Priya Hubbard and Jessica Borges invite their friend Keith over for rosé to tell him about their in-depth investigation of one of the biggest crime lab scandals of the century.
Priya Hubbard & Jessica Borges
The F’d Up Finale Recap Written by Brandi AbbottOn F’d Up this season we’ve learned a lot about how broken the criminal justice system is and how fucked up the NC SBI Crime Lab has been. There has been some reform based on everything that has come to light, but there is still a long way to go. After Alan Gell’s case in 2004, the governor signed a bill that required DAs to provide all of their files from their cases to defense attorneys if they ask for them. The attorney general at the time, Roy Cooper, made changes to the SBI Crime Lab. He installed an ombudsman to address concerns relating to the crime lab or its employees. Documents and ASCLD-LAB reports were posted for transparency, but none of the results or repercussions from internal investigations seem to have been made public. The governor at the time, Pat McCrory, moved the SBI Crime Lab from under the purview of the attorney general at the time, Roy Cooper, to the department of justice so that it was under the purview of the governor and the name was changed from the NC SBI Crime Lab to the NC State Crime Lab. In 2016, Roy Cooper ran for governor and narrowly beat Pat McCrory, which put the crime lab back under his control. Right after the audit report was released, the governor at that time, Bev Perdue, signed a bill making it a crime for lab workers to withhold results. The North Carolina SBI Blood Stain Pattern Analysis unit was suspended during the audit. To this day it has still not been reopened and analysis of bloodstain patterns is outsourced.When Priya and Jess went into detail about the history and missions of the crime lab in NC, they didn’t mention that all of the information was from the current crime lab’s website. According to their site they and other forensic labs across the nation are now subject to the ISO/ISE 17025 accreditation standard. ANAB is authorized to perform this accreditation but no one can confirm whether or not they’re the one’s doing the accreditation for the NC State Crime Lab. One would hope not given that ANAB merged with ASCLD LAB who spent years accrediting the SBI Crime lab while it was full of misconduct. Priya checked out some public documents on the state crime lab’s site and found an update on the preservation of biological evidence. They now preserve evidence in capital cases until the convicted person is executed or dies and if a convicted person receives a life sentence, the evidence is preserved until they die. But if a person pleads guilty in a crime – evidence is only preserved for three years! Three years doesn’t seem like very long given how often coercion of confessions occur. Priya says that she’s visited the site often over the course of doing research for this podcast, and that recently a lot of information that used to be easy to access like policies, accreditation reports and the like are not as easy to obtain. Policies can only be accessed if you sign in with a Microsoft account and you have to email the lab to get accreditation reports. Another reform is the forensic advisory board that is now in place and includes forensic scientists from a couple of different states, however, they could benefit from a commission like the one Marvin Schechter is on in New York that includes more people who are involved in the justice system or are impacted by forensic science, like defense attorneys. Their website includes the minutes from their board meetings up until a year ago, but if they’re still meeting, they don’t seem to update the site any longer. The new director of the lab, Vanessa Martinucci, does have a forensic background which is a big deal considering their past employees. She has a Masters in biology and was a supervisor at the Houston Forensic Science Center. People Priya and Jess have talked to who were or are affected by the lab has said a lot of this hasn’t helped to fix the huge systemic issues that have happened. Instead, it seems as though they’re making changes to distract from their issues. People had been trying to enact change in North Carolina even before Greg Taylor’s exoneration. Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake had been noticing problematic issues in NC cases, the same kind Chris Mumma was noticing when she was clerking for him. Because of these concerns, in 2002 Chief Justice Lake established the Criminal Justice Study Commission, the purpose of which was to review police and prosecution procedures for factors that helped lead to wrongful convictions. This commission helped to birth the Innocence Inquiry Commission - which ultimately led to Greg Taylor’s exoneration. In very sad news, Chief Justice died last month, but he leaves a legacy of trying to make the world a better place. Chief Justice Lake, along with Darryl Hunt and others, helped in getting the Racial Justice Act enacted in 2009. As you may recall from an earlier episode, the Racial Justice Act allowed death row inmates and those still on trial to challenge their sentence if they thought it had been negatively impacted by their race. They also discussed that in December of 2012, three defendants who had been on death row had their cases reheard because of this act and their lives were saved. F’d Up covered three cases on the past episode but there was actually six. As you may remember from that episode, the three that were discussed had their sentences reduced to life in prison and this was only possible because they filed their grievances prior to 2013 when then governor Pat McCrory signed a repeal of the Racial Justice Act. This repeal affected all of the cases. One of these cases was Tilmon Golphin, a black man, was pursued by the police through the woods where they eventually caught him. A perspective juror who was black overheard two white jurors say that Tillman never should have made it out of the woods. The black juror brought this up and the prosecutor questioned him about it. He was struck from the jury but the two white people were not. Overall, five of the seven qualified black people were removed from the jury. Tilmon was ultimately sentenced by a jury of 11 white people and one black person. This was in Johnston county which had billboards boasting that it was “KKK country” up until the 80s. Another case was Rayford Burke who was black and was sentenced to death by an all white jury. The prosecutor drew attention to Rayford’s size and race in a negative fashion and called him a “big black bull” during a plea for the jury to find him guilty. Quintel Augustine is also black. In his case, the prosecutor wrote handwritten notes about each perspective juror. For a perspective white juror who admitted to drinking, they wrote “drinks, country boy, okay” but described a perspective black juror who admitted to drinking as a black wino. For a black female juror they made the note that she was from a “respectable black family” but made no such note for any of the white jurors about their potential “respectable” families. In the case of Marcus Robinson there was a perspective juror who was black and a high school graduate. The prosecutor asked this juror if he repeated grades or had trouble reading, but never asked any of the prospective white jurors the same question. This prosecutor admitted he was not particularly racially fair. Christina Walter’s trial involved the prosecutor asking prospective jurors if they ever felt they had been burgled. Two white perspective jurors who had had some minor property crimes and felt it wasn’t a big deal ended up on the jury, whereas a black prospective juror was struck when they said they didn’t feel like a victim over their car being broken into and a radio stolen. Out of 14 qualified black jurors, 10 ended up being struck.Cassandra Stubbs, the director of the ACLU Capital Punishment Project, said that one of the things that was so remarkable about the Racial Justice Act was that before when one suspected prosecutors were acting discriminatory, there was no opportunity to question them. With the RJA they had to testify about and answer to their actions. As of August of 2019, the RJA is back on the table. The state Supreme Court heard all six cases that fell under the RJA. A couple of choices were on the table. Do the four defendants try and get back life without parole or do they try and get new hearings since it’s already been proven that there was racial bias in their cases. According to the NCCADP, for the other two cases the court will decide whether people on death row who filed claims under the RJA will get their chance to present their evidence in court even after the repeal. They went on to say that three of the six defendants were sentenced to death under an all white jury. The NCCADP breaks down a study done in Michigan that was covered in the death row episode to say that qualified black jurors were struck from capital juries at twice the rate as white jurors. Even when other factors are brought in, the disparity can only be attributed to race. Defendants found direct evidence of discrimination such as prosecutors’ notes of potential jurors where the notes included descriptions such as “blk wino” and “thug”. Cassandra Stubbs is the director of the ACLU Capital Punishment Project and represents one of the defendants, Marcus Robinson. She spoke with a reporter at the Real News Network and said that even though the NC Supreme Court didn’t re-sentence them to death and did not enter a new order about their life sentences, after they remanded, all four prisoners were moved from the prisons around the state where they had been serving their life without parole sentences. Without any reason at all, these four defendants were moved back to death row. If the court rules in the defendants favor, they can get new hearings and present significant evidence that race played a factor in their sentencing. The RJA attorneys said that the states highest court must take on this crucial issue and if it doesn’t, it will send the message that the state is willing to execute people after overwhelming evidence of racism in their trial has come to light. Cassandra said never before had any state sanctioned dismissal of comparable allegations and proof of racial bias. The state’s position is that since the RJA has been repealed we should all just forget about everything and move on, but the court cannot. Attorneys for the NC Attorney General’s office did not dispute the evidence of racism and said that racism in capital trials is serious and must be dealt with. However they asked the courts to deny the cases and leave the lower courts to deal with it, though they haven’t been doing a great job so far. As of right now, the courts have not ruled and it’s unclear when that’s expected to happen. The New York Times Editorial Board wrote an article about the RJA, which showed that the actions of the prosecutors in these capital cases were unconstitutional. The practice of being able to strike black jurors from cases with impunity was banned by the Supreme Court in 1986 after a case named Batson v. Kentucky. However, just because the Supreme Court banned the practice, it doesn’t mean prosecutors stopped doing it, just that they tried to hide it better. The article said that especially in places like North Carolina, this wasn’t the behavior of a few bad apples, it was standard operating procedure. There was a document distributed to NC prosecutors in training that apparently listed 10 “race neutral” explanations for striking a juror in case a judge asked. Categories included inappropriate dress, physical appearance, attitude, body language, and hair. If this is too subtle for you, the document was titled “Batson Justifications Articulating Juror Negatives”. This is especially important as prosecutors receive no repercussions for their actions, except under the RJA. As mentioned earlier, in August of this year attorneys from across the state argued before the state Supreme Court on behalf of the six individuals who are on death row and filed claims under the Racial Justice Act. Cassandra told a reporter for the NCCADP that everyone who filed a RJA case is entitled to a hearing on their RJA claims. This was because of a case decided after the Civil War called “Keith”, which is the best name! Cassandra said in the case of Keith, a war criminal who massacred boys and men ages 13-60 was given amnesty by the NC Supreme Court because of due process. He was given a defense by the NC Legislature. A few years later the NC Legislature came in and repealed that act, and he successfully invoked the defense that was given to him by them. The Supreme Court ruled that he was entitled to it, and a repeal could not take it away. So essentially, the question is will a law that protected confederate soldiers and has never been overturned protect these cases. When the court eventually rules on all of this, according to the NCCADP, the outcome could affect nearly 150 other prisoners who petitioned under the RJA but never got their day in court. Lawyers for the prisoners who filed claims said the law may now be gone but they still should have a chance to prove that their client’s punishment was racially motivated. There’s a group of former judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials who have a hope that the court will use this as an opportunity to strike down punishment in NC all together.A series of articles written by Radley Balko, he sought solutions from experts who work in the areas of law and forensics. Radley wrote that the legal system is too reluctant to revisit cases. As Priya has mentioned before, she’s of the opinion that retesting old cases with updated science is her idealistic solution to so many issues. Money is a huge obstacle with this but I would bet there are those who don’t want even more of their mistakes to come to light. Within the past 10 years there have been attempts to correct some of the issues with forensic science. In 2013, Congress and the Obama administration created the National Commission on Forensic Science, a panel of lawyers and scientists whose job it was to come up with standards and protocols in this field. However the Trump administration allowed the commissions’ charter to expire in April of 2017 - which is unsurprising since he doesn’t even believe in science. Radley found in speaking with his experts that the one resounding answer for reform has been what has come up again and again that all forensic labs should become independent of police and prosecutors. However, according to the experts Priya and Jess have spoken with, police and prosecutors don’t want to give up their “aces up their sleeves” especially as they are provided with little to no cost. Radley found that people he reached out to agree that if we keep this current system, then defense attorneys should be given the same amount of funds to provide their own experts. Forensic pathologist Judy Melinek told him that local pubic defender offices need to be funded at the same level as prosecutor’s and need to be given the same amount of access to forensic evidence. She also suggested that the laws should be changed to where defendants can appeal their convictions if scientific advancements indicate that they were wrongfully convicted based on faulty scientific testimony. Radley discussed the fact that many fields of forensics have come under scrutiny in recent years such as blood stain pattern analysis, hair fiber analysis, ballistics testing, and fingerprint analysis. Eyewitness testing has also been shown to be much less reliable than most people think and juries give them too much consideration. Bloodstain pattern analysis has been criticized as being more subjective than scientific. Steps have been made in the right direction using something called “fluid dynamics and physics”.Sandra Guerra Thompson, a law professor and the director of the Criminal Justice Institute at the University of Houston Law Center is a founding member of the board of directors of the Houston Forensic Science Center. The crime lab in Houston was once affiliated with the police and underwent a huge scandal similar to the North Carolina SBI Crime Lab. However, the response from their scandal was for the crime lab to be replaced with the Houston Forensic Center which is an independent lab. Texas has also created an influential science commission that in 2016, rendered bite mark evidence, a type of junk science, inadmissible. Sandra told Radley that the more information an analyst gets from law enforcement officials, the more likely they are to produce a false positive. Good scientists know that cognitive bias is a threat and take precautions to keep it from corrupting their work. Many of Radley’s experts suggested the idea of a case manager to benefit labs. As analysts receive information such as race, a case manager, who would preferably have a scientific background could be the go between for analysts and law enforcement and would decide what information needs to be distributed to the analyst. Barbara A. Spellman, a professor of law, and former professor of psychology from the University of Virginia suggests that for every case of which there is forensic evidence could have three forensic evidence who would examine the evidence together. By lottery one would be the consultant to the plaintiff, one to the defendant, and one would testify at the trial. Radley mentioned that a few of his experts cited the Houston Forensic Science Center as the ideal model of an independent science driven crime lab. That lab has already implemented the case managers and the shield analysts from being able to expend any bias. Sandra suggests that labs should be transparent and all documents including accreditation and even budget reports should be posted on the website and easy to find. She also suggested independent labs across the board, not just for eliminating bias, but also because she’s learned that independence enables labs are able to be transparent without needing approval from law enforcement and they eliminate the appearance of pro-police bias. She says that having scientists (who are not affiliated with police) collect the evidence from crime scenes restores the public’s trust, especially in officer-involved shootings.Another of Radley’s experts is Fred Whitehurst who Priya spoke with about his personal experiences in the FBI Forensic Lab. He was the whistleblower in a scandal there and ultimately turned his experience into an organization to help whistleblowers. Whistleblowers should be protected so that they’ll be more comfortable coming forwards. ASCLD-LAB had reporting protocols that involved using your own name and handwriting your complaint so that it essentially discouraged anyone from coming forward and “tattling”. Fred and a gentleman named John Lentini, another one of Radley’s experts in fire and arson – they were in complete agreement: suggesting that analysts be held accountable if their expert opinions led to a wrongful conviction. John also suggested that prosecutors be held accountable for intentional Brady violations - which is where prosecutors are required to hand over any and all evidence that could potentially exonerate the defendant. John told Radley he wants the court to reverse the Connick v. Thompson decision so that prosecutors will be held accountable for these violations. As John Lentini told Radley, and perhaps this answers some of the questions about Brady violations. Priya said she’s all for prosecutors being held liable for their wrongdoings, but she had no idea what the Connick v. Thompson decision was, so she looked it up: apparently the Connick in this is Harry Connick Sr. - the father of Harry Connick Jr. And the Thompson in this case was John Thompson who, in the 80s, was charged - with another guy - for killing someone. And in this case, a fucking lot of fuckery happened.Including Connick allegedly withholding evidence that blood that was not the victim’s was found on or around the body - and that blood did not match John’s blood. John was innocent.John sued and won $14 million dollars a million for each year he was wrongfully imprisoned. But, you know, no one liked that - and nothing Priya read suggests this, but my theory is that John was a black man in Louisiana who was a shining example of a bunch of white prosecutors fucking up. So, his win was appealed. