Latest / Wrongful Conviction / #259 Jason Flom with Alan Newton

Transcript

#259 Jason Flom with Alan Newton · Wrongful Conviction

• 0:03
  Speaker 1: On June twenty third, nineteen eighty four, at around four am,
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: at a bodega in the Bronx, a male customer bought
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: beer and a twenty five year old woman bought cigarettes.
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: It's unclear whether they knew one another. The store clerk
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: said that the woman willingly got into the male customer's
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: blue and white sedan. However, according to the woman, she
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: was abducted upon leaving the store. Then she was dragged
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: into a park, raped, sodomized, and robbed before chasing the
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: man down and getting her money back. Then, while waiting
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: for a cab, the same man dragged her into an
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: abandoned building where he again assaulted her, but this time
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: he cut her face with a razor blade, blinding her
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: in her left eye and threatening to kill her if
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: she went to the police. When she awoke, she called
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: first responders and went to the hospital, where she underwent
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: surgery and a rape kit. Police showed her a mugshot
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: book and she chose the picture of a man named
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: Alan Newton. The store clerk identified Alan as well from
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: a photo array, but on the night of the crime,
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: Alan had stayed with his fiance's family in Queens, all
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: of whom had said that no one had left in
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: the middle of the night. Curiously, no zerology was presented
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: at trial, only two very shaky IDAs from the witness
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: and the victim, who could not agree on whether the
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: victim knew her assailant or not. Advances in DNA testing
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: would be all that Allan needed to eventually disprove his accusers,
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: but only if the police could be bothered to locate
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: the rape kit right where it had always been for
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: twenty two long years. This is Wrongful Conviction. Welcome back
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: to Wrongful Conviction today. Well, this is long overdue because
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: ever since I started doing this podcast back in two
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: thousand and six, team, I've thought a lot about this
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: case of the man you're about to hear from in person,
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: Alan Newton, and I don't know why we haven't gotten
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: around to it till now, but I'm so glad we're
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: going to do it today because this is a story
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: that needs to be heard, and it's a hard one
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: to hear, by the way, and I'm very, very excited
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: and honored to have you here today, Alan Newton, Welcome
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: to Wronful Conviction.
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: Thank you. Jason. Definitely appreciate what y'all, guy is doing
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: as far as getting our story out there.
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: So let's go back before this happened, and before you
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: were exposed to the worst that our criminal legal system
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: has to offer. Your life was pretty good, right.
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: Fairy decent. I was working, had graduated high school, and
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: my mind, you know, back in nineteen eighty four, living
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: my best life and appearing when to go to college
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: in a couple of years is and that's an ordinary
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: young guy just living my life.
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: I mean, you're working for the New York Telephone Company
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: obviously a name that doesn't exist anymore, but New York
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Telephone Company for people who remember that far back, was
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: a big company in New York, obviously, and you were
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: going to hip hop dance parties in the Bronx, which
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: was again like that was the popular thing to do
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: back then. And if I understand correctly, you were also
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: engaged at the time, right.
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: Yes, I was living in the Bronx. My fiance was
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: living in Queens, so I was working in Manhattan. So
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: I was basically traveling around New York City through the
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: bows and parties.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: Just making your way, right like any other twenty three
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: year old guy would be doing at the time. And
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: so you had one previous incident that I guess put
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: you on the radar of the authorities, right, Can you
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: tell us about that?
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: It was the year in nineteen seventy nine, two three
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: months before I graduated high school, and I was at
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: a party and got in a fight with another young
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: teenager at my age and got a battery charge. And unfortunately,
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: it was the photographs and the police mug shot books
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: that the victim supposedly picked out to connect me to
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: this longful conviction of us.
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean we've heard that story before, whether it's
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: with the John Asier Velasque's case or so many other
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: cases where some minor infraction for which somebody in a
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: different zip code probably wouldn't have been arrested or charged.
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: But you know, a little high school incident, a fight.
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: I'm not saying a fight isn't a serious thing, but
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: it was a fight among two teenage boys, which happens
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: every day in different cities all over the country, and
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: ninety nine percent of the time no charges are filed.
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: But you know, in the poorer communities, people of color,
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: you can end up with a record that could end
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: up with a mugshot in a book that can end
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: up in a wrongful conviction, and it happens time and again,
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: and that's exactly what happened in this case.
