. In one case of a wrongful conviction, the defense had only $500 to dispute the prosecutor’s expert that a gun found in the defendant’s mother’s home was the murder weapon. That $500 got him a mechanical engineer who was blind in one eye and who had almost no experience testifying as a gun expert.

All too often prosecutors oppose efforts to reopen cases where a potential wrongful conviction appears evident. They will ignore overwhelming evidence pointing to an error simply to save their record. The appeals courts seem to be a complete waste of time. Seldom is a wrongful conviction overturned on appeal, especially at the state level. Often those trying to free the innocent are forced to conduct their own investigation, including paying for DNA testing.

There were so many stories of dispassionate judges, jurors, prosecutors, detectives, and prison officials that it’s easy to see why Just Mercy is such a great title. One story that highlighted the inhumane treatment of solitary confinement was the story of Ian Manuel. Ian, thirteen, along with two older boys attempted to rob a couple in Florida. When the woman resisted, Ian shot her with a handgun given to him by one of the older boys. The woman was wounded in the cheek but survived. Ian’s appointed lawyer convinced Ian to plead guilty in hope of a lighter sentence. Instead, the judge sentenced this thirteen year old to life in prison without the possibility of parole. This was not a mandatory sentence. The heartless judge could have sentenced Ian as a juvenile where he would have been eligible for parole at age eighteen. When the author catches up to Ian he has been in solitary confinement for over fourteen years, locked away in a concrete box and prevented from all human contact. Can you imagine that happening to anyone let alone a thirteen year old boy? There’s no question that Ian deserved punishment, but the punishment should match the crime. At one point the author arranges for a photographer to take a few photographs of Ian to help put a face on his case. This is what Ian wrote to the author after the photo shoot, “I don’t know how to make you feel the emotion and importance of those photos, but to be real, I want to show the world that I’m alive! I want to look at those photos and feel alive! It would really help with my pain. I felt joyful today during the photo shoot. I wanted it to never end.” The author ultimately petitioned the Supreme Court to fight for Ian and thousands of other Ian’s locked away in tiny cells for the rest of their lives. The court ruled that it was indeed cruel and unusual punishment to sentence a juvenile to death or life in prison without parole.

Not everyone agreed with the Supreme Court’s ruling. The author tells the story of one judge who, after learning of the ruling, changed his life sentence without parole to a sentence of 175 years.

The author successfully gets Walter freed, but next comes the battle for compensation. Walter was sentenced in a state that did not offer compensation for wrongfully convicted men. Some states put a cap on awards as low as $25,000 regardless of how long that person was in prison. That is outrageous. Even the press has become desensitized to stories of wrongful convictions, claiming “innocence fatigue.” Really?

As the author states, our criminal justice system is set up to treat people better if they are rich and guilty than if they are poor and innocent. This book is must reading for anyone currently in or planning on becoming a part of the criminal justice system.

September 14, 2015 By Emilio 3 Comments

A Wrongful Conviction in the Making

This is a story unlike any other that I’ve come across. If you type in the search phrase “wrongful convictions” in the search box on this site, you will see the numerous cases of wrongful convictions that I have covered. Some of the wrongfully convicted are freed. Some are still in prison (see the story on Darlie Routier). In the case of Angelika Graswald, here is a wrongful conviction that hasn’t happened yet. The fact that this woman is even in jail facing murder charges is a miscarriage of justice.

I’m sure you’ve heard about this case. A woman and her boyfriend go kayaking on the Hudson River. The boyfriend’s kayak capsizes and he ends up drowning. The boyfriend, Vincent Viafore, isn’t found immediately. Angelika is questioned by police about the incident. She apparently made a comment about having removed the drain plug from her boyfriend’s Kayak. That statement, along with what some viewed as bizarre behavior after her boyfriend’s death, and a $250,000 life insurance policy, made Angelika a suspect in her boyfriend’s death. What is first reported by the media as an accident is soon turned into a murder plot. She confessed to staging the whole thing, according to police. The media jumps on the murder bandwagon and the story takes off.

