Latest / Wrongful Conviction / #222 Jason Flom with Jarrett Adams and Dmitri Henley

Transcript

#222 Jason Flom with Jarrett Adams and Dmitri Henley · Wrongful Conviction

0:02
Speaker 1: On September sixth, nineteen ninety eight, three teenagers from Chicago,
0:06
Speaker 1: Jared Adams, Dmitri Henley, and Rovon Hill, took a trip
0:09
Speaker 1: to the University of Wisconsin Whitewater for a party. While
0:13
Speaker 1: trying to meet up with their friends, a student named
0:15
Speaker 1: Sean Demain invited the guys into his dorm room to
0:17
Speaker 1: use his phone, where they ended up hanging out with
0:20
Speaker 1: the man's friends and meeting two girls who will refer
0:23
Speaker 1: to as the accuser and her roommate. After some flirting,
0:27
Speaker 1: the two young white women invited the three young black
0:29
Speaker 1: men back to their own dorm room, and the group
0:32
Speaker 1: slowly trickled up to the room. When the roommate finally arrived,
0:36
Speaker 1: the accuser was performing oral sex on one of the
0:38
Speaker 1: young men on the roommate's bed. Enraged, the roommate called
0:42
Speaker 1: the accuser a slut and ran out of the room.
0:45
Speaker 1: The accuser ran after her roommate, who went into a
0:48
Speaker 1: friend's room and locked the door. When her apology was rebuffed,
0:51
Speaker 1: the accuser returned to the room and continued the sexual encounter.
0:55
Speaker 1: Later on, the group all went outside to the smoking area,
0:58
Speaker 1: where they reconnected with John Demaine joked around and went home.
1:02
Speaker 1: It all seemed like a consensual coming of age experience
1:06
Speaker 1: until it wasn't. Three months later, the criminal legal system
1:10
Speaker 1: and the racism that has always plagued our country came
1:13
Speaker 1: to claim three more victims, and in typical fashion, money
1:17
Speaker 1: and arbitrary procedural bars made for three radically different outcomes
1:22
Speaker 1: for these three young men, two of whom spent nearly
1:25
Speaker 1: a decade each behind bars. This is Wrongful Conviction with
1:30
Speaker 1: Jason Flaum. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm.
1:51
Speaker 2: That's me.
1:52
Speaker 1: I'm your host, and I am particularly excited today, even
1:56
Speaker 1: honored because we have such an incredible group of guests.
2:00
Speaker 1: First of all, Keith Finley is on the show, and
2:03
Speaker 1: Keith is all. I'm just going to say it like
2:05
Speaker 1: it is. He's a legend in the innocence community, a
2:08
Speaker 1: professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School, former president
2:12
Speaker 1: of the Innocence Network, which is an affiliation of early
2:15
Speaker 1: seventy innocence organizations throughout the world, co founder of the
2:18
Speaker 1: Wisconsin Innocence Project. You may know him from Making a
2:22
Speaker 1: Murderer as well. Keith, all I could say is I'm
2:24
Speaker 1: really honored that you're here.
2:26
Speaker 2: Thanks so much.
2:27
Speaker 3: I'm really glad to be with you here.
2:28
Speaker 1: And so with us today are two guys I'm proud
2:31
Speaker 1: to call my friends, both of whom are roughly convicted
2:34
Speaker 1: of a crime that never happened. So, first of all,
2:37
Speaker 1: Jared Adams, your journey post exoneration has been nothing short
2:41
Speaker 1: of remarkable. Jared has been an attorney with the Innocence Project,
2:45
Speaker 1: He's now in private practice, he's an author, He's been
2:48
Speaker 1: on TV a bunch of times. Jared, I'm so sorry
2:52
Speaker 1: for what you went through, but I'm glad you're here.
2:53
Speaker 2: Thank you. Jason. I appreciate you having beyond.
2:56
Speaker 1: And with him is Dmitri Henley. Dmitri was convicted of
3:00
Speaker 1: the same crime that Jarrett was convicted of, again as
3:03
Speaker 1: a crime that didn't happen, and Dmitri still has not
3:07
Speaker 1: gotten justice, and we're going to get into that. So
3:09
Speaker 1: I appreciate you being here, Dmitri.
3:11
Speaker 4: All right, thanks for having me.
3:13
Speaker 1: So before we get into the store, Jarrett and Dmitri,
3:16
Speaker 1: where did you grow up and how was your life
3:20
Speaker 1: in a nutshell before this this insane saga began.
3:25
Speaker 5: So we grew up South side of Chicago and attended
3:28
Speaker 5: the same high school a little bit outside of Chicago
3:32
Speaker 5: in the suburbs, and you know, we met through passing,
3:37
Speaker 5: but we knew with each other and he and working
3:39
Speaker 5: at the same summer job and started to hang out together.
3:42
Speaker 1: So Jared, take us back to the day in question.
3:45
Speaker 1: Its September sixth, nineteen ninety eight. You and Dmitria a
3:48
Speaker 1: third friend, Rovon Hill. You guys headed up to the
3:51
Speaker 1: University of Wisconsin, Whitewater to go to a party, you know,
3:54
Speaker 1: just doing like normal stuff that kids all over the
3:56
Speaker 1: country are doing basically every day, right, Yeah, So.
4:00
Speaker 5: I mean, that's just it. The neighborhoods in which we
4:02
Speaker 5: and Dmitria grew up in are extremely rough, and you know,
4:06
Speaker 5: we weren't in gangs doing drive by shooting each other.
4:09
Speaker 5: That's just not what we were into. Each one of
4:11
Speaker 5: us came from backgrounds and families where our families were
4:14
Speaker 5: active in our lives. You know, where you're going, what
4:17
Speaker 5: you're doing. So how we got there was this. We
4:20
Speaker 5: each told our parents we were spending the night over
4:24
Speaker 5: each other's house, and we all three went to go
4:26
Speaker 5: to this party and puol what is known as.
4:29
Speaker 2: Like an all nighter.
4:30
Speaker 5: We would go up to the party, party all night,
4:32
Speaker 5: and then afterwards we would hit a waffle house and
4:36
Speaker 5: be back home at about seven eight, you know in
4:38
Speaker 5: the morning. Right, we had done it before, no issues,
4:41
Speaker 5: no problems at all. And so we go to this
4:45
Speaker 5: party and we're looking, you know for the main central
4:49
Speaker 5: party room. But when we got to this campus, it
4:52
Speaker 5: was parties in every dorm room. You could go to
4:56
Speaker 5: this dorm room, beer pong, this dorm room, people smoking
4:59
Speaker 5: weed and and so we just were kids escaping the
5:03
Speaker 5: violence in Chicago going to a party on a college
5:07
Speaker 5: campus like so many other kids do each and every
5:10
Speaker 5: day in America.
