Open Mike Podcast

In 2005, 18-year-old Kenneth Nixon and his girlfriend were arrested and charged with murder, arson, and four counts of attempted murder in conjunction with a tragic Detroit firebombing that killed two children. While Kenneth’s girlfriend was acquitted by a jury, he was sentenced to two life sentences.

A collaborative review by the Medill Justice Project, Cooley Law Innocence Project, and Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit would ultimately determine Kenneth didn’t receive a fair trial, citing inconsistent eyewitness testimony, opportunistic jailhouse informant testimony, and poor arson investigation. On February 18th, 2021, Nixon was released from prison, 16 years after his conviction.

In this stunning installment of Open Mike, Kenneth reflects on the systemic biases that contributed to his wrongful conviction and provides updates about his post-release life — including inspiring advocacy work with the National Organization of Exonerees.

Show Notes

[00:01] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:17] Kenneth Nixon’s background and bio.

[01:43] Welcome to the show, Ken! You’ve been out of prison, almost eight months to the day! What was it like walking out of prison, getting your freedom back after sixteen years?

[02:45] So much has changed over sixteen years… what milestones did you miss the most when you were incarcerated?

[03:28] How many children did you have when you were convicted? Did you get to see them when you were in prison?

[04:44] In 2005 there’s a firebombing on Charleston Street in Detroit, Michigan. 20-month-old Tamyah Vaughn and her 10-year-old brother, Raylond were killed. Where were you when this happened?

[05:36] Later on you found out the crime happened around midnight… where was this house in relation to you? Did you know this family?

[06:27] Why do you think the thirteen-year-old brother of the victims told police he saw you commiting this crime?

[08:22] This young boy’s transcripts showed that he was inconsistent all along; he couldn’t get his stories straight!

[09:01] How did his statement come out at trial? Did your lawyer do a good job in demonstrating the inconsistent statements and impeach him?

[09:45] Your girlfriend Latoya Caulford was also charged, so she was unable to testify on your behalf. What was her charge?

[10:03] Did the boy say he saw her too?

[11:30] Latoya was acquitted… is this your children’s mother? Is she still part of yours and the kids’ lives?

[12:31] Let’s talk about the prosecutor, Patrick Muscat — he’s been a prosecutor on several of these wrongful conviction cases. He framed you to be a jilted lover who wanted revenge. When he said that, what was your reaction?

[13:33] There was testimony at your trial that stated you had gasoline on your clothes. Can you explain why that was?

[14:32] Police brought a dog in to identify fire accelerants at the scene of the crime. Muscat didn’t tell the jury that the dog is trained to detect petroleum-based products — a dog doesn’t know the difference between gasoline and perfume, or motor oil and glue, for example. Ken’s possessions that had gasoline on them were taken for testing at the lab and didn’t match any of the evidence at the scene of the crime.

[15:23] Didn’t a cop, Robert McGee, say that his dog linked your clothes to the crime, and his dog is never wrong?

[15:41] Were you satisfied with how your attorney defended you?

[16:31] We’ve done several wrongful conviction stories here on Open Mike, and one of the lynch pins that convicted many people were jail snitches, which are so problematic for so many reasons. And in your case, you had one who claimed you admitted to the firebombing. What do you know about this guy, and did he get a deal for testifying against you?

[17:52] Outrageous! Did he ever come clean and say he lied?

[18:56] Did the student’s interview eventually lead to your exoneration?

[19:51] Did you and your girlfriend get tried together?

[20:44] When you heard the guilty verdict, what was going on in your head?

[21:52] What did you tell the sentencing judge right before you were handed your sentence?

[22:07] How did the Justice Project at Northwestern University get involved in your case?

[25:24] How did the Brady violations come to light? Did the students identify them or did something else happen?

[26:43] The Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit and the Cooley Law Innocence Project got involved… I assume Northwestern University got them involved?

[27:28] What information was presented to the judge, and what did he do?

[28:09] One thing that’s a little strange here, is that the victims’ family were upset about your release. What do you think about that?

[28:58] You’re still a young man — what’s in store for you ahead?

[29:48] Ken is part of the National Organization of Exonerees which aims to bring awareness to the wrongful conviction crisis.

[30:27] Ken is the 28th person exonerated by the Wayne County Conviction Integrity Unit.

[31:43] Thank you to Kenneth Nixon for appearing on the show! There are so many similarities between all of these wrongful conviction cases, but thankfully the truth came out and Ken is reunited with his kids. Thank you for watching Open Mike — please subscribe, comment, like, and share the episode, we’d love to hear from you! We’ll see you soon.

In June 1993, Navy veteran Derrick Sanders was arrested for the shooting death of a Milwaukee man he had assaulted seven months previously. Although he had no role in the man’s death, inept legal counsel advised him to plead no contest to charges of first-degree intentional homicide, party to a crime, and he was sentenced to 21 years to life in prison.

Over the next twenty-five years, Derrick would be entrenched in legal rigmarole after filing a motion to withdraw his plea. He argued that, due to his attorney’s inadequate explanation of potential punishment, he did not intelligently enter the plea. In August 2018, a Milwaukee County circuit judge granted Derrick’s motion to withdraw the plea. A few weeks later, the Assistant District Attorney dropped the charges and Derrick was a free man.

In this riveting, all-new episode, Derrick and Mike discuss the complex, systemic deficiencies that enabled Derrick’s wrongful conviction. Derrick also reflects on ways he would have advocated for himself more staunchly and drops some firsthand truth bombs about what we should know to protect ourselves from a false accusation.

Show Notes

[00:01] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:33] Background and bio of today’s guest, Derrick Sanders.

[01:29] Hello, Mr. Sanders! Welcome to the show.

[02:07] You’re a Navy veteran who was honorably discharged, you had a well-paying job. But you got involved in assaulting Jason Bowie — what was that about?

[03:25] Your friend was Anthony Boddie, who got you involved in this, right? So, you were sticking up for him, beating up on the guy you thought stole the TV… when you left the scene, he was still alive?

[5:00] You decided to start cleaning up at the abandoned house… you had cleaning supplies there?

[05:32] So, you took off and what happened next?

[06:48] At what point did you hear the gunshot, or did you never hear it? Who shot Jason Bowie?

[07:33] Despite the fact that he was your friend, Anthony Boddie told police you were present for the shooting, which you weren’t. Is that correct?

[08:19] Didn’t John Peavey, in one of his eight statements, also claim you were present during the shooting?

[08:42] What did you tell police when they caught up with you in June 1993?

[09:32] At the end of your written statement, you expressed sorrow that this occurred over a television set. Why did you write those words?

[10:15] Both you and Boddie were charged with first-degree, intentional homicide and party to a crime. Did you know what party to a crime meant at that point?

[11:01] Your attorney, was he court-appointed? What kind of job did he do for you?

[12:39] Derrick’s private attorney urged him to plead no contest, which is basically unheard of for a murder case.

[13:19] The judge sentenced you to 21 years to life, with the possibility of parole in 2015. What went through your mind when you heard that?

[13:56] A couple years after you were incarcerated, your mother received a signed affidavit from Anthony Boddie. What did that affidavit say?

[16:49] Did your attorney lose his license after this?

[17:51] You spent twenty-two years in prison after the affidavit was sent. Why didn’t that letter get you out?

[19:38] Who was your appellate attorney throughout this? Because they did a great job getting the conviction overturned and presenting you options.

[20:41] It makes no sense — it seems like your second attorney was as bad as the first attorney! She had you plead guilty to the exact same charges after the appellate attorney got you all these options!

[22:55] One of the reasons we do these shows is to educate people. At the end of the day, you weren’t educated on criminal justice proceedings, and it’s your lawyer’s fault. But there is some responsibility on you… do you take that responsibility that you may not have done the right thing?

[24:31] To everybody listening… if you’re sitting in prison and you don’t agree with your lawyer, and it feels like something is wrong, get a second opinion.

[25:11] Let’s fast forward… what happened in 2018 that got your case reviewed by the police again?

[28:20] You got a new lawyer, and the judge was listening to your story… what happened next?

[30:23] Did the letter you write to the judge make it in the file? Was your attorney combative on the stand, or was she helpful to your cause?

[32:27] What did the judge do after this hearing?

[34:45] The state compensated you a measly $25,000… what was that about?

[37:06] I wish you the best on those lawsuits and claims and hope you get every dollar you’re entitled to. You were treated wrongly by the state and had some incompetent attorneys, never received apologies, and were wronged.

[39:21] It’s been three years since you’ve been out… how are you doing these days? What are you up to?

[41:05] I’m so sorry this happened to you, this is maddening and ranks up there as one of the most messed up stories I’ve heard. All I can do is apologize on behalf of your lawyers and for the failure of the system. Hopefully someone listening to this podcast will learn something and hopefully avoid the type of mistreatment you faced. Thank you for appearing on Open Mike and best of luck in the future. Take care.

[43:11] If you know someone who needs to hear this podcast, send it. Forward it. Please like, and subscribe, and comment to let us know what you’d like to see on upcoming episodes. We look forward to seeing you in the coming weeks. Thanks for listening, thanks for watching.

In April 2010, Eric Anderson was arrested and charged for involvement in a robbery and beating of two men outside their Detroit home. At the time of the crime, Anderson was actually at a Coney Island, ten miles from the scene, where he was shot in the foot, necessitating immediate medical attention.

Despite hospital records confirming his treatment, and Coney Island security footage substantiating his injury, Eric would spend nine years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit, asserting his innocence the entire time.

The Michigan Innocence Clinic re-investigated Anderson’s claims of innocence and, following an interview with the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office’s Conviction Integrity Unit, his sentence was vacated on April 30th, 2019.

How did such a convoluted chain of events transpire when multiple pieces of evidence corroborated Eric’s claims of innocence? Why was he allowed to languish in prison for so long when it was clear he couldn’t have committed this robbery?

Tune in to this mind-blowing, all-new installment of Open Mike to find out!

Show Notes

[00:01] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:20] Eric Anderson’s background and bio.

[02:10] Welcome to the show, Eric. The story is kind of crazy and convoluted but, not to do a spoiler alert, you’re out of prison after spending nine years wrongfully incarcerated. Let’s show how ridiculous this conviction was.

[03:10] April 18th, 2010, about 3:30 in the morning. Tell us about your stop at Coney Island. What happened there that led to you being shot in the foot?

[04:14] You walk into the Coney and almost immediately get shot in the foot. Then what happened?

[06:02] You didn’t want to go to Detroit Receiving Hospital, which was closer, you chose to go to Sinai Grace because that’s the hospital you were familiar with? These facts become very relevant to your trial later.

[07:05] Were you released that night, or did they keep you overnight?

[07:38] At the same time of your shooting, two armed men with their shirts pulled up over their faces robbed 20-year-old Gregory Matthews Jr. and a friend, 19-year-old Stephon Tolin, on the street outside Matthews’s home in Detroit, Michigan. Did you know these two people?

[08:37] This happened a few miles from the Coney Island you were shot, is that true?

[10:05] One of the witnesses said they heard a gunshot as the assailants were turning a corner, which was included in the police report.

[10:30] Ten days later after you were shot, what happened?

[11:23] Police pulled over Eric (and his friend who was driving) and told Eric he was under arrest; they believed he robbed Gregory and Stephon and shot himself in the foot.

[11:44] Do you know how you became a suspect?

[14:25] Two weeks after Eric’s arrest, they transported him to Michigan State Police to take a polygraph test.

[16:28] To this day, you’ve never seen your face on surveillance footage from that Coney Island. But your distinctive, Ed Hardy jeans, tight hair, and other identifying markers could tie you to the scene of your shooting. Is it clear that, when you walk in, that’s you? Does the video show you getting shot in the foot?

[18:30] When you got the polygraph, did you have an attorney yet?

[18:56] For anyone watching… the second you are under arrest, stop talking and get an attorney, and let the attorney walk you through this process.

[19:10] You took the polygraph… did they tell you right then and there that you failed it? What did they say to you?

[19:43] In September 2010, Eric was offered a plea of probation. He declined because he didn’t commit the crime.

[20:40] Eric was confident that people upholding the system of justice would do the right thing, and he declined to hire an attorney to save money.

[22:59] Two months later, Eric went to trial with a court-appointed attorney who improperly represented him, and didn’t show the jury the surveillance footage, despite Eric’s urging. He provided the jury video stills instead.

[24:39] One of Eric’s friends who was also implicated in the crime, yet not arrested, testified on Eric’s behalf.

[25:21] What was the prosecution’s case?

[26:44] The angle of Eric’s bullet wound proved that he didn’t shoot himself. His court-appointed attorney didn’t recruit any expert medical witnesses to verify.

[27:40] Who did the prosecution put on? These witnesses who said they saw you pistol whip and rob these guys?

[29:47] Did your defense attorney cross-examine these witnesses?

[30:45] The location of the robbery in respect to Sinai Grace seems to be what hurt you in trial. Where about did the robbery occur? How many miles is that from Sinai Grace?

[32:11] How did they argue that you would have even known about that shooting while you were at Sinai Grace? How is that even possible?

[33:17] Despite all of these defenses, you were convicted on November 5, 2010, of two counts of armed robbery, assault, and illegal use of a weapon. What did you think of that guilty verdict?

[34:18] Did you ever think the truth would come out after that massive sentence?

[34:32] Two years later, the Michigan Court of Appeals vacated your assault conviction, because it was multiple punishment for the same offense. But upheld the other charges and resentenced 12 to 20 years plus two years for weapons charges. That was basically a technicality issue. But you did something smart and, in 2018, got the Michigan Innocence Clinic involved. How did you do that?

[36:40] The Michigan Innocence Clinic convinced the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office Conviction Integrity Unit, upon their own investigations, to vacate Eric’s convictions.

[37:46] Tell me about the person who admitted to the crime you were accused of committing. How did you find out who did it?