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court. And despite popular opinion that there were an awful lot of shenanigans in that case, the Supreme Court ruled in Harry Connick Sr.’s favor, and, well, prosecutors can legally withhold Brady materials. Obviously, Queen Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented in this case. Because of course she did.Prosecutors are almost immune when it comes to wrongdoing. They’re immune to civil cases and are rarely disciplined in cases of misconduct. An article written in March of 2019 looking into accountability for prosecutors in California, mentions that the CA State Bar rarely investigates prosecutors. They mention that a lack of resources may contribute to this. They looked at a study that found in California from 2004-2009 there were 707 instances where a judge found that a prosecutor committed misconduct. Only six of those resulted in a public sanction by the state bar. This problem isn’t isolated to California: in Massachusetts only two prosecutors were publicly disciplined between 1980 and 2016. There were at least 142 instances during that same period of time where a judge reversed a guilty verdict or dismissed charges due to prosecutor misconduct. Over 1,400 non-prosecutors have been disciplined in Massachusetts over the last 15 years. In Louisiana, the first professional sanction against a prosecutor didn’t occur until 2005. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo approved a bill in the spring of 2019 to set up the nations first independent commission to investigate reports of misconduct by prosecutors. The bill received support from many black and latinx democrats who saw it as an answer to systemic racism. The commission will be made up of 11 people who can investigate attorneys and determine whether their conduct is unprofessional or unlawful. Prosecutors have been fighting this and calling it unconstitutional, even filing suit against it. The article discusses the different types of unethical stuff prosecutors do and mentions that they have a “whatever it takes mentality”. The article also notes that when someone is accused of a crime they cease to be seen as a person by the legal system. It says that without plea bargaining our criminal system couldn’t process the nearly 11 million arrests that occur every year, and without misconduct way fewer people would plead guilty. We live in a culture that doesn’t trust defense lawyers. Marvin Schechter told Priya that people often ask him how he can defend guilty people to which he replies “how can I not defend innocent people?” Our system promises innocent until proven guilty but that doesn’t seem to be the case. The defense attorneys fight for that promise, but exonerees are left with broken promises from the system. They’re presumed guilty from the beginning and often are even after being exonerated. They deserve a public apology and the victims deserve a promise that the justice system will do everything they can to find the person actually responsible for the crime. Priya and Jess asked their experts if they had a “wis hlist” of reforms they would like to see. On Chris Mumma’s list was restrictions or controls on the use of jailhouse informants. In many of the cases this podcast has covered, jailhouse informants were used and were lying. The I Beverly Lake Jr Fair Trial Act was put up for a vote. It included concerns about the reliability of jailhouse informants and suggested that no one should be convicted based on the word of a jailhouse informant alone, there should be other corroborated evidence. Regulating the use of jailhouse informants should be done nationwide and Connecticut is currently doing work in this area. The new rules there include requiring pre-trial hearings on whether their testimony should be allowed and forcing prosecutors to disclose any deals with informants and their history of testifying in other cases. A bill was signed in July that will create the nation’s first statewide system to track the use of informants and the benefits they receive in exchange for their testimony. California, Connecticut, Oklahoma, and Utah all require juries to be given instructions to scrutinize informant’s testimonies. Also on Chris’ wish list was a more cooperative post-conviction review and resolution process and repercussions for prosecutorial misconduct. This item was on a few of their expert’s list. Kim Cook’s and Saundra Westervelt’s list includes that the state helps an exoneree readjust to life after exoneration. They suggest reparations for the exonerated person and their family, compensation within a reasonable about of time, expungement of the crimes for which they were convicted immediately upon release, access to healthcare including mental healthcare, free education and training for employment, assistance finding employment, and adjustments to social security, they also want officials and advocates to remember the harm done to the victims or family of victims at the heart of the original conviction case. They suggest reparations that may assist in their healing in the form of: time to ask questions about how this happened, answers to be provided by the judicial body overturning the conviction or someone in a position of authority who does not continue to maintain the exoneree’s guilt, an opportunity to meet the exonerated person if both parties agree, financial compensation to help with costs from the wrongful conviction, access to healthcare to assist with physical or emotional trauma, and extension of the statute of limitations for rape and sexual assault cases to allow the identification of the actual perpetrator. Priya goes a step further and says that the evidence should be preserved for a long time. This is especially true as it’s not always easy for survivors to come forward. Marilyn Miller said she would like to see the adoption of common sense standards set by The Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science (OSAC). The standards they set include minimum requirements, best practices, standard protocols, and other guidance to help ensure the results of the forensic analysis are reliable and reproducible. She would also like to see the accreditation of forensic science programs in higher education. Marilyn was also asked about some of the things she was grateful for. The standards set by OSAC is one of those as well as lawyers who understand the power of forensic science done properly and 25 years of cool students. The impact of the results of the audit will be felt for a long time as prosecutors and defense attorneys examine cases up to two decades old. Chris Mumma is still dealing with the reverberations today. In episode two we learned that the Center on Actual Innocence rejects 95% of the cases that come across their desk as they have to pass a series of rigorous tests. When Chris takes on a case, it means not only that there’s credible evidence that the individual is innocent but it seems to mean the individual is definitely innocent. When she takes on a case she completely dedicates herself to the case. Chris had been dealing with the SBI Crime Lab since 2006 and is still dealing with the repercussions of their misconduct. On May 5th 2008, a boater on the Catawba River in Mt Holly, NC called 911 after seeing a car that had run off an embankment and a body near it. When police arrived, they discovered the body of Ira Yarmolenko, a 20 year old UNC Charlotte student, lying dead next to her car. She had three ligatures around her neck and 100 yards down the embankment a man named Mark Carver and his cousin Neal Cassada were fishing. DNA found microscopic skin cells that “matched” Mark in Ira’s car. This is touch DNA which is really unreliable because it’s something you could leave just by picking something up in the store. Mark and Neil were charged with the murder of Ira and ultimately placed under house arrest. Being charged with a murder you didn’t commit sounds like it would be extremely stressful, so it’s not that big of a surprise that the night before his trial, Neil had a heart attack and died. Prosecutors offered Mark a deal where he would get four to eight years in prison, and, as he was innocent, he turned down their offer and the case went to trial. Like we’ve seen before, the defense thought the case was really weak and didn’t bother to provide any evidence. At this point, it was 2011 and the 230 cases from the audit had happened but that was evidently not enough for the defense attorneys to be diligent. A year earlier there had been a publication of updated guidelines that were relevant to the evidence reported at the trial. Had the DNA testing been reported at the trial, none of it would have been reported as matching Mark but instead he was sentenced to life in prison. Chris Mumma took on Mark’s case in 2013 and after a number of delays, the hearing began last spring. On April 8th, 2019, former SBI Special Agent Mark Booty testified. He said that in the lab in 2010 everyone was panicked about the audit report that had just come out but inexplicably inside the lab, agents were ignoring scientific advancements that could have helped Mark. He told the court that they were trying to save their jobs and that they weren’t focused on science at the time. A couple of years prior to the trial, Chris Mumma pointed out the similarities between Mark and Greg’s cases where the biggest reason for the conviction was proximity to a dead body. Priya says that, on a personal note, it was great watching the headlines over the summer because in June the judge set aside Mark’s case and he walked out of the courtroom a free man. However, he still has an ankle monitor and was not found not guilty. Mark will likely have to suffer through a new trial, but maybe justice will prevail and the charges will be dropped. Of course this means that after a decade, there has been no investigation into who actually murdered Ira. Mark and Neal have always been the only suspects so it’s likely that, as with Greg, there won’t be any investigation, meaning there will be no justice for the victim and her friends and family. There are many similarities between Greg and Mark’s cases including the minuscule evidence and offers of plea deals. Chris refers to Mark as her “Greg Taylor 2.0”. It was Greg’s case that sounded the alarm that something was drastically wrong in the SBI lab, which plunged the lab into chaos. The chaos that resulted in no one paying attention to the evidence that could have cleared Mark and his cousin. Chris says that it’s almost ironic that the exoneration of one of her clients could have lead to the wrongful conviction of another. In Radley Balko’s articles that were referenced earlier, Judy Melenik suggested that if the courts are following the laws placed before them by legislatures then it’s time to find legislatures who are serious about criminal justice reform and who are ready to pass laws that fund forensic labs and require the legal system to give the wrongfully convicted another chance at overturning those convictions and seeking retribution. Jess and Priya advises us that DAs are elected officials and that the best thing we can do is "vote the F’d Up people out”. To close the podcast, the F’d Up crew share their final thoughts on what they’ve covered this season. Keith says that in doing this podcast he’s been most surprised about the justice system’s willingness to pick and choose evidence to which Priya says that they don’t treat someone as innocent until proving guilty. It’s more like they decide the person is guilty and just work towards proving it. When asked what reform she would like to see since doing this podcast, Jess said for her it’s that the prosecutors are held accountable. Priya says that that’s also a huge deal for her and that behind the scenes of doing the podcast she’s learned that you have to be very clear in asking for a lawyer. You can’t say something like “I may want a lawyer now” you have to clearly invoke your right for a lawyer, and she wants more people to know that. In closing they want us to know the most important thing we can do to help is vote.
Acronyms are F’d Up P. 2RecapWritten by Brandi AbbottContinuing from where the last episode left off, George Goode - who was sentenced to death after being convicted of murder - was thankfully granted an additional hearing in 2004. Judge Jenkins, who had filed the complaint against Attorney Diane Savage, recused himself, and Goode’s case was heard by a new judge. Diane obtained the SBI lab notes which revealed that the alleged blood on George’s coveralls was actually grease. Not blood. The case file didn’t include a confirmatory test of the “invisible” blood on George’s boots. DNA testing revealed that profiles were obtained, but it was most likely due to a transfer. All of the evidence from George’s case was crammed together in a bin, including the bloody tailgate from the victim’s truck and the clothes worn by George’s brother and friend which were covered in the victims’ blood. An article from the Winston-Salem Journal stated that DNA testing wasn’t part of the original case against Goode and that, before the hearing, the state asked to have George’s coveralls, which had tested negative for blood in 1992, retested. This time, blood from both of the victims was found, most likely because they had been in a bin with other objects covered in the victims’ blood.People in the scientific community were shocked by this mishandling of evidence. Some said they might have tested George’s coveralls or boots but would have done control tests and reported the likelihood of contamination. The SBI Crime Lab did not run control tests. They had one of their fiber experts examine the coveralls with a microscope. He concluded that the stains were blood that had soaked into the garment at the time of the crime, but he never used chemicals to confirm that the substance he was examining was actually blood. The deputy director of the SBI’s Crime Lab at that time, William Weis, told the Winston-Salem Journal that what another lab would do in a case described to them may be completely different than what they would do, as the SBI Crime Lab are looking at the evidence and the others are not. He said he believed they should rely on the evidence presented in court. The issue with that way of thinking, is the confirmatory tests were not included in the evidence presented, therefore the evidence presented in court is misrepresented. You may remember from the last episode, Deaver said he hadn’t done a confirmatory test on George’s shoes, which was suspicious and out of character for him. At the trial, he referred twice to the “blood” he found as if he were sure that’s what he had found, and during the hearing, the DA said that they had proved George was “literally up to his ankles in the blood of both victims.” Diane rhetorically asked The Journal how a prosecutor could say someone is up to their ankles in blood if there was never a test for blood. She was extremely upset about everything happening, and she and other attorneys lodged complaints with ASCLD LAB.Complaints to ASCLD LAB in 2011 needed to be submitted in writing. All complaints of labs were to be directed to their executive director, Ralph Keaton, and receipts of the complaint would be confirmed within 20 days. However according to Marvin Schechter, the New York attorney Priya spoke with, there was no procedure for follow up with these complaints. The complaint ends with an ASCLD LAB board vote. If 2/3 of the vote can’t be reached, the case is dismissed, and the complainant must be notified.On October 5th, 2004, Diane sent a few letters of complaint about the SBI to Ralph Keaton. She’d called and had a conversation with him and was directed to put her complaints in writing. She wrote one letter detailing everything about George Goode’s case and in another letter mentions that the phenolphthalein test used out of date chemicals. She then wrote about Brenda Bissette’s testimony. Bissette swore under oath that she’d had no knowledge of how the evidence had been stored, but Diane showed Brenda photos of her standing directly next to the evidence in the bin, and she corrected her testimony on the witness stand. This was not the first case Marilyn Miller had encountered Bissette co-mingling evidence on. In the evidence for George’s case, there was a pair of pants with blood in different areas. The cuttings from each area were all packed together in one evidence bag, leaving great potential for cross contamination. This should have rendered the cuttings inadmissible. Diane wrote in her complaint that SBI Crime Lab Deputy Director Jerry Richardson stated that he knew nothing of the condition of the evidence’s packaging, that it was Bissette’s responsibility, and admitted that Bissette saw the evidence before it went to the lab.In 2009, a judge reprimanded SBI Blood Stain Pattern Analyst, Duane Deaver, for misleading the jury in George’s case by referring to the substance on George’s clothes as blood as if it were fact. After the audit in 2010, Diane wanted a new trial for George, especially since he had been mentioned in the audit. George was not given a new trial but was given a resentencing hearing where it was determined he’d had ineffective council in the original hearing. His sentence was reduced from death to life in prison. All of the money wasted by an innocent man being on death row for 20 years could have been spent a multitude of ways that would actually help the community. They could have even used it to retest old evidence with the newer science that’s become available since the initial trial. George Goode, with no evidence linking him to the murders, is still in prison to this day.There was no national database that kept track of labs that incurred infractions or were involved in scandals. Various newspapers had reported on 50 labs, 28 of which where ASCLD LAB accredited. Marvin Schechter’s memo cites 11 states where their lab failures encompass different forms: there were mistakes in the identification of fibers, destroyed blood samples, DNA contamination, failure to perform maintenance and calibration, mix up of key physical evidence, faking calibration dates, false credentials, and many more. Marvin cites the NC SBI Crime Lab as one of the worst in terms of failures. ASCLD LAB accredited that lab five times during the time all of these errors were being made. After the audit was released, ASCLD LAB issued statements basically amounting to “that was then, this is now,” which seems to be what we keep hearing. They also appointed a new president, although it’s unclear if it was related to the audit. The new president said that the confirmatory results that proved substances weren’t blood “weren’t hidden” and that they were “in the notes.” Oh sure. In the notes where no one could see them except the shady lab techs, definitely qualifies as “not hidden.” ASCLD LAB flat-out rejected that lab reports issued by forensic serologists were inaccurate, misleading, intended to hide information, and essentially chose to ignore the findings of the audit. Ignoring and finding no issue with all of the shoddy practices done by the SBI Lab only enables the potential for all of this to happen again.For the resentencing hearing in George’s case, Diane was working with an attorney named Bill Garrens. Bill had a special interest in this