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: And you're absolutely right because you know later on on
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: learning about the case and all that the other guy
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: that had to fight with wasn't coming to court. So
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: it really wasn't anybody, you know, pushing the case along
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: through the justice system. But in my ignorance, not knowing
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: better and just wanting to move on because I was
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: working and losing days at work, you know, coming back
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: and forth to court, I decided just to take a bleed.
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: And like you said, under different circumstances and another zip code,
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: the case with it. Just like you said, it's just
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: a fight between teenagers at a party. But that's not
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: the way the justice system, like the dol out punishment
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: when it comes to certain communities, it's more so about
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: putting people through the criminal justice system and making sure
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: that they have a record for the rest of their lives.
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: So that brings us right up to the time of
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: the crime. Now. At four am on June twenty third,
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: nineteen eighty four, a twenty five year old woman stopped
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: at a convenience during the bronze to buy cigarettes, and
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: there are some conflicts in the narrative between the victim
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: and the store clerk that had an impact later in
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: the compromised way in which the jury decided the case.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: So back to the night of the crime, the store
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: clerk said that the assailant also came into the store
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: at that time and bought a beer before returning to
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: his car, a blue and white Sadan, where he was
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: honking his horn for the victim. In this case, the
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: store clerk said that the victim went to the car voluntarily.
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: The victim, while maintained when she exited the store that
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: this other customer, the assailant grabbed her from behind, put
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: a box cutter to her throat, and threw her into
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: the blue and white sedan and it drove off. Now,
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: after a few minutes, the car stalled, and when the
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: assailant got out to check the engine, allegedly the passenger
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: side door handle was broken off so the victim couldn't
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: get out of the car. The assailant then dragged her
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: to a nearby park where he orally sodomized and raped
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: her and attempted to take her money in cigarettes.
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: Yes, she said the guy took her money. She says
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: she ran after the guy, and the guy gave her
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: money back. When she claimed that she asked some kids
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: to feed. He didn't say she was going to caught
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: a cop at this time anything. She says she was
• 6:58
  Speaker 2: waiting for a cab. She said the guy came and
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: abducted her again. This time he took her an abandoned building,
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: raped her again, robbed again, and this time he'd cut.
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: Her in case it wasn't horrible enough, he'd cut her
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: face with a razor to prevent her from identifying. He
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: actually blinded her in one eye, and he told her
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: that if she called the police, he would come back
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: and kill her. She saw his back as he ran away,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: and then she passed out. But when she came to
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: and regained consciousness, she went to a call box. He
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: used to have these police call boxes around the city,
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: and she called the police. Let me ask you. She
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: described the victim as five to seven or five eight,
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: one hundred and sixty pounds, with a short afro, had
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: a mustache, but she said she couldn't tell if he
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: was darker light skinned because it was the middle of
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: the night. Obviously it was very dark out, and she
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: told the detective at the hospital that he was physically
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: large and that his name was Willy. Did any of
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: this stuff match up with you?
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: It didn't match up with me. It wasn't anything that
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: connected me to the crime. I was in Queens that
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: weekend with my fiance, had the ticket steps from going
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: to see Ghostbusters Saturday, and.
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: Yeah, wow, Ghostbusters. You know, I'm just thinking about that
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: movie was like such a huge thing. It can't It
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: was like the only thing we were talking about that
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: summer of eighty four, which has other implications, specifically that
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: there was no DNA testing back in nineteen eighty four
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: at the hospital. They did do a rape kit and
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: sperm was gathered, but without the DNA testing that eventually
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: would exonerate you. Alan, all they had was zerology. So,
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: to the best of your knowledge, did they do any
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: testing about blood types at all of this evidence that
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: they had collected.
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: Not to my knowledge, I didn't find any paperwork. But
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: I have to believe they had an idea because when
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: I got arrested, I went through Rikers Allen and back
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: then they was taking blood from you. But as far
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: as I know, they never did any soology testing, even
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: though they had my blood type and they had a
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: solology evidence that was in the rape kit.
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: So soroology testing was standard protocol back then in a
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: case like this. If they had something to use against you,
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: I'm sure you know that they would have. But the
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: only evidence from the rape kit that the DAUS was
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: that spermitozoa were present, proving that a sexual interaction had occurred,
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: but nothing about blood types, which is very suspicious. And meanwhile,
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: the detectives brought their mug book down to the hospital
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: and the victim, who had remember just gotten out of
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: eye surgery, was shown a dizzying amount of pictures. Who
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: knows what was going on during this process as far
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: as the suggestive nature of it or the pressure they
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: put on her when she was in an extremely fragile state.