[38:47] The actual perpetrator was serving prison time for a different time and offered to admit to the crime. But you didn’t take him up on the offer. That’s curious to me!

[40:05] The perpetrator also sent Eric a signed affidavit saying he committed the robbery.

[41:01] You’re doing twelve years of prison time for a crime you didn’t commit, and you have compassion for this guy to not add on to his sentence! It sounds like a smoking gun that could have gotten you out sooner. Did the Michigan Innocence Clinic use this information?

[43:32] A breakdown of the hospital records demonstrated that Eric couldn’t have committed the robbery.

[44:12] How long after the Conviction Integrity Unit interview were you released? Can you tell me about that day?

[47:53] Did anybody from the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office apologize to you?

[49:17] Eric and the National Registry of Exonerees are pushing for greater awareness of the wrongful conviction crisis that has been plaguing the American criminal justice system.

[50:53] You’ve been out for two-and-a-half years… how difficult has it been to reacclimate to society?

[51:21] You did receive some compensation from the state of Michigan, correct? What about the federal government?

[54:48] One of the reasons we do these shows is so that potential jurors will do the right thing, look at things with the right skepticism, and put the proper weight behind their decision. Because these wrongful convictions happen all the time and people need to hear about these stories.

[55:29] Did the man who committed these crimes ever get convicted? Have you spoken with him?

[56:23] Thank you for coming on the show. I’m sorry for what you went through and am grateful for your advocacy work to help change some of these laws.

[58:10] Thank you for watching Open Mike with another wrongfully convicted person, right here in Michigan. Eric Anderson spent nine years in prison for a crime he absolutely could not have committed. Another heartbreaking story. Lots of thanks to Eric for sharing his story. Like, share, comment, subscribe, and give us feedback on what you’d like us to cover next. Until next time!

Detroiter Thelonious Seaercy has wrongfully served 17 years behind bars for a murder that a self-professed hitman has confessed to committing.

Despite no evidence tying him to the scene of the alleged crime, Searcy is stuck in a holding pattern. He and his lawyer await to see if the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office appeals a ruling from the Michigan Court of Appeals.

Why is he stuck under house arrest? Why doesn’t Prosecutor Worthy dismiss his charges?

Tune into this riveting episode of Open Mike to find out.

Show Notes

[00:07] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:26] Thelonious Searcy’s background and bio.

[00:54] Welcome to the show, Thelonious. Your name came up on Episode 10 of Open Mike, and I learned about you a long time ago during the Davontae Sanford case. Your name came up because both of you were wrongfully convicted, and there’s a hitman out there doing the crimes! You’ve been out of prison since April 2021… what has life been like for you since getting out?

[02:14] The two children you mentioned — you had them even before you went to prison. How old are they? And your wife stuck by you the last seventeen years you were incarcerated?

[03:01] You’re out on bond right now waiting for a second trial. The Michigan Court of Appeals says you should be given a new trial. When you got that decision five months ago, how did you feel?

[04:13] What’s your understanding of why the Court of Appeals decided you deserve a second trial?

[05:27] What was the aspect of the case that made them decide you deserve a new trial?

[07:43] What is a 40-caliber bullet relevant?

[09:04] How did you find out that Jamal Segars was murdered?

[10:11] Although Thelonious was at a family BBQ with over a dozen alibi witnesses, he became a suspect in the case due to a jailhouse informant, whom he knew from the streets.

[17:05] Ten years after his conviction, Thelonious submitted a Brady Violation to his judge, but it was dismissed, claiming the information wasn’t new.

[18:32] That Brady Violation must have had something to do with you being granted a second trial. Is that true?

[23:20] You’re out on bond, you’re wearing a tether… Prosecutor Worthy has the ability to change her mind, but she says she wants to try you for a second time despite all these moving parts and various claims from multiple parties and admissions from hitmen… What about all the alibi witnesses, how many were called in the first trial?

[25:11] Thelonious had improper, paid representation from an attorney who is since deceased.

[25:52] Is your current attorney having discussions with Prosecutor Worthy about dismissing your second trial altogether?

[26:54] What do you think Prosecutor Worthy’s vendetta is?

[29:19] You’re confirmed to home in the meantime — do you have a trial date?

[29:49] Thelonious wrote eighteen books while he was incarcerated.

[29:56] Check out Thelonious’s book, Be First: Part 1 & 2 (Hood Novel) on Amazon!

[30:47] What do you think are the main reasons you were convicted in the first place?

[37:54] What did this alleged eyewitness, Natasha, testify to?

[39:29] You had this one eyewitness and three others who corroborated her claim … were they all there at the scene of the crime?

[40:13] You believe that the jury will believe the alleged hitman, Vincent Smothers, if he testifies and admits responsibility for this murder?

[40:57] I have a note here that says you recently graduated from Blackstone Career Institute… tell us what that is and what you hope to do with that, assuming that tether comes off!

[43:04] Amazing. Thelonious, I wish you the best of luck and I hope things go your way. Please keep us up to date on what happens! Your case was eye-opening, and I hope you keep in touch.

[44:21] Thelonious has a documentary in the works — be on the lookout for it in the next six months!

[45:30] Thelonious Searcy’s story isn’t over — we will see if Kym Worthy decides to try him a second time or drop the charges. Comment, subscribe, comment, and share this episode with your friends and family! Take care.

Eli Savit is a nationally recognized attorney, public servant, and civil rights advocate who currently serves as the Washtenaw County Prosecutor. Prior to his term, he served as a law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, was a civil-rights and public-interest attorney, and also had a career as a public-school teacher. In addition to serving as Washtenaw County's Prosecuting Attorney, Eli is a faculty member at the University of Michigan Law School.

Eli has been an integral part of several major, successful civil rights and environmental initiatives in Michigan and across the country, including a successful effort to have the Michigan Civil Rights Commission recognize discrimination claims against LGBTQIA+ Michiganders, and assisting New Jersey, Maryland, and Puerto Rico in their quests to hold corporate polluters responsible for waterway contamination.

In this inspiring installment of Open Mike, Eli discusses his close relationship with late Justice Ginsberg, and how her tutelage helped inform his decision to carve out a career shaped by public service. Additionally, he and Mike consider the inherent problems with the American cash bail system (one of two for-profit bail systems in the world) and reflect on Eli’s recent, successful elimination of Washtenaw County’s cash bail program!

Show Notes

[00:09] Eli Savit’s background and bio as Washtenaw County Prosecutor.

[01:26] Welcome to the show, Eli! There was a prosecutor for how many years prior to you?

[2:03] How was taking over an office from someone who had been there for twenty-eight years?

[03:46] You were born and raised in Ann Arbor, went to U of M Law School, and were clerk for two United States Supreme Court Justices, is that right? Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. That had to have been amazing — what was that like?

[06:05] The same-sex marriage case, Obergefell v. Hodges, wasn’t that a Michigan case?

[07:50] The way that last year went down with the former president getting that appointment… that was such a horrible way that went down, and I’m sure it was sad for Justice Ginsberg’s legacy. Do you have any opinions on that?

[10:50] After working as a clerk for two icons, you could have had any job that you wanted, ones that pay more lucratively. What was that thought process like?

[12:46] The way you chose to run your campaign, one of radical inclusivity, was really impressive. When I read that, I wondered how you were going to make everyone happy — I’ve never heard of a campaign like that! Can you take us through that?

[17:19] Let’s talk about cash bail… last year, we filmed an episode with two young ladies who are reforming the system via Bail Project Detroit… it was such an eye-opening thing for me as an attorney. You’re the first prosecutor I personally know who has eliminated cash bail. Could you explain to our viewers why you believe so strongly cash bail should be done away with?

[25:57] Entire states are now abolishing cash bail. Washington D.C. got rid of it in 1992, and New Jersey got rid of it in 2017. Crime rates in New Jersey subsequently plummeted.

[27:55] Research shows that people will still show up to court, even without cash bail as an incentive! Something like 90% of people show up to their court dates, either way. Is that what you’re finding in Washtenaw?

[30:42] After the bail situation, what are some other initiatives your office is working on?

[31:09] On the first day of his term, Prosecutor Savit banned all zero-tolerance policies in favor of adopting a more holistic, case-by-case approach to various crimes and conditions under which they occurred.

[36:00] On Open Mike, we’ve had at least ten guests who were wrongfully convicted. As a prosecutor, what does your office see as your role in helping to free innocent people who were wrongfully convicted in Washtenaw county?

[40:28] There’s a lot of discussion about blanket immunity which completely protects people from prosecution for crimes related to testimony they provide… what are your thoughts on blanket immunity for people who are bad actors in processes that result in wrongful convictions?

[43:57] We see a ton of jail house snitches and bad IDs from police misconduct… have these two areas of potential problems been examined by your office?

[47:18] Where did you teach in New York City?

[48:28] You’re doing so many amazing things in Washtenaw County, and I can’t commend you enough. I know it’s not easy, and I can’t thank you enough for your service. We’ll have you on in a year or two to touch base on all the incredible work you’ll have undoubtedly done. Thank you again for being on Open Mike!

[49:20] What a life, Eli is leading! Doing amazing things to change the criminal justice system for his constituents, and hopefully the world! Comment, like, and subscribe to Open Mike! We really appreciate you; stay tuned for new episodes coming up soon.

On December 27, 1988, North Carolina resident Gilbert Poole was arrested and charged with the murder of a Michigan man he had never met. Due to faulty evidence, inaccurate eyewitness testimony, and inept defense counsel, he would ultimately be wrongfully convicted of murder and spend the next 32 years of his life in prison.

After independently maintaining his innocence for the first 14 years of his incarceration, Mr. Poole was represented by the Western Michigan University Cooley Law School Innocence Project for the next 18 years. Post-conviction DNA testing was conducted on crime scene evidence that matched neither Poole’s nor the victim’s, prompting the Michigan Attorney General’s Conviction Integrity Unit to conduct a full investigation that resulted in his exoneration on June 15th, 2021.

In this stunning and heartbreaking episode of Open Mike, Mr. Poole reflects on the profound personal losses he experienced because of his wrongful conviction, the little-known, harsh realities of the American criminal justice system, and how he intends to spend his remaining years as a free man.

Show Notes

[00:22] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:25] Gilbert Poole’s background and bio.

[01:19] Welcome to the show, Gilbert! It’s so nice to have you here. We interviewed your attorney, Marla Mitchell-Cichon a few weeks ago and then you sent me a really nice email… tell our listeners and viewers what you thought of that interview and why you wanted to come on the show!

[03:19] May of 2021, Oakland County Judge Rae Lee Chabot set aside your conviction… we saw the photos of you exiting prison with your arms raised in victory — what was it like to walk out a free man after 32 years in prison for a crime you knew you didn’t commit and proclaimed your innocence over from day one?

[04:46] You went in at age 22 and came out at age 55… that’s a lifetime! What were some of the things that happened to your family while you were incarcerated that you can never get back?

[07:25] Did you have any siblings growing up?

[09:44] Who was Gilbert Poole at 22 years old when you were arrested? What were you up to at that point in your life?

[11:12] When you were arrested, you had a girlfriend who played a horrible, pivotal role in all this… what was her name? Were you living together at the time?

[12:59] About six months after the murder of Robert Meija, the date of which Gilbert was in Michigan instead of his native North Carolina, Gilbert’s girlfriend went to the police and implicated him in the murder — so she could have a ride from North Carolina back to Michigan.

[15:11] You get arrested for Robert’s murder; he was last seen leaving a bar where several patrons provided a description and composite sketch of a suspect some said looked like you. Did it look like you?

[17:02] Had you ever heard of Robert before? Or even been to that bar before?

[21:32] As you’re sitting there, listening to this bogus testimony, your head must just be exploding?

[24:30] Since Gilbert’s trial, bite-mark evidence has been debunked by countless leading forensic organizations. Prosecutors still try to bring it into trials, based on bad laws.

[26:29] Your lawyer didn’t give the jury a reason to disbelieve any of this shoddy evidence or testimony, no expert witnesses were called, nothing. What were they supposed to do other than believe it?

[27:27] 11 of the 12 exonerees we’ve had on Open Mike didn’t take the stand at their own trials.

[27:59] Your ex-girlfriend lied about what you told her… how did she get the information about this murder? Did she even know about it, or did she make it up when she was talking to the police and falsely claimed you had previously killed?

[29:54] Did she testify at trial?

[32:31] Due to Gilbert’s education level and lack of “finesse” in presenting his arguments as opposed to a license lawyer, the concerns he repeatedly voiced to the court of appeals were not taken seriously and dismissed.

[33:06] The blood and hairs at the scene of the crime didn’t match you, bite-mark evidence didn’t match you, and some blood-stained pebbles were also found t the scene of the crime. Were those tested?

[37:29] Is your defense attorney still practicing?

[38:11] Let’s fast forward 28 years… DNA samples confirmed your blood was nowhere at the scene of the crime. This is five years before you were released… tell us how that made it through the appellate court.

[39:52] What was the evidence that convinced the Michigan Attorney General’s Conviction Integrity Unit that your conviction was a mistake?

[42:23] We learned on our last episode that while there are 6,000 prosecutors’ offices in America, there are only 100 conviction integrity units (CIUs).

[46:50] You were away for 32 years and have been released for not even three full months… you’re not upset! You said you could barely find any malice in your heart, which is such a wonderful thing… that you’re able to forgive quickly and try to enjoy your life. It’s mind-blowing, and it’s a lesson to us all. Listening to you is really beautiful.

[49:18] What are your plans, now that you’re out?

[50:21] I’m happy that you’re out, and that justice came for you, even if it was late. I hope that you find peace, happiness, and the mental health treatment that you deserve. If there’s anything we can do to help, we’d be honored. Do you have any parting words for viewers of this show?

[51:19] Thank you for coming on the show, Gilbert! Take care of yourself.

[51:41] You heard it — Gilbert’s story from his own words, his own voice. That was an intense one. I thank him for coming on the show, and I thank you for watching, commenting, and listening. We’ll see you back on Open Mike… until next time! 