5:12
Speaker 1: Yes, I mean I think a lot of people are
5:13
Speaker 1: listening now and going, hey, that reminds me. One time
5:16
Speaker 1: I went out, I told my parents da da dah,
5:17
Speaker 1: and then I stuck in. And you know, so who
5:19
Speaker 1: is Sean Demain Because you ended up going to his
5:22
Speaker 1: room to use the phone? Right, how does that play
5:25
Speaker 1: into any of this?
5:26
Speaker 5: So Shandamain actually saved our life. It's who he is
5:29
Speaker 5: because he was the person who you know, unbiased and
5:32
Speaker 5: supported you know, our version.
5:33
Speaker 2: Of events, the truth.
5:34
Speaker 5: And so when we go to this college campus again,
5:37
Speaker 5: there's parties everywhere, but we're looking for a specific party.
5:40
Speaker 5: So we talked to Shan Domain who was outside in
5:44
Speaker 5: like a smoking area. And just so the listeners are understanding,
5:47
Speaker 5: this is nineteen ninety eight, so this is before everyone
5:50
Speaker 5: had cell phones. People usually had pages, so we went
5:53
Speaker 5: to use his phone. But when we were doing it,
5:55
Speaker 5: it was like his room was like party central checking.
5:59
Speaker 5: So it was everal people who would come in, Hey,
6:01
Speaker 5: got what you guys doing. Hey, we're getting ready to
6:03
Speaker 5: go here. Hey you got a beer? You know, Hey,
6:05
Speaker 5: we'll be back downstairs a little bit later. We were
6:08
Speaker 5: all playing video games in there, so when we're playing
6:11
Speaker 5: a video games, it's when these two young ladies come
6:14
Speaker 5: into the dorm room and we're flirting, we're talking, we're laughing,
6:19
Speaker 5: everybody's drinking, and eventually we all make our way upstairs
6:24
Speaker 5: to our accusers dorm room, and we did it like staggered. First,
6:28
Speaker 5: Dmitri and Rovan went up and I came up a
6:32
Speaker 5: few minutes later, and we were there. We were in
6:34
Speaker 5: a room and we had a consensual encounter and this
6:37
Speaker 5: young lady's roommate walked in on it, and that's when
6:41
Speaker 5: the wheels of a false accusation started to turn.
6:44
Speaker 1: So the roommate walks in on you in the midst
6:46
Speaker 1: of this sexual encounter and calls the accuser a slut
6:48
Speaker 1: and then runs down the hall to a friend's storm room. Now,
6:51
Speaker 1: at this point, your accuser gets up, goes after the roommate,
6:55
Speaker 1: but doesn't say anything at all about being raped or
6:58
Speaker 1: assault or anything like that, but simply not on the door,
7:00
Speaker 1: and says, are you mad at me? The roommate wouldn't
7:03
Speaker 1: open the door, and according to a sworn statement I
7:05
Speaker 1: have right here, the roommate said, and this is a
7:08
Speaker 1: direct quote, I told her to go back to doing
7:11
Speaker 1: whatever she was doing, but not on my bed. So
7:14
Speaker 1: it's probably fair to say that that might have been
7:17
Speaker 1: what made her mad. So the accuser went back to
7:20
Speaker 1: the room they shared and continued the sexual encounter. So
7:25
Speaker 1: I mean, I don't think I'm alone here in being confused,
7:29
Speaker 1: because if an actual assault was taking place, as was alleged,
7:34
Speaker 1: why does her roommate call her a slut instead of
7:37
Speaker 1: trying to do something to save her or summon help.
7:41
Speaker 1: And after chasing her roommate down the hall, why did
7:45
Speaker 1: she go back to her room instead of trying to
7:48
Speaker 1: escape or again trying to cry out to get someone
7:51
Speaker 1: to help her. It doesn't add up.
7:54
Speaker 3: Number One, The roommate walks into her room and sees
7:58
Speaker 3: the accuser on her bed engaging in what her looks
8:03
Speaker 3: like consensual sexual activity. That's why she calls her a
8:06
Speaker 3: slot and runs down the hall. Second point, if it's
8:09
Speaker 3: a rape, are these guys going to let the victim
8:12
Speaker 3: get up and leave at on her own free will?
8:14
Speaker 3: Yet that's exactly what she did. Then, if it's a rape,
8:17
Speaker 3: is the victim going to say, are you mad at me?
8:20
Speaker 3: Or is she going to say, hell me, I'm being raped?
8:22
Speaker 3: But no, she says, are you mad at me? Now?
8:24
Speaker 3: The question you asked is what's the explanation as to
8:26
Speaker 3: why she walked back.
8:27
Speaker 2: To the room.
8:28
Speaker 3: The closest they came to an explanation was that she
8:31
Speaker 3: was going to leave, and she was walking towards the stairs,
8:34
Speaker 3: which took her past the bedroom, but there was a
8:36
Speaker 3: stairwell at the other end of the hall.
8:37
Speaker 2: She didn't go that way.
8:39
Speaker 3: She walked back towards her room, and in the process
8:42
Speaker 3: she walked past the room of the ra who lived
8:46
Speaker 3: on the hall, and didn't knock on that door ask
8:49
Speaker 3: for help. During the course of the encounter, she got
8:51
Speaker 3: a phone call from somebody and she chatted on the
8:54
Speaker 3: phone and giggled, never said anything about I'm being raped.
8:57
Speaker 3: I mean, it's just a head scratcher. How anyone could
9:00
Speaker 3: have thought this was a sexual assault.
9:03
Speaker 6: And not only that, I actually accompanied her walking down
9:06
Speaker 6: to the room that the roommate went into, and I
9:09
Speaker 6: was there with her while she was standing there trying
9:11
Speaker 6: to talk to her through the door, and when she
9:12
Speaker 6: could not even gain any access and went back to
9:15
Speaker 6: the room, I stayed there because I tried to talk
9:18
Speaker 6: her roommate out of the room, because we talked a
9:20
Speaker 6: little bit when we was in Sean de Maine's room,
9:22
Speaker 6: so I can actually hear them in the room, the
9:24
Speaker 6: roommate and the residents of that room having a conversation.