case because he had had his eye on Deaver since around 1989 when there was a murder case that Bill had been the defense attorney on. When interviewed for this podcast, Bill said the case was a brutal beating with a baseball bat to the victim’s head, and his client claimed he was a bystander. Deaver had been at the SBI Crime Lab for about four years at this time, and he knew he needed to do a reconstruction of the crime scene. Deaver went to a gymnasium, put up a sheet, put down something similar to parchment paper, put pumpkins on the parchment paper, grabbed a bat and “went to town.” Bill raised concerns about the science behind smashing pumpkins in 1989 and the judge agreed with him, refusing to show Deaver’s recreation in court. Two things to be noted are that concerns with Deaver had been brought up as early as 1989 and that Bill, as a male attorney who was not a Yankee, was allowed to criticize Deaver with no repercussions, while Diane faced disbarment when she did it. Also, according to the News and Observer, the reason it was ruled that George had had ineffective council, was because his attorney had not raised concerns about Deaver… the very thing Diane had been punished for doing.In the last episode, it was said that the executive director for ASCLD LAB, Ralph Keaton, wanted the headquarters to be in North Carolina because he lived there. Well, prior to joining ASCLD LAB, he was the assistant crime lab director of the NC SBI Crime Lab until 1995. In fact, he wasn’t the only former-SBI Crime Lab employee: there were two others, John Neuner and Michael Creasey. Keaton stated that they recused themselves from matters related to the NC SBI Crime Lab. However, every article Priya has read has comments from Keaton on the SBI lab. The News and Observer reported that around the time the audit was released or about to be released, he said that he didn’t think there was a large number of cases that had a miscarriage of justice and that the absence of evidence isn’t evidence of innocence. Neuner defended ASCLD LAB by saying they had suspended labs and put labs on probation, but he couldn’t say which ones because they don’t keep up with it. Neuner’s predecessor attributed the infrequency of suspensions or dismissals to the fact that labs accredited by ASCLD LAB are simply of “high quality.” This seems pretty unlikely, considering all of the mistakes coming out of the SBI Crime Lab, and how closely the staff of both ACLD LAB and the SBI Crime Lab commingled. In 2007, the serology unit was in trouble due to testing proficiency and was moved out from under the oversight of ASCLD LAB.Priya says that she’s of the opinion that Keaton and his cronies recommended that the SBI Crime Lab get the serology unity away from oversight. She implies it was a “real bro culture” out there and that judges protect DAs and analysts. That everyone was buddies who help each other out, leaving defense attorneys as the only people who are looking out for their client. If ASCLD LAB isn’t putting in proper procedures to make sure that the labs are operating as they should: in a manner designed to help carry out justice, it’s no surprise that injustices have happened. Jess says that it seems like ASCLD LAB was designed to prevent injustices but instead was perpetuating them. Ralph Keaton was the one to encourage Duane Deaver to start teaching classes at the SBI Crime Lab. So basically, the executive director of the accrediting body for the SBI Lab was responsible for getting their most public purveyor of fuckups started.Priya says one thing she’s noticed in all of her research is that Deaver was always by the book. He lied and cheated, but in a manner that was approved of by the SBI. There were two times he actively straight up lied. Once was in 2009 before the panel in Greg Taylor’s case. He claimed he hadn’t thoroughly reviewed the file and hadn’t lied on purpose. There’s credible evidence to support this as he approached one of the DA’s after the hearing and said that a confirmatory test had been done and it was negative. He was the person who let people know it was there. Priya’s conspiracy theory is that Deaver lied in 1997 at George Goode’s appeal when Diane asked about the confirmatory test and he said he didn’t do one. She says that in all of research she’s done on him and interviews and trials she’s watched or read, she’s noticed that he doesn’t tend to remember many of the cases he’s been involved with. The two he brings up regularly are Greg Taylor’s and George Goode’s. He often brings up George’s case, including in a 2013 deposition when he was fighting to get his job back. This case really sticks out to him and not doing a confirmatory test was really out of character. Priya thinks that even though withholding the results of confirmatory tests was sanctioned at this time, Deaver knew it was wrong. She thinks he did a confirmatory test, that he knew the results, they were in his written notes and that he guessed that Diane was going to ask about it. She thinks he brought this up to his superiors and was scared. She points out that around this time, a superior had ordered a lab tech to destroy evidence in Daniel Green’s case, and that it wouldn’t be a leap to think the SBI lab would be freaked out at the idea of a defense attorney asking for the results of that test - especially since 10 years later, people still didn’t know that they even did confirmatory tests. Priya thinks that the confirmatory test was done and the record of it was destroyed. As F’d Up has mentioned before, the practices in the SBI Lab were originally unwritten policy. Deaver’s superior sent out a memo saying if an initial test for blood and saliva was positive but confirmatory tests were not, they should say that evidence showed chemical evidence for their presence. And this is when this kind of reporting became written policy. Priya says she believes that the SBI Crime Lab covered up Deaver’s lie and made an entire policy to “really drill it home,” because they always looked out for their guys and themselves.Next episode is the finale and F’d Up will be exploring reforms, recommendations for change and one last F'd Up case.
Acronyms are F’d Up Pt. 1RecapWritten by Brandi AbbottIn 1992, George Goode was at his home with his brother Chris and friend Eugene DeCastro. The landlord, Leon Batton, came by for rent and a verbal fight broke out outside between Chris, Eugene, and Leon. George was still in his trailer. The argument escalated really quickly - to the point that Chris and Eugene attacked Leon physically and ultimately stabbed him to death. Leon’s wife, Margaret, got a call that someone was attacking her husband and she rushed over – Chris and Eugene turned their attention to her and inexplicably killed this poor woman as well. George who had remained inside for the entire altercation was in shock and terrified but Chris and Eugene snapped him out of it and all three men fled. For whatever reason, Chris handed Leon’s wallet to George at some point - so evidently they had robbed him as well. George was arrested very quickly, shortly followed by his brother, and Eugene the next day. As they had no time to pop home and take a shower or anything, Chris and Eugene were still covered in blood when they were picked up. George had absolutely no blood on him; and the SBI Crime Lab at the time even verified this, but a knife was found near where he was arrested and he had Leon’s wallet and somehow he was charged with murder. George’s trial began in 1993 when Duane Deaver was a young up and comer, and he testified at the trial that there was “invisible blood” on George’s boots. No one asked if this was his initial test or confirmatory test, because at that time, no one knew to ask. No one asked about the coveralls George was wearing which had been tested by a different analyst and received negative results because the defense didn’t have access to the files. George and Eugene were sentenced to the death penalty, whereas Chris received life in prison, but as he was actually covered in blood, we aren’t sure why he received a lighter sentence. Diane Savage, who has been mentioned a few times so far in the podcast, was born and raised in New York and a bit of a troublemaker. She was kicked out of her family home at a very young age, but she was scrappy and got a job in a lab to provide for herself. After a few years of working there, the lab workers decided to unionize and she helped them. She also helped with community organizing. Stuff like this was what she really enjoyed and wanted to continue helping others. She decided law school was the way to go, and got in to Georgetown. During her time in Washington D.C., she met her now husband who received a job opportunity in North Carolina, so they relocated. When she first arrived in NC, she was told by a local that she had “three marks against her”. 1. That she was a Yankee, 2. That she went to a fancy school and, 3. That she was a woman. Diane’s first case as an attorney in North Carolina was George’s appeal. As we learned in the last episode, if you’re sentenced to death row, you’re appointed two defense attorneys. He got Diane and Lisa Williams. As Diane was reading through the case file, she noticed that there wasn’t a record of confirmatory tests. She had hired forensic expert, Marilyn Miller, and also had her lab background – and both women found the lack of secondary tests concerning. Note: This case was Marilyn’s first experience with Deaver and his shitty science. Phenolphthalein was the presumptive test that was used to confirm the alleged blood on George’s clothes. At the trial Diane questioned Deaver about his confirmatory tests, which were standard operating procedure in the SBI lab (even if reporting them was not), and Deaver claimed he didn’t do one. As evidenced throughout the podcast and in the Audit report, he always did a confirmatory test - so this was weird. The judge in this case didn’t like that Diane Savage was “living up to her last name”, according to Priya, and the DA didn’t like the way she was treating Deaver. According to Diane, Judge Jenkins told her that she engaged in character assassination and maligned elected public officials. He also told her that if she were correct about Duane Deaver, a grand jury should be convened and people prosecuted for perjury. Diane said that the judge struck the pleading over what she said about Deaver and she would have to start over again. He also took what’s called judicial notice to basically declare as “fact” that Duane Deaver was great. To further prove his point, he reported Diane to the state bar for discipline. She was investigated and removed from her cases.Thankfully, she was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing. Priya pointed out that this was in 1997 and if people had listened to Diane then, they may have been able to shave 13 years off of a lot of people’s sentences and maybe even saved some lives (see: Death Row is F’d Up). ASCLD LAB was the only agency that had accredited the SBI Crime Lab as of 2010, and as the News and Observer stated, had missed all of the problems. They should have been aware of all of the mess the SBI had been concocting and should have stopped it. ASCLD LAB stands for The American Society of Crime Lab Directors Laboratory Accreditation Board, is not to be confused with ASCLD which is just the American Society of Crime Lab Directors. Confused yet? I sure am. As F’d Up has discussed, the NCSBI Crime Lab is closely intertwined with prosecutors and ASCLD LAB is much the same. ASCLD LAB HQ was located in Johnston County, NC - which was in close proximity to the executive director’s home. In 2016, ASCLD LAB joined forces with an organization named ANAB, which stands for ANSI-ASQ National Accreditation Board. The hidden acronym in that one stands for American National Standards Institute- American Society for Quality. If your acronym is so long, it needs its own acronym, you have a problem. After the merger, ASCLD LABS and ANAB became just ANAB. When ASCLD was formed in 1974, their early goals were to address a quality control for labs and their practices, and it was decided that accreditation was the way to go. As ASCLD was not an accrediting body, ASCLD LABS was formed in 1982. Labs accredited by ASCLD LAB must be up to their standards and willing to be re-inspected on site every five years. The process for accreditation includes a tech or supervisor selecting at least five cases for review, which basically means the lab can pick whichever cases they want to be reviewed - and would obviously select their best cases. If a lab is found to be non-compliant, they have the opportunity to correct the issue. At some point after the audit, Chris Swecker told the News and Observer that it was thought that ASCLD LAB was infallible and it was surprising to him that they hadn’t gotten a better sense of what was going on in the SBI Crime Lab for all of those years. It was surprising to only him however, as the labs always knew that ASCLD LAB was coming for a review and were allowed to cherry-pick cases. According to a few articles, the SBI has repeatedly had to fix policies or correct cases in order to pass, but they always did pass and remain in good standing with ASCLD LAB. ASCLD LAB is quoted as saying that they often bend over backwards to help labs pass because they want them to pass. A defense lawyer Priya spoke with, who is part of the New York State Commission of Forensic Science, named Marvin Schechter wrote in a memo in 2011 that ASCLD LAB could more accurately be described as a product service organization that sells a seal of approval for a fee. This is something labs can use to bolster their credibility.Marvin Schechter was in his office in New York when he got a call from a friend in D.C. that a commission was being formed to identify needs from forensic science. They wanted a well-rounded committee of lawyers, scientists, and judges with different perspectives of the needs of forensic science. They were missing a defensive attorney and Marvin’s friend recommended him. With this commission, he coauthored the National Academy of Science’s 2009 report titled “Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward”. This report was a 350-page look at forensic science that identified the needs of the forensic science world and made recommendations to the forensic science community. One thing that the report didn’t look at was accrediting entities for forensic labs in the countries. People like Marvin began getting concerned about these entities, such as ASCLD LABS, because they seemed to have no concern about the blatant wrongdoing in the labs. He wrote a memo to the New York State Commission in March of 2011 that was a detailed analysis about ASCLD LAB and forensic laboratory accreditation which is what inspired Priya to reach out to him for F’d Up. What she learned from speaking to him was that around the same time as the audit and everything going on in NC after Greg Taylor’s exoneration, the SFPDCL (San Francisco Police Department Crime Lab) were garnering attention. A tech in the drug testing area had been stealing cocaine from the lab for personal use, and in May of 2010, the drug testing section was shut down. A whistleblower sent a letter in 2008 to a public defender and a letter in 2009 to ASCLD LAB revealing that there had been a DNA test tube mess-up by a tech that was covered up by a supervisor. In July of 2009, ASCLD LAB sent a letter to that supervisor who denied knowing anything about it. After investigating, verifying that there was a mixup, and finding out the files had been destroyed in an attempted cover-up, ASCLD LAB accredited that lab for another five years. In 2009, the NYSIG (New York State Inspector General), issued a report that mentioned the SDPDCL and its issues. It also mentioned a tech in the NYSPFIC (New York State Police Forensic Investigation Center) had fabricated fiber analysis evidence which occurred while the lab was being accredited by ASCLD LAB. A guy named Jay Jarvis who was on the ASCLD LAB board of directors, referred to this report in an article he had written, meaning they were aware of these issues. The gist of the excuses thrown around over these fuckups is that it’s “one guy in one lab”, but it’s not. There’s a pattern of, at minimum, gross negligence and at most, intentional lying. Duane Deaver is usually named in relation to the disaster that is the SBI Crime Lab and their audit, but as we’ve learned, he wasn’t the only one fucking up, just the one most often blamed. As you may remember, the NAS report in 2009 recommended that lab employees have a science background in biology or chemistry. And… Peter Duane Deaver graduated from North Carolina University with a degree in zoology in 1984. On December 1st, 1985, Deaver was hired by the SBI to work in the serology section of the SBI Crime Lab. Deaver attended the SBI Academy in March of 1986 and worked his first serology case in 1988. At that time a man named Mark Nelson was in charged of the serology department. In 2010, Deaver was involved with 50 of the 230 cases in the audit. When the audit was released, he was suspended with pay and advised that he was the subject of an administrative investigation. In January 2011, he was officially fired. One reason behind this was that he was asked to look over some evidence during his suspension in October of 2010 which was sanctioned by the SBI, but in late October, without permission, he assisted a criminal profiler with writing a complaint related to the case. He asked for his name to be taken off of this complaint as he wasn’t suppose to be working on it while on leave, but removing his name wasn’t legal.Another reason was on September 3rd of 2009, Deaver told the IIC that there was no further testing in Greg Taylor’s case, but there had been. The last reason was his unprofessionalism in saying “that’s a wrap baby” at the end of the video where Gerald Thomas was trying to “shore up” evidence in Kirk Turner’s case. About a month after being fired, he met with SBI Director McLeod in an attempt to get his job back but was denied. He appealed his firing and the case went before the State Human Resources Committee. He claimed that he didn’t perjure himself at trial because he rushed through the file quickly in the car right before the hearing. He defended his performance in the video by claiming he didn’t know the sound would be on in the video. He presented the video he did with Suzi Barker in the Peterson case where she jumps up and down and pointed out that she was only reprimanded, whereas he was he fired. Essentially, everything Deaver had done was being done by everyone in the SBI Crime Lab. His lawyer brought up the fact that Deaver was the scapegoat for the SBI. Getting rid of him was a way to put the public’s mind at ease. The State Human Resources Commission came to the conclusion that the lesser disciplinary action of being demoted with a reduction in his salary would have been appropriate for Deaver. They noted, however, that on July 16th, 2013 Deaver was found to have presented false or misleading evidence for the Michael Peterson case and that would have been grounds for firing. Deaver was unfired in November of 2014 and reinstated into his previous position with two years of backpay and “all of the other benefits of continuous state employment”. He was fired again the same day he was unfired with a backdate of July 16th, 2013 which was the day his misconduct in the Michael Peterson case came to light.Meanwhile, Suzi Barker is still employed with the SBI and Gerald Thomas has climbed the ladder to almost the top of the SBI. Essentially, as F’d Up has been saying this whole time, Duane Deaver isn’t the only problem, there are problems in labs all across America. Next week’s episode will delve more into those, more acronyms, the rest of George Goode’s case, and some tinfoil hat theories about Duane Deaver.