Marissa Boyers Bluestine is an award-winning criminal justice attorney and reform advocate who serves as the Assistant Director of the Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. As Assistant Director, she oversees policy and public awareness by promoting reform through cutting-edge data, public education, and legislative reform for issues and outdated laws that beleaguer the criminal justice system.

A former public defender, Marissa has helped facilitate the release of fourteen Pennsylvanians convicted of crimes they didn’t commit, in addition to proactively working with law enforcement to train, update, and include them in investigative techniques empirically proven to exceed obsolete practices that lead to wrongful convictions.

In this all-new installment of Open Mike, Marissa and Mike discuss the ever-growing need for conviction integrity units, holistic methods to help prosecutors’ offices prevent and rectify wrongful convictions, and how the prosecutorial function must be extended past merely convicting and incarcerating people.

Show Notes

[1:38] Introducing Marissa Boyers Bluestine, Assistant Director of the Quattron Center for the Fair Administration of Justice from University of Pennsylvania School of Law!

[01:48] We’ve talked about conviction integrity units (CIUs) on the show before… for our viewers who aren’t aware, could you tell us what they are and what they do?

[03:59] Why is it such a novel concept for prosecutors to hold their staff accountable, that they’re not railroading defendants?

[04:36] The prosecutorial function doesn’t end at conviction and incarceration. It even continues once justice is served — there’s no element of finality until justice is served.

[05:18] So, the enlightened prosecutors who aren’t out solely for convictions are taking justice seriously and digging into credible evidence that manifests decades later?

[07:46] How many prosecutors’ offices are there in this country?

­[09:19] I love that you’re hearing about new conviction integrity units, even though there are only 100 for 6,000 prosecutors’ offices. You have to have some political clout to pull this off, and be in the right jurisdiction!

[10:47] Karen McDonald, the Oakland County Prosecutor, is opening a conviction integrity unit in October, 2021.

[11:42] Visit convictionreview.net to check out a resource center designed for conviction review/integrity units in their beginning stages!

[12:29] Who are some of the exemplary conviction review units around the country?

[14:41] What does a conviction integrity “done wrong” set us up for?

[16:08] For the thousands of prosecutors’ offices that don’t have CIUs… how do you convince them to put aside the politics and mistakes that may have been made in favor of doing the right thing?

[17:42] There are a lot of common threads that link a lot of these wrongful convictions… what are some of the most frequent patterns you see?

[19:26] Prosecutors are protected from being sued by absolute immunity, even if there are bad actors involved. As a result, there are never any learnings that help fix the problems at hand.

[23:07] Under Brady law, exculpatory evidence submitted for review must be material; material evidence is the caveat.

[25:34] Tunnel vision in the criminal justice context is a tendency of participants in the system, such as police or prosecutors, to focus on a specific theory of a case and to dismiss or undervalue evidence which contradicts that theory.

[28:19] One of the key issues with CIUs is that they receive information and bring it to light — without them, the information would likely never see the light of day and the wrongfully convicted person would likely never be released. There’s a shocking parallel between the amount of cases go through CIUs and the amount of cases that involve withheld evidence violating Brady standards; it’s an extraordinarily high percentage.

[28:51] How many people are sitting in prison because exculpatory evidence was withheld? It has to be in the thousands.

[30:18] In the 28-year-long wrongful conviction case you mentioned… is that prosecutor’s office now going back and reviewing every single file they have to ensure they’ve gotten the right suspects?

[30:53] There should be a root cause analysis done of every exoneration case with people who have stakes in the outcome —  prosecutors, police, judges, defense, etc. No exoneration is ever one person; it’s a system with multiple players.

[32:31] How often, or how rare, is it for someone to give a false confession?

[33:18] The way police are trained to conduct interrogations is driven to get a statement of inculpability — to get a statement that self incriminates, regardless of actual truth. And the first step of this process is to confront a suspect, talk over them, and relentlessly hound them until they stop denying.

[36:35] Will Bendan Dassey ever get out of prison?

[37:15] What’s wrong with the judges who’ve studied that case, watched the show, and still remain unmoved and do nothing?

[38:27] The word “innocent” doesn’t appear in The Constitution. It’s about guilt or not-guilt. If the courts determine there wasn’t constitutional error — even if the person is innocent — they will remain in prison. We need to respond to cases of innocence. 43:56]

[40:32 I think most states now mandate recordings of confessions to avoid false confessions, is that correct?

[41:36] Make sure to visit convictionreview.net for resources on wrongful convictions and to connect with a conviction review unit, and the Quattron Centre’s website for more holistic materials addressing all needed, long-term, structural improvements to the justice system.

[43:32] The Macomb County Prosecutor is also opening a conviction integrity unit.

[43:44] Marissa, thank you for being on the show, this was incredibly eye-opening! I really appreciate you educating me and our audience, this was really great.

[44:02] If you know somebody who needs to hear more about CIUs and Innocence Projects, like this episode, share, comment as you usually do, and thank you for watching! I look forward to seeing you next time on Open Mike.

Professor Marla Mitchell-Cichon is an attorney, advocate, and criminal justice expert who has helped facilitate the release of seven wrongfully convicted Michiganders. As Executive Director of the WMU-Cooley Law Innocence Project, she and her team, largely consisting of law students, work to secure the release of factually innocent people solely through post-conviction DNA evidence, the only innocence organization in the state of Michigan to do so. To date, the WMU-Cooley Law Innocence Project has screened over 5,800 cases, several of which are actively being prepared for court.

In this compelling, all-new episode of Open Mike, Marla discusses her 18-year-long work on the wrongful conviction of Gary Poole, a Michigan man who was falsely accused of murder and spent 32 years behind bars. Tune in to learn how she helped get him exonerated, how we can best protect ourselves if wrongly accused of a crime, and how WMU-Cooley Law Innocent Project can help if someone you know is falsely incarcerated!

Show Notes

[00:24] Background and bio of Marla Mitchell-Cichon.

[00:43] Marla, welcome to Open Mike!

[01:11] Can you tell us a little about the Western Michigan University Cooley Law Innocence Project?

[01:47] Most Innocence Clinics focus on cases without DNA or have a mixture of cases where DNA may or may not be involved. WMU Cooley’s only takes on cases where there is a DNA component. 

[02:47] What role do the students play at the Innocence Project?

[03:31] How did you personally become interested in helping the wrongfully convicted?

[04:14] The WMU-Cooley Law Innocence Project has helped a number of people, including Kenny Wyniemko who was on several of our episodes, including our 100th Episode Special. How gratifying is it when you’re able to free an innocent person?

[05:19] I’m familiar with your work, specifically the case of Gilbert Poole… how did he become a suspect in that case?

[06:59] Weren’t there cigarette butts and underwear that weren’t run through DNA testing prior to the trial?

[08:38] DNA is one of the best tools to prove innocence… but it’s performed by people, and people can make mistakes.

[10:38] Bite mark evidence has never been scientific, yet it’s a very common forensic practice that prosecutors lean on to convict people.

[15:16] Contrary to popular belief, hair samples aren’t scientifically accurate, unless the piece of hair has a root attached to it.

[16:51] In Mr. Poole’s case, can you discuss the fingernail evidence that excluded his culpability?

[18:33] When you get involved in the Poole case, what eventually led to you convincing the state Attorney General’s integrity unit to make the motion to release?

[23:31] When you have a criminal trial, that is the only opportunity you have to put the facts on a court record. Once that record is made, most of the time, any reviewing court will be limited to reviewing what’s on the record.

[24:31] Now that these conviction integrity units are around, you went to them… what was the smoking gun that allowed you to convince them everyone got it wrong?

[26:36] In Poole’s case, no one actually saw who killed the victim. Poole was never put in a line-up or independent identified. The government also introduced a composite drawing that was created after Poole had been arrested.

[27:29] Will Gilbert be compensated for the time he spent in prison?

[28:40] Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and members from her office attended Mr. Poole’s release reception and sincerely apologized for the struggles he unjustly experienced.

[30:58] There are still so many innocent people in prison. What can we, as a society, do to help the wrongfully convicted?

[32:21] Make sure to check out the WMU-Cooley Law Innocence Project’s website for more information on the cases we discussed in this episode!

[32:47] Eighteen years of dedication on this case, Marla. It’s frankly mind-boggling to me. I commend you, I respect you, and we’re lucky to have you working on behalf of those whose voices have been silenced.

[33:31] If you have a loved one in prison, or are in prison yourself, the WMU-Cooley Law Innocence Project only accept inquiries and applications from the individuals who are incarcerated. Write directly to their office for assistance!

[33:58] Marla Mitchell-Cichon, thank you for being on Open Mike! I hope to talk to you again.

[34:06] What a smart person, and what an incredible clinic she and her students run! Visit their website if you want to donate, educate yourself, or contact them for help. Thank you for being here on Open Mike! Like, subscribe, share, spread the word on this crucial issue. We’ll see you next time!

Mike Ware is the Executive Director of the Innocence Project of Texas, where he champions the rights of the wrongfully convicted and tirelessly fights to overturn their sentences. In this compelling installment of Open Mike, he discusses the egregious case of Lydell Grant, a Houston man who was convicted on the basis of six false identifications, only to be released from prison a decade later once crime scene evidence was finally run through proper DNA testing.

How can faulty identification processes be improved upon to avoid these miscarriages of justice? Why did it take a decade for DNA evidence to be reviewed when a man’s life was on the line?

Find out, on this all-new episode of Open Mike!

Show Notes

[00:11] Mike Ware’s background as director of Innocence Project of Texas.

[02:28] Welcome to Open Mike! So, tell us, how and why did you get involved in the Lydell Grant murder case?

[04:50] Was that a flat-out lie?

[05:34] At trial they determined the fingernail evidence was inconclusive?

[06:23] Did the defense have the DNA looked at by their own expert?

[07:39] Mr. Grant was identified by six eyewitnesses… the reason you were able to get him out of prison was due to the DNA. But the reason he was locked up to begin with was due to the eyewitnesses… Is the way that the murder happened relevant to his story?

[11:01] Lots of people saw the perpetrator… I assume there was some kind of composite done?

[12:24] How did the police find Mr. Grant?

[13:29] The identification process wasn’t videoed or recorded… were the suggestive tones, or finger pointing from the police? We don’t know because these IDs were conducted in people’s homes and other locations.

[15:06] The identifications weren’t conducted in a double-blind manner, meaning the detective presenting the photo spread to the witnesses knew which person in the spread was the suspect.

[16:22] How did Lydell’s trial go? From what I read, he had court-appointed counsel.

[18:00] In Mike Ware’s experience, jurors never believe alibi witnesses. 

[19:32] Lydell was sentenced to life and wrote a letter to your offices, where it was vetted by law student staff. And what’s really impressive is that one of the students found the DNA anomalies. This law student saved this guy’s life!

[21:33] How quickly after finding the DNA anomaly were you able to get the actual suspect’s name?

[29:22] So, rather than investigate the actual suspect, they want to keep investigating Lydell, who’s been in prison all this time? That’s very strange.

[30:24] Did Mr. Grant know what was going on throughout all these months that there was another suspect? Or did you keep him in the dark as to not get his hopes up?

[33:49] The technology was there in 2011. Had they properly tested the evidence back then, they would’ve found the suspect in the system then.

[35:24] You mention the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sat on the case, but I have a note that they refused his exoneration request, and then asked the six eyewitnesses who falsely identified him to respond to his claims of innocence!

[37:22] It took ten years for the judges to get affidavits from the eyewitnesses explaining their current position.

[41:12] Is Mr. Grant going to get some money in the state of Texas for his wrongful conviction?

[41:50] Under Texas state law, Mr. Grant is entitled to $80,000 per year for every year he was locked up.

[43:21] You mentioned this law you got passed… not even half the states have proper identification law, stating it has to be blind on both sides… how do we get that passed in every state?

[46:12] I saw a statistic that over 5,000 or more people in Texan prisons are innocent. Is that true?

[46:55] You’re in a tough state, a conservative state, and the fact that you have an Innocence Project is astounding. You’re doing great work. I appreciate it, and I’m sure the people of Texas appreciate it. If people watching want to help, how can they do that?

[47:19] Make sure to visit their website, or even call Mike Ware on his cell phone! 817-992-1132.

[47:36] Thank you, Mike, for being on Open Mike. These stories are so important to tell. I think Mr. Grant is really lucky you set up such a great team to review his case. Congrats on all your success and thank you for coming on the show.

[48:29] Texas Innocence Project came through for Lydell Grant. Six eyewitnesses says he killed a man, and they were dead wrong! The actual killer, proven by DNA evidence, is currently on trial. Let us know what you think about this case. I’d love to hear from you. If you know someone who needs to hear this episode, pass this along, comment, like, and subscribe. Thank you for being a fan of Open Mike, and we’ll see you next time!

In 1988, Alfonzo Riley’s friend asked him if he wanted to make some money. As a broke college student, he said yes. Little did he know that simple decision would shape the rest of his life.

Alfonzo ended up transporting drugs from Brooklyn to Albany in a transaction gone awry. Two men ended up losing their lives and, while he was in a different room when the shootings occurred, he was charged under New York’s controversial felony murder law and sentenced to 71 years to life.

It would take overcoming two malicious judges, three decades behind bars, and multiple applications for clemency for Riley to be given a second chance — his sentence was commuted by Governor Andrew Cuomo in 2018.

Having earned multiple degrees during his incarceration, Alfonzo is now a paralegal case handler in the New York Legal Aid Society’s wrongful conviction unit, attempting to judicial wrongdoings like that he experienced.

Why are felony murder statutes allowed to harshly punish people who didn’t commit murder? Several states have already abolished them — is a federal ban next? Were the judges on Alfonzo’s case ever held accountable for his excessively harsh sentence?