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: But then eventually she picked out your picture from that
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: arrest back in high school. Then they brought a photo
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: lineup to the store clerk who also picked you.
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: Out, and even what they have the stalk clerk. The
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: stalk clerk said the reason why she recognized me. This
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: is what she claimed on a stand I was the
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: only guy that I came into the establishment and the
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: last twelve hours that she didn't know.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: And again we don't know how suggestive they were being
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: with either of these identifications, and then both of them
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: having already seen your picture. It's not surprising at all
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: that both women picked you out of a live lineup,
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: so you were arrested. But something about this idea and
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: the whole situation should have stuck out to everyone involved.
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: The clerk maintained that the victim knew the assailant, but
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: the victim didn't know you at all, right, I mean,
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: did you know the victim.
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: Not at all? Never seen her, never met her, never
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: knew right.
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: Plus you had a solid alibi. Your fiance and her
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: daughter bouch for you. You've got the movie ticket stubs,
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: you had stayed up late watching TV with her family
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: and Queens before spending the night there. I mean, you
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: were in an entirely different borough.
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: I wasn't in the brongs that weekend. I was in
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: Queens and Bookman. And it gets even better now. When
• 10:52
  Speaker 2: I first got arrested, my fiance, you know, intended father
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: in law. He was a retired correction officer. He went
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: to the Bronx District Attorney's office and said, listen, I
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: don't know what this case is about, but I know
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: this man was at my house in Queen's and they
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: try to ask, well, do we have a key? Do
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: he be coming in three four in the morning. They
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: was like, listen, he don't move like that. It wasn't
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: no urgency to try to get to the truth, to
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: find out what really happened. And like I said, the
• 11:22
  Speaker 2: victim also told the cops this guy named was some
• 11:26
  Speaker 2: guy named Willy. Later on, I found out that the
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: cops was investigating some guy named Willy, and paperwork that
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: I was able to get years later showed that they
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: was doing investigation into somebody. Matter of fact, there was
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: a series of rapes going on in the community and
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: it was fitting a similar description, a similar mo and
• 11:45
  Speaker 2: that just stopped.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: I mean, it sounds like maybe this guy could have
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: been an informant, or they were protecting him in some way.
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: I don't know, because otherwise, why would anybody want to
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: let a serial rapist remain free. It's insane, but that's
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: what happened, and I can only speculate because I have
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: no idea what was going on behind the scenes. And
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: it's crazy when you talk about your father in law
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: to be, you know. I mean, this is a guy
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: you would think would have some credibility, you know, in
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: that system especially, And they didn't care what he had
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: to say. They didn't care what you had to say,
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: they didn't care about your fiance. In fact, they were
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: aggressively disinterested, no question. They were fighting against the truth
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: and they won.
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: They said, when they can't to stand. Well, once we
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: focused on mister Newton, everything else ceased in regards to
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: another suspect. And a lot of these cases, the person
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: that committed these crimes go on to commit multiple crimes. Okay,
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: I'm not caught. They don't stop and like check themselves, right.
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: And this is a guy who was so depraved that
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: he also took a box cutter to her face. I mean,
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: like this is like, this is a person that we
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: should all want off the streets, you know what I mean.
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: Jesus Christ. This episode is underwritten by global law firm
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: Greenberg Traig through its pro bono program. Greenberg Traig leverages
• 13:12
  Speaker 1: its more than twenty four hundred lawyers across forty two
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: offices to serve the greater good of our communities and
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: provide equal access to justice for all in the field
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: of criminal justice. Greenberg Triwerg attorneys have exonerated and freedomand
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: in Philadelphia represent numerous individuals previously sentenced to life for
• 13:28
  Speaker 1: crimes committed as juveniles and resentencing hearings, and received the
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: American Bar Association's twenty twenty one Exceptional Service Award for
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: Death Penalty Representation for their work on five death penalty cases.
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: GT is reimagining what big law can be because a
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: more just world only happens by design.
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: They offered me three years, Jason, they offered me three
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: to ten years in a plea deal, and I couldn't
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: take debt saw. I made a constant decision to go
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: to trial and fight this all the way through.
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: How long did the trial take?
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: Five to six days altogether?