Death Row is F’d Up RecapWritten by Brandi AbbottA truck driver named Allen Ray Jenkins was found murdered in his home on April 14th 1995. He had been shot at close range with his own shotgun. Two teenage girls admitted to being in his home at the time of his murder and claimed that a man named James Alan Gell, who goes by Alan, was the murderer. The SBI Special Agent Dwight Ransom and the Chief of Police locked on to Alan pretty immediately. Witness claimed to have seen Jenkins alive after the 3rd of April, but the police needed him to have been killed on the third for reasons that will be covered in a bit, so they pretty much coerced the witnesses into changing their statements to say they were unsure of when they last saw him alive. The police arrested Alan on August 1st 1995, and he was charged with first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit murder, armed robbery, and conspiracy to commit robbery. The girls testified at his trial saying that he had committed the murder, and Alan was convicted and sentenced to the death penalty. Because Alan wasn’t well off financially and had received the death penalty, the state had to supply him with two public defenders. Also, a law was enacted where they had to be supplied with the entire case file, whereas that wasn’t true for pre-convictions. Defense attorneys James Comey and Mary Pollard began working Alan’s case in 2002 and found the original witness statements wherein the witnesses said they had seen Jenkins alive after April 3rd which raised a lot of red flags. They brought in Marilyn Miller to help with this case and she went to the crime scene and examined the evidence and photographs from the crime scene. The bloodstain patterns were initially analyzed by an SBI Special Agent named Dennis Honeycut who was NOT a bloodstain pattern analyst. If he had been trained in bloodstained pattern analysis, like Marilyn, he would have been able to tell that the blood stain patterns did not match up with the girls’ story about where Alan and Jenkins had been standing. They changed their story six different times, getting closer and closer to what the police needed each time. The attorneys also called a professor of entomology who was able to determine that based on the maggots in Jenkins’ body, he died on April 8th, 9th, or 10th, but definitely not April 3rd. The reason the April 3rd date was so important to the investigators was because Alan had ironclad alibis for the 4th ‘til when Jenkins’ body was found. In 2002, Alan’s conviction was vacated and he had to be retried in the murder of Alan Ray Jenkins. Alan’s defense team at the retrial included Mary and James, but also Joe Cheshire and Brad Bannon who were Kirk Turner’s defense attorneys. After another two years, Alan was acquitted of all charges on February 18th, 2004.The death penalty has been around at least since 18th century BC. King Hammurabi had about 25 different crimes that were punishable by death, and 5th century BC Rome would carry out the death penalty by crucifixion, drowning, beating, burning alive, or impalement. England in 16th century AD incorporated more methods including hangings, beheadings, burning at the stake, and drawing and quartering. Crimes punishable by death included: treason, not confessing to a crime, and more. The first known execution in North Carolina was a Native American man in 1726, likely in the form of a public hanging. Public hangings were treated more like a party than an execution and entire families would travel to attend, possibly with a small feast prepared. By 1910, the State of NC took charge of executions, whereas before, they were handled locally. There seemed to be a need for consistency and a more humane method, so the state decided that the electric chair would be less painful than hangings, and then in the 1930s replaced the electric chair with the gas chamber. In 1972, the US Supreme Court ruled the death penalty as cruel and unusual punishment and ruled that the jury would be able to use their discretion when imposing the death penalty. North Carolina enacted a law in response that certain crimes would be mandatory for certain crimes - which led to 120 condemned inmates. Four years after that, the US Supreme Court overturned the mandatory death penalty laws and those 120 condemned inmates had their sentences vacated, commuted, or were re-sentenced to life in prison. By 1977 in NC, the death penalty was reintroduced for first-degree murder. The 80s and 90s were a time recognized as “tough on crime” across the entire US and harsher punishments were handed out more freely. Between the years of 1984 and 2006, 43 people were executed in North Carolina. On October 29th, 1988, North Carolina officially made lethal injection the soul method of execution. Alan Gell’s removal from death row and ultimate acquittal warranted a review of how death penalty cases were pursued by law enforcement. They should have taken the death penalty off of the table until they could review what happened in Alan’s case. There have been nine people acquitted from death row in North Carolina, and the chances are high there are still innocent people on death row in that state today. In 2003, Senator Eleanor Kinnaird proposed a bill to create a two year study on capital sentencing along the economic, geographical, and racial lines but the bill didn’t make it past the NC House of Representatives. On August 18th, 2006, Samuel Flippen was the last person to be executed in North Carolina, and since then there has been a hiatus on executions in the state for various reasons. In 2014, a Wake County Superior Court Judge named Donald Stevens blocked the use of lethal injection in the state, finding that method to be cruel and unusual. This means that people who are still on death row in North Carolina, most of which have been there since the 90s, get to spend every day wondering whether or not the state will eventually kill them. Alan Gell spent nine years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit, six of which were spent on death row. F’d Up wanted to try and understand what those six years looked like. They went to the website of The Department of Safety to see how they describe death row. According to the website, there are two facilities, one for men and one for women and each one provides a day room. Inmates can spend their time in the day room or their cells, all of which are all single cells. Each cell includes a bed, a sink, a toilet, and a wall mounted writing desk. The day room includes tables, a TV, and showers at the end of it. Two days a week inmates can go for a supervised jog or play basketball. All in all, sounding like a summer camp so far. The website warns, that if a death row inmate violates prison regulations, they may be placed in a cell block segregated from death row. However, a report by the ACLU “Called a Death Before Dying” reports that inmates are locked in their cells for 22-24 hours a day with little human contact, lack of natural light, and severe constraints on visitation. The Center on Death Penalty Litigation is a non-profit organization that provides legal representation to death row inmates. Gretchen Engle, their executive director who’s been with the center since 1992, described being on death row as a harsher punishment than serving a life sentence. She told NC’s public radio that work and education opportunities are limited, inmates can only talk to lawyers or loved ones on the phone or through protective glass, and that it’s more isolating for women as there are only three there. Inmates spend their days waiting for their sentences to be reduced or to be executed. All of this can have extremely adverse affects on mental and physical health and there are very few resources provided to combat these affects. Death Row is populated with living breathing human beings, a lot of which committed the same or similar crimes as people who are NOT on death row. Advocates for the death penalty claim that it’s an effective deterrent for heinous crimes - which is untrue. It’s also used as a bargaining tool by law enforcement and prosecutors. The death penalty as a bargaining tool was examined in a study, which says that because prosecutors have the ability to determine how someone is charged, they often choose first-degree murder as it allows for the death penalty, Apparently, all a prosecutor has to do is go before a judge and show that there are aggravating factors present. The study reveals that people who have spent months in jail under the possibility of being tried capitally, are more likely to plead guilty in hopes to avoid the death penalty. The study states that while death sentences have decreased in North Carolina, capital charges have not. Also according to the study, there has been at least one wrongful capital prosecution in North Carolina every year since 1987. This study showed that prosecutors are charging the maximum penalty for negotiating in their weakest cases. Prosecutors also have complete immunity from misconduct and face no repercussions or accountability. The study learned that the state spent nearly 2.4 million dollars in defense costs to pursue these failed capital cases. Since 2006, 16 convicted murderers have been sent to a death row that isn’t executing people. The state had made some reforms and recognized the impact of mental illness, coerced confessions, and incompetent public defenders. Death Row supporters, however, are critical of the delays and want the executions to happen. Some are obviously eager for the state to begin killing human beings again. Ken Honeycutt is a former prosecutor who use to celebrate new death row convictions by gifting his assistant prosecutors with lapel pins shaped like nooses. Friendships are developed by people on death row, as these people are who you spend your days with, and you have a big thing in common: You’re facing certain death. Alan Gell formed a close friendship with a man named Desmond Keith Carter. Alan believed that Desmond’s case warranted another look and begged his attorneys to help his buddy when Alan was taken off of death row. This was before the SBI Crime Lab audit, and while Alan’s case was not listed on there, Desmond’s was. Duane Deaver had been the analyst in Desmond’s case, and according to the audit, his testing confirmed the presence of blood despite a negative result. Desmond confessed to the crime. It’s completely possible that Desmond’s confession was coerced using this blood “evidence”, but it’s also possible that it wasn’t, as there’s no way to know for sure. Desmond’s attorneys weren’t experienced in capital cases. Priya says she personally believes Alan’s assessment of the situation and that Desmond’s case deserves to be looked into. She says that if we depend on jailhouse informants for negative testimonies, why can’t we depend on them for positive testimonies as well?There were a lot of people who believed in the importance of getting Desmond off death row including the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty who wrote a public plea for his life that examined his upbringing and substance abuse. Desmond may have been self medicating due to coming from a broken home, and became addicted to alcohol and drugs. His grandmother tried to get him help, but he was rejected due to lack of health insurance. A couple of weeks after this is when he may have ended up in his alleged victims home, though it’s unclear if there is evidence linking him to the victim. On that day he had been drinking, smoking crack, and using tranquilizers, and allegedly went to the victims home seeking money for more drugs. The plea for his life says the death penalty won’t stop the cycle of violence linked to poverty and oppression because it fails to address the roots of the crisis. Desmond also didn’t have the money for an attorney and was appointed one named Doug Hux who had previously reprimanded by the state bar. The plea states that capital defenders are the ones most often reprimanded. The ACLU published a fact sheet called “Race and the Death Penalty” that said that impoverished people who go through the death penalty are regularly represented by ineffective council who are underpaid and overworked which affects people of color the most. The plea references a 2001 study conducted by the University of North Carolina that illustrates the racial divide between both the race of the defendants and the race of the victims. Of the people on death row, 82% of them had cases involving white victims. Race also comes into play with sentencing. Desmond was a black man who was convicted of killing a white woman. Black people represent about 20% of people in North Carolina, but there are 78 black people on death row, 52 white people, and others who are Native American or identified as “other”. The numbers are disproportionate and do not mean that black people commit more crimes, what they mean is that the system is broken and needs to be fixed. Priya says that one step towards that is unbiased science.People started seeing the giant problem with racial bias in the criminal justice system, and with the help of Darryl Hunt, the Racial Justice Act was enacted in August of 2009 that allowed death row inmates to challenge their sentence if they believed it was impacted by racial bias. This also covered people being currently tried. They can show evidence demonstrating that race was a factor in their case during sentencing. This can be done in three ways: evidence that the death penalty was sought or imposed more frequently in the case of one race more than others, evidence that the death penalty was sought or imposed more frequently on behalf of victims of one race more than others, or evidence that race was a significant factor in decisions to exercise peremptory strikes during jury selection. You may have thought that if you were tried it would be by a jury of your peers, however the 6th amendment only refers to a person getting an impartial jury, but nothing about them being your peers. White men used to be the only people allowed to serve on juries – it’s still kind of that way today. In 2010, two associates professors of law at Michigan State University did a study on racial bias in jury selection in North Carolina. They looked at a number of factors in the jury selection progress and found that prosecutors excused eligible black members as jurors at a significantly higher rate than other races and that this was even higher in cases involving black defendants. At that time in North Carolina, of the 160 people on death row, 31 of them had all white juries at their sentencing and 38 had predominately white. North Carolina is one of the few states who don’t pay their jurors for jury duty. Some employers allow you to use sick time or vacation time, but that’s not always an option. Judges will often excuse a person from jury duty if it’s going to be a significant financial burden, but often those that are excused are people of color in poverty. These are usually the people that a defendant needs on their jury, and this could be fixed by the judged ordering employers to pay or it becoming federal law to do so. In December of 2012, three defendants successively appealed their sentences under the Racial Justice Act and got their sentences reduced to life without parole. The case was appealed by the state and was overturned, but in 2018, the case was appealed again and their sentences were reduced again. When their cases were heard in 2018, they were reheard retroactively because some white Republicans worked to rewrite, then successfully repeal, the Racial Justice Act.One of the seven people listed in the audit that had been sentenced to death row, Patricia Jennings, was resentenced after the report was released and moved from death row to general population after 23 years. All of the usual things an exonerate experiences like continued PTSD, reintegration, depression, struggling with loss of relationships etc… are experienced by a death row exoneree and more. Kim and Saundra spoke with an exoneree who lived with the fear of being strapped in and killed every single day who didn’t want to put his seatbelt on his lawyer’s car because of the trauma associated with being strapped in. Another person Kim and Saundra spoke with compared their experience to an open wound because they never stop hurting and another said they struggle with detachment even seven years after his release. There’s a dehumanization to being placed on death row - Alan Gell says society has to perceive them as monsters because to perceive them as human beings, it wouldn’t be acceptable to execute them. He says “you have to take the humanity away for the death penalty to be okay.” The effort to dehumanize can start during the investigation and might be seen during sentencing. A man named Greg Wilhoit told Kim and Saundra that during his sentencing the judge said “We will kill you by lethal injection, and if that fails we’ll kill you by electrocution. If the power goes out, we will hang you. If the rope breaks, we will take you out back and shoot you.” For a person on death row, there are additional issues that a person in prison may not face. There’s a survivors’ guilt when the people they’ve made friends with get taken away for their execution, or if they’re exonerated for leaving people behind on death row.Prior to his release, Alan Gell struggled with disillusionment when his lawyer discovered evidence that would eventually exonerate him. A video of one of the teenage girls talking to her boyfriend about the story she was going to fabricate was never given to Alan’s initial defense attorney. On top of this was the witness statements and altered witness statements and the whole time, he’s struggling to understand why none of this was brought up at his trial. Alan was happy when he got out but then was slapped with the reality if it all and wanted to know where the evidence had gone. He said that he believed for years that the girls manipulated the system and the system didn’t know any better. He said he still found it discouraging that he was the 113th mistake. The 113th person exonerated from death row. Once he was free, he had a hard time with women because of the circumstances that got him on death row. He thought he may be betrayed again. However, he reconnected with an old girlfriend after getting out of prison. Jess says perhaps it was easier to trust her because he knew her before and that she was the same woman he had been dating when he cheated on her with one of the two teenagers who accused him of murder. They reconnected and fell in love and got married. Prior to the wedding she joked that he better not cheat on her again because “remember what happened last time” which is super dark but Jess says probably is the type of humor they can share. The couple recently had a baby. Priya found an execution procedure manual from the North Carolina Central Prison where men on death row reside. The first step is setting an official date, then the order of the execution, then a week before the execution the prisoner is placed on deathwatch status. One to three days before the execution, the condemned prisoner is transferred to the deathwatch area -where they are closely monitored by an officer. The “execution team members” include a licensed physician, two registered nurses, two paramedics, and seven correctional custody personnel - who the manual describes as executioners. These people are all hired by the warden and must possess a willingness to participate and be of sound mind. There are rehearsals of the execution process around every other month or so. The condemned prisoner will have to have a medical personal identify veins and potential problems with access to them. There are two groups of syringes on hand, one to be used as a backup if the first group doesn’t work. The prisoner will be placed on a gurney and a roll of gauze will be placed into each of the prisoner’s hands - which are then taped to prevent them from trying to stop the execution. The condemned prisoner can give last words after all of the IVs are in place and the warden will call the Secretary of Public Safety to make sure there have been no changes. Post-execution the body will be transferred to the medical examiner’s office who will establish cause of death and arrange for transportation to a funeral home if that’s what the next of kin wants or it will be disposed of by law. Immediately after the execution, the warden will hold a post-execution debriefing with the execution team members to discuss how it went. Priya says that at no point in the manual did she see anything about mental health care for the people who participated in the execution. She says there’s no way that participating in taking another human life wouldn’t have adverse affects. That even in the off chance that they are okay with it and know in their hearts that the person committed an awful crime and feels like they deserve this, what happens if they find out the person was innocent down the road? How would they feel if they had put Alan Gell to death or any of the other death row exonerees?There were seven people listed in the audit who were on death row or already executed. John Hardy Rose was one of these people and was executed on November 30th, 2001, nine years prior to the audit. A man named Joseph Timothy Keel was executed seven years prior to the audit on November 7th, 2003. Joseph’s attorney was interviewed about his client being on the list and said that that was the problem with the death penalty, that there were no do-overs and that they can’t go back and fix these errors. Patricia Jennings was mentioned earlier in the episode. There’s not a lot known about the remaining names on the report but their presence on it, almost certainly means that true justice wasn’t served. Their names were John Robert Elliott, Terry Lee Ball, and Chris Roseborro. Priya says she would call these seven cases resulting from the SBI’s crimes attempted murder, and three of them, actual murder. Desmond Keith Carter was scheduled to be executed on the day that Alan’s case was vacated. He had begged his lawyers to help Desmond, but at that point there was nothing they could do. On December 10th, 2002, Desmond Keith Carter was executed. The fuckery in the SBI Crime Lab resulted in those deaths and more as there are others on the list who died in prison. How did this lab get away for this as long as they did? The scope of the audit was limited to 1987-2003. That was 16 years wherein 230 cases where found, seven of which were death row cases. This is a lot for a crime lab who were accredited by ASCLD LAB. F’d Up will get into them and more on the next episode.