Show Notes

[00:01] Alfonzo Riley’s background and bio.

[1:51] Alfonzo, welcome to Open Mike! I’m so glad you’re here, I’ve read so much about you. Tell our listeners and viewers about the day that changed your life.

[03:27] Was this the first time you were involved in anything like that?

[04:18] I assume it probably sounded like easy money at the time! Getting paid money to transport… what was it, marijuana?

[04:59] You were the first person in your family to go to college. Went to New York Institute of Technology, got good grades… and it just sounds like you made a dumb decision. Take us through how everything went down. Were you the driver? Why were you needed on this drug run?

[5:54] Were you armed?

[06:27] I know you were on another level of the building when the shooting occurred… tell me how that happened?

[07:32] What did you think when you heard gunshots? You were there to show your support during the transaction, so what was going through your head?

[08:11] The drug sale took an antagonist turn when people were being declined the cocaine they wanted to purchase, which is when the shooting occurred.

[09:34] When did you know you were being charged with felony murder?

[09:22] In New York City, a typical murder trial will take between 12-18 months to go to trial. Alfonzo went to trial in 6 months in Albany, which was hugely accelerated, especially in 1988.

[10:43] On Open Mike, we’ve interviewed over ten exonerees, but yours is a different type of story. The fact that you weren’t in the room, but were charged under the felony murder rule nonetheless… have you ever denied that your presence or any actual involvement?

[12:47] Did the trigger man get the same exact sentence?

[13:26] Did you have a jury trial? Were all the other participants convicted?

[14:26] I remember in law school learning about felony murder, and it’s a bizarre statute. It was used as a deterrent for even being in a bit part in a crime. For example, if you drove someone to light an empty house on fire, and that house had a person inside who was killed, the driver will get the same charges as the person who actually struck the match.

[16:35] You’re sentenced to 71 years. You’re coming right from college, probably a decent dorm at a good university. Can you even describe the change, going from college, to prison for 31 years?

[18:55] What’s amazing to be is all you accomplished in prison. You got an Associate’s Degree, a Bachelor’s Degree, a paralegal degree, worked in the law library, volunteered at a children’s center, and — what’s most interesting to me — is you became a chess champion! So you definitely made the most of your time, which is pretty unusual — wouldn’t you say?

[20:26] Alfonzo is currently studying for the LSAT.

[20:42] Let’s talk about your chess championship! Did you know how to play before prison?

[21:13] Who taught you how to elevate your game in prison?

[21:56] What was your standard, opening move?

[22:00] What did you think about The Queen’s Gambit?

[23:35] Are you still playing? Have you ever been in a tournament?

[23:33] Let’s talk about your clemency. For our viewers and listeners who don’t know the difference between a pardon and clemency, can you explain?

[25:39] After various application attempts, on December 31st, 2018, Governor Andrew Cuomo commuted Alfonzo’s sentence.

[26:03] How did you get Cuomo’s attention? He has about 7,000 clemency applications sitting on his desk and has let out less than twenty. How did you get his attention?

[30:42] There were only two criminal judges in the court that Alfonzo went through, and they had a mutual competition going in which they would see who could sentence defendants to more time before they retire.

[32:08] I’m going to assume they were never disciplined? Holding judges accountable is nearly impossible. It’s reprehensible, and I’m sorry you had to deal with that.

[32:57] You had some great people who got the governor’s attention, you found out about your release on New Year’s Eve… and it’s only been two years! I heard you still had to remain in prison for four weeks even after the governor announced your commutation? That had to have been excruciating!

[34:24] You’ve been out for two-and-a-half years. What are you up to now? How’s life?

[35:20] These days, Alfonzo is a paralegal case handler at the Legal Aid Society in New York in the wrongful conviction unit. The unit started in May 2019 and they’ve already experienced success with clients Carlos Weeks and James Davis.

[36:20] What a perfect job for you. I mean, how lucky are these guys to have you working on their cases. Someone who cares and takes it seriously. I’m really impressed. I also heard you got married in prison in 2014, not knowing if you’d ever get out! You’re still married and living with your wife now, congratulations!

[37:12] I wish you the best of luck in law school, and if you ever want to bring an exoneree on Open Mike to help generate publicity for the ills of our criminal justice system, I’d love to have you back on the show. It was super nice to meet you — keep in touch!

[37:59] What a nice guy, Alfonzo Riley. Really impressed with what he did in prison and how it’s serving him now. If you know anybody who needs to hear this episode, send it to them! Like, comment, subscribe, and let us know the types of things you want us to address. We really appreciate you listening and watching. We’ll see you next time.

We’re making a departure from our standard format for a very special Father’s Day exclusive! In this heart-warming episode, Mike is joined by his daughters Jillian, Ella, and Lexie who flip the script on their dad and ask him the burning questions you’ve always craved the answers to. What career would Mike have if he weren’t a lawyer? Which professional snafu has he learned the most from? If he were a salad ingredient, which one would he be and why? Unlock the Morse Code and learn more about your favorite attorney-turned-podcast host in this all-new installment featuring three very special guest hosts.

Show Notes

[00:56] Mike Morse: Welcome to a special, Father’s Day edition of Open Mike! You can see I have my daughters, Ellie Morse, Lexie Morse, and Jillian Morse who’s in Brooklyn. Thank you for coming on today!

[01:19] MM: We’re doing a special episode where my daughters wanted to ask my questions. I don’t know them, these haven’t been pre-screened, and everything is fair game. So, we’ll see how they do! Jillian, you’re the oldest — do you want to go first?

[01:49] Jillian Morse: Yes! How old were you when you knew you wanted to be a father?

[02:34] Ella Morse: What are some of the fondest memories you had with your dad?

[03:29] Lexie Morse: What’s the biggest thing you’ve learned from your dad?

[04:16] EM: He taught you well — you’re the best dad in the world!

[04:23] JM: If your dad wasn’t a lawyer, do you think you would be in this field doing personal injury?

[05:08] MM: You’ve stumped me, Jillian! I’ll say yes because I’ve been doing it for thirty years and love it. But would I have done it if my father Joel wasn’t one? I’ll say yes, but truly I have no clue.

[05:30] EM: What do you enjoy most about being a father to us?

[06:18] LM: Okay, I have one. What is your favorite tradition we have as a family?

[07:37] JM: As a kid, how did you and your dad celebrate Father’s Day?

[08:46] EM: Super cute! This question is kind of unrelated to Father’s Day, but it’s one I’m curious… if you could travel one place you haven’t been before, what would it be?

[09:45] LM: What’s your favorite hobby?

[10:24] MM: I took Lexie golfing recently, and she almost killed a kid. She hit a ball right into another kid and was like, “Alright, I’m done! Never doing this again!” Isn’t that basically what happened?

[10:41] JM: What are the top two items on your bucket list for 2021 and 2022? Are you going to write another book?

[12:52] EM: What is a mistake or failure that has taught you the most in life? What’s a downfall that brought you back up?

[14:09] LM: Where is your favorite place to travel to?

[14:32] JM: I feel anywhere warm with mountains, you’ll be happy. What’s your favorite game to play as a family?

[16:08] LM: This is one I really want to know the answer to… which one of us gets on your nerves the most? And you can’t say me!

[17:11] EM: I have a question that you ask often! I’m curious — if you could be any part of the salad, which part would you be and why?

[18:11] MM: I ask that question in interviews sometimes, and that’s where Ella got that question!

[18:21] JM: I have a question that’s not fully developed, but… how would you feel if you had a son instead of three daughters? Do you think you’d be more prepared to raise a son?

[19:21] MM: Would I have been equipped? No, I wouldn’t have been equipped! I wasn’t equipped to raise a daughter either, but I did an okay job. I would have been happy with a boy, and I was thrilled with a third girl. Three girls is special, it’s unique, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything.

[20:19] MM: I’m now seeing questions from my staff that I’m going to ask YOU guys. One final question, and then we’re going to end. What’s your favorite memory growing up, focused on your Dad?

[21:04] JM: This was a couple summers ago and we went on a Daddy-Daughter trip, you visited me while I was out there for a couple days. And we would walk the old, cobblestone streets together, ate some amazing sushi on Chelsea Street, then we went to Berlin, had an amazing time, and then we went to Prague. Every second on that trip was so fun, never a dull moment.

[22:11] EM: That really jogged my memory! I think traveling in general is something we all value and love. And I think it’s rare to go on a trip, just one parent to a daughter. One of the trips you and I did was canoeing in Green River, Utah. And we had so much fun, we laughed, we had no idea what we were doing.

[23:46] LM: I loved going to Daddy-Daughter dances with you! Getting dressed up and dancing all night.

[24:14] MM: Girls, thank you so much for coming on Open Mike, and being yourselves and asking questions. I love you all so, so, so much.

[24:36] MM: Thank you all for watching this special episode of Open Mike. Happy Father’s Day to all the dads out there, and we’ll see you next time! Thank you.

In 2007, Floridian Air Force Sargent Ron Wright was shocked to learn his friend Paula O’Conner and her infant son Elijah were horrifically strangled and murdered inside her home. Although no forensic evidence, weapon, cell records, or any testimony incriminated Ron, he was accused of the murder, and held in jail for six years until a 2013 trial where he would be determined guilty and sentenced to death. In 2017, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that all evidence presented was “purely circumstantial” and insufficient to prove Ron was the murderer. He was acquitted of the murder charges and became the 27th person to be exonerated from death row in Florida. Inspired by the injustice he faced, Ron is now a staunch advocate, partnering with Witness to Innocence and Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty to abolish the death penalty along with other criminal justice reform initiatives. How has Ron managed to rebuild a life that was stolen from him? Did Paula and Elijah O’Conner ever receive the justice they deserved? Find out the answers to these questions and more on this stirring installment of Open Mike.

Show Notes

[00:51] Ron Wright, welcome to Open Mike!

[00:05] I’ve been reading all about you… what an ordeal you’ve been through. Before we dive into everything that happened to you… you were in Desert Storm, Desert Shield, you were an active Florida police officer… is that true?

[01:38] What made you want to serve your country and community?

[02:16] Were you born and raised in Florida?

[02:36] Let’s go back to 2007… you were living in Orlando, married and with a son at the time?

[03:08] How did you meet Paula O’Conner… what year was that?

[03:59] Did you eventually date this woman?

[05:11] You’ve maintained you’ve never had a physical, romantic relationship with her?

[06:02] Describe your friendship — would you see her daily, weekly, monthly when you were in town?

[06:54] She was murdered in 2007 with her young son… before she was murdered, she released a blog post on a military-type website accusing you of a series of crimes, correct? She alleged that she was your mistress, you were her father’s child, and she had contacted your wife.

[08:14] Ron and his wife were estranged at this time, but not divorced.

[08:29] How did you find out Paula had been killed?

[10:23] Did your defense attorney ask when the last time you two talked on the phone?

[10:51] Three weeks before the murder, is it true she sued you for medical bills for the child she claimed you fathered?

[12:10] Why would you want to have her on your insurance if you didn’t have sex with her?

[13:53] Are you maintaining that you only had sex with her once? Or are there other times you remember?

[15:08] Ron had a friendly, almost mentor relationship with Paula’s daughter who was in the ROTC program.

[15:26] How old was the baby when he was murdered?

[17:01] You’re maintaining that you didn’t see her at all while she was pregnant?

[17:16] You’re not denying the baby, Elijah, who was sadly murdered in 2007, was your child?

[17:59] You were interviewed by the police shortly after the murders and were all over the news. They didn’t arrest you for approximately six years after the murders… is that true?

[19:01] Ron was in prison from his arrest in 2008 until his trial in 2013, maintaining his innocence the entire time.

[21:30] Did you have court-appointed attorneys, did the military provide you attorneys, did you hire your own?

[21:59] For five years, your two court-appointed attorneys went through the discovery process, researched, and prepared for your 2013 trial where you faced the death penalty?

[24:13] There’s one piece of circumstantial evidence I want to talk about. A type of glove found at the scene of the murders that was accessible at the military base you stayed at… DNA was found on it, but then DNA wasn’t found… tell us about this glove.

[28:28] How long was this trial? Did you present other alibi witnesses?

[30:14] How far was the base from Paula’s home? Her daughter wasn’t home at the time of the murders?

[31:19] The daughter was set to receive over half a million in life insurance proceeds… was she ever looked at as a potential witness?

[32:25] In your opinion, did the murderer wear this glove?

[34:18] Did they pull a Johnnie Cochran on you and have you put the glove on?

[36:33] Do you have any idea where the glove was found inside the home?

[37:28] I read that the police allege you didn’t cooperate in their investigation. Do you feel you cooperated?

[39:04] Let’s talk about the circumstantial evidence at the scene of the crime… in your case, being sued for medical bills, the alleged infidelity, the glove — these types of things are circumstantial evidence… as you look back on this years later, are you surprised the jury convicted you based on this evidence that doesn’t directly tie you to the crime?

[41:12] As Ron told his attorneys — the case felt more like a paternity case masquerading as a murder case.

[43:55] Your lawyers mentioned the outcome would hinge on the results of the paternity test, which ended up coming back positive. Tell me about the day when you discovered you were the father.

[46:34] You maintain that Paula invited you over, and got you drunk on Jell-O shots to the point where you didn’t remember having sex with her.

[49:01] From what you’re telling us… this woman had to have been mentally ill! The stories she was telling were delusional, which suggests a mental instability.

[51:10] Paula had an incarcerated brother in a work release or similar program who had gone on the run during one of his times away from prison. Her address was one of his last known addresses. When Ron refused to help him, which would have been aiding and abetting, she exploded at him. This was the first behavior Paula demonstrated that may have suggested some latent illness or instability.

[53:09] Did you testify at trial? Was there evidence of her being unstable in any way?

[54:02] Other than the circumstantial evidence of being sued by Paula three weeks earlier, the positive paternity test, and the glove, was there anything else the prosecution used to assassinate your character?