9:27
Speaker 6: But they decided not to come out, so I went
9:29
Speaker 6: back to the room. We engaged in the sexual acts,
9:32
Speaker 6: and then we actually went downstairs to the smoking area.
9:35
Speaker 5: And I thank god that we all did, because when
9:38
Speaker 5: we went downstairs in the smoking area, Sean Demaine was
9:42
Speaker 5: outside and he was the one who created the timeline
9:46
Speaker 5: of corroborating our innocence. It was so so crazy, because
9:50
Speaker 5: this thing was out of embarrassment. You know, this girl
9:54
Speaker 5: didn't go to the police or anything. She went to
9:58
Speaker 5: a friend and said, my roommates making these accusations about
10:03
Speaker 5: me being a slut, saying that I was sleeping with
10:05
Speaker 5: these black guys. That didn't happen. So before you hear it,
10:09
Speaker 5: I was actually rape. It was that friend who went
10:12
Speaker 5: to another friend, and that's how the rumor started to
10:15
Speaker 5: circulate and the investigation started. This young lady, through the
10:18
Speaker 5: help of the police, said that she walked up to
10:22
Speaker 5: her dorm room and was opening the door, and before
10:25
Speaker 5: she knew it, two to three black guys that she
10:27
Speaker 5: didn't know was behind her, and we just walked our
10:29
Speaker 5: way into her room, cut the lights out, and played
10:31
Speaker 5: the music. The accusation wasn't that she knew us or
10:35
Speaker 5: that she met us. We knew we had been invited up.
10:38
Speaker 5: We knew that after the roommate had walked into the room,
10:41
Speaker 5: we had all went down in the smoking area where
10:43
Speaker 5: we were with Sean Demain again. And so if you're
10:46
Speaker 5: asking the questions about how on earth could an incomplete
10:49
Speaker 5: and crazy story like this make its way to a
10:52
Speaker 5: conviction and result in twenty eight and twenty years. It's
10:55
Speaker 5: because we were try as black men raping a white girl,
11:01
Speaker 5: and it did not matter if it made sense because
11:04
Speaker 5: of the historical depiction of black men and white accuses.
11:10
Speaker 1: And we know how that can go.
11:12
Speaker 3: Three young black men from Chicago visiting UW Whitewater. It's
11:16
Speaker 3: a fairly rural community that's very white, and a lot
11:19
Speaker 3: of these sexual assault cases are difficult because he said,
11:23
Speaker 3: she said, But this one, in so many respects, wasn't
11:26
Speaker 3: even he said, she said. The accuser's own version of
11:30
Speaker 3: events was actually, in many respects, in many important respects,
11:34
Speaker 3: the same as Dimitri and Jared's version, in that she
11:39
Speaker 3: candidly admitted on the stand that no one used force
11:42
Speaker 3: against her, no one raised their voice, no one threatened her.
11:46
Speaker 3: And so when I read the transcripts of this, I
11:48
Speaker 3: was scratching my head and said, well, where's the sexual assault?
11:51
Speaker 3: All we see here is that she says they engaged
11:54
Speaker 3: in sex, And what made it a sexual assault in
11:56
Speaker 3: the prosecution's eyes and in this community's eyes, was that
11:59
Speaker 3: she claim that, despite the absence of any physical force,
12:03
Speaker 3: despite the absence of any threats, she went along with
12:07
Speaker 3: the sexual acts because she was frightened of these men. Well,
12:12
Speaker 3: think about it. Why in the world would she be
12:14
Speaker 3: frightened of them if they were all at a college
12:16
Speaker 3: party together and they'd been flirting, and she invited them
12:18
Speaker 3: up to her room. You know, nobody was doing anything
12:21
Speaker 3: by onderarth writing. The only thing that I can conjure
12:24
Speaker 3: up in my mind that explains this potential fright is
12:27
Speaker 3: that they were black men.
12:28
Speaker 2: You know.
12:28
Speaker 1: I was struck also as I was reviewing aspects of
12:32
Speaker 1: this horrible story that there was a number of months
12:35
Speaker 1: went by before you were arrested. And of course I'm
12:37
Speaker 1: talking about December one, nineteen ninety eight. But why was
12:41
Speaker 1: that the lapsed time in there? This must have been
12:43
Speaker 1: all in just distant memory at this point, right.
12:47
Speaker 3: Yeah, Yeah, I really can't answer what took so long,
12:50
Speaker 3: other than to suggest that, I mean, clearly, if it
12:52
Speaker 3: had been an open and shutcase from the beginning, it
12:55
Speaker 3: wouldn't have taken so long. Clearly, the police and prosecutors
12:58
Speaker 3: recognized that there were problems with this story, and they
13:02
Speaker 3: took some time to build the best case they could.
13:05
Speaker 5: So, unbeknownst to us, Sean Demain wrote a three page
13:10
Speaker 5: handwritten statement saying everything that we're saying right now on
13:13
Speaker 5: this podcast. So the police had already had that statement
13:17
Speaker 5: and they couldn't explain it. And then they went and
13:20
Speaker 5: did a check on the phone records, and during the
13:23
Speaker 5: time that we were up there in this young lady's room,
13:26
Speaker 5: the phone was ringing. She was on the phone talking
13:29
Speaker 5: to friends. So the authorities, instead of allowing the evidence
13:32
Speaker 5: to tell them the truth, they decided that they were
13:34
Speaker 5: going to make a case and base it off of race.
13:37
Speaker 2: And nothing was going to keep them from doing that.
13:39
Speaker 6: So leading up to the arrest, you know, I'm working
13:42
Speaker 6: as an assistant manager at this grocery store and my
13:45
Speaker 6: dad comes by the job and says, hey, you know,
13:48
Speaker 6: the police came by the house. They want you to
13:50
Speaker 6: come down to police station to grew you out as
13:52
Speaker 6: a suspect and an armed robbery.
13:54
Speaker 4: I said, Dad, this is absolutely nuts.
13:56
Speaker 6: That said, I'm not going down there, man, because I
13:59
Speaker 6: don't know what they're doing to me.
14:00
Speaker 4: I heard stories.
14:01
Speaker 6: I didn't think it was gonna be a good idea,
14:02
Speaker 6: but my dad was like, no, I think you should go.
14:04
Speaker 6: So make a long story short, after work, I went
14:07
Speaker 6: down there. My dad went along with me. He was
14:09
Speaker 6: sitting down in the lobby. So I'm talking to one
14:11
Speaker 6: of the texts at the time. You know, we just
14:14
Speaker 6: want to rule you out, you know, we don't want
14:15
Speaker 6: you to get in trouble. When we get done asking
14:17
Speaker 6: a few questions, maybe we'll take you downstairs to take
14:20
Speaker 6: some pictures.