The Cost is F’d Up Part TwoRecapWritten by Brandi AbbottOn August 10th, 1984 the body of a woman who had been sexually assaulted and stabbed to death was found. A witness stated that he had seen the victim with a black man named Darryl Hunt the morning before she had been murdered. Another witness claimed they had seen her with another man who couldn’t have done it but then changed their statement to say they had seen her with Darryl after being pressed by the police. Darryl’s girlfriend was arrested for outstanding charges against her, but was most likely arrested so the police could get more information on Darryl. She told them that he had confessed to her that he had murdered the victim. Darryl maintained his innocence, but was tried for first degree murder. Many of the witnesses testified that he had either been seen with the victim or covered in blood, but he testified that he didn’t even know the victim. He was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. It’s possible that his jury was completely white but there are conflicting reports. One holdout on the jury prevented him from being sentenced to death.When Darryl was convicted, the black community was upset to say the least. The black community thought he was innocent, whereas the white community thought he was guilty. The case was extremely racially charged, even in prison because the victim was a young successful white woman. Darryl told Larry that he was a target for the skinheads. After five years in prison, Darryl’s conviction was overturned because it was revealed that the prosecutors presented Darryl’s ex-girlfriend’s statement, which she had recanted even before the trial. He was released on bond while he awaited a new trial and was offered a plea deal that if he just pled guilty he could have time served and not spend another day in prison. As he was innocent, he refused.Darryl was retried in front of all of all-white jury and, as well as the original witnesses, some jailhouse informants showed up to testify. Darryl was convicted for a second time and sentenced to life in prison. During all of this, the SBI had compiled a report that was thousands of pages long, but the trial court opted to not review it and the judge ordered it sealed so that no one would be able to read it. All requests from Darryl’s attorneys, Mark Rabil and Ben Dowling-Sendor, to get the report unsealed were denied. The attorneys requested DNA testing on a semen sample found on the victim because Ben found out that the SBI had more evidence than they were saying, including this sample. Prior to this, the SBI complained that the sample was too degraded to test. Darryl’s attorneys argued that there was witness tampering and evidence that the SBI was clearly concealing. The judge disagreed that there was anything shady going on, but allowed for testing of the semen sample.In October of 1994, the test results came back and Darryl was not a match to the sample. The victim’s mother begged for there not to be a third trial as she had already been through it twice. The judge refused to exonerate Darryl, saying the case was only somewhat weakened by this evidence, and believed that Darryl could still be guilty. Darryl’s attorneys appealed many times but were continuously denied.In February of 2003, Darryl was still in prison even though it had been 19 years since he was convicted and 10 years since he proved his innocence. Darryl’s attorneys requested that the semen sample be run through the state database and it got a match. The match was for a man named Willard Brown who confessed to the crime. He was allegedly in prison at the time of the murder, but according to the movie “The Trials of Darryl Hunt”, Mark Rabil found out he had been released prior to the murder. Mark also discovered that there may have been another victim who survived and the police may have coerced her into not pressing charges against Brown for some unknown reason and destroyed evidence of this crime. The DA tried to delay Darryl’s release because they were sure they had their man. However, with overwhelming evidence that he was innocent, Darryl was released from prison on December 24th, 2003. He had to go before a judge six weeks later and prove his innocence again, and Darryl Hunt was finally exonerated in 2004. He received a state payment of $300,000, and, when he sued the city of Winston-Salem, received a settlement of over 1.6 million dollars.Every case F’d Up has covered has been settled which Jess says protects the system and prevents it from having to admit culpability. The Innocence Project and Center on Actual Innocence makes a difference by showing law enforcement and the public that there are people in prison who are actually innocent, which will go a long way towards helping these injustices. Prosecutors will sometimes do press conferences saying they just didn’t have enough evidence which places doubt in the public’s eye about the exonerated. Kim Cook said that a public apology instead could go a long way. If you’re exonerated and return to where you once lived, the community may recognize you from the crime you were convicted of and not as someone exonerated from that crime. Saundra and Kim reference a woman who was wrongfully convicted of killing her child and exonerated. She returned to her hometown, but most people still believed she was a monster. Facing an accusatory community can be an added stressor, and extremely frustrating.The trauma of a wrongful conviction doesn’t just affect the exoneree, their family and loved ones are affected as well. According to a report called “Who Pays: The True Cost of Incarceration on Families”, the US spends 80 billion dollars to lock away more than 2.4 million people in jails and prisons. This has a huge impact on people who are “already stigmatized, penalized, and punished.” Unjust policy has created a legacy of collateral impacts that last for generations, especially in women, low income families, and communities of color. If a family is already struggling financially before a member goes to jail, the loss of income and court related costs can add up and create a financial hole. There are also charges for phone calls or emails with a prisoner, care packages, and costs related to visiting such as traveling or possibly lodging depending on how far away they are incarcerated. In short, outside of the costs of court fees and just losing their income, it’s going to cost you quite a lot just to communicate with your incarcerated love one. Also according to that report, families who are not able to speak with or visit their loved one are more likely to report experiencing negative affects on their health. The report says that these affects hit women and people of color the hardest deepening the societal divides that push many into the criminal justice system in the first place. Almost one in every four women and two in every five black women specifically are related to someone incarcerated. The system is set up to keep people of color down.It can take a year from being released to actually be pardoned and, as we learned last week, an exoneree must be pardoned to get the state allocated money. If an exoneree’s record is not expunged or sealed, it can be extremely difficult to reenter the work force. The question “have you ever been convicted of a felony” is a kind of a trick question to an exoneree because there’s not exactly a box to check for “yes, but I didn’t do it”. According to the Innocence Project, it can take three or four years for a criminal record to be expunged. This can affect more than jobs, as landlords may not want to rent to you after they run your background check, you can’t provide work history or credit history for a mortgage, and Section 8 housing doesn’t allow convicted felons. The system sets the exoneree up for failure, and they often can end up homeless which can lead the exoneree back on the path to prison.The article “How Private Equity is Turning Private Prisons Into Big Profits” states that “Poverty in particular perpetuates the cycle of incarceration while incarceration leads to greater poverty.’ Estimates say that nearly 40% of all crimes are a result of poverty, and the majority of incarcerated people are low income. Because of extremely problematic policies, by 1985 prisons in 34 states were under court supervision for violating constitutional rights of prisoners. President Ronald Reagan’s war on drugs had begun, leading to a steady influx of newly incarcerated American’s. Priya tells us that 1985 was around the time she lived in DC and that homelessness and gangs were on the rise. Her dad was a White House press photographer for UPI, and would walk past the homeless people at the gates of the White House, who President Reagan claimed didn’t exist. Her dad took a photograph of a homeless man there, started getting to know some of the regulars he encountered, and was, in general, taking really powerful photographs. One of the people he would speak to recommended he go to one of the homeless shelters. When he got there, the kids really wanted to play with his cameras so he taught them how to use them, and let them shoot photos. He noticed that their photographs were much lighter and had more hope than his own which were more serious and taken from an adult perspective. He ended up leaving UPI and started a non-profit called Shooting Back where kids would take photos, develop them, and he and some of the kids would travel the country educating others on the homeless situation. This program helped kids steer clear of getting involved in gangs, Priya says she remembers that one of the kids who wasn’t in the program for very long ended up being a victim of murder but she’s unsure of it was gang related but that considering the climate, it’s possible it was. She remembers that another kid who went through the program sent her dad an email a few years ago thanking him for helping him stay out of prison, because he’s certain that’s where he would have ended up. She says the cycle can be broken and arts education can help. Reagan ended up recanting his statement on homeless people and Priya says she believes that the work of her dad and others contributed to that. She says that the reason she’s telling the story is that there were people, including her dad, at that time in the most powerful city in the nation trying to help but the government kept pushing forward with what was in front of their eyes instead of getting to the root of the issue.A woman named Bianca Tylek, the founder of an advocacy group called Worth Rises has cataloged 3,100 companies with a financial stake in mass incarceration. Jess says that incarceration is good for business, just terrible for people.In 2005, Darryl Hunt founded The Darryl Hunt Project for Freedom and Justice, a non-profit dedicated to educating people about criminal justice reform, advocating for the wrongfully convicted, and providing resources to individuals who were recently released from prison. A reporter from the local paper interviewed Darryl Hunt in 2014. It had been 10 years since his exoneration and he still felt the conditioning of prison. He would pause before doors and wait for them to automatically open. If he left the house, prior to his return, Darryl would drive to an ATM and withdraw money, simply to have his face photographed so that there would be a record of his movements. Darryl said he never left his home without fear of being picked up for something he didn’t do on his mind. He also said that he refused to celebrate the anniversaries of his exoneration. He recognized the miracle of it and was grateful for it, but said for others around him it would be a celebration but for him it would just be reliving it. The article says that Darryl’s attorney, Mark Rabil, and Darryl became extremely good friends. The racial divide had not ended with Darryl’s exoneration, if Darryl and Mark went out to dinner in a more black neighborhood, everyone knew and loved Darryl. However, if they went out to dinner in a more white neighborhood, it would be quieter as he didn’t know many people and some kept their distance. Priya said it’s interesting to her that some of the people they have covered have moved out of North Carolina. Not that anyone can blame them as I’m sure it’s a constant reminder of what happened and they’re surrounded by people who still only see them as a convicted felon. Darryl did not move, however. He said he stayed in Winston-Salem because it made people uncomfortable. If people had a constant reminder of the injustice he went through, maybe it wouldn’t happen again. Because he worked in justice reform, he would spend time in courtrooms. Mark Rabil said his face was a reminder to the people who put him away and that some DAs would cross the street to avoid him. When he walked into a courtroom, it would go quiet. In the same year Darryl was exonerated, he dedicated his life to justice reform. In addition to his non-profit, he worked with the Innocence Injustice Clinic at Wake Forest University School of Law where he helped people get their criminal records expunged and spoke publicly, allowing law students to ask him about his case. He joined the board of directors for the Center on Actual Innocence. He helped advocated for the Racial Injustice Act of 2009, which basically forbade race from being a factor in the pursuit of the death penalty. He was working non-stop and was the type who could never say no to the point of personal risk to his mental health. It was like he was paying something back. Priya says that all of this work was clearly taking a toll on him. Darryl’s friend Mark Rabil was quoted as saying “He was the voice of the voiceless who was wounded by 20 years of wrongful incarceration and taking on the burdens of so many people and fighting systems that can’t be changed in one lifetime.” On March 13th 2016, Darryl Hunt completed suicide.Darryl Hunt has an incredible legacy. In North Carolina, anyone over the age of 16 can be tried as an adult, and, if convicted, may not be eligible for financial aid in schools when they get out. Many people, guilty or not, want to do better when released and want to start with an education. Darryl told friends that education is the key to breaking the cycle of incarceration. In 2017, the Darryl Hunt Memorial Scholarship was set up to help provide tuition to those that had been convicted of crimes. Darryl’s legacy is amazing but it doesn’t change the fact that he died. His friend and lawyer Mark Rabil was the only constant in his life, as his own mother had been murdered and the case was never solved. Mark told the Winston-Salem Journal that 19 years of wrongful incarceration is what killed Darryl Hunt.Darryl got to taste freedom, at least for a moment. Next week’s episode will revisit the audit because not everyone got that chance. Seven of the cases on the audit’s list were sentenced to death and we’ll learn more about those cases and death row, itself.