That’s the story I heard and believed. That is until I watched the excellent 48 Hours episode Death On The Hudson. The 48 Hours episode starts with the police theory and the edited video confession of Angelika. If you didn’t go any further than the details I have already provided, you would think this is a slam dunk case. However, once all of the facts are laid out, anyone with any common sense can see that this was a tragic accident and nothing more.

First, let’s start with the damning admission that Angelika removed the drain plug on the Kayak. When the police detective heard that piece of incriminating evidence it was all over for Angelika. But here is the problem, and it’s a very big problem. The drain plug is on the top of the kayak, not the bottom as assumed by the detective and anyone else not familiar with this kayak. The drain is about the size of your pinky. You could splash water over that drain plug all day long and the kayak still wouldn’t fill up with enough water to capsize it. Angelika admitted to removing the drain plug weeks earlier, not on the day of the incident. She had removed it as a safety precaution for her cat who was playing in the kayak.

Next the police say she removed a ring on her boyfriend’s paddle that allowed it to not work properly, then she apparently took it from him so he couldn’t use it as a floatation device. Are you kidding me? Maybe the police should go out and test their theory, like 48 Hours did, before making ridiculous claims.

Angelika didn’t want to go kayaking that day. It was her boyfriend’s idea. So there is no premeditation. Angelika called 911 as soon as it happened. If she was going to kill her boyfriend, would she do that? Why not wait until you got back to shore?

What about her confession? She confessed, didn’t she? First, if you have any doubts that someone can make a false confession. please watch the documentary confessions here on this site. Angelika was interviewed, without a lawyer, for eleven hours. Her big concern, as she told police, was to get done with the interview so she could take care of her cat. She told the police what they wanted her to say so she could go home.

The river was choppy that day. The water temperature was 46 degrees. As water poured into the kayak from the waves, the boat capsized. Without a life vest, Vincent was in trouble fast. Hypothermia would have made swimming difficult. The choppy water made it harder for Angelika to assist her boyfriend. She called 911.

Now in order for the prosecutor to have a case the medical examiner has to declare Vincent’s death as a homicide. So what does the medical examiner do when Vincent’s body is discovered a month after the incident? He declares that Vincent died from drowning. He also called it a homicide because someone other than Vincent had removed the drain plug. The drain plug had nothing to do with the boat capsizing. The medical examiner needs to lose his job.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is how wrongful convictions occur. It starts with one or more detectives who have a hunch. As soon as they have something that seems to corroborate that hunch, they develop tunnel vision and try to fit the evidence to their theory. If the prosecutor is lazy, incompetent, or both, there is a trial. A not guilty verdict is not a guarantee. In fact, the odds will be against her once the trial starts, no matter how good her defense team is. Jurors want to believe that the police know what they’re doing. Why else would they be charging this woman with murder?

I sure hope someone in the prosecution office is paying attention. You don’t have a murder. You have a tragic accident. Drop the charges. It’s the right thing to do.

UPDATE

So now it looks like the prosecutor realized that he had no case. So what does he do? Let Angelika go? No. If he did that he would have to explain why it is that he let an innocent person sit in jail for two years when there was no case. So he came up with a better idea. How about we threaten her with a lengthy prison term. Then we’ll tell her that if she agrees to a plea deal, where she admits that she tried to kill her boyfriend, that she can be out of jail in as little as a year or two thanks to time served. If Angelika would have had a decent defense attorney, she would have gone to trial and won because they had no case against her. Orange County Chief Assistant District Attorney Christopher Borek should be ashamed of himself. He should have done the right thing and admit that they had no case. Defense attorney Richard Portale should find a new line of work. You don’t plea an innocent person.