14:20
Speaker 4: So I said, okay, fine, no problem. So that's what.
14:23
Speaker 2: Happened, same thing they did to me.
14:25
Speaker 5: I come home one day and there's a card in
14:28
Speaker 5: my door and it's from the police and it says
14:30
Speaker 5: robbery homicide. I'm like, nah, I know they got the
14:33
Speaker 5: wrong God like, let me let me call in before
14:36
Speaker 5: my crazy father see this in this door and just
14:38
Speaker 5: go nuts, right.
14:39
Speaker 2: So I called.
14:41
Speaker 5: And the guy was like, hey, you know this is
14:43
Speaker 5: a textive so and so, and you know, we just
14:45
Speaker 5: want you to come down and take a picture so
14:47
Speaker 5: we can, you know, rule you out of this accusation
14:49
Speaker 5: because you know, we know you've never been in trouble
14:51
Speaker 5: and we don't have you know, a booking photo or
14:54
Speaker 5: anything like that. You know, just come rule yourself out.
14:56
Speaker 5: I'm like, man, I'm on my way. So when I
14:58
Speaker 5: go down there and they have an investigator from Wisconsin
15:01
Speaker 5: there and the investigator is asking me all these questions
15:04
Speaker 5: about you know, us going to the party, and did
15:07
Speaker 5: you go to the party, did you have sex at
15:09
Speaker 5: this party? And I'm answering the question straight forward, like
15:12
Speaker 5: like I'm doing now. Yeah, you know, we had a
15:14
Speaker 5: crazy incident with this girl and her roommate were arguing.
15:17
Speaker 6: So they come and arrest me for a first degree
15:20
Speaker 6: sexual assault and I'm like sexual assault, Like when did
15:24
Speaker 6: this happen?
15:25
Speaker 4: I wasn't disbelieve. I couldn't believe it.
15:27
Speaker 6: And being a kid at that time, I'm thinking that
15:30
Speaker 6: they're going to arrest me. I'm finna go right out
15:32
Speaker 6: here to prove my innoc's nabby, right back to my life.
15:36
Speaker 6: Of course, she didn't happen that way.
15:54
Speaker 5: I was gonna be charged, along with Dimitri and Rovan
15:58
Speaker 5: with five counts of first to resexual assault. I think
16:01
Speaker 5: I was turning eighteen, like a couple months later, and
16:04
Speaker 5: Dimitri had already turned eighteen and Rovan was eighteen, so
16:08
Speaker 5: we were all kids, Like I remember being so quiet,
16:12
Speaker 5: you know, on that intake getting off the bus going
16:15
Speaker 5: through intake.
16:16
Speaker 2: We wasn't in Kansas anymore, you know.
16:20
Speaker 1: So all three of you guys were arrested on December
16:23
Speaker 1: first of nineteen ninety eight. I'm talking about Ravan of course,
16:26
Speaker 1: as the third person arrested, but we haven't really talked
16:29
Speaker 1: about him. Keith, if you could explain how these.
16:31
Speaker 7: Paths diverged at this point, right, because the three guys
16:35
Speaker 7: were all accused of the same exact thing, in the
16:37
Speaker 7: same exact circumstance, but all three ended up with completely
16:41
Speaker 7: different outcomes.
16:43
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was exact same conduct, the exact same incident,
16:45
Speaker 3: the exact same time, place, circumstance, exact same evidence. Everything
16:50
Speaker 3: was identical. But you're exactly right, three very different outcomes,
16:54
Speaker 3: which is part of what we've been trying to get
16:56
Speaker 3: the legal system to pay attention to. And how did
16:59
Speaker 3: that happen, Well, the three of them were charged together.
17:01
Speaker 3: They were tried together initially, but the first trial ended
17:06
Speaker 3: in a mistrial. The prosecution was apparently expecting a strong
17:10
Speaker 3: statement from the accuser coming in about how she was
17:13
Speaker 3: forced and all that, and yet when she got up
17:16
Speaker 3: on the stand, she acknowledged that there was no force used,
17:20
Speaker 3: that no one threatened her.
17:21
Speaker 2: Et cetera.
17:22
Speaker 3: And so the prosecutor recognized that there was a fatal
17:25
Speaker 3: flaw in the case as originally charged, and so the
17:29
Speaker 3: prosecutor moved to amend the charges to fit the evidence
17:33
Speaker 3: as it had come in from the accuser. And at
17:36
Speaker 3: that point Gerald Boyle, defense attorney for Ravan Hill, just
17:40
Speaker 3: went nuts objected, and the court agreed that it was
17:44
Speaker 3: unfair to amend the charges mid trial like that, after
17:47
Speaker 3: the case had been partly presented, after strategies had been
17:50
Speaker 3: locked in and whatnot, and so the prosecutor declared a mistrial.
17:54
Speaker 3: A mistrial simply means that this trial ends and we're going.
17:58
Speaker 1: To do it again.
17:59
Speaker 3: But there are some circles instances in which a mistrial
18:01
Speaker 3: ends the case for good. And Ravon Hill's lawyer thought
18:05
Speaker 3: that this mistrial was caused by the prosecution's own mistakes
18:09
Speaker 3: and therefore a retrial should be barred. And so as
18:13
Speaker 3: the prosecution set to retry all three of them, Ravon
18:16
Speaker 3: Hill and his attorney sought leave to appeal and to
18:20
Speaker 3: stop the retrial from occurring. The prosecution, not wanting to
18:24
Speaker 3: wait for that appeal to be concluded, then just pulled
18:27
Speaker 3: Dmitri in Garrett's cases away from Ravan's and initiated the
18:31
Speaker 3: retrial for them without Ravan Why Jarrett and Dmitri's lawyers
18:36
Speaker 3: didn't join in that appeal. I have no idea, but
18:39
Speaker 3: they didn't didn't stop the appeal, so Dmitri and Jarrett
18:42
Speaker 3: were tried together without ravon at a second trial.
18:46
Speaker 1: What's particularly sickening to me is the fact that your
18:49
Speaker 1: attorneys called no witnesses at the trial. No freaking witnesses here.
18:54
Speaker 1: It is your life is at stake. They didn't even
18:57
Speaker 1: make an effort on your behalf.
19:00
Speaker 5: Tell them about the no defense theory, Kief.