The Cost is F’d Up - Part One Recap Written by Brandi Abbott Around 2015, a man named, LaMonte Armstrong sued the city of Greensboro, NC and three of its former cops after spending almost 17 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit. On July 12th, 1988 Ernestine Compton was found murdered in her home. The crime was publicized on Crime Stoppers, and an informant with a reputation for lying called in and said Mr. Armstrong was the killer. The police followed up on his statement, but at some point he recanted this and the case went cold. By 1992, the police had reason to suspect Christopher Caveness was involved. There was palm and fingerprint evidence at the crime scene so the SBI was brought in to match it to Caveness - but it wasn’t a match. The police had never let go of the idea that Mr. Armstrong had committed the murder, and the informant changed his story again, becoming the star witness in Mr. Armstrong’s trial. In 1995, Mr. Armstrong was convicted of murdering Ernestine Compton. In 2010, the informant recanted his statement again. The cops had failed to mention he was paid $200 and received a lighter or reduced sentence for another crime. The palm print was run again and actually did match Caveness, but by then, he had died in a car crash – not total justice for the victim. But, Mr. Armstrong received some semblance of justice when he was exonerated in 2012 - and the next step was to try and be pardoned, because apparently those two things are separate. Once you’re released, you have to submit an application to the Governor to basically reprove your innocence, then you have to wait until they decide whether to pardon you or not. Thankfully, Mr. Armstrong was pardoned in 2013; which meant he could then apply to receive money that the state sets aside for exonerees. The amounts vary from state to state but in North Carolina, an exoneree can receive up to $50,000 for every year that they spent in prison… though, they cap it at 17 years. There are people in our country who have been exonerated but not pardoned. Jess says that it makes sense that a state wouldn’t want to pardon someone as it admits culpability and they don’t want to pay someone hundreds of thousands of dollars. Mr. Armstong luckily received $750,000 from the state, but because of the severe injustice in his case, he was able to file a civil suit against the city of Greensboro and the three cops responsible for his conviction. The city hired 5 local lawyers to represent the cops in the suit, and as the trial dragged on into 2016, it was reported that the city spent $270,000 towards expenses for it. This meant that the city and state had spent over a million dollars for one wrongful conviction at that point. The city settled in 2016 and offered to pay Mr. Armstrong $6.42 million, as they should have. If someone goes to prison due to a wrongful conviction and mishandling of evidence, they obviously deserve some kind of compensation. If you’ve ever wondered where that money comes from however, the answer is that some can come from insurance but a large amount comes from taxpayers. Priya found a report written in 2015 called “Criminal InJustice”. This report is based on California statistics, not North Carolina, as a report like this seemed unprecedented, but the situations are similar. The report included cases in California where the defendant was convicted of a felony and the conviction was reversed between the years of 1989 and 2012 and the charges were dismissed or the defendant was acquitted on retrial. They examined 692 cases in total and 607 of the cases “illuminate a dark corner in California’s criminal justice system”. The defendants in these 607 cases spent a combined total of 2,186 years in custody. Many of these defendants filed lawsuits and received settlements as a result of the errors. 58 of the 607 people filed claims asking for compensations. At the time of this report’s publication, only 14 of these claims were granted, 36 had been denied, and some were still pending, despite all 58 having been credible. A total of five million dollars was awarded to the 14 defendants, and this fee would have been much larger for taxpayers if all 58 people had been awarded compensation. Looking at all 607 cases, the report estimates that the wrongful convictions cost taxpayers $221 million for prosecution, incarceration, and settlement. The remaining cases out of the initial 692 examined are referred to in the report as group exonerations as they were cases that had multiple defendants. The most prominent of these was the 2002 Rampart Police Scandal in which a group of LA police officers admitted to falsely arresting or accusing hundreds of mostly Latinx residents of various crimes, 228 of which received civil settlements. LA paid more than 70 million dollars in settlements related to that scandal, and the total cost has been reported as between 125 million and one billion dollars. The settlement costs includes payouts to three LAPD officers who had lost their jobs over the scandal, despite having not been involved. The total cost to California taxpayers for all 692 of these cases was more than 282 million dollars. This doesn’t include the cost of people who were arrested but never convicted which adds cost to taxpayers significantly. The money owed to Mr. Armstrong that wasn’t covered by insurance was to be paid by an increase in property taxes to Greensboro residents. Kirk Turner, who was one of two cases covered in this podcast where the accused was declared not guilty, recently won a $200,000 civil suit against the SBI. His case, however, cost the state way more than that. Greg Taylor sued and was awarded $4.6 million from the SBI. By 2013, the SBI and its insurers had paid about 16.4 million dollars between three wrongfully convicted men who spent a combined 40 years behind bars or in detention. Leslie Lincoln, the other case F’d Up covered where the accused wasn’t convicted, you may remember from episode three as having lost everything. She got a lawyer and tried to sue but the lawyer was lagging and doing nothing so she got a new lawyer. This one also dragged his feet on the issue, and ultimately the statutes of limitations ran out. Leslie suffers from PTSD and lives in section 8 housing. Jess says that her situation is more the norm than those who received millions of dollars. In 2012, when Mr. Armstrong was exonerated, there was about a year between when he was released and when he received his payout which Jess says is the case for any of the exonerated who are fortunate enough to be awarded a payout. Priya spoke to Saundra Westervelt and Kim Cook for this episode. Saundra is a professor emerita at UNCG and Kim is a professor of sociology and criminology at UNCW. They’ve dedicated decades to studying and writing about the post-exoneration process and what happens to exonerees once they’re released. When someone is exonerated, they sometimes only receive a couple of hours notice, and have to walk out of prison in the clothes they were wearing when they went in, sometimes decades ago and with no car or transportation. Some people may be lucky enough to have someone still to pick them up or bring new clothes but for a lot of people, years in prison leads to a loss of connections in the outside world. It’s possible that an exoneree has been transferred to a prison hours away from wherever they live, assuming they even still have a home. Many people walk out of prison, finally free after spending years inside for crimes they didn’t commit and find themselves in an entirely new world with no clue of where to go or what to do. Unlike parolees, there are no programs in place to help the exonerated rejoin society. There use to be halfway houses specifically for exonerees, but over the years it became defunded. Programs like the Innocence Project or Center on Actual Innocence help the exonerees that they were working with but there are still many exonerees that weren’t working with a program like these. Exonerees can’t just pick up their cell and call an Uber or a Lyft, because they don’t have phones and may not even be aware of ride services like that. There may be a payphone outside of prisons, but one still may not know anyone’s numbers. Kim Cook told Priya that every exoneree has PTSD, but that it’s what they call Continued PTSD because it continues to happen as they’re faced with all of the challenges of the outside world. Prison takes away your ability to make decisions so sometimes even being faced with what we would consider a small decision (like which cereal to buy) can lead to a panic attack, as this happened with one of the people Kim Cook was working with. A lot of exonerees have limited stamina from being cooped up and find it difficult to walk long distances, and they sleep on the floor because they aren’t used to having a comfortable bed. Essentially, after spending years confined to a cell with limited yard time, especially with speed of which technology and everything has evolved, everything can be overwhelming. Some exonerees give talks on what happened to them in order to try and enact change and will find themselves lost and disoriented on the way to these talks. The New York Innocence Project has two social workers who help exonerees which really should be standard. You may remember all of the milestones that Greg Taylor missed like his daughter’s wedding and graduation, and every exoneree has some version of that story. There are so many relationships and milestones that slipped away while they were in prison and coming to terms with that can be extremely difficult to say the least. In some cases, some exonerees may feel resentment for loved ones who didn’t believe they were innocent or towards people who moved on to a new relationship. To pile onto all of the depression and PTSD, is a rising feeling of bitterness over the injustice, and, in some cases, guilt for leaving their friends, and what was essentially their support system for years, behind in prison. Priya says there were so many things she hadn’t considered and she’s not alone. I’m sure many of us thought that when someone is exonerated, that’s their happy ending and didn’t realize how many hoops they still have to jump through. Next week F’d Up will be exploring more of the costs and aftereffects of exoneration and another fucked up case. We think that’s the end, but then… Jess tells us, “Hey everybody…. we just wanted give you all an update about LaMonte Armstrong. We recorded this episode a little while ago, we were trying to be respectful of Mr. Armstrong’s first name and not mispronounce it. We found out recently that the people who knew him best called him L.A. One of those people was Kim Cook, she posted about him very recently, because, tragically, a couple of weeks ago - as of this airing - he passed away from cancer. We reached out to Kim to ask what she’d like to say and she gave us permission to read out what she’d written on social media: ‘There’s s deep sadness in my heart today. My friend LA has passed away. It seems like I’ve known him for a long time, and i don’t recall exactly when we first met. We hit it off right away. Every time he came to Wilmington we would meet up for a visit. We often enjoyed seeing each other at The Innocence Network conferences, and he bought me funny gifts (like a New York Yankees jacket - I’m a Boston Red Sox gal), and always made me laugh. We both joined the Board of Directors of Healing Justice before it was publicly launched. Please join me in donating to his beloved Healing Justice in his memory. Thx.’
The Audit is F’d Up – Part Two Recap Written by Brandi Abbott This week’s episode picks up with a continuation of the audit and the case of a man named Daniel Green. Daniel Green was at a cookout on July 22nd, 1993 when he ran into his friend Larry Demery. Demery asked him if he wanted to come with him to New York to make a delivery, Daniel declined and Demery left the party alone. A few hours later he was back and freaking out. He asked for Daniel’s help and this time Daniel went with him. That same day, a man named James Jordon, the dad of Michael Jordan, attended the funeral of a friend in Wilmington, North Carolina. He headed home at 12:30 AM. It was about a two hour drive and he must have been tired because he pulled off of the highway to take a nap. On August 3rd 1993, a fisherman discovered a body in a remote swamp in South Carolina and it appeared the body had been in the swamp for about a week. On August 5th, the Cumberland County Sheriff’s Department were notified that an abandoned and stripped Lexus, belonging to James Jordan had been found. His family hadn’t spoken to him since July 22nd but no one had filed a missing person’s report. On August 7th, the coroner in Marlboro County, South Carolina cremated the body, saving the jaw and hands for identification purposes and on August 13th the teeth were matched to James Jordon. Back on June 22nd, Demery didn’t admit to Daniel that what he needed help with was moving a body until they were back at his car. Damery told Daniel that he went to a hotel for a drug delivery, that the man he was delivering to tried to proposition him which led to a fight, and there was a shooting. James Jordan is the man who was shot. On August 15th 1993, Demery and Daniel were arrested for murder. They had ridden around in James Jordan’s car for three days. They made calls from his car phone, including to 1-900 sex numbers, and made home movies using James Jordan’s video camera which included Daniel wearing the championship ring and watch Michael Jordan had given his father. Both Daniel and Demery had pasts involving spending time in jail. The cops tried tactics to get them to turn on each other, including threatening them with the death penalty and it worked for Demery. Between the time Demery took his plea offer and his testimony, he changed the story on what happened that night but the plea offer stood. He testified that he and Daniel tried to rob James Jordan, and that Daniel shot him. Daniel was convicted of first degree felony murder and was sentenced to life in prison plus ten years. Daniel has maintained throughout that he was not involved with the robbery or murder, but his conviction was upheld by the North Carolina Court of Appeals in 1998 and the North Carolina Supreme Court in 1999. He filed a Motion for Appropriate Relief, known as an MAR, in 2000. His appointed council had done basically nothing, and in the 2008 after Daniel filed a supplemental MAR, the judge decreed his case would be reviewed and he would be appointed new council. In 2010 he asked for the NCCAI’s representation but they declined because he had recently been appointed new council. Daniel’s case was on the list of 230 cases impacted by the SBI’s shoddy practices. The same bloodstain reporting issues from Greg’s case were present in Daniel’s, and Chris Mumma agreed to take on his case in 2016. Chris reviewed his case and increasingly felt like he wasn’t involved in the robbery or murder and the NCCAI joined his co-council. The SBI complained that the audit done by Swecker and Wolfe looked at their old science through a modern science lens. This doesn’t really work, though, as the audit focused on their practices and reporting, or misreporting rather, not on their actual "science". Jennifer Elwell testified and dismissed the audit completely, though she admitted she only read parts of the report. She claimed that Swecker and Wolf didn’t understand forensic science, which seemed to be the common consensus across the SBI lab. Elwell refused to acknowledge that either she or the SBI were in error. In 2011, DA’s offices in NC had gone though about 150 cases from the report and claimed that these seemed okay as there was other strong evidence in every one of the cases. If that were true though, would this episode on Daniel Green even be happening? The phone calls made from James Jordan’s car was pointed at as the most important evidence by law enforcement including the sheriff, as it linked Daniel and Demery to the car. They failed to mention, however, that the second call made was to a drug dealer named Hubert Deese, the sheriff’s son. Demery and Deese were former coworkers who use to work about two miles from where the body was found in South Carolina. Deese was never interviewed by the police. He was interviewed by the prosecutors, but the defense was never aware. Daniel’s attorneys knew that the phone calls from the car were important to the prosecution’s case and that they were making a big deal out of them, but as far as they knew, the phone calls had only been to sex lines. The coroner noted in his report that there was no hole in the victim’s shirt to match the bullet hole in his chest, but law enforcement did not collect the shirt as evidence. The shirt was given to the funeral home and was buried due to an offensive oder, but was later exhumed and there actually was a bullet hole. Demery, who was considered the star witness, had been given that plea deal. He was originally sentence to life plus 20 years, but his deal made him eligible for parole in 2015. Priya couldn’t find anything saying whether or not he’d been released. The defense was never informed about the plea deal. The prosecution also didn’t read out the list of their potential witnesses to the jury to make sure there’d be no issues. One of the jurors had been accused of sexual misconduct by two of the witnesses. There was a witness who claimed Daniel had robbed him, but, it turned out, was just plain racist and said that all black people look alike. Elwell recanted her own testimony. She originally testified that she found James Jordan’s blood in his car, but her tests were all inconclusive. She admitted to withholding four inconclusive tests results that could have undermined the prosecutor’s theory of how James died. Daniel’s attorneys claim that the DA intentionally exaggerated Elwell’s findings and withheld her notes. The judge stated that withholding the results of the tests were a violation of his order. Right after Daniel was convicted, Elwell claimed she was ordered by a supervisor to destroy the only known samples of James Jordan’s blood, and that she had never before been asked to do that by a supervisor. The defense stated that they had never been informed the samples were destroyed. One of Daniel’s attorneys said the judge who sentenced Daniel to prison filed an affidavit stating that if Elwell has changed her opinion on the substance found in the car then her testimony at trial would constitute as false and misleading testimony on material fact. The blood evidence was the only physical evidence supporting Demery’s version of events and was critical in his conviction, making what was said earlier, about all of the 150 cases in the audit having other strong evidence, false. Despite all of this, Daniel is still in prison. In regards to the Derrick Allen case, which was covered last week, the local paper says the hearing for him touched on the issue of whether the SBI lab is independent or whether it tips the scales of justice in the courtroom in the favor of the prosecution and police. National Academy of Science issued a report in 2009 that said that crime labs should be independent and out from under the influence of prosecutors or police. So, of course, a former judge with no science background named Joe John was appointed interim director of the SBI Crime Lab by Attorney General Roy Cooper. After being there for a month, Joe John told the News and Observer that his impression was that the lab workers were not puppets of law enforcement. He said the analysts told him that they believed their customer was the criminal justice system as a whole. However, Elwell told the News and Observer that the SBI lab was drawing new guidelines to provide a stricter standard of customer service for their client, the state of North Carolina. Joe John did an internal investigation of the lab at the instruction of the DA’s office and found an additional 74 cases that were not included in the audit. These were found by hand reviewing files. Elwell was the analyst in 38 of those cases, and Deaver was the analyst in one. Deaver had 50 cases in the original audit and Elwell had 37. This new investigation brought her total to 75 mishandled cases. Spittle had 90 cases in the audit and 26 in this new investigation so he still holds the lead for worst lab analyst ever. Jess reminds us that the former SBI director, Robin Pendergraft, said that all of the problems at the SBI Crime Lab were just one guy. Defense attorneys were worried about the prosecutors reviewing the cases. Diane Savage said that there was no way for prosecutors to know how a jury would respond if it learned about improperly handled evidence. The News and Observer interviewed the Foreman of the jury in Kirk Turner’s case who said jurors were stunned by the SBI’s conduct. When asked about Gerald Thomas he said he was very conservative and a “law and order guy” but that he didn’t know what word to use but “fraud”. Prosecutors, however, felt that only by them looking though the cases would the result be true justice. DA Willoughby looked though all of the cases that went through his office, and they all appeared to be fine in his opinion. You may remember him from episode two wherein it was revealed he didn’t like the Innocence Inquiry Commission. He stated that the status of his cases would not change, and that most of them had confessed before there was any blood evidence. Willoughby also said that the science needed to be accepted as science whether it was unhelpful or not and that he didn’t think anyone was tipping the scales in the favor of the prosecutors. When the report of the independent investigation was released, Swecker said that the way the SBI lab reported impacted the decisions that were made. It could have resulted in situations where material favorable to the defendant was not disclosed. So there are those that may have had other evidence against them and with the addition of the blood evidence, they may have plead guilty in the face of all of that evidence. Chris Mumma said she didn’t think that there was anyone who would be surprised that the DAs felt that there was additional evidence of guilt on top of the blood evidence as that was why they were prosecuting in the first place, and that she wanted the defense to review those cases as well. SBI Greg McLeod acknowledged the concern raised by defense attorneys and urged prosecutors to complete their case files for review. Priya takes a moment to say how affected she’s been by these cases and names some of the people they’ve covered so far whose lives were ruined or impacted. For good news, F’d Up has been assured that every name on both lists have now been thoroughly looked into and justice has been pursued or is being pursued. After the initial audit Jennifer Elwell was suspended, though they don’t know if she was ever fired, due to her 37 cases in the initial audit. Deaver was suspended with pay, which I would just call a vacation. Attorney General Roy Cooper said that the SBI was going to make changes to its procedures and promised to send the cases flagged in the audit back to the courts for review. Changes were being made and many of the convicted were being released. However, getting out of prison isn’t as easy as you would think. Next week’s episode will take a look at the challenges the exonerated face.