July 14, 2015 By Emilio 1 Comment

Michael Morton’s Modern Day Classic

Review of Getting Life by Michael Morton
Rating *****

I am a huge fan of shows like 60 Minutes, 48 Hours, 20/20, and Dateline. I never pass up an opportunity to watch one of these shows when they’re on. Such was the case when I happened upon the story of Michael Morton. Michael Morton was wrongfully convicted of killing his wife and spent 25 years in prison before his exoneration. That story alone was enough to capture my attention. But what really made his story so compelling was that it was told by Michael Morton himself, sitting alone in a courtroom. It was one of the most captivating stories I’ve ever seen on TV, or anywhere really. That’s also when I learned that Michael Morton had written a book about his experience.

It’s not often that I would call a book a classic, but Michael’s book Getting Life is just that. Only someone who has lived through such an experience can explain what it was like. When that story is told by a gifted writer, you have the makings of a book that will stand the test of time. I would go as far as to say that this book is a modern day The Count of Monte Cristo.

Michael explains in often moving, poetic prose what it was like to see his life unravel. First his wife is brutally murdered. Then he is blamed and convicted of the murder. His three-year old son is taken from him and raised by the sister of his wife Christine. Michael describes in vivid detail his feelings and emotions as the gravity of what has happened sinks in. He paints an unflattering picture of life behind bars, of the justice system, and his feelings of abandonment and isolation.

As the years pass by things only get worse. His son eventually cuts off all ties with him. He changes his name to that of his adoptive parents. Year after year goes by as Michael sits alone in his bare cell, enduring the inhumane existence of life behind bars. But not all is so dark. Michael tries to make the best of a very bad situation. He takes advantage of education opportunities offered to inmates. He describes his classes as “…an Oasis of sanity in an intellectual desert.” Michael becomes an avid reader. His insatiable appetite for reading allows him to experience life through characters and events outside the prison walls. It offers him an escape from the hell that is prison. It also makes him a better writer.

When the Innocence Project takes on his case, Michael sees a glimmer of hope. But as is the case with so many wrongful convictions, the district attorney, John Bradley, fights all attempts to conduct DNA testing that could exonerate him. Years go by as Michael’s lawyers fight for DNA testing. Years are lost to an unjust criminal justice system unwilling to admit to having made mistakes. But eventually DNA testing is allowed and the real perpetrator is identified. A freedom of information request for the original detective’s investigation notes reveals exculpatory evidence that was not shared with Michael’s original defense team. As it turns out, even though Michael’s son Eric was only three years old, he was old enough to describe what had happened and pin the murder on another individual — a monster as three-year-old Eric describes him. There were reports of a mystery man in a green van seen by neighbors in the days before the murder. All of these details were purposely kept from the defense by prosecutor Ken Anderson. Worst of all, the man identified as Christine’s killer had killed another woman several years later.

Michael’s story is not over when he is finally freed from prison. He describes what it is like to go from a life of isolation and lack of stimulation to a life outside where he has never used a computer or cell phone. He writes about the slow path to reconciliation with his son, who has subsequently married and had a daughter of his own.

Then finally there is a twist not found in most wrongful convictions. The prosecutor who withheld evidence is held responsible. He loses his law license and his job as a judge. Seeing the former prosecutor and judge trying to gain sympathy for his financial losses as a result of his legal defense, without acknowledging his own prosecutorial misconduct, is sweet vindication. Instead of taking responsibility, Ken Anderson blames the system for failing Michael Morton. Then there is the prosecution of Mark Alan Norwood, the real killer.

As good as this book is, I don’t believe it is getting as much recognition as it deserves. For one, the publisher has decided to overprice the eBook. I can see $12.99 for a newly released book, but you can’t justify that price a year later. And despite a documentary called An Unreal Dream, a 60 minutes special, countless positive reviews and media appearances, the book is not doing as well as it should. I hope that changes. This book deserves your time.

After reading the book I watched the documentary An Unreal Dream on Netflix. I recommend doing the same. Seeing Ken Anderson squirm on the witness stand is worth the price of admission.