19:02
Speaker 3: Yeah, so that's actually the basis upon which we ultimately
19:05
Speaker 3: succeeded in getting Jared's conviction overturned, was claiming that defense
19:09
Speaker 3: council was constitutionally deficient under the sixth Amendment. Both Dimitri
19:14
Speaker 3: and Jareded's lawyers got together and talked about it and
19:16
Speaker 3: decided they would present what they called a no defense defense,
19:20
Speaker 3: which means they were just going to rest on the
19:23
Speaker 3: prosecution's case and say, well, they didn't prove guilt beyond
19:26
Speaker 3: a reasonable doubt, so we're not going to put on anything.
19:29
Speaker 3: And what we argued in what the United States Court
19:31
Speaker 3: of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit agreed was that made
19:34
Speaker 3: absolutely no sense at all because they had a defense
19:37
Speaker 3: this was entirely consensual, and the consensual nature of it
19:41
Speaker 3: was in a very compelling way, corroborated established by the
19:45
Speaker 3: testimony not only of the accuser's roommate, but also by
19:48
Speaker 3: the testimony of Shan Domain And these lawyers never even
19:52
Speaker 3: talked to Shan Demaine.
19:55
Speaker 1: So let's just go to the moment that had to
19:58
Speaker 1: be the worst moment of a lot worst moments, which is,
20:01
Speaker 1: of course, when the jury came back.
20:03
Speaker 6: I remember sitting out in the lobby talking to my dad,
20:07
Speaker 6: and my dad the type of guy he was.
20:08
Speaker 4: He was a very confident guy, you know.
20:11
Speaker 6: For seeing my dad when he was reacting, and seeing
20:13
Speaker 6: Jared Diad how he was reacting when we were talking
20:15
Speaker 6: about really strong men, I mean, just out there, very nervous.
20:20
Speaker 6: I couldn't help at that moment before we even heard
20:22
Speaker 6: the verdict, just become very emotional.
20:25
Speaker 5: Yeah, I remember both our dads, you know, had to
20:28
Speaker 5: be escorted out of the courtroom.
20:29
Speaker 2: You know, they just couldn't believe it.
20:31
Speaker 5: And when we're found guilty, I just, man, I had
20:34
Speaker 5: to say something. So I'm like, this is a lie,
20:36
Speaker 5: you know, I'm apologizing to my parents. I'm like, but
20:39
Speaker 5: I'm not about to apologize for a rape I didn't commit.
20:41
Speaker 5: So they ended up giving me eight more years in
20:43
Speaker 5: prison based on that, saying that I wasn't remorse for
20:46
Speaker 5: and I had an outburst. So me and Dmitri were
20:49
Speaker 5: split up based on that, I went to a maximum
20:53
Speaker 5: slash super maximum. Dmitri because he had twenty years, he
20:57
Speaker 5: was like on a track to go to meet prison
21:00
Speaker 5: right away. Based on the time in Wisconsin, if you
21:03
Speaker 5: get anything over twenty five years, you're basically going to
21:07
Speaker 5: go do time with everybody who has twenty five to life.
21:10
Speaker 5: And so after we were found guilty, Ravine hadn't went
21:14
Speaker 5: to trial yet. I started to write letters to Raban's attorney.
21:19
Speaker 5: That's when boiling them for the first time interview Sean Demain,
21:23
Speaker 5: and when they interviewed Shondmain, they called them as a
21:25
Speaker 5: witness and Demain was like, look, I wrote a three
21:28
Speaker 5: page statement when the officer came and talked to me
21:31
Speaker 5: the night after, so I don't know what else you
21:33
Speaker 5: guys want. That's how we found out that the officer
21:36
Speaker 5: never turned over that three paige statement. It was never
21:39
Speaker 5: a part of the record when we were going to trial.
21:42
Speaker 3: So they proceeded with a retrial against Ravne, and Ravne
21:47
Speaker 3: having a better lawyer than had been assigned to Jared
21:50
Speaker 3: and Dimitri. Ravane's lawyer saw the value of Sean Demain
21:55
Speaker 3: as a neutral, independent witness who could both corroborate that
21:59
Speaker 3: the girls had been flirting with the boys before and
22:02
Speaker 3: had invited them up to their rooms, and even more importantly,
22:05
Speaker 3: could establish that after the alleged sexual assault, he saw
22:10
Speaker 3: Jarrett and Dimitri, along with the accuser and her roommate,
22:14
Speaker 3: socializing and laughing together in the smoking area outside the
22:18
Speaker 3: dorm rooms, which was entirely inconsistent with the accuser's version
22:22
Speaker 3: of events and entirely inconsistent with what would have happened
22:26
Speaker 3: had they just completed a sexual assault. And so, having
22:30
Speaker 3: presented shond Mayne's testimony at his own trial, the jury deadlocked,
22:35
Speaker 3: was unable to reach a verdict, and so another mistrial
22:38
Speaker 3: was declared and all of the charges that were ultimately
22:41
Speaker 3: dismissed against Ravane.
22:43
Speaker 5: I want to say one of the roughest days where
22:46
Speaker 5: I really just started to fall into a shale was
22:49
Speaker 5: when I found out that they dismissed all the charges
22:53
Speaker 5: against Rovin. When they found that statement that was with
22:57
Speaker 5: Hale by the police, and then A decided not to
23:00
Speaker 5: give me a Dmitri new Trials. That's when I really
23:04
Speaker 5: was like, if it doesn't work, that evidence that supports
23:09
Speaker 5: all of your innocence that wasn't presented and didn't make
23:12
Speaker 5: his way in your trial, if it doesn't work by
23:15
Speaker 5: way of truth, then how does the system ever work?
23:18
Speaker 5: I mean, that's really how I felt.
23:19
Speaker 2: I'm like, I thought, Okay, maybe.
23:22
Speaker 5: Now that they have this statement, they know and they
23:25
Speaker 5: all apologize and will come home. Never happened like that,
23:29
Speaker 5: And I remember, you know, my salemate. I was locked
23:32
Speaker 5: up old white guy. You know, he was the one
23:34
Speaker 5: who encouraged me to pick up the pen and start
23:38
Speaker 5: to write. And essentially it was if you gonna go down,
23:41
Speaker 5: go down swinging. And I started to write everyone that
23:45
Speaker 5: I could think of, and both me and Dmitri were
23:47
Speaker 5: writing the Innocence Project and everybody we could trying to
23:51
Speaker 5: figure out how could we get help.