[56:18] How did your lawyers argue that you didn’t remember having sex with Paula that night and that whole series of events without your testimony?

[57:34] Is there anything in hindsight that you think your lawyers could have done differently?

[59:45] No Innocence Projects took on Ron’s case because Florida’s constitution demands that every death penalty case be reviewed by the Florida Supreme Court in what is called a direct appeal. During this direct appeal, Ron was acquitted by all seven justices because there was no evidence that tied him to the crime. It didn’t even go to appellate court in between. 

[01:04:15] You can watch the oral arguments before the Florida Supreme Court here.

[01:05:42] Tell me what you’re up to these days!

[01:06:10] Ron works with both Witness to Innocence and Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, which has elected him to their executive board as a director, chiefly working to abolish the death penalty amongst other criminal justice reform initiatives.

[01:06:52] You have not been compensated by the state of Florida for the 8.5 years you spent in prison, have you? Are you fighting for it now?

[01:06:41] To this day, no one knows what happened in Paula O’Conner’s house. And to that point, no one wins in this circumstance.

[01:12:31] Ron, thank you for being here with us on Open Mike. I appreciate you for sharing your story with us.

[01:14:04] There you have it. I didn’t know what to expect with Ron Wright’s story, but I love the give-and-take we had. He said he would have convicted himself, I probably would have convicted him on circumstantial evidence, and we would have been way wrong. If you know anybody who would find this episode interesting, forward it to them, tag them, comment, like, subscribe! And thank you for watching. Take care

In 1973, Detroit artist and award-winning boxer Ray Gray was accused of breaking into a local drug dealer’s home and fatally shooting him. Though none of the surviving occupants were able to identify the invaders, Ray became a focus of the investigation. Tunnel vision, corruption, faulty identification processes, suppressed evidence, and failure to investigate other suspects culminated in additional tragedy — refusing to admit his guilt, Ray was sentenced to life in prison without parole where he would remain for the next 48 years.

Ray's wrongful incarceration catalyzed a decades-long quest for freedom and truth. Collaborating with The Innocence Project and legendary Detroit journalist Bill Proctor, he accepted a plea deal from the Wayne County Prosecutor’s office and was finally released from prison on May 25th, 2021, after nearly a half-century behind bars.

In this captivating installment, Ray sits down with Mike for his FIRST, exclusive interview following his release — a mere week after he obtained freedom. Ray and Mike cover the gamut of his experiences— how he found love while in prison, the role art played in helping him cope with incarceration, challenges readjusting to civilian status, his plans for the future as a free man, and more.

Show Notes

[00:02] Welcome to Open Mike

[01:08] Barbara Gray and Ray Gray, thank you both for coming on Open Mike. Ray, what was your first week out of prison, after 48 years, like for you?

[02:04] You’ve been in prison since 1973… to say the world has changed is an understatement. What are some of the things you’ve seen that were different?

[03:20] Ray is hesitant about lingering in stores for fear he’ll be accused of stealing something and be sent back to prison. He’s still adjusting to post-prison life and will be for a while.

[04:20] I can’t imagine the post-traumatic stress, and anxiety, and trauma you must be experiencing, dealing with all these new things.

[06:36] Quality of food and access to mobile devices after heavy telephone usage monitoring has been a hugely different experience compared to incarceration.

[07:37] As I’m reading the stories, and I got to meet your wife this morning, part of this is a love story! I want to bring your wife, Barbara, into the interview. Barbara, you met Ray in 1978 when he was already incarcerated for five years… how did you two meet?

[10:34] How many years had you been in the prison system teaching art before you met Ray?

[11:26] Was it love at first sight for you, Ray?

[12:48] There was a seven-year gap between your first meeting and your 1985 wedding in prison. How did that work — you were corresponding, you would see each other on weekends?

[15:19] Were you able to stand next to each other and get married in prison?

[16:04] You’ve never been able to sleep together in the same house for thirty-five years… what has this first week together been like?

[19:06] To set the stage, the original crime was the robbery and murder of Ruben Bryant on February 6th, 1973… three short months later, you were sentenced to life in prison. Your lawyer didn’t advise you to have a jury trial, so you had a bench trial under a less experienced judge… You’ve maintained your innocence all these years — did you know Ruben prior to the murder?

[20:39] You were home at the time of the murder and had at least four people with you who testified on your behalf. Who was your defense attorney back then? Was he court-appointed?

[23:11] There was one eyewitness who testified that you were part of the robbery that resulted in murder. Is that accurate? Could she pick you out of a lineup?

[24:51] Other than her eyewitness testimony, was there any other evidence that linked you to the scene of the murder?

[27:33] A mustache was the perpetrator’s only identifying factor the eyewitness honed in on. Ray happened to have a mustache when he went into the lineup — after being threatened by one of the police officers. The eyewitness identified Ray before he even stepped under the light.

[28:50] Many people fought for your innocence, including two people sitting in the room with us — former TV journalist Bill Proctor and former Michigan State police officer and deputy director of the Detroit Crime Commission, Ellis Stafford.

[29:13] Bill, you started reporting this story in a professional capacity but then started believing Ray’s story… can you take us on that journey and what compelled you to believe him?

[32:43] In 1980, a man named Charlie Matthews signed an affidavit admitting he was present at the scene of the crime, but then pled the fifth. So, as early as 1980, people were trying to help Ray — that’s forty plus years ago!

[34:49] Bill, you’ve been on the show multiple times and we’ve had many conversations with the U of M Innocence Clinic… these types of scenarios keep coming up. What they did to Ray is textbook and disgusting…

[35:27] Ellis, this is the first time we’ve met, thank you for coming on the show, sir. How did you get involved in Ray’s case?

[36:22] Ellis believes he and Bill were allowed to speak with Ray in prison because the wardens themselves believed Ray was innocent. They also allowed a polygraph test in 2012 that Ray passed.

[39:10] Ray, before this experience, you were a four-time Golden Glove boxing champion! Tell us about that, how did you get into boxing?

[40:17] Did you create art throughout the last 48 years in prison? Where is all this artwork now?

[43:04] Throughout Ray’s case, police were complicit in Brady Violations by withholding evidence that would have affected the outcome of the trial.

[46:07] Ray is discussing all the lack of evidence that implicated him… witnesses were on the floor, looking up at the suspect. Bill, where did all of this information come from?

[48:21] We’ve never interviewed someone who has maintained their innocence… yet, Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy vacated your first-degree murder sentence, and asked you to please guilty to second-degree murder. You pled no contest, which they accepted and gave you a lesser sentence for time served which is when you were released from prison.

[50:43] Ray, when did you start having discussions with your lawyers over this outcome being a possibility? Was it days, weeks, months? Take us through the whole negotiation process of your plea deal

[52:25] The fact that you pled no contest to second-degree murder — you’re saying you can appeal that?

[55:10] You were sitting in prison for 48 years… what were you waiting for?

[57:15] Do you think the witness was the major holdup in your case?

[57:51] You said you’ve been waiting 48 years for the truth to come out… you’ve now been out of prison for a week. Do you feel that the truth came out?

[58:28] Marvin Bryant, the former Wayne County Sheriff actually thought you were the wrong man, is that correct?

[60:01] You’ve maintained your innocence, steadfast. Tell me about your decision to plead no contest to get out… how agonizing or easy was that process?

[61:00] One of the reasons Ray accepted the plea deal was due to health risks, including a 98% positive COVID-19 test rate, the highest of any prison in the country.

[01:01:03] If you had lied and admitted guilt to a parole board, do you think you would have gotten out sooner?

[01:02:28] You could be one of the most principled and patient people… did you think this day would come?

[01:04:11] I don’t think there’s anyone who could listen to you tell your story and not believe you.

[01:05:35] Is there a fight left in this scenario? What is your team telling you the next steps are?

[01:06:36] Because the conviction integrity unit didn’t get you an exoneration, you’re not entitled to Michigan’s Compensation Fund, which would entitle you to $50,000 for every year served — $2.5 million. Was that a bitter pill to swallow?

[01:08:26] Bill, I know you’re frustrated. Do you think an unwillingness to pay victim’s compensation played a role in any of this? What’s your perspective?

[01:09:56] In Ray’s case, why do you think they wouldn’t exonerate him?

[01:14:53] Ray, it sounds like you had a lot of supporters, but Bill Proctor especially did a lot for you while you were in prison. Have you been able to connect since your release? What would you like to say publicly to him?

[01:16:41] What does the future look like for you?

[01:20:06] I love that you’re an artist and art helped you through 48 long years, and that you’re still creating. I would love to see what you create…from the Mike Morse Foundation, we’re going to give you a donation toward your art supplies, so you can buy a whole lot of supplies, and canvasses, and I hope you’ll come back and show me some of your artistry.

[01:24:29] Out of the 107 episodes we’ve done, this is probably the most important, the most meaningful one. I really thank you for being so vulnerable, and opening up, and coming here so soon after your release. These stories are very important to hear, so people can educate themselves… your story is amazing, and I wish you and Barbara the best life together. You are quite a teacher. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.

[01:26:05] There you have it — Ray Gray’s story, incredibly powerful and moving. If you know somebody who needs to hear this episode, forward this to them. Listen, comment, like, and subscribe. Thank you for tuning in to Open Mike.

While release from prison can be a joyful occasion, people who have been incarcerated face an entirely new series of challenges upon reclaiming their civilian status. Housing, a fundamental human right, is perhaps the most daunting of these challenges which can be observed in the disproportionately high number of homeless people with criminal histories. Pioneer Human Services is a Seattle-based social enterprise that partners with communities to transform society by honoring the humanity of people, reducing the impact of mass incarceration, and empowering people to lead safe, healthy, productive lives by overturning barriers, such as housing discrimination. In this inspiring latest installment, Mike sits down with CEO Karen Lee to discuss ways we can lessen the stigma against people who were formerly incarcerated and normalize affirming reentry programs for the betterment of everyone in our society.

Show Notes

[00:02] Welcome to Open Mike!

[00:46] Karen Lee’s bio and background as CEO of Pioneer Human Services.

[01:44] Welcome to the show, Karen!

[02:21] A lot of the people we’ve interviewed, especially in wrongful convictions, have talked about how they don’t have many housing options or familial help when they’re released from prison. Tell us about what you’re doing to help them!

[02:42] Housing is probably the biggest challenge that people experience after prison. Not many studies are conducted in this sector, but all of them identify that a disproportionate amount of homeless people have criminal history.

[04:57] Editor’s note: for the purpose of the show, nonincarcerated people will be referred to as “civilians.”

[08:17] I’m impressed — 500 units seems like a lot of units to be able to offer people! Is the government, local, state, or federal, subsidizing these at all?

[08:51] HUD sends vouchers, but when Pioneer accepts those vouchers, they lose authority over who gets placement in those units.

[11:27] Pioneer Human Services believes universal housing is a fundamental, human right. Everyone deserves it, regardless of what has happened to them in their past.

[12:48] Part of incarceration, we would hope, is called reentry planning, where people are offered education, degree opportunities, trade skills, so they can support themselves upon release. When people who are wrongfully convicted are released, the prison oftentimes receives less than 24 hours’ notice. Depending on the nature of the crime, some people aren’t even offered these educational or training opportunities, because reentry isn’t deemed a legitimate possibility.  

[14:11] With the thousands of people you’ve helped, I’m curious — what are some of the common stereotypes and misconceptions about people who have been incarcerated?

[17:43] These are all really great points. How do we educate people and change the beliefs and stigmas surrounding people who have been imprisoned?

[20:40] One of the ways is to change the language with which we identify people. For example, instead of saying “inmate” say “someone who has been an inmate.” By identifying their humanity first, you refrain from labeling them.

[21:51] Do people who were formerly incarcerated experience the same discrimination finding a job as they do housing?

[24:34] Do you understand where the employers are coming from in their concerns and fears of hiring people who were convicted of felonies? More specifically, do you think those fears are misplaced?

[25:22] Our country tends to take this blanket approach regardless the nature of one’s crime, they’re automatically not “worthy” to be hired.

[26:06] We see so many racial inequities about people going into prison… are you seeing the same racial inequities once people are released?

[27:10] During our last economic expansion, when unemployment was at 5%, people who had a felony conviction were at 35% unemployment, Black men were at 37% unemployment, and Black women were around 42%.

[29:11] As a society, how do you think we level the playing field and eliminate social inequities?

[31:31] Is expungement one of the solutions to this issue? Is that something you’re pushing toward?

[33:30] Are you optimistic with a new President and new Congress that we’ll see some changes made to the criminal justice system?

[35:27] Make sure you check out the Pioneer Human Services website and take their mass incarceration quiz to see what you know and educate yourself on this important issue. Connect with Karen Lee on LinkedIn and follow Pioneer on Facebook and Twitter as well!

[36:25] It was such a pleasure to chat with and learn from you, Karen. Thanks for coming on the show!]

[37:00] If you know somebody who needs to hear this episode, forward this to them. Listen, comment, like, and subscribe. We love you all for tuning in, and we do need to educate ourselves and each other on these issues. Thanks for watching and being a fan! Talk to you next time.

For the last sixteen years, Susan Slotnick has gone beyond the walls at the Woodbourne Correctional Facility to bring the joy, passion, and healing properties of modern dance to incarcerated men and boys.

After retiring the dance company she ran for forty years, Susan was free to teach in concordance with her true humanistic values: mindfulness, kindness, social justice, and universal accessibility. Her volunteer work in the prison system is the culmination of these values. Through her love, talent, and attention, Susan has impacted countless lives and facilitated legitimate rehabilitative progress in men’s prisons, as well as AIDS and cancer survivors, and homeless populations.

Susan has witnessed firsthand the transformative power artistic expression can have on otherwise marginalized — or confined — communities. How can we holistically amplify our inmate programs so that those who return to society avoid becoming recidivism statistics?

Show Notes

[00:01] Welcome to another episode of Open Mike!