The Audit Is F’d Up – Part OneRecapWritten by Brandi AbbottLast week’s episode left off with us learning that the audit of the SBI Crime Lab revealed 230 mishandled cases. This week F’d Up will delve into the audit, but first… an important content warning for sexual abuse and child abuse.First in the audit, they took a sample of cases from 1989 to 1991 and found 30 cases consistent with the scenario in Greg Taylor’s case. Then they reviewed all 15,419 files from 1987 to 2003, looking specifically for cases that had similar language to Greg’s case such as “indications of blood” or “chemical indications for the presence of blood”. Out of that search criteria, they pulled 932 files. Each of those files were thoroughly reviewed and 230 of them contained at least one instance of “where the lab notes reflected that a positive presumptive test for the presence of blood was followed by a confirmatory test of which results were negative, inconclusive or no result.” None of these had the negative test results recorded anywhere except in the analyst’s lab notes. In 40 of these cases, law enforcement was either not able to identify a suspect or the suspect wasn’t charged so they did not result in wrongful convictions, and in 20 additional cases there was either a dismissal or the suspect was found not guilty.The next phase of the audit concentrated on confusing language and they found 105 cases similar to Greg’s. Nine of the cases resulted in dismissals or not guilty verdicts and in the remaining cases, the defendants had served their time or been released.The next phase was “misleading reports.” There were 36 cases that contained reports that said no other tests were conducted but they had been with negative or inconclusive results. Three of these cases had defendants who were still in prison at that time. The final phase of the audit was “misrepresented final reports” which involves cases where the actual results of the confirmatory tests were not reflective of the results contained in the lab results. There were five cases in this category and… they were all handled by Duane Deaver.According to the audit report, not all of these cases resulted in a wrongful conviction but a number of cases warranted a reinvestigation. The recommendation was that if anyone wanted to look into these cases it was up to the defendant, their attorney, or the prosecution to determine whether or not the case was worth reopening. Attorney General Roy Cooper received the report, distributed it to DAs across the state, and then released it to the public.One of the names on that list was a man named Derrick Allen who lived with his girlfriend and her two year-old daughter in 1998. On February 9th, 1998 his girlfriend went to work, leaving him at home with her daughter and a woman who was staying with them named Kia Ward. Around half an hour after his girlfriend left, Derrick called 911 because the baby had passed out. When the EMTs arrived, the baby had no pulse and was dead. The EMTs found what seemed to be blood inside the left leg of the baby’s onesie. She had complained about pain in her leg and passed out after being taking out of a bath. The autopsy revealed abrasions or lacerations to her vaginal orifice. Shortly after, Derrick was arrested and in winter of 1998, he was indicted with first degree sex offense, felony child abuse, and first degree murder.***When the audit was released people were rightfully angry. Many of the DAs, defense attorneys, and other people in the justice system publicly spoke out against the SBI Crime Lab. AG Roy Cooper said, “The lab can not accept attitudes that are not open to the possibility that a mistake has been made. It can not ignore criticisms and suggestions from the outside.” Spoiler alert: it did. Some lab employees completely ignored the report. Also, Duane Deaver was not the only analyst who tested the spot on Greg Tayler’s truck. Deaver’s superior, Jed Taub, assisted with the analysis. Duane Deaver is talked about most because of “The Staircase” which had that video of him doing his “science”, but Jess says no one ever talks about the woman in the video. Suzi Barker had seven cases mentioned in the audit. Jed Taub retired in 2004 after being with the SBI for 30 years, and was working with the Pitt County Sheriff’s Office as a forensic investigator when the audit was happening in 2010. Taub claimed that they didn’t report the negative result of a confirmatory test because it’s misleading, and that the tests didn’t matter because they couldn’t be sure it wasn’t blood. He said everyone was making a big deal over nothing. He only reported negative tests if the first test was negative. Taub had nine cases mentioned in the audit but basically blamed any “misunderstandings” on attorneys. SBI Special Agent Jennifer Elwell who has been mentioned on previous episodes shared Taub’s viewpoint and said the audit was just “one person’s opinion”. Turns out, she was mentioned in the audit quite a bit.Special Agent Jennifer Elwell and her superior, David Spittle, analyzed items from the scene of the Derrick Allen case for a presence of blood. Elwell was the only one who testified and was mentioned in the audit. The initial testing on the items showed a presence of blood but the confirmatory Takayama test did not, which she wrote down in her notes. When she explained the science at Derrick’s appeal she said you would be looking for a specific formation of crystals to occur. If they did not appear, you would say the test was negative or inconclusive. A negative test result only means the analyst was not able to see the crystal formation. Elwell did the Takayama test in Derrick’s case. She put the small sample of alleged blood and the Takayama reagent under the microscope and waited for the crystals to form. According to Marilyn Miller if the crystals do not fully form, that’s a negative result and if there’s enough of the sample left, a second test should be done. If the crystals still do not form, that is negative. Elwell said at the appeal that crystals didn’t form and that they “tried to form” but nothing happened. According to Miller, crystals can try to form but that is considered a negative result.***Kia Ward submitted to a polygraph test without the defense’s knowledge. She admitted that she had had sex with Derrick and considered him an “enemy.” Everything she said about him the investigators took as fact, just ignoring the fact she admitted she had a vendetta against him. On April 2nd 1998, the state decided to pursue the death penalty.***After the audit report was released prosecutors and defense attorneys were in shock and wanted to review all of their cases. Around 80 defendants out of these cases were still in prison at this time. Checking those 80 cases was considered a top priority by the Executive Director for Prisoner Legal Services, and defense attorneys were encouraged to go through the list of those names and see if any of their clients were on it.***Derrick Allen was facing the death penalty and was rightfully scared so in 1999 he agreed to enter Alford plea deal which basically just acknowledges that a person knows that prosecutors have damning evidence that would likely result in a guilty verdict at trial but doesn’t admit any guilt. This plea deal got him sentenced to 43 years in prison which completely sucks for an innocent person but is still better than dying. In 2004, he withdrew his Alford plea and was given a new trial since he had been in prison five years and was tired of being there over something he didn’t do. The day after Greg Taylor was exonerated on February 18th 2010, Derrick was appointed a new lawyer named Lisa Williams who reviewed his case files and found things were missing like pages from the investigating agent’s report. This is a violation of NC’s Open File Law which was enacted in 2004 and a federal Brady v. Maryland law. Lisa Williams wrote a letter requesting the entire file, and through this discovery found out a bunch of F’d up shit. At this point everyone knew what had been happening in the SBI lab, including the judge in Derrick’s case, Orlando Hudson. Judge Hudson dismissed Derrick’s case “due to the prosecutors withholding critical information and flagrantly violating Derrick’s constitutional rights” and said that the prosecutors had caused such irreparable prejudice that he had no choice but to dismiss the case. Just like in the previous cases covered, the investigators refused to investigate other suspects because they believed Derrick was guilty. The DA, Tracy Cline, called Judge Hudson dismissing Derrick’s case “an extreme abuse of power” and issued a series of derogatory comments against the judge about that case and several others.In September 2012, the state Court of Appeals unanimously decided there were no grounds for Judge Hudson’s dismissal and that he didn’t have adequate evidence to dismiss the case. His ruling was reversed and the case went back to Durham County Superior Court. There was apparently substantial independent blood evidence, which Priya says she doesn’t really understand because she could only find a reference to a paper towel found in the kitchen that contained blood and that what was thought to be blood on the onesie was not blood.The next four years, Derrick was not in prison but found himself having to worry about whether he was going to be charged again or sent back to prison until October of 2016 when a Durham ADA filed records of the case being dismissed. The reason being that after significant investigation into the case witnesses either could not be located or refused to assist the prosecution.In 2016, at 38 years old, Derrick had spent over half of his life either in prison or wondering if he was going to go back to prison. This miscarriage of justice affected not only him, but the baby’s mother, and all of their friends and family. Also, if he didn’t do it, whoever hurt the baby is still out there. When F’d Up interviewed Chris Mumma, the executive director of the NC Center on Actual Innocence, she told them that the problem with the system, is you expect the scales to be balanced but they aren’t balanced.***The audit of the SBI lab basically revealed that Deaver was telling the truth when he said he was following SBI policy for how he reported in Greg’s case. In 1997, it became written policy whereas prior to that it was unwritten and analysts just used their discretion. From 1986-2002, which was nearly the entire span of the audit, a guy named Mark Nelson was the Forensic Biology Section Chief at the SBI lab. He acknowledged after the audit that omitting confirmatory tests was bad practice. At section meetings reporting positive results was discussed and standardized but there was no discussion of reporting negative or inconclusive results. Two analysts who were interviewed by Chris Swecker for the report said that they had been told about the possibility of false positives but they ignored those warnings believing that a positive finding in the tests indicated blood because they had done testing on plant based materials that were known to cause false positives but hadn’t gotten a positive reaction. Swecker said that they were writing their reports to law enforcement and were trying not tp write any negative results. Swecker also wrote that there was anecdotal evidence that some analysts were not objective in their mindsetEight analysts were mentioned in the audit report. Priya says that one of the things that made her bring the idea for this podcast to Jess is that Deaver was getting all of the heat for the way things had been mishandled but he wasn’t the only person doing crap. Only four of the analysts named were still working in the SBI lab when the audit was released and one was doing contract work for the agency. Priya says time had passed and “a couple of the agents had retired which rhymes with fired” such as Brenda Bissette. The agents who looked into the SBI lab found that Bissette had accounted for 24 of the cases 36 cases found in category three of their audit. The other analysts in category three were Deaver, with five cases, and an analyst named Lucy Milks who had two cases and left the SBI in 2006, but worked on contract as a chemist in the drug chemistry section. Also mentioned in the audit was Suzi Barker, who was mentioned earlier for being on the video from “The Staircase”, and a guy named Russell Hollie who had an actual background in science and had brought up a lot of the issues with the SBI lab before the audit occurred. He had one case listed in the audit report from 2001. Priya says it’s just her opinion but it may go more to the culture of the SBI lab and their process of reporting than to his science and Keith says it could have actually just been a mistake. As of 2011, he was still working with the SBI but it’s unclear where he is now. David Spittle, who was also mentioned earlier, left the SBI in 2001 had two cases mentioned in category three but was responsible for almost 90 cases out of the entire 230 cases. As Swecker also mentioned on the report, it’s possible that the cases on the list resulted in guilty pleas or the inability for the defense attorneys to have a fighting chance. Priya says this 100% came into play with Derrick Allen and came into play with a man named Daniel Green. F’d Up will dig into his case and, as always, more fucked up shit on next week’s episode.