23:54
Speaker 3: I was at the time co directing the Wisconsin Innocence Project,
23:58
Speaker 3: is a clinical program in which law students handle real
24:00
Speaker 3: cases under faculty supervision. And we received these letters from
24:04
Speaker 3: both Dimitri and Jarrett asking for help and describing what
24:08
Speaker 3: had happened, and just by happenstance, we got to Dimitri's
24:13
Speaker 3: letter first, and so I gave it to my students
24:15
Speaker 3: to do an analysis of the case. And they came
24:18
Speaker 3: back and they said, this case is outrageous, this guy
24:21
Speaker 3: is innocent. We've got to do something about it. And
24:24
Speaker 3: so we looked at it and we realized that he
24:27
Speaker 3: had appealed through the state court system and had lost,
24:31
Speaker 3: which meant that federal Habeas corpus review was the next
24:35
Speaker 3: place to look. The problem is, we realized that under
24:39
Speaker 3: President Bill Clinton, Congress passed and Clinton signed into laws
24:43
Speaker 3: something known as the Anti Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.
24:46
Speaker 3: The acronym is called EDPAT, which made it much more
24:49
Speaker 3: difficult to obtain federal Habeas corpus relief. And one of
24:52
Speaker 3: the ways it made it much more difficult was that
24:54
Speaker 3: it imposed a one year statute of limitations, and by
24:57
Speaker 3: the time we were able to review Dmitri's case, his
25:00
Speaker 3: one year had elapsed. He was procedurally barred from going
25:04
Speaker 3: into federal habeas. But the student said, but you know,
25:06
Speaker 3: his co defendant also wrote. Jared Adams also wrote, and
25:09
Speaker 3: by pure happenstance, Jarrett and Dmitri's state court appeals had
25:14
Speaker 3: been handled separately, and Jarrett's appeal had been decided a
25:18
Speaker 3: short time later than Dmitri's, which means his one year
25:22
Speaker 3: statue limitations was a little bit later. And by the
25:25
Speaker 3: time we were able to review Jared's case, he still
25:28
Speaker 3: had about a week left before his statue limitations expired.
25:33
Speaker 3: And so my student said, look, we got to do something.
25:35
Speaker 3: We've got to file this federal habeas. They drafted the habeas.
25:38
Speaker 3: We filed it just before the expiration of the one
25:40
Speaker 3: year deadline and just got it in under the window,
25:43
Speaker 3: and we're able to then proceed with litigating that claim.
25:48
Speaker 3: We were denied relief in the district court in Milwaukee.
25:51
Speaker 3: We appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for
25:53
Speaker 3: the Seventh Circuit, and the three judge panel unanimously agreed
25:57
Speaker 3: that Jared's conviction was invalid. Vag the conviction in June
26:01
Speaker 3: two thousand and six, and he was finally released from
26:04
Speaker 3: custody in January of two thousand and seven. This is
26:08
Speaker 3: how we wind up with three completely different outcomes. Ravine
26:11
Speaker 3: Hill never convicted Jared's convicted and serves the better part
26:15
Speaker 3: of a decade in prison, but then his conviction is vacated,
26:18
Speaker 3: so he's exonerated. In Dmitri exact same case, exact same facts,
26:22
Speaker 3: remains convicted of that crime to this day.
26:27
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, it has to live his life with
26:30
Speaker 1: that sort of scarlet letter or you know, that stigma
26:34
Speaker 1: for no reason whatsoever.
26:36
Speaker 2: Yeah.
26:36
Speaker 3: I got to tell you is it is one of
26:38
Speaker 3: the great sadnesses of my career that we have not
26:41
Speaker 3: been able to correct this injustice for Dmitri.
26:45
Speaker 6: I want to say, my dad actually passed six months
26:48
Speaker 6: before I got out, and it was one of the
26:51
Speaker 6: things I wanted him to disturb that moment.
26:53
Speaker 4: And man, I told you someday I was going to
26:55
Speaker 4: make it here.
26:57
Speaker 6: I wanted him to at least be a part of
26:59
Speaker 6: that moment, and he wasn't.
27:18
Speaker 3: So after Jared was exonerated, we were still struggling with
27:22
Speaker 3: what had happened to Dimitri and said this can't be justice,
27:26
Speaker 3: and so we thought, well, what in the world can
27:28
Speaker 3: we do? We said, you know, there is a longstanding
27:31
Speaker 3: doctrine in Wisconsin law that says that circuit courts have
27:35
Speaker 3: the inherent authority to grant a new trial in the
27:38
Speaker 3: interest of justice. It's just a broad discretionary granted authority
27:42
Speaker 3: and decided, well, if the interest of justice ever called
27:46
Speaker 3: for a new trial, this is the case where it
27:48
Speaker 3: calls for. So we filed a motion on behalf of Dimitri.
27:51
Speaker 3: Then went back to the same judge who presided over
27:54
Speaker 3: the conviction and said, look, this can't be justice in America.
27:57
Speaker 3: To have these wildly disparate outcomes on the same facts
28:01
Speaker 3: and a federal appellate ruling saying that these guys have
28:04
Speaker 3: been denied their right to the effective assistance of counsel.
28:07
Speaker 3: This can't be right. And the trial judge agreed and said,
28:11
Speaker 3: in the interest of justice, I can't let this conviction stand,
28:13
Speaker 3: and she reversed Dimitri's conviction, to my great dismay, for
28:18
Speaker 3: reasons that I still can't fathom. The state chose to
28:22
Speaker 3: appeal that decision, and I'm thinking to myself at the time,
28:25
Speaker 3: on what basis this is a discretionary judgment. Discretionary judgments
28:30
Speaker 3: are almost bulletproof on appeal because the very nature of
28:34
Speaker 3: discretion is the judge can do it or cannot do it.
28:36
Speaker 3: It's up to the judge. And what they actually just
28:39
Speaker 3: chose to appeal on was to challenge whether the judge
28:42
Speaker 3: even had the legal authority to grant a neutral and
28:45
Speaker 3: the interest of justice at all. It went up to
28:48
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court, and we have now an extremely conservative,
28:53
Speaker 3: very pro prosecution Supreme Court, and they seized that opportunity,
28:57
Speaker 3: and in Dmitri's case, they changed the law and ruled
29:01
Speaker 3: that circuit courts do not have the authority to grant
29:05
Speaker 3: a neutrial and the interest of justice. They took that
29:08
Speaker 3: authority away and thereby reinstated Dmitri's conviction in what I
29:13
Speaker 3: see as one of the really sad moments in Wisconsin history.