[00:43] Susan Slotnick’s background and bio.

[01:54] Susan, welcome to the show! Very happy to have you. I wanted to start with your background and childhood and how it prepared you for what you’re doing today.

[03:03] Susan was a “juvenile delinquent” with a troubled childhood exacerbated by wildly different parents and a traumatizing household. However, she had many different artistic passions and outlets for exploring them.

[04:37] How many years now have you been working in the prison system?

[05:28] Susan doesn’t believe in incarcerating young people, except in the rare cases they must be locked up to protect society.

[05:49] It doesn’t sound like you were ever concerned for your safety, walking into any of these prisons?

[06:51] In twenty years, Susan was only concerned for her safety once.

[07:03] What compelled you to seek this out, to go into prison to teach the arts?

[09:39] Are you formally trained in dance?

[09:43] When she was younger, Susan studied under the wife of famed Russian ballet dancer, Igor Youskevitch.

[12:51] Could you tell us about some success stories about people you taught to dance while in the system?

[16:08] One of Susan’s students who developed stage 4 stomach cancer was eventually released early, after multiple denied appeals, largely because of his participation in her dance program. The video of his performance can be found on her website.

[18:21] That story alone must have made the last twenty years worth it, right?

[19:13] Are prisoners generally receptive to dance? Are they good dancers, or does it even matter?

[20:59] 97-98% of prisoners are eventually released, which is a very important reason to be more interested in the quality of prison programming.

[22:22] The prison circumstance for a certain segment of the men makes them want to avail themselves to every possibility to have a better life on the inside — so they were willing to fully immerse themselves into the experience.

[23:26] Were you regularly able to showcase dance to the other prisoners? If so, how did they react?

[27:23] It looks like you update your Facebook page regularly, and it’s amazing to see these men dancing with such passion… what kind of feedback are you getting from strangers or your

Facebook friends about what you post?

[28:50] Is your program run on donations? Does it need help if people are inspired by this story?

[29:54] Susan doesn’t need any assistance, and simply requests people educate themselves via independent methods or her book, Flight: the Dance of Freedom.

[31:08] Susan, I really appreciated your story and your mission. Thank you for coming on the show!

[31:37] An interesting episode! We don’t oftentimes dive into this aspect of the incarceration system. Really inspiring. If you enjoyed this episode, please comment, share and like. Thank you for being with us on Open Mike!

On February 20th, 2020, Kevin Baker and Sean Washington walked out of prison after spending twenty-five years locked up for a double-murder they didn’t commit. The trial that condemned them to a quarter century of incarceration relied on a sole witness who later acknowledged she was under the influence of crack cocaine at the time of the killings.

How did Kevin and Sean prove their innocence? Was justice for the victims ever attained? Tune in to this week’s jarring installment of Open Mike to find out.

Show Notes

[00:58] Kevin Baker’s and Sean Washington’s backgrounds and bios.

[01:47] Mike Morse: Kevin Baker and Sean Washington, welcome to Open Mike! Let’s start with Kevin. How long were you in prison for a murder you did not commit?

[02:21] MM: I know this is a really hard question, but how has this affected your life and the types of things you missed in prison?

[03:07] MM: Sean, do you want to answer that question?

[03:14] Sean Washington: Being in prison takes a toll on you. We’ve lost multiple family members, didn’t have the opportunity to be fathers to our children, we missed out on a lot. Prison does something psychological to you, too. Men who do time in prison suffer PTSD, just like people who go to war.

[04:01] MM: At 23 years old, before getting arrested, what were your plans for the future?

[05:39] MM: What was it like growing up in Camden, New Jersey?

[08:03] MM: I unfortunately have to bring you back to January 28th, 1995… there’s a double a murder that would change both of your lives forever…

[09:57] Sean encountered the bodies of Margaret Wilson and Rodney turner, initially mistaking Rodney’s body for his nephew’s, which made him distraught and compelled him to called 911 anonymously.

[10:34] MM: Five days later, an informant said her cousins were in the area. Did either of you know her cousins?

[12:51] MM: Were either one of you friends these witnesses? Did you used to hang out with either of them?

[14:30] MM: Police decided to make arrests on February 13th, 1995. Kevin you were taken into custody, and Sean, you ran from the police. What happened there?

[17:28] MM: Did either of you have the understanding that there was a bad identification?

[18:11} Kevin Baker: I knew it was a bad identification, because I wasn’t there! I’m starting to question if the witness was actually there… her story can’t make sense if I wasn’t there… there was nothing that corroborated her claim.

[20:28] MM: What kind of defense attorney did you have?

[21:41] MM: Did your lawyer ever interview your alibi witnesses?

[24:25] MM: Did anything happen with these lawyers? Did they get reprimanded or grieved?

[25:35] MM: I assume you were offered plea deals?

[26:53] MM: They never recovered weapons, DNA evidence, or more than one unreliable witness named Denise Rand?

[27:38] MM: Denise Rand was allegedly paid under a material witness statute.

[32:01} MM: Kevin and Sean had a joint trial.  

[33:31] MM: Too many people we interview didn’t make noise when it became apparent they were getting railroaded. But it sounds like you were making noise…

[35:04] MM: August 1st, 1996 you’re both convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced for sixty years. Did either of you think the truth would ever come out?

[37:88] MM: Sean, what happened to your 911 call that you placed?

[39:25] Sean’s case was a topic of discourse at a convention, which sparked the interest of several lawyers.

[42:47] MM: The witness who claimed you guys were guilty of murder died of breast cancer, but her friends came forward and told her you were innocent…

[45:58] MM: February 11th, 2020, you walk out of prison. What was that feeling like?

[47:38] MM: Kevin, where are you at? What are you doing now?

[48:16] MM: Sean, what about you?

[49:59] MM: Have either of you been compensated by the state of New Jersey?

[51:11] MM: What would you like other wrongfully convicted people to know?

[53:45] You need to advocate for your rights if you believe you’re innocent. No one will change the way the law is interpreted unless people stand up for the truth — even when the truth is being challenged.

[54:41] MM: Thank you both for your message and for urging our viewers to stay awake. Appreciate you both. Thank you for sharing your stories.

[55:13] MM: Thank you for watching and listening Open Mike. Another tragedy, and the state won’t compensate them. It’s unbelievable. It’s the same, old stuff. It’s frustrating and heartbreaking. We appreciate you for being part of our community. We’ll see you next time.   

In April of 1989, teenage mother Sabrina Butler experienced every parent’s worst nightmare when her nine-month-old son Walter suddenly stopped breathing. Despite her intense resuscitation efforts, Walter was pronounced dead at the hospital. Sabrina was then subjected to interrogation by twelve police officers and three detectives — without an attorney present — only to be charged with capital murder and sentenced to death. After years of appeals and assembling a new, internationally renowned defense team, Sabrina was exonerated in 1995, becoming America’s first female death row survivor.

Sabrina now serves on the board of Witness to Innocence, empowering other death row survivors to raise their voices and eradicate the practice of capital punishment, once and for all. Why was a perfect storm of poverty, overt racism, oppression allowed to yield the death sentence of a minor? How do we compel our leaders and citizens to contend with the realities of a fatally flawed criminal justice system? Watch this stirring episode of Open Mike to find out.

Show Notes

[00:01] Background of Sabrina Butler Smith’s case and her horrific experience in the legal system.

[02:21] Welcome to the show, Sabrina. Your story is chilling, and I’m honored you’re here. Let’s jump in. This started with the tragic death of your son Walter and turned into a greater tragedy when you were charged with his murder as a teen. Tell us what happened!

[06:26] Sabrina, was your son healthy up until this point? And he had his regular shots and pediatrician up until this moment? He never had any broken bones or was treated for any injuries?

[07:22] You’re at the hospital, and there are doctors and nurses working on Walter… and you’re panicking because you think you’re in trouble for having left him alone and returned to him in this state… and then what happened?

[07:51] What were the lies you were telling?

[08:48] Doctors and nurses were asking Sabrina many situationally related questions while she was holding the body of her child, i.e. in a state of extreme distress where she was not in the right mind to provide accurate responses. She was then taken to the police station where asked questions, only to be released. The next day, Sabrina returned to the hospital where she was once again taken to the police station where she was aggressively interrogated/intimidated for four hours.

[11:11] So, when you were being interrogated at the police station, did you know your baby had already passed or were you still waiting to hear about his condition?

[11:53] The police read Sabrina, a minor, her Miranda Rights but didn’t understand implications of its language, including misinterpreting her right to remain silent as, “don’t speak until spoken to.”

[12:38] Eventually, you signed a confession… explain how that happened. What did you confess to?

[13:24] Sabrina didn’t learn of Walter’s cause of death until her second trial. She wasn’t allowed to plan or participate in a funeral and didn’t even learn of his burial place until two years after her release.

[14:10] Can you tell us about how you got your first attorneys?

[14:35] Sabrina didn’t meet her trial attorneys until two days prior to the first court date. In 1989, court appointed attorneys were receiving a mere $1,000 per capital case. There was no jury of her peers, no witnesses were called, and she believes her attorney was drunk.

[16:54] Do you remember how many days this trial was? You say you knew deep in your heart you were getting railroaded in this trial…

[18:28] What did the jury look like, were they all-white?

[18:53] The woman who had helped you administer CPR the night Walter passed was in the court room, and your drunk defense attorney didn’t have the thought to put her on the stand… how does that happen? You must have wanted to scream at the court room.

[20:06] The jury came back, you’re sitting in the court room, and they find you guilty of capital murder. What’s going through your head?

[21:23] Did your defense attorneys ever participate in a hearing where they advocated for you not being out to death? What was life like in prison, on death row?

[23:10] Much of what Sabrina learned about legal proceedings was from her cellmate, not her lawyers. Her legal team kept her in the dark.

[23:30] Thank God for that woman being with you… can you tell us about the appeal process?

[24:17] It looks like, two years later, your new lawyer Clive Stafford Smith and his team convinced the state supreme court that the state prosecution improperly commented at trial on your decision not to testify — which is unconstitutional. That’s something you learn on day one of law school. Do you remember what the prosecutor said about that at trial?

[25:12] You get granted a new trial and are now sitting on death row for three years? Did any of your attorneys try to get you out on bond?

[25:58] Before we get to the second trial, tell me about your family, your first child, what the dynamics of support are like for you during this time.

[26:45] Sabrina’s mother became her biggest advocate, appearing in the news, even becoming homeless in her quest to let everyone know what the state of Mississippi was doing to her daughter.

[27:02] Let’s talk about the second trial… were you more optimistic for this second trial with your new defense team?

[27:46] Did either of your first two defense attorneys get disciplined, as far as you know?

[28:27] How was the second trial different from the first one?

[28:50] Clive discovered Walter’s death was caused by nephrotic syndrome, which Sabrina’s daughter also has. Walter also had heart problems and Irritable Bowel Syndrome, which caused peritonitis, inability to defecate, and ultimately led to his death by robbing him of oxygen. An autopsy had previously been conducted by the state but was completely inadequate and inept.

[31:07] Were there any witnesses called at your second trial?

[31:42] Sabrina didn’t need to take the stand in the second trial because her new legal team had provided such an immense quantity of evidence.

[31:58] Was the jury makeup any better during this second trial?

[32:17] It took just one hour for the jury to deliver her innocence verdict.

[32:44] You did have an expert witness on the second trial?

[34:32] It sounds like these are night-and-day trials… were you more confident going into this second trial?

[35:28] We’ve done several wrongfully convicted episodes and, Sabrina, your story goes to show how important it is to have good lawyering. They should be teaching your story in law school! This is 101. And the communication you’re talking about goes to show how important it is.

[36:16] You’re acquitted, I can imagine you’re elated to get out of prison after six-and-a-half years. What did those first steps outside feel like?

[38:11] The state granted you $300,000… how did you feel about that?

[38:30] How hard was it reacclimating to society after this ordeal?

[39:45] Tell the viewers and listeners… how is your life now?

[40:09] You mentioned you’re doing speaking and making appearances on podcasts like this… and you also have a website you’re involved with. Can you tell us about that?

[41:45] Sabrina is also working on a tell-all book called Exonerated: The Sabrina Butler Story that’s currently in its completion stages.

[42:34] You’re actually talking to state legislators and working on death penalty reform. Can you tell us about that?

[43:12] You’re also on the board of Witness to Innocence, which empowers death row survivors to help overturn the death penalty in the United States…

[44:26] We’ve done some episodes on Shaken Baby Syndrome (Abusive Head Trauma) cases… your case kind of falls under that category, do you agree?

[45:56] Sabrina is the first woman in the United States to be exonerated from death row.

[46:10] Editor’s note: Julie Baumer’s nephew did not die from his medical condition and is still alive to this day.

[46:56] Sabrina is also attempting to start a halfway house for female exonerees and ex-offenders in Memphis, Tennessee because, while there are plenty of programs for men, there are few available for females.

[49:03] The last question I have for you is… what is your message for people sitting behind bars who know they are innocent? How do you inspire hope in them?

[49:48] I think those are perfect words to end on. Sabrina Butler Smith, thank you for so much for being on Open Mike and sharing your story with us.

[50:17] That was emotional, another crazy exoneree story from a really beautiful woman, Sabrina Butler Smith. Thank you for watching and listening. Send this to someone who needs to hear it. Donate to Witness to Innocence and her website. Thank you for being here for Open Mike.

Sex sting busts are often regarded as heroic acts justice, but the ethics surrounding them aren't necessarily clear-cut.

When a police set-up resulted in the incarceration of Kathleen Hambrick’s son, she claimed fraud due to a series of misleading interactions that equated to entrapment. Four years after his arrest, the Hambricks find themselves in legal limbo, having appealed the initial conviction, only to be recharged.

Throughout their ordeal, Kathleen has come to believe these police-run stings involve a state-funded incentive which compels law enforcement to violate the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force and make criminals out of law-abiding citizens to turn a profit.