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: So Trialy only used the rate kit and other biological
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: evidence to determine that a sexual act had occurred, but
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: no zerological evidence was presented, So we don't know what
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: they found out, if anything, at all. And I'd only
• 14:20
  Speaker 1: be speculating to say that since they had identifications from
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: the victim and the witness, they may have ignored or
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: hidden inconvenient exculpatory evidence, like if the blood type didn't
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: match Allen, And of course many years later DNA testing
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: absolutely excluded Allan and proved that these two misidentifications were
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: just that totally unreliable. And that's really all this trial
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: came down to. The two misidentifications.
• 14:48
  Speaker 2: They had to line up. They had to line up.
• 14:50
  Speaker 2: I was picked out by the victim and this witness.
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: But when they both came to court a year later
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: and saw me again, neither one of them initially picked
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: me out in court, neither one of them, and then
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: the district attorney I was on the case at the time.
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: The ABA had a discussion with the victim and the
• 15:10
  Speaker 2: store clerk, and they both came up with an excuse
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: of why I'm now the guy.
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: So the only evidence they had was shaky, but somehow
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: that was still enough to overcome your defense. What if
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: anything was presented in your favor.
• 15:25
  Speaker 2: I mean, not only did my fiance testify, her daughter testified.
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: My fiance also took a lot of detective tests, see
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: passed it. You know, the court was informed, the district
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: attorney was informed about this. And unlike you see on
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: CSI or one of these other law and order shows
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: where okay, somebody passed a lot of detective tests. Let's
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: try to do a little more research. The only thing
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: the judge did he turned to my fiance while she
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: was on the stand and said, listen, if you say
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: anything about that lie of detective tests, I'm gonna hold
• 15:55
  Speaker 2: you in contempt.
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: Right, and obviously lie. Detective test results are inadmissible because
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: the testing is super were subjective. But back in nineteen
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: eighty four, polygraph results were still admissible in court. So
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: it's interesting and confusing that this judge seemed keen on
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: keeping that information from the jury, which brings us to
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: this very odd verdict. You were acquitted of all the
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: charges stemming from the incident at the park, but convicted
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: of the charges related to the victim's attack in the
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: abandoned building, which I had to read that like three
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: times because I was like, but wait a minute, it
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: was known at the time directly from the victim that
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: it was the same person.
• 16:33
  Speaker 2: Correct, So.
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: Can you I mean, that's a great question. I just
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: helped me out here because I don't understand I.
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: Got to answer for that. Remember, now, the victim and
• 16:45
  Speaker 2: the clerk had different testimony in regards to how the
• 16:49
  Speaker 2: victim got into the car. The victim says she was abducted.
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: The clerk says she randomly walked into the call. So
• 16:58
  Speaker 2: the jury submided is that these two people knew each other.
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: And then to hear what the jury told my lawyer
• 17:06
  Speaker 2: about why they made that decision, it was like, oh, yeah, well,
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: they called the girl a liar about being abducted coming
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: out the store. They went with the store clerk's testimony
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: that she walked into the car on her own, which
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: means they were saying the girl and the guy was together.
• 17:25
  Speaker 2: But we believed something went wrong after the park, so
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: they believed the victim when she says she got assaulted
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: in the building, but they thought she was lying about
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: the park and that came out because she got cut.
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: If this woman did not get cut, I truly believed
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: I wouldn't got convicted because they attitude was, well, this
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: was a consensual relationship, even though that wasn't the testimony
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: outside of what the clerk said about the guy beeping
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: the horn and the victim walking into the car. So
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: that's called to be pugnant verdict because it's the same victim,
• 18:01
  Speaker 2: it's the same evidence, and a judge legally don't supposed
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: to allow because it's inconsistent.
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: I mean, the jury was presented with this conflicting evidence,
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: and maybe in the interest of public safety or so,
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: they thought, they were very willing to come up with
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: their own narrative of the events to come to this verdict,
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: which of course isn't what they're supposed to do. They'd
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: accepted the store clerk's testimony, in effect, calling the victim's
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: testimony about not knowing her attacker, they called that a lie. Meanwhile,
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: it was undisputed that she didn't know you at all,
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: yet she identified you anyway. That means if the store
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: clerk was right, the victim must have been protecting her
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: actual attacker when talking to the police and fingered you
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: in his place. On the other hand, if the store
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: clerk was wrong, maybe she was abducted by a stranger.