29:17
Speaker 3: So we tried another tack, and we went back to
29:19
Speaker 3: the same trial court judge again and said, all right,
29:22
Speaker 3: you can't vacate the conviction, but you can modify the sentence,
29:26
Speaker 3: and so please modify Dmitri's sentence to time served so
29:30
Speaker 3: that at least he can get out of prison. And
29:32
Speaker 3: to the judge's great credit, she did that, which is
29:35
Speaker 3: why Dmitri was ultimately set free. But he remains convicted
29:39
Speaker 3: of a sexual assault and must register as a sex
29:42
Speaker 3: offender and bear all the burdens that go with being
29:45
Speaker 3: a convicted felon and a convicted sex offender.
29:48
Speaker 1: And ultimately he was freed after.
29:50
Speaker 4: How much time, almost two years.
29:53
Speaker 1: I must say also that in these two cases of
29:57
Speaker 1: Jared and Dimitri, there are a lot of heroes at
29:59
Speaker 1: the end of the right. I mean, let's not forget
30:02
Speaker 1: the law student who managed to catch this before it
30:04
Speaker 1: fell through the cracks. And of course you and your
30:07
Speaker 1: whole team at the Wisconsin Innocence Project. We're gonna link
30:10
Speaker 1: in the bio to Wisconsin Innocence Project.
30:12
Speaker 2: Jarrett.
30:13
Speaker 1: Of course there's you and Dimitri, who are you know,
30:16
Speaker 1: just sort of pillars of strength and just courageous people
30:19
Speaker 1: who I think so many of us are inspired by.
30:22
Speaker 1: And anyone who's new to this cause wants to know
30:26
Speaker 1: two things. One is, if a prosecutor framed somebody, do
30:29
Speaker 1: they face any consequences? And we both know that the
30:31
Speaker 1: answer is almost one hundred percent of the time, no, none, whatsoever.
30:34
Speaker 1: And then they want to know people will tell me,
30:36
Speaker 1: please tell me the person who went through this got compensation.
30:39
Speaker 1: And in your case, neither one of you guys got compensation,
30:42
Speaker 1: which is I mean, you know, it's nuts.
30:47
Speaker 5: I mean, and Jason, listen, you know, so get compensation.
30:50
Speaker 5: Dmitry still has it on his record. Right, I'm gonna
30:53
Speaker 5: give you a quote Thurgood Marshall said that sometimes you
30:56
Speaker 5: got to just do what is right and let the
30:59
Speaker 5: law catch up. And that's exactly the reason why I
31:02
Speaker 5: came home to get this degree to become an attorney,
31:05
Speaker 5: because I felt like this couldn't just be Jared Adams,
31:09
Speaker 5: DIMITRIENLEI wrongfully convicted, conviction reverse the end I needed to
31:14
Speaker 5: carry on to be able to get to this point
31:17
Speaker 5: where not only do I have the experience of going
31:20
Speaker 5: through it, but now I'm gaining the experience and I'm
31:23
Speaker 5: blessing the clients that I come across by helping them
31:26
Speaker 5: get through it.
31:27
Speaker 1: No, and amen to that. It really is inspiring to
31:30
Speaker 1: see you out there fighting a good fight and channeling
31:33
Speaker 1: this awful, this nightmare that you went through into something
31:36
Speaker 1: so positive. So now Jared, you're an attorney. You have
31:40
Speaker 1: offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. I think you
31:43
Speaker 1: have a book coming out on top of everything else,
31:46
Speaker 1: which I'm I'm really excited to read. It's called Redeeming Justice. Jared,
31:51
Speaker 1: if you could just tell us a little bit about
31:52
Speaker 1: the book.
31:53
Speaker 5: Right, So, it talks about my journey because what I
31:55
Speaker 5: didn't want people to think is that I got here alone,
31:59
Speaker 5: because I didn't get here alone.
32:00
Speaker 2: I had to help with the community.
32:01
Speaker 5: I had to help, and the support even of Dmitri
32:03
Speaker 5: while going through through years of law school. Me and
32:06
Speaker 5: Dmitri supported each other as well and Keith Finley. The
32:09
Speaker 5: Wisconsin inisis Project Life After Justice. If you want to
32:13
Speaker 5: go and support the work support Life After Justice, Support
32:16
Speaker 5: Center for Forensic Science, which I am a part of
32:19
Speaker 5: the board SIFTS along with Keith Finley. SIFTS is an
32:22
Speaker 5: organization that make sure we hold people accountable in terms
32:25
Speaker 5: of forensic evidence and how it's being used in the
32:29
Speaker 5: ways in which it should and shouldn't be used. That's
32:31
Speaker 5: important to people's innocence as well. There are so many
32:34
Speaker 5: ways to get involved, including holding lawmakers and legislators responsible
32:40
Speaker 5: for laws such as that book which Keith spoke about,
32:43
Speaker 5: which is currently keeping Dmitri with this record. There are
32:46
Speaker 5: ways for us together to help and to right the
32:49
Speaker 5: wrongs that have been created by bad legislation. Use your voice,
32:53
Speaker 5: it is key.
32:54
Speaker 1: So we're going to have a link to the book
32:57
Speaker 1: and they have a bio as well as a link
32:59
Speaker 1: for people who want to find out more. And get
33:01
Speaker 1: involved with the Center for Integrity and Forensic Sciences support
33:05
Speaker 1: click the link in the bio We need you. Now
33:07
Speaker 1: we turn to the closing of the show, which of
33:10
Speaker 1: course is called Closing Arguments. First of all, I thank
33:13
Speaker 1: each of you again from the bottom of my heart
33:16
Speaker 1: for being here, taking your time and sharing your stories.
33:19
Speaker 1: Jarrett is just an amazing guy man, and it's great
33:21
Speaker 1: to have you here. Of course, Dmitri Henley, thanks again
33:25
Speaker 1: for sharing. I know it's not easy to share your story,
33:27
Speaker 1: but it's important. And Keith Finley, you know when I
33:30
Speaker 1: grow up, I want to be you. So what can
33:33
Speaker 1: I say? And now the closing Arguments works like this,
33:36
Speaker 1: I'm going to turn my microphone off and leave each
33:39
Speaker 1: of yours on for you to share any final thoughts
33:43
Speaker 1: that you want. You can say nothing or everything or
33:46
Speaker 1: anything in between. So let's finish the way we started. Professor,
33:49
Speaker 1: why don't you go first? And then Jarrett and Dmitri?
33:53
Speaker 2: Yeah? Thanks.