Corruption within law enforcement isn’t uncommon — can we take their words at face value? Should there be alternative consequences for sex offenders who haven’t committed a physical crime against another person? How do amateur sex sting operations complicate this already convoluted dynamic?

Show Notes

[00:21] Background of Jace Hambrick’s case and his mother, Kathleen Hambrick.

[01:34] Welcome to the show, Kathleen!

[01:41] I know you’ve seen some of our previous episodes with Chris Hansen, CC Unit, and Anxiety Wars… I appreciated your email and feedback, and that’s why we’re having you on! Those who like the show and have different points of view, please contact me — I never would have gotten to meet Kathleen had she not contacted me.

[02:11] Kathleen, can you tell us about your son and how he grew up a little different from most kids in terms of social interaction and online dating?

[03:05] So at twenty years old he was living at home and had a job. Tell us what happened to him with the sex sting by undercover police.

[03:35] Kathleen’s son Jace went to an 18+ portion of Craigslist looking for a hook-up with another consenting adult, under the assumption that everyone else on there was an adult.

[04:11] Can you clarify one point? When you say Jace doesn’t pick up on red flags, what do you mean by that?

[04:45] Jace had previously been in Naval boot camp, but they wouldn’t accept him, despite his high degree of intelligence, due to his ADHD.

[05:23] Back to the Craigslist story… he thought he was meeting an adult — what happened next?

[06:00] The person Jace was interacting with said she was 13. He thought it may have been a type and she meant to type “23” instead. When he attempted to clarify, she said, “I like college guys.”

[06:25] He didn’t believe her? Or he thought he misread something and continued the conversation?

[07:06] Jace asked for a picture she was sent a picture of a 24-year-old woman, which he interprets as the truth. He believes she’s a 24-year-old pretending to cosplay as a 13-year-old. They proceed to talk explicitly and decide to meet.  

[09:03] An hour-and-a-half later, where did they meet, what kind of place?

[09:45] Jace goes to the woman’s residence and she comes out and beckons him to come in. She is the same woman in the pictures she sent. He walks into the house and gets arrested.

[10:38] At the time of the arrest, the woman from the picture was 26-years-old. In the picture, she was 24.

[10:52] So the police had her online as a sting operation… they walk into this house and immediately arrest him?

[11:33] Did your son try explaining the situation to the police who arrested him?

[11:46] Did the police check his criminal history for child porn and other elicit activity?

[12:56] So what happened when he went through the legal system?

[13:25] They went to trial, reluctantly did a bench trial to avoid getting a jury involved, and he was convicted. They then appealed, stating they didn’t agree to a bench trial, and the verdict was overturned after Jace spent a year-and-a-half in prison. Since then, he’s been recharged and has to go back to trial.

[14:54] Does your lawyer know you’re publicly talking about this stuff?

[15:34] When was Jace’s trial? Can you provide a timeline of how this panned out?

[15:58] And the prosecutors are still going after him… what was his original sentence?

[16:18] He’s already served his eighteen months… so I’m confused as to why they want to retry him!

[16:37] You recently told Jace’s story on the Dr. Phil Show. I haven’t seen that episode but tell us about your experience on that show.

[19:27] Kathleen asserts that these sting operations get money from the federal government for every arrest and prosecution, regardless of whether the accusations are true.

[20:06] If the picture of had been of this police officer when she was thirteen, would you feel differently?

[21:27] There’s a huge difference between amateur sting operations doing this type of activity versus police doing it. These amateurs we’ve had on the show believe they’re doing the right things and busting potential abusers. But the difference in legality is quite drastic. Can you tell us what you think is wrong with these amateur “vigilantes?”

[26:09] I assume you’ll be going for a jury trial this time. Is there a trial date set? Have there been any plea offers to try and resolve this case?

[28:08] Have you ever seen To Catch a Predator, back in the day? What do you see wrong with those?

[29:00] I’ve seen the Chris Hansen shows and I believe, and a lot of other people believe, that these people are showing up for a sexual encounter with a minor. And they’re busted. And a lot of them admit it on the show! Do you think that’s entrapment of people who shouldn’t be caught?

[30:41] What’s your message to these amateur sting operations that blow the whistle on people they think are committing crimes?

[31:19] Do you think all sex stings by the police should be stopped?

[32:05] I appreciate you sharing your point of view! Thank you for reaching out, and best of luck to you and your son.

[32:24] There you have it! A different point of view on this issue. Let us know your perspective — which side are you on? And why? Look forward to hearing your comments. Please like and share the episode! Thanks for being here — we’ll see you next time.

Robert Riggs is Peabody Award-winning journalist and digital media entrepreneur, widely regarded as one of the nation’s top investigative journalists. In his new podcast, Free to Kill, he exposes the rampant, deadly corruption that has come to poison many parole board systems across the country. In a disturbingly increasing trend, many parole boards let out vicious killers who go on to commit new crimes while refusing to parole the wrongfully convicted, simply because they do not admit to their crimes or show remorse. This episode of Open Mike sees Robert discussing the most heinous crimes he’s covered throughout his storied career, reflecting on ways parole boards have failed those they claim to protect, and examining the intersection of wrongful convictions and deceitful parole boards.

Show Notes

[00:19] Welcome to Open Mike, Episode 101!

[00:46] Robert Riggs’s background and bio.

[01:23] Welcome to Open Mike, Robert Riggs!  Robert is one of the country's top investigative reporters. You've been on CBS Evening, Evening News, CBS 60 minutes ABC nightline, as well as local stations. Tell me about some of the hot stories you broke or covered as an investigative reporter.

[01:50] Robert tells the story of serial killer Kenneth McDuff who, enabled by political corruption, essentially bought himself parole and continued a killing spree.

[03:14] You’ve done reporting on parole boards before, with Free to Kill… what did you discover about parole boards?

[05:51] They want people to admit their guilt, take responsibility. It feels like that's the only litmus test to whether or not they're going to get out… If someone is innocent, and they keep proclaiming their innocence, there's no way they're going to get paroled. Do you think that's true?

[06:48] We cover a lot of wrongful convictions on Open Mike, and there as estimations that tens of thousands of innocent people are locked up. Some of the people we’ve interviewed have gotten a break because of an investigative journalist, like yourself. What's your sense? Do you think that there is a enough journalists covering these types of wrongful convictions or potentially wrongful convictions? To expose this this tragic injustice?

[09:20] Case after case that we cover…it comes down to a bad court-appointed attorney who pushes deals on innocent clients because they have too many cases, or they don't have enough time to do all the work. It feels like that should be a national story, but I think you just answered the question why we're never going to see a big story about this.

[13:02] Have you ever sat through a trial or covered a trial, where you've heard about so-called scientific evidence on bite marks, or Shaken Baby Syndrome, or even arson cases, that just didn't make sense?

[14:46] As we're talking about reporting… what we see in a lot of our cases here in Michigan, are that the police and prosecutors are lying. They hide exculpatory evidence to kick convictions and have crazy tunnel vision. Why isn't the media all over this? You might have already answered my question that it's budget cuts. But it’s just mind blowing to me that the public doesn't know what's happening.

[17:34] On true crime reporter you started talking a little bit about this five-part series… what can you tell us about one of the crazy cases that you've covered on that?

[21:02] Robert tells the story of Annie Laurie Williams who, in 1955, murdered and dismembered her two young sons. She was imprisoned, but then released by the Texas parole board after 25 years served, started a new life in Idaho where she likely killed a widower and took over his social security benefits.

[23:13] How the heck did they let this woman out for such a heinous crime?

[23:26] One of the problems is that the parole files in the prison files are secret. It's against the law to make them public. In Robert’s case, he developed the sources and they started leaking information about corruption to him at their own legal risk.

[24:14] True Crime Reporter podcast is available on all your favorite podcast apps, so be sure to check it out!

[26:16] On that note, Robert, Peabody Award-winning investigative reporter, I really loved having you on the show. I love hearing these stories. They're mind blowing to me, and we're going to check out your podcast today. I'm going to go check it out today. Thanks for being on Open Mike. And thanks for doing what you do, and keep exposing all this crazy stuff out there.

[28:06] I am literally going to subscribe to that podcast right now. Hope you enjoyed that episode. Like it, share it, comment, tell us what else you want to hear. And we will bring it to you here on Open Mike. That was Episode 101. I can't believe we are over 100. But thank you for your support. Thank you for sharing the episodes as you do. And I'll see you next time.

Open Mike has made it to triple-digits! On our landmark, 100th installment, Mike reunites with three former guest exonerees, Aaron Salter, Julie Baumer, and Kenny Wyniemko, as well as two journalists who have been blazing a path to illuminate the wrongful conviction crisis, Kevin Dietz and Bill Proctor. In this groundbreaking centenary episode, our guests reflect on their detestable experiences in the criminal justice system, update us on their current initiatives and whereabouts, and offer us their opinions on the future of the justice reform movement amidst a still-divided political climate. Plus… Mike provides a development on his own plans to dive headfirst into the arena of justice reform.

Show Notes 

[00:01] Mike Morse: Well first, let me start out by saying thank you for everyone being here. It's a trip down memory lane. Seeing all your faces, Julie and Aaron and Kenny and Bill and Kevin Dietz, celebrating our 100th episode… I didn't think we would get here. When I started the podcast, it was just kind of out of fun. And I wanted to learn, and I wanted to do something because podcasts were all the rage. I never thought we’d get to 100 podcasts. The fact that you guys are here to help me celebrate 100 is very meaningful to me. The fact that my producers just told me that we're over 3 million downloads and listens. That's rare. When I started this podcast, we didn't know which direction fully it was going to go. And when I first met Aaron Salter, Episode 32, and Aaron told me his story, I remember the emotions, I remember the sadness, I remember the shock. Being a lawyer, 28 years handling only civil cases… that this was happening in our justice system was outrageous to me. And then meeting Kenny and Julie and several others, it really did affect me, it really did change me. And at the end of this podcast, I'm going to make an announcement, I'm going to tell you guys something that I haven't told many people. All of your sharing, and courage, and love that you've shown me… and the fact that we are now friends, we talk, we have lunch, we text each other, we help each other — it’s changed my life for the better. And it's meaningful to me, and the fact that it's only been a year and a half that I didn't think this was coming. And then I'm still growing up as an attorney and learning things about the law, which I admit I think is pretty cool. So, I thank Kevin Dietz for introducing me to this stuff, because I was probably your idea to have Aaron on, and introducing me to these amazing people has changed my life. And to be quite honest, it’s changed my family's life. I have three daughters, two of them are in college, and they are watching our episodes. They were both social work, social work, education majors, and now they're talking to me about social justice classes. They're talking to me about law school. And I think it's because of the three of you, and Bill, and others. I wasn't even planning on talking about that, but that's true. I mean, I was sitting with my freshmen last night looking at her classes, and she was looking at social justice and criminal reform and classes like that. It's hard to turn away, it's hard to not want to learn more and hear more.

[02:56] MM: So, saying all that, I'm going to start with Aaron Salter. And Aaron, your story is amazing, heartbreaking. Scary that it could happen to such a nice young man who was, you know, won a partial college scholarship on his way to Arkansas. And the fact that this happened to you, I'd like you to tell our listeners and viewers who maybe didn't see Episode 32 a little bit about what happened you starting in 2003?

[05:01] In 2003, Aaron was with his cousin when a drug deal went awry, and his cousin was shot twelve times — and survived. The person who shot Aaron’s cousin shot another person three days later, and Aaron was misidentified as the perpetrator.

[05:21] MM: Where were you when you were arrested? You were at a family member's house?

[07:21] Aaron Salter: From the very beginning, a female named Joanne Thomas, the deceased’s sister, actually stood up in court and said she knew I didn’t kill her brother, that the person who killed him was a guy named E. Everybody should have been stepping up to be like, “Well, okay, I knew there are holes in this case, I know that testimony is powerful.” There is no way that I should have still gone to prison. Like that should have been a wake-up call for somebody, somewhere to be like, Okay, well, maybe we rushed this. But they didn't do it.

[08:26] Kevin Dietz: And then you end up in prison. Did you realize at some point, “Wow, innocent people end up in prison, this happens in real life?”

[9:03] KD: What was the key to getting out, what was the turning point?

[9:06] AS: Man, the turning point was when my when my federal defender team actually submitted an application to the conviction integrity unit. And when they did that, I was out within like 30 to 60 days.

[09:26] MM: Refresh our memories —what was the smoking gun that that the conviction integrity unit, hung their hat on to finally allow you out?

[10:35] MM: Prosecution withheld your mugshot from defense until the conviction integrity unit was just able to access it from the evidence room. Why didn’t they want you to have thar?

[10:39] AS: Because for one my whole claim was suggestive identification.

[10:55] MM: Didn't your height and weight not add up to a witness? Weren't there witness identifications that were skinnier and shorter?

[11:50] MM: You were also in prison with the man who actually committed the crime, is that true?

[12:53] AS: Absolutely. I was in a prison with him. He wrote a letter to my attorney saying that he’ll be able to help me if I can assign some type of contract to compensate him for a statement. But my attorney ruled his stuff out — you’re basically putting your testimony for hire man, so that's not even credible. We couldn't even use him if we wanted to… but he reached out to my attorney and everything organically.

[14:44] MM: One of the biggest things I've learned over the last year and a half is that if you're paroled in Michigan, for a crime you committed, you have all these wonderful benefits. You get money, you get housing, job help, medical…. But if you're exonerated for a crime you didn't commit, you get nothing. You saw a void in this system, and you bought you use your hard-earned money that you got after your lawsuit. And you bought a house so you could put people up. Tell us a little bit about that.

[16:09] MM: A lot of us are wearing or have these pins that I'm showing to the camera: Innocence Maintained: Better not Bitter. Can you tell our listeners and viewers what this is?

[16:49] MM: Tell us about this app you’ve created for exonerees — how is it going to help people who are wrongfully convicted?