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: But then the jury should have believed her about both assaults.
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: They just chose to believe half of the victim's story
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: about the building, and we don't believe what happened in
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: the park. And they said, well, we're going to go
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: with the store clerk because supposedly she's an independent witness.
• 19:06
  Speaker 2: But it was also testimony from the victim herself, now
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: that she had got assaulted about less than a month
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: before by an ex boyfriend. So it was a lot
• 19:15
  Speaker 2: of things that came out. But I also believed the
• 19:18
  Speaker 2: judge played a big part in my trial because the
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: ADA in my case was kind of new, fresh out
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: of law school. You know, she wasn't up the park
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: when it came to trying to question witnesses. The judge
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: was taken over across examination and direct examination. It was
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: like you're supposed to be, you know, the arbitrator, not
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: make the case for the ADA. Unfortunately passed away before
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: my case got overturned, because I would have really liked
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: to show him that I was really innocent.
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: I'm sure that would have been satisfying. Considering what you're
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: telling us now, and also what we know this judge
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: had already said to your fiance by being held in contempt,
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: it sounds like he was really, for all intents and purposes,
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: just another prosecutor, like an adjunct prosecutor, which obviously totally
• 20:03
  Speaker 1: tilts the scale, and not in your favor at all.
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: So at this point, did you expect the jury would
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: see past the nonsense?
• 20:12
  Speaker 2: I mean, when you're telling the truth, you believe in
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: your heart, it's gonna stand up. You believe it's enough.
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: It came as a real shot. I wanted to prove
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: my innocence and say, hey, I got the wrong guy here.
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: You know, this can't go on. And I didn't think
• 20:27
  Speaker 2: it was gonna last twenty two years. And I mean
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: I didn't think I was gonna get convicted either. So
• 20:48
  Speaker 2: the first thing I did once I got of state,
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: the first motion I put in the post say motion
• 20:56
  Speaker 2: was trying to get psylology testing. That's the first motion
• 20:59
  Speaker 2: I put in. I wanted to try to get that
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: rape kit and try to test it, you know, and
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: this was pre DNA. I just want to test it
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: for blood typing. Judge Einstein all through the years when
• 21:10
  Speaker 2: I was founding motions on my behalf, he just he
• 21:13
  Speaker 2: would shoot me down. He just disregarded all my motions.
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: Even I was trying to find the rape kit and
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: presenting you know, the republic verdict, everything got dismissed. And
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: it was hard, man, you know, it was rough. I
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: lost both my parents in there, and ooh, things that
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: you know that I lost I could never get back.
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: But I had my family and they was, you know,
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: always there for me. And so having that support and
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: had to keep fighting though until I got it right though,
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: until they realized they made a mistake.
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: And that took unfortunately way too long, as it usually
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: does in these cases.
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: Ten years after I got convicted, New York State passed
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: the DNA law. I was one of the first people
• 22:00
  Speaker 2: to put in the motion as far as trying to
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: get testing.
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: On August sixteenth, nineteen ninety four, that was the first
• 22:06
  Speaker 1: time that you requested the post conviction DNA testing, but
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: the court denied your request because they said the kit
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: could not be located.
• 22:16
  Speaker 2: Because I was going to pro say, the courts allotted
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: DA's office to indicate, well, we can't find it. We
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: did a search, we can't find it. And so my
• 22:26
  Speaker 2: one true hope of proving my innocence in my mind
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: didn't exist anymore, you know, was gone Vanitho.
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: And that had to be a terrible blow, right, you.
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: Know, I was almost broken though in you know, no
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: chance of getting out I got to do all this
• 22:40
  Speaker 2: time unless I go say I did something I didn't
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: do to try to make parlole. And I had spoke
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: with you know, my brother about it, my family, and
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: I was like, hey, I may have to go take
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: a program here and say I did this crime just
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: to have consideration, not for release consideration. And my family
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: was like, nah, you're not doing that. I was like,
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: I'm doing this time. They was like no, we all
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: doing this time with you.
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: That sounds like a pretty dark time. But fortunately this
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: whole situation turned around and this is the good stuff.
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: So what happened next?
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: So now, ten years after that, when Innocon's Project come
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: on a case, Vanessa Popkin reached out to the Browns
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: County District Attorney's office and the ADA decided, Okay, you know,
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: we're gonna look for it now because we have an
• 23:32
  Speaker 2: attorney acting us. The relationships the Innocence Project had with
• 23:37
  Speaker 2: the district attorney offices made it possible. I mean, the
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: courts couldn't make the DA's office look for it.