33:53
Speaker 3: Well, first, let me start by saying thanks to Dmitri
33:57
Speaker 3: and Jarrett for being who they are and for having
34:00
Speaker 3: strength that they have shown to endure all this and
34:02
Speaker 3: to keep up the fight. It's not over. I don't
34:05
Speaker 3: know if I could have done what you've done, Jason,
34:08
Speaker 3: I got to say thank you to you for giving
34:10
Speaker 3: them a voice, for giving us a voice, for getting
34:12
Speaker 3: the word out there, for all you've done to support
34:14
Speaker 3: the movement. It's just vitally important what you're doing here
34:18
Speaker 3: as well. And I guess the only other thing I'd
34:21
Speaker 3: say right now is this case is just a reminder
34:24
Speaker 3: of so many of the things that are wrong with
34:25
Speaker 3: our criminal justice system, beginning with the baked in racism
34:29
Speaker 3: that I think is just undeniable in a case like this,
34:32
Speaker 3: to the problems with the way counsel is assigned to
34:37
Speaker 3: people who can afford to hire their own lawyers. Too,
34:40
Speaker 3: as we've seen so strongly here, all of the barriers
34:43
Speaker 3: that legislatures, Congress, and the courts are erected to achieving
34:48
Speaker 3: justice on behalf of the wrongly convicted. We got a
34:51
Speaker 3: lot of systemic reform we've got to engage in. That's
34:54
Speaker 3: why programs like this and the work of people like
34:56
Speaker 3: Jared Dimitri is so important.
34:58
Speaker 5: Man.
34:59
Speaker 2: Thank you, Keith, thank you Jason.
35:01
Speaker 5: You know, when we were reached out to do this,
35:03
Speaker 5: I wanted to make sure that all three of us
35:05
Speaker 5: was on because we are all three connected.
35:08
Speaker 2: You know, including Rovinne.
35:09
Speaker 5: I mean, what many people don't know about Rovine is this,
35:12
Speaker 5: after Romane's charges were dismissed, Rovinn went to the army,
35:16
Speaker 5: and the army has its own experiences, both negative and
35:19
Speaker 5: positive as well. So it's like he had never talked
35:22
Speaker 5: about going to the army. He wanted to escape and
35:25
Speaker 5: never ever be in a situation like this again, and
35:28
Speaker 5: that's forever changed his personality as well. And so to
35:31
Speaker 5: have gone through all of this, three different people, three
35:35
Speaker 5: different outcomes, you know, I decided to write this book
35:38
Speaker 5: about the journey and about the work that I'm doing
35:41
Speaker 5: now and about being able to work alongside of Keith
35:44
Speaker 5: now and to work and try to figure out how
35:46
Speaker 5: do we finally get finality in justice for Dimitri's case.
35:51
Speaker 5: And the book focuses on what it was like for
35:54
Speaker 5: me and Dmitri going through it and to have the
35:57
Speaker 5: opportunity now to speak about it, you know. Compensated. I
36:01
Speaker 5: didn't get it done. I got out, and I bust
36:03
Speaker 5: my butt to get to where I am. But I
36:05
Speaker 5: believe in sending the elevator back down, which is why,
36:08
Speaker 5: no matter you know, how or where my career, you.
36:11
Speaker 2: Know leads me.
36:12
Speaker 5: I most certainly won't forget those who help me on
36:15
Speaker 5: my journey, Keith Finley, the Wisconsin Innocence Project, and also
36:18
Speaker 5: those who are part of my journey, Dmitri and Jason.
36:21
Speaker 5: I can't thank you enough. I mean, this is a
36:23
Speaker 5: huge platform and what it does, I hope you know
36:26
Speaker 5: this is this for many people, me and Dmitri included.
36:29
Speaker 5: This platform gives people for the very first time, to
36:33
Speaker 5: be the author of their own story because for so long,
36:36
Speaker 5: the police reports and the false narratives within them have
36:40
Speaker 5: become the facts of the case. And now because of
36:42
Speaker 5: this platform, the record could be set straight. You know, Jason,
36:45
Speaker 5: you guys are the only podcast that would have me,
36:48
Speaker 5: Keith and Dmitri telling the story together, and I thank
36:52
Speaker 5: you guys for that opportunity. I want people to go
36:54
Speaker 5: out by the book and support Life After Justice, a
36:57
Speaker 5: nonprofit and also sifts the Center for for Ends the Integrity.
37:00
Speaker 2: Thank you guys again.
37:02
Speaker 4: I really appreciate you.
37:03
Speaker 6: Keith Man, you know, you guys gotten me who I
37:06
Speaker 6: am right now and I'm.
37:07
Speaker 4: Very appreciative of that. Thank you again.
37:10
Speaker 6: Think Wisconsin ANDSCE Project, you know, as well as Jerry,
37:12
Speaker 6: you know, Jared's my brother forever man, and I'm definitely
37:15
Speaker 6: grateful for him, you know, reaching back, and I agree
37:18
Speaker 6: definitely what he said.
37:19
Speaker 4: Jason.
37:19
Speaker 6: You know, we appreciate the opportunity for you giving us
37:21
Speaker 6: the platform to actually getting our side of the story
37:24
Speaker 6: out there.
37:25
Speaker 4: What I can say, you know, talking about this is
37:27
Speaker 4: just like.
37:28
Speaker 6: Opening old wounds. You know, this is a story that
37:31
Speaker 6: I live. It's difficult, it has been difficult. But my
37:34
Speaker 6: whole point of view from the day I got out,
37:37
Speaker 6: even when I went in, you know, was to have
37:39
Speaker 6: some hope and I'm going to make the best of
37:40
Speaker 6: the situation regardless of what I was going through. I
37:43
Speaker 6: do look forward to today that my name is finally clear,
37:47
Speaker 6: but you know, until then, I'm going to continue to
37:49
Speaker 6: live the best life I can and continue to fight
37:53
Speaker 6: with whatever I have to work with. So again, I
37:55
Speaker 6: thank everyone for the opportunity.
38:05
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm.
38:09
Speaker 1: Please support your local innocence organizations and go to the
38:12
Speaker 1: links in our bio now to see how you can help.
38:15
Speaker 1: I'd like to thank our amazing production team, Connor Hall,
38:18
Speaker 1: Justin Golden, Jeff Clyburn, and Kevin wardis The music on
38:22
Speaker 1: this show, as always, is by three time OSCAR nominated
38:25
Speaker 1: composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us on Instagram
38:29
Speaker 1: at Wrongful Conviction and on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast.
38:34
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm is a production of Lava
38:37
Speaker 1: for Good Podcasts and association with Sigma Company Number one