[17:43] The app will be revealed on August 15th at an Exoneree Awards ceremony taking place at the Detroit Yacht Club.

[18:17] MM: That’s awesome! Save us a table — we’re coming. We're going to turn to Julie Baumer who's sitting to your right. Julie Baumer, Episode 77 on the Open Mike Show. Julie has another really heartbreaking story. She was arrested for doing the right thing, seeking medical help for her for her sick baby nephew. She was convicted with no evidence of any abuse. Just two doctors testifying about Shaken Baby Syndrome, which we now know is junk science. It's such junk science that they’ve changed the name to Abusive Head Trauma. You had a terrible defense attorney, not presenting any evidence in your first trial to help you. And you had the first case at the Michigan Innocence Clinic in Ann Arbor took that did not involve DNA evidence. So, you are kind of a famous person up there. But tell us a little bit about your story. And for the people who have not heard or seen it.

[19:43] Julie Baumer: Basically, my younger sister ended up getting pregnant, it was an unplanned pregnancy. With the support of my family, I chose to do an in-family adoption. After Philip was born, he was hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit for about a week. So, we knew that there was going to be some form of complications. We didn't know the extent of it. When he was five weeks old, he basically had a medical breakdown, if you will, because he completely stopped eating. And he just became very lethargic. So of course, I called his pediatrician and, and by direction of his pediatrician, I took him into the ER in Macomb County. The county transferred him down to Children's Hospital where, 24 hours later, he was undergoing brain surgery to relieve pressure in his brain. His brain had swollen. 24 hours after that, I was invited into the sheriff's department to interview. At that point I was I realized that I was a suspect for child abuse. And so immediately, my family and I started our defensive. Initially we went back to the birth, which was traumatic, during which my sister had been given two doses of Pitocin. So, we thought there were some definite issues during the birth. However, several months later, I was formally charged with child abuse first degree. And 18 months later, I was convicted and sentenced to 15 years.

[22:06] MM: You actually had two trials… what happened after your first conviction?

[22:10] JB: I immediately began the appeal process. After I exhausted all of my appeals by the grace of God, ironically, that same year in 2009, U of M, opened up the non-DNA Innocence Clinic and I was able to get my case heard. I was granted a second trial, where I had several doctors who testified on my behalf that weren't available during my first trial. They clearly stated that there was no crime committed at all. Unfortunately, my nephew had suffered a form of childhood stroke, venous sinus thrombosis. And I was exonerated completely.

[23:36] MM: How long were you in prison?

[23:45] MM: Thank God you had good attorneys for after the second trial. You’ve been out ten years — can you give us an update on your life? What are you doing these days?

[24:09] JB: I've nestled myself into a nice little community where I work as a realtor. And to fill some void and give my part back, I indulged in several service clubs, and do a lot of volunteer work.

[24:38] MM: Well, thank you for sharing your story again with us today. All the details, Julie Baumer, Episode 77, on the Open Mike Show. And last but not least, Kenny Wyniemko

one of the craziest stories I think anybody could ever hear. We did two episodes on Kenny, 45 and 50. As I'm interviewing more people, getting myself into this world, your story almost checks all the boxes of what could go wrong in one of these types of cases. Starting with, dirty cops, a jailhouse snitch, a corrupt prosecutor, a bad judge. On and on — and that's probably why Netflix did a whole show on you. That's probably why you have this fabulous book that your friend Bob wrote about you, Deliberate Injustice. Kenny, I think about your story all the time, as I do with all the stories. You're also you're wearing your Innocence Project shirt, which will tell us about… For the viewers who have not seen our four plus hours on you, why don't you give us a couple minutes on what happened to you?

[26:31] Kenny Wyniemko: Well, first of all, Mike, thank you for the kind words. It's always a pleasure being with you and my fellow exonerees. What happened to me unfortunately, I was arrested in 1994, and charged 10 weeks after this rape happened. And at the time that rape happened, it was a big story in the Detroit Free Press, The Detroit News, Macomb Daily, our local paper. And I remember reading about the rape and thinking to myself that, no one should have to go through that. No way. July 14th, 10 weeks later, I was arrested and charged with 15 counts of Criminal Sexual Conduct, one count of Breaking and Entering, and one count of Armed Robbery…

[34:41] MM: It’s a good story, and it leads into why you think you were behind bars for so many years. What was your next encounter with the Clinton Township police?

[35:19] On July 14th, 1994, Kenny was awoken by a woman in a business suit asking if he was Kenny Wyniemko. When he responded affirmatively, she moved aside, and four police officers rushed into his living room, pinned him down, handcuffed him, and took him to the Macomb County police department to be identified in a lineup. He had no idea what they were talking about, requested to call an attorney, and was denied. Kenny was put in a lineup, but ultimately released from the station. When he returned home to shower, a plain clothes police officer refused to let Kenny in until the police had a search warrant, pulling a gun on Kenny and pointing it at his head. Kenny went to his parents to shower and, upon his return, found that his house had been ransacked by the police and unnecessarily vandalized. The next day, he returned home after going to the grocery store to replace broken items and was met by eight police — some with sawed-off shotguns — who stated he had been identified in the previous day’s lineup and was under arrest.

[42:48] MM: As you’re talking, I'm now remembering why we spent so many hours with you — because you're a damn good storyteller. For those of you who are interested, Episodes  45 and 50 have so many twists and turns. For those of you who want to hear more, be sure to check out those episodes. Now, I want to turn to now is your work with Innocence Project.

[43:58] KW: Well, this project is responsible for my release! I was still locked up in prison and I happened to see Barry Scheck on Phil Donahue Show talking about how he's working with DNA that would prove someone's guilt or innocence. So, I wrote to him with a packet of the facts surrounding my case, asking for help. About five months later, he wrote back saying that the information sounded serious. However, he had a backlog of about 4,000 cases… that was the bad news. The good news was they were going to open up a private Innocence Project at Cooley Law School in Lansing. I was their first case and they got me out.

[45:20] MM: You told me before we started filming today that you were the second person in Michigan and the 129th person in the country to be granted a DNA release?

[45:34] KW: In Michigan, we're up to 130, but nationwide, as of last Friday, we’re up to 2,755. It’s still just the tip of the iceberg, and that’s why I’m proud to be part of Proving Innocence with Bill Proctor. There’s no more worthy cause in the world.

[46:05] MM: We're hearing about people getting out every week, which is an amazing, amazing thing. I want to turn to Bill Proctor now, who was kind enough to come on Open Mike Episode 51. Bill works tirelessly for wrongfully convicted people. He's a member of the Michigan Broadcasters Hall of Fame, and the founder of Proving Innocence. Today he runs Seeking Justice, currently on the trail of Who Killed Shannon Siders, which is an amazing website… Bill, thank you for coming to the show today. Tell me how you got involved fighting for the wrongfully convicted.

[47:00] Bill Proctor: I was lucky enough to have an almost 40-year career in television and was a reporter, anchor. But had a private investigator in 1994 bring me a case out of Port Huron. This was a strange situation where a college student was murdered in broad daylight on a community college in 1986. Well, lots of twists and turns brought the police to a fella named Frederick Thomas Freeman. And Mr. Freeman had the misfortune of dating, for maybe two weeks, the girlfriend/fiancé of the murder victim. While the police looked at his general level of misconduct, that never indicated something so serious as to felony level. He wrote a couple of bad checks, drove a motorcycle without a license, those kinds of silly things. But he was just kind of an arrogant tough guy who thought he was God's gift to women. Bottom line is they put together a case that to this day is the most ridiculous presentation you've ever seen in your life that essentially convicted an innocent man. That was in 1986, for the trial. I took on the case 1994- 95 and was among the first reporters in the state of Michigan to essentially step out in a big way to present an actual innocence claim. The claim was extremely strong with a jailhouse snitch who got rewarded to make statements about what he heard in a jail cell that Freeman allegedly said girls who claimed that he was some sort of ninja master who could levitate himself from one another room to another that kind of thing, throwing stars all this kind of stuff. And the real bottom line was, this was a shot gun murder in broad daylight on the college campus. Freeman, with all of his martial arts prowess, could have snapped this neck quietly and walked away with no problem. That didn't happen. This, we strongly believe today, had to do with drugs, mayoral connection to drug dealers, corruption, and bad actors. What I learned from that case, from a private investigator, is that there are so many elements of a trial that can misrepresent the truth…

[50:36] MM: And this person is still sitting in prison today, right?

[51:10] BP: The list that you've heard from your guests, the list of the tens of thousands of cases that have been examined by a number of innocence projects around the country, have come down to a very comprehensive, constant evaluation of the problem of wrongful conviction in America. Six, seven, maybe eight specific reasons for all of them…. The list is long. It's difficult, Michael, and yes, the entire country needs to know that this is more than a notion more than a TV show. More than a television series. These are people whose lives and the lives of their families are ruined by bad work in the criminal justice system.

[54:03] MM: And from all accounts. Bill, you are helping so many people you're working as a private investigator trying to get people out. I know what good work you do. I've seen it. The new the new case that you're working on is very compelling. Do you want to tell a little bit about that and direct people to that website so they can so we can let the world know what's happening?

[58:03] KW: Bill was talking about eyewitness misidentification being a leading cause. It is the leading cause of wrongful convictions. And if you look at the facts, amongst the exonerees, all of us are throughout the country, the eyewitness identification has been proven wrong 78% of the time. 78%. That's scary numbers.

[58:56] Mike, Aaron, Julie, Kenny, spend time comparing multiple identical factors that contributed to their wrongful convictions: poor defense attorneys, aggressive prosecuting attorneys, tunnel vision, eyewitness errors, bad forensic science, perjury, and official misconduct.

[1:01:18] MM: We’ve done six or seven wrongful exonerees interviews. And the thing that amazes me is the perception of how bitter you all should be. But you have found the spirit to work hard and help others who are left behind in these exact situations. You've started nonprofits, you've been vocal about injustice, you lecture, you help pass laws. So, I want you to all tell me why? Why do you feel the way do you do? How do you keep a positive attitude? And why are you trying to help others?

[1:04:54] MM: A key to the future in this fight for justice is awareness, education, breaking down the stigma associated with being an exoneree. Tell me about how your family, friends, and even strangers treated you after you got released from prison.

[1:08:04] MM: Bill, I want to ask you — how do we keep the pressure up on those in the justice system to prioritize freeing innocent people over putting people away?

[1:08:23] BP: At this stage in the country, we have a serious problem. Because at one point, you might be able to get everyone elected to a legislature to sit around a table, listen to suggestions, and walk down a road of some reasonable compromise. I'm sorry, Mike, I don't think it's going to happen now. I think the lunatic in the White House for four years, his year before, and his continued effect on this population means that not enough people of reason, open mind, and open hearts will sit at a table and make changes in laws. I just need to remind everybody that what happens in the criminal justice system is essentially a wonderfully written set of laws and rules and processes and procedures. But we forget that people administer those laws. People have human failures. People do things that they're not supposed to do under law, or even in ethical or moral practice. I really don't know where we start, Mike. But everybody should know that. Yes. Not only do wrongful convictions happen, but they can be prevented. And yes, if somebody is telling you and insisting from the very beginning at trial or charges that they didn't do it, every single friend that's possible needs to step up and listen and try to help before the conviction takes place.

[1:09:50] MM: You would think that all of the news that's being made about wrongful convictions, and the integrity units, and podcasts like this with 3 million eyeballs on them… that people will start getting the message…. My hope is that if there are people out there who have said things to police that aren't true, that they will come forward and say, “You know what, I might have made a mistake.” And I know that takes courage. And I encourage people to gather that courage because you have beautiful souls who are sitting in prison for crimes they didn't commit. Thousands of people around this country that need the truth to be told. And I want to thank you all again, for being here. I want to thank you for sharing your stories, because I know it's not easy. And I want to tell the three of you that after hearing your stories, and learning from Bill, and watching the movies and reading your books, that the Mike Morse Law Firm has decided to put — lack of a better word — our money where our mouth is, our energy where our mouth is. And we have taken on a case of a man that, I believe, did not get a fair trial on a Shaken Baby Syndrome case. A man who's sitting in prison for life and did not get a fair trial. He had a terrible defense attorney, there was not one expert witness called against eight expert witnesses by the state. And I am working hard with a team of lawyers here at the Mike Morse Law Firm to get this man a new trial. This is probably one of the hardest things that my firm has ever done. I am doing it because of you three. You have encouraged me. Throughout it, Bill, you have helped me, and we've had several conversations about taking cases like this. And because this man did not have the quality attorney that he should have, we are going to fight as hard as we know how to get this man a new trial. We will share more details in the coming months. We are in the midst of it right now, getting the evidence, talking to experts, putting together a brief… I'm nervous about it. You get one shot at a 6500 motion, as you guys all know. And I'm hopeful. I'm hopeful. And I just wanted you guys to hear it first.

 [1:13:07] KW: Mike, God bless you. I wish that there were more attorneys like you that take the time to help when you see something wrong. You try to right it. I think that's what all of us do. And the bottom line is — all anybody ever wants when it comes to the justice system is the truth. So, I take my hat off to you. I commend you. May God bless you.

[1:13:28] AS: Mike. I just want to say one thing, man. I really respect you for doing that. Because when I was in prison, the only thing I wanted was for somebody to pick up my case and help me. So that's real commendable, man. And it's a lot of work, but I know you can do it.

[1:13:50] MM: You know what, Aaron, it wouldn't happen had you not come on my show. Or had you guys not introduced me to Dave Moran up at the Innocence Clinic. So, lots of things happen and wouldn't happen if Kevin Dietz, my good friend, didn't suggest we do these episodes on Open Mike. You know, I feel emotional about it. I'm excited about it. I'm nervous about it. I can't believe that we've done 100 episodes! We have gifts for you all that we're going to give you as well. And thanks again for being here.