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: In November two thousand and five, the kit was found
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: after a physical search of the evidence barrels at the
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: Pearson Place Queen's warehouse, which means the rape kit was
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: found in the same barrel that was indicated on the
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: evidence voucher, which is to say, it was where it
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: was supposed to be and where it had almost certainly
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: been all those years that they had been saying they
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: couldn't find it. It was right there.
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: Now it was supposed to go back to the Bronx.
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: It never went back to the Bronx. They didn't come
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: to pick it up after the trial. And what happened.
• 24:27
  Speaker 2: You know, evidence that's not reclaim is sent to piercing
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: place in Queens and like you said, it was indicated
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: on the voucher that it was sent somewhere else. Now
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: this is the tricky part. If it had got sent
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: back to the Bronx, there's a possibility I wouldn't have
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: been here. Because the Bronx was losing and destroying stuff,
• 24:51
  Speaker 2: Queens Warehouse was bigger, so they was able to maintain property.
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: Even though they got property in there for fifty years,
• 24:59
  Speaker 2: they was able to maintained it. So technically it wasn't
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: where was supposed to be, but it was where it
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: was indicated to be.
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: So in April two thousand and six, FSA Forensic Scize
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: Associates attained a full DNA profile from the Daglan cervical swabs.
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: The reference samples were collected from you Allen and FSA
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: and the Bronx DA's office confirmed the DNA drum roll, please,
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: here we go. The DNA conclusively excluded you as the
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: source of the sperm are covered from the victim. Immediately
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: after the rape, justice finally prevailed. It was delayed, but
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: not denied. It was delayed for twenty two years, and
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: on July sixth of two thousand and six, you walked
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: out of a Bronx courthouse after the instance project and
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: the Bronx County DA's office filed a joint motion to
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: vacate your conviction. I remember this because we were all celebrating.
• 25:54
  Speaker 1: What was that moment like for you?
• 25:56
  Speaker 2: I was heaving. I was. I was like being born
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: in an I didn't see it coming. I was almost
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: prepared just do the whole forty. That was the attitude
• 26:07
  Speaker 2: I had, because the pre parole board told me I
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: have no chance unless I take responsibility. And so I
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: couldn't see it. And I mean I was walked around
• 26:19
  Speaker 2: like a zombie. I was just you know, being led
• 26:22
  Speaker 2: by my family and you know, I mean the lights
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: and it was the best moment in my life, you know,
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: like getting convicted, you know, twenty two years prior to that,
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: I didn't see that curveball coming. I didn't really see
• 26:38
  Speaker 2: this curveball coming too, because they told me the evidence
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: was gone. So when they found it, you know, it
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: was like, if it's not tampered with, I know, I'm okay.
• 26:47
  Speaker 2: Let me interject one thing real quick. If it was
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: up to the city, I would have never got exonerated.
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: We found out during the civil trial the ocmme's office,
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: when they was doing the testing and they was contaminating
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: they own samples, they was not able to come up
• 27:06
  Speaker 2: with a result whether that was my DNA or not
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: because the sample that they had they was contaminating it.
• 27:14
  Speaker 2: So whether it's being done deliberately or you know, just
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: in competence, it's still being done. And if you can't
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: get access to independent testing, which is what the Innocence
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: Project was able to do, instead of relying on just
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: the ocme's office, you're in a catch twenty two situation
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: because you can only believe the sworn documents that they
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: submit to the court. It's the same way when I
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: was fouling my motions pro say all those years, they
• 27:41
  Speaker 2: were swearing to the court that they did a search
• 27:44
  Speaker 2: and can't find the evidence.
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: It's terrifying, I mean, it's scary. Enough to think it
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: could get lost. Like even when your evidence was sitting
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: in that warehouse, there could have been a flood, right,
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: there could have been anything, and you would be doomed.
• 27:57
  Speaker 2: But it wasn't. So when Live six came and they
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: cut a brother loose, like I said, it was like
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: my born day. That's like my second birthday now and
• 28:09
  Speaker 2: I look forward to that day and I cherish it.
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: I appreciate life so much more now because I realized
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: how quick we can have it snatched away from us,
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: just you know, on somebody's accusation, somebody's claim, and you
• 28:27
  Speaker 2: know how we really don't have any rights because that's
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: what it came down to. You know, you're guilty until
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: you prove your innocence. That's the way the system is now.
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: So it was you know, bittersweet too at the end
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: of the day because I had lost so much, like
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: I said, both my parents. So it was bittersweet.
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: Forty five years old, you released out into the world.
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: No job. Ir fiance had moved on. I mean, I
• 28:50
  Speaker 1: can't blame her after twenty two years, but you know,
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: you hit the ground running anyway. Scholarship from the Third
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: Good Marshal Fund enabled you to roll and get it
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: bes business administration, right. I remember meeting you back around
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: that time, and we started working as a youth mentor,
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: started dating, even water skiing in the Caribbean, eventually right
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: and graduating in two thousand and ate it. Of course,
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: you filed civil rights lawsuit and were awarded a lot
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: of money. I don't think there's any amount of money
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: that would be enough to justify the suffering that you
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: went through and your family went through. But the fact
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: is it's nice to see. I mean, unfortunately most exigneries
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: never get any compensation. It makes me happy to see
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: when somebody like you does at least get that monetary
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: reward so you can, you know, do the things that
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: you want to do.
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: And I'll get back though, and I try to help
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: that the exonves try to go out there and talk
• 29:48
  Speaker 2: about this issue because I could stay in my you know,
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: man cave and you know, stay depressed and stay focused
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: on the last forty years of my life. But it's
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: more about you know, letting people know there's something beat
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: out there and we could make things better. But we
• 30:06
  Speaker 2: all have to you know, stay you know, vigilant and
• 30:10
  Speaker 2: trying to make this possible.
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: And I'm glad you're out there doing it. Everything you're doing,
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: it's so important. People need to hear from you. You're
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: including right here, right now on this podcast. So now
• 30:19
  Speaker 1: getting towards the closing of the show, it's called closing arguments,
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: and it works like this. I'm gonna first of all,
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: thank you again for being here and for being such
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: a beacon of hope and for sharing your story. And
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: then I'm going to kick back in my chair, turn
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: off my microphone, leave my headphones on, and just listen
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: for anything else you want to share with me and
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: our audience.
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: Thank you, Jason. I appreciate you guys and being able
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: to tell this story. It's a blessing because I think
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: this is, you know, one subject that all sane minds
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: think alike. We should not have innocent people being wrong
• 31:00
  Speaker 2: fee convicted and locked up for anything. If there's any
• 31:06
  Speaker 2: chance and any shred of evidence that proved us, I think,
• 31:10
  Speaker 2: you know, we should move mountains to exonerate, you know,
• 31:14
  Speaker 2: men and women, because you have a lot more woman
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: now that's being wrongfully convicted also. And and like I said,
• 31:20
  Speaker 2: I think this is one thing that you know, we
• 31:22
  Speaker 2: all agree about. But we just have to be diligent
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: and always reminding, you know, public officials that this is
• 31:31
  Speaker 2: a subject that affects each and every one of us,
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: and each time the opportunity arises, we must help people
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: in these situations, you know, while they in prison trying
• 31:44
  Speaker 2: to prove their innocence, and definitely when we come home,
• 31:47
  Speaker 2: because like you said, I had to hit the ground
• 31:50
  Speaker 2: running because it wasn't nothing there for me. I had
• 31:54
  Speaker 2: a lot of help, fortunately, and unfortunately, a lot of
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: my you know, felt exonneries don't have that type of help,
• 32:01
  Speaker 2: you know, whether it's you know where they got exalivated
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: or you know, their family or friends situation. It's so
• 32:07
  Speaker 2: important that you know, we all as a society try
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: to not only prevent this from happening in the future,
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: but when it does, make every opportunity to make these
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: people hold again, you know, make advite they can't go
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: back and obtain what they lost, but moving forward we
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: can all make life better for us.
• 32:37
  Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I'd like to
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: thank our production team Connor Hall, Jeff Cliburn, and Kevin Wartis,
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: with research by Lyla Robinson. The music in this production
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph.
• 32:50
  Speaker 1: Be sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction,
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction podcast, and on Twitter at
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good. On
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: all three platforms, you can also follow me on both
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: TikTok and Instagram at it's Jason Flahm. Ravel Conviction is
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: the production of Lava for Good podcast and association with
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: Signal Company Number one