Cheating Is F'd Up - Part Two Recap Written by Brandi Abbott After a quick update of what happened last week, Jess tells us that Gerald Thomas met with Duane Deaver, Chief Deputy Jerry Hartman, a lawyer from the DA’s office, and the DA’s investigator to try and find evidence proving that he killed Jennifer on purpose instead of in self defense. Deaver and Assistant District Attorney Brown hadn’t actually seen Kirk’s bloody T-shirt yet; just photos. They quickly noticed a pointed tip in one of the bloodstains. Priya and Jess show Keith a picture of the shirt (which you can also see on the Facebook page @Effed Up) and he says it looks more like someone placed the knife on the shirt instead of wiping it. This stain led to a theory that Kirk killed Jennifer with the knife and then staged the scene by stabbing himself in the leg with the spear – twice. Because of this conversation, Thomas no longer believed it was the stain of a bloody handprint. Keith wonders why you would stab yourself somewhere that could be potentially fatal – this question leads to the information that the spear went all the way through Kirk’s leg and Keith, who’d previously thought as the DA did, changes his opinion about suspecting that Kirk had staged everything. Thomas now believed the stain was actually a knife being wiped across the shirt - even though his initial report said it was a hand. In April of 2009, prosecutors supplied the defense with some discovery including Thomas’ updated interpretation of the blood evidence that Kirk killed Jennifer and wiped his knife on his T-shirt. The defense attorneys, Joe Cheshire and Brad Bannon, hired their own forensic experts, Stuart James and Marilyn Miller. Kirk being a rich white guy, had the money to hire forensic specialists. Both of these experts thought the SBI Crime Lab was wrong and the bloodstain was a mirror stain, which basically is created when an item is folded together, transferring blood from portion of the item to a fresh, unmarred spot. Stuart was hired to do the analysis and Marilyn was hired to do the reconstruction, but because Marilyn also had experience with bloodstain analysis, she helped Stuart out. They determined that the stain was created by the fabric folding when the EMT’s were cutting off his shirt. The EMTs were focused on saving his life and just cut all his clothes off and tossed them to the side. The experts’ opinion was forwarded to the prosecutors, and Gerald Thomas claimed the ADA asked for additional testing to disprove that the bloodstain was a mirror image. A month later he sent an email to a colleague saying he would conduct tests to “shore up” his conclusions, and he and Deaver got a replica knife and T-shirt to try to recreate the stain. The local paper reported that there was a video of Thomas wearing a clean shirt, dipping the knife in blood only getting blood on the edges and carefully wiping the blood on his shirt in an attempt to duplicate the stain. They performed this test twice on camera with Deaver’s director-like commentary audible at the end of the tape. Deaver went so far as to conclude the tests by saying “that’s a wrap, baby.” Along with the fact that the knife’s blade would be covered in blood, not just the edges, Thomas and Deaver using brand new T-shirts instead of an older worn T-shirt like Kirk was wearing means that the fabric would have responded differently. Nevertheless, the tests were performed and they solidified Thomas’ new conclusion: The bloodstain was made from a pointed object being wiped on the shirt. In May of 2009, Thomas and Hartman from the sheriff’s office had a phone conversation, which Thomas included in his notes – as was protocol. He wrote down that Hartman told him that he was present when the EMTS cut off Kirk’s shirt, that the bloodstain was already on the shirt, and that he laid it flat to dry so the stain wouldn’t be impacted by any handling of it. In July of 2009, Brad Bannon, the defense attorney, called Thomas into his office because he wanted copies of all of his files. Although SBI analysts are discouraged from speaking to the defense, Brad had gotten permission from the DA’s office. Thomas gave him a copy of his complete file and Brad went through everything. While going through the file, something grabbed his attention. The copy of the initial report from September 2007 in the file was different from the copy he already had. He noted that the copy he had, had the numbers 24, 25, and 26 in the corner of the page - which appeared to represent page numbers. The second copy he had just been given had the same title but he noticed the page numbers where different, they were 1441, 1442, and 1443. At first glance it seemed to be the same report, but upon closer examination, one line where Thomas states his opinion about the shirt had changed. The first report had referred to the bloodstain being consistent with a bloody hand being wiped on the shirt and the new report referred to it being consistent with a pointed object. It seemed that Thomas had changed the report, but left the same date on it and didn’t follow the SBI Crime Lab standards of creating a separate report for an amendment. If Brad hadn’t asked for the file, the defense never would have known about the change in the report before the trial. Not only that, but, while looking through the file, Brad also found the notes from Thomas’ phone call with Hartman and he thought something was off with that as well and he decided to ask Thomas about it at trial. Marilyn Miller, the forensic expert, had examined Kirk’s jeans. There was a bloodstain inside the pocket where he kept his knife. She determined it was a transfer stain from where he reached into his pocket to get his knife and that it was his own blood; which supported that he had been stabbed before pulling out his knife. Thomas took the stand next and Brad brought up the phone conversation between him and Hartman where Hartman had said that he had been there when EMTs cut off Kirk’s shirt, that he had been the one to lay the shirt out, and that he had seen a pointed stain on it at that time. Thomas confirmed that that conversation had occurred and that was definitely what Hartman said. When Brad questioned Hartman about the same thing, Hartman said he didn’t say any of that. He said what he told Thomas was that he was not there when the EMTs cut the clothes off of Kirk, that when he did arrive, the clothing was crumpled so he laid the shirt out flat to dry. Thomas claimed that this was just a misunderstanding. Brad then dug into Thomas about his file. He wanted to know how defense attorneys would be able to understand whether or not Thomas was reinvestigating which Thomas tried to evade. Brad then asked if he talked about experiments that were being set up to prove theories and Thomas said yes. Brad then asked if it was important to record those theories and Thomas said “I have them in my head, I know what theory I’m trying to prove…” Later on in the questioning, Brad asked if he could produce any notes or anything that reflect what was said during the meeting with the ADA and Deaver and everyone in January of 2009. Thomas said he didn’t take notes, he had the pictures, and he initialed the photos so everyone would know that he took them and where they were from. Brad then showed him the pictures – they had no initials. Brad showed Thomas an envelope and asked if it was an envelope Thomas used to hold a swab of blood and Thomas said it was. Brad asked how the envelope described the swab and Thomas said “blood sample from cardboard boxes” to which Brad asked if he was aware that there was more than one cardboard box taken in for evidence. Thomas said he was aware and Brad pointed out that looking at the envelope, he would have no idea which box it came from. Brad then questioned Thomas about the change in his report and how nothing on it indicated it was changed. Thomas inexplicably told Brad that he’d amended the report. Which was apparent. The good news is that on August 21st, 2009, the jury deliberated for 6 hours and Kirk Thomas was found not guilty for reason of self-defense. Marilyn’s testimony about Kirk’s pocket ended up being the key evidence as juries actually do love an expert witness when they’re actually an expert and know what they’re talking about. Speaking of… when Marilyn Miller and Stuart James went into the sheriff’s office, not a single piece of that pocket had been cut out and tested and it was never mentioned in the SBI Crime Lab’s notes because no one had even bothered to test it. So, that’s great! But – hold up. Who’s Gerald Thomas and how did we get here?! Gerald Thomas was born in 1971 in North Carolina and graduated from Greensboro College in 2002 with a degree in art, history, and political science. In 2008, he got a Masters in Arts and Sociology. From 1992-1999 he worked at the Liberty Police Department. From 1995-1999, he was a detective with the Randolph County Sheriff’s Office, and from 1999-2003, he was the assistant police chief and police chief at the Liberty Police Department. Basically he spent 11 years in law enforcement and his only science background was attending a training course in basic bloodstain pattern analysis taught by Duane Deaver, Jennifer Elwell and others before joining the SBI. In 2007, he took a similar course at a local community college and in 2009 took an online graduate course from the University of Florida. It turns out that all agents who want to work in bloodstain pattern analysis have to attend a minimum of three crime scenes and have them reviewed by other analysts. Deaver did almost all of Thomas’ mentoring and report reviews, and after Thomas had recorded ten crime scenes, Deaver released Thomas to work crime scenes on his own. Inexplicably, according to Thomas, in the Turner case he didn’t know his report change counted as a new opinion and should have been added in a new report - which gives off the faint odor of bullshit. As of August of 2008, he completed the NC blood training program which is not a certificate program, but on his CV as of 2010, he listed it under his certifications – he lied on his resume. Priya, Keith and Jess discuss the idea of lying on one’s resume – not a SUPER nefarious practice. However, we’re talking about a person who is literally dealing with life and death situations. In addition to that, his CV also had a few references of cases he had provided testimony on which included the Turner case which had made him kind of a laughing stock in the forensic science community, and another case where he sat on the stand long enough to say his name and what he did before the judge dismissed him after finding out what Thomas’ testimony was going to be. In 2010 during the audit of the lab, the training Deaver did was one of the top concerns but there were many more. Marilyn Miller told the News & Observer that many forensic scientists outside of North Carolina had been concerned about Deaver and his protegé for a while but felt powerless to do anything. She said that he taught people his shoddy practices, which would cause them to teach the same and it would just be a cycle. This proves true when we find out that Thomas also taught courses in bloodstain analysis and even became an evaluator for training. Jess said that while they agree with Marilyn that it’s frightening to think of Deaver’s reach, it goes beyond the training to common sense and character. Even if we gave Thomas the benefit of the doubt that some things were human error like labeling the envelope, it doesn’t change the fact that he lied about the conversation with Hartman, lied on his resume about being certified, and edited a report without giving any indication he had done so which is against North Carolina law. There’s even a statute about that very thing! Jess says what if it wasn’t a rich white guy who could afford great lawyers and outside expert witnesses and no one had ever tested the pocket or questioned Thomas about his call with Hartman. She thinks they would be in prison for murder. Priya says that looking at Thomas’ past career, it shows an obvious pattern of him climbing the ladder and that since prosecutors give reviews and rate analysts, which can lead to promotion, it makes sense that he changed the report to match what they saw. Priya says Thomas has fascinated her since the beginning because she saw something saying he’d remained employed for the SBI, even after making all of those giant errors, the small errors and everything in between. It turns out, he not only remained employed there, but was promoted in 2010 to Assistant Director of Field Services of the SBI. In December of 2016, a reporter wrote that he couldn’t find anything saying whether or not Thomas was still working for the SBI and Priya ran into the same problem but she would Google occasionally. BUT… In October of 2018, she Googled and found that he was promoted to Deputy Director of the SBI. The entire SBI. Though there was an investigation of the SBI lab’s training and internal practices, the results of the investigation were not made public and any necessary changes to it were not made public. At this point the lack of transparency is expected, but still disappointing. On August 18th of 2010, the two former FBI agents who performed a five-month audit of the SBI Crime lab released their results. Out of over 15,000 cases that they examined, they found that the SBI Crime Lab withheld, misreported, or distorted evidence in more than 230 cases. F’d Up will be going into those cases and more next week.
Cheating Is F'd Up Part One Recap Written by Brandi Abbott This episode starts with a content warning for sexual assault/domestic violence/violence. In 2010, while the NC SBI Crime Lab audit was happening, a defense attorney named Brad Bannon was concerned about a recent case of his. Brad was the type of lawyer who always thought just 30 more minutes of work would break the case – those 30 more minutes would often turn into hours, days and even weeks. The infamous Duke Lacrosse Rape Case was one of these. A woman accused David Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty of sexual assault. Then District Attorney Mike Nifong supplied thousands of pages of DNA evidence done by an independent lab because he didn’t like that the SBI investigation revealed that the boys were innocent. Brad noticed that the images of the DNA didn’t match and did a ton of research into DNA so that he could understand it. This led to him being able to tear apart the expert witness in court and the boys were found not guilty. So, that’s the kind of lawyer Brad is. In 2007, Kirk Turner was a successful dentist who had been married to Jennifer Turner for 23 years. Jennifer was a horse lover who wanted to start a breeding farm. She had nine horses and this took up a lot of her time, and occasionally Kirk would help her out after work. Everyone was shocked when Kirk announced he was leaving Jennifer and their daughter asked him if he was cheating on Jennifer. He denied it but he was lying. Jennifer took him to court and he was ordered to pay her $30,000 a month. She then found out about the affair and sued the other woman in an alienation of affection suit. North Carolina is one of the few states who recognizes alienation of affection and it allows a spouse to sue a third party for wrongful acts that deprived one of a lack of affection from their spouse. This lawsuit pissed off Kirk and he told Jennifer that there was more than one way to end a marriage… Which is ominous. On September 12, 2007, Kirk and his friend, Greg Smithson, went to pick up some welding equipment from the garage/shed (pretty sure here in NC, we would just call it a “shop”) at the house that he and Jennifer had previously shared, but now it was just Jennifer living there. Within a couple of minutes, Greg heard screaming or fighting, and a couple of minutes after that Greg limped out of the shed, covered in blood. Smithson didn’t know what was happening and ran into the shop to call 911 – and that’s when he found Jennifer’s dead body. The police arrived at the scene and eventually Chief Deputy Jerry Hartman was called and he arrived a few hours after both Kirk and Jennifer’s body had been taken to the hospital. Hartman went into the shop and examined the scene. There was blood everywhere. He saw clothes in the office area including Kirk’s t-shirt and jeans, which had to be cut from him. Hartman left the scene to get a search warrant so he could check everything out properly. Keith wants to know why he needs a search warrant at an obvious crime scene and Priya is like well we have scientists not being scientists so at least the cop is acting like a cop! Hartmant got the warrant and was back within a few hours which is when the shirt and jeans were photographed. Because there was blood on the boxes, table, floor, and basically all over the place, a discussion took place between Hartman and the on scene investigator, they wanted to bring in a bloodstain pattern analyst and called in the SBI Crime Lab. The bloodstained clothing was taken to the sheriff’s office and Hartman went over to the hospital where Kirk was. Kirk had been stabbed twice in the leg and had lost a ton of blood. Kirk told Hartman that Jennifer had attacked him with a decorative spear that was leaning against the wall. Priya takes a moment to ask what the fuck is going on in North Carolina with all of these rich white people just having decorative weapons laying around – first Michael Peterson with “The Staircase” and now this! Kirk said that Jennifer shoved the blade into his left leg and then stabbed him again. The second stab was about an inch away from hitting his femoral artery. According to the News and Observer, Kirk reached into his right pocket, pulled out his knife and slashed at her. He slashed her neck twice and severed her carotid artery. According to testimony at the trial, her trachea, windpipe and jugular were cut. His story is basically that Jennifer attacked him and he just started flailing in self-defense. On September 14th, 2007 SBI Special Agent Gerald Thomas went to the crime scene to investigate the bloodstain patterns covering everything. This was two days after everything had taken place and a lot of the evidence had been taken to the sheriff’s office so he headed there next. They switch over to a “Science Sidebar” real quick and Priya gives us a quick definition of blood stain pattern analysis and how they are studied. She tells us that there are three types of blood stains: passive stains, transfer stains, or projected or impact stains. Transfer stains result from objects coming into contact with existing blood stains and leaving wipes, swipes, or other pattern transfers behind. Gerald Thomas finished his examinations that same day and completed his report about two weeks later. His report included notes about a large bloodstain on Kirk’s shirt and that it was a Transfer bloodstain pattern resulting from a bloody hand being wiped on the shirt. The day of Jennifer’s death, Kirk’s buddy Greg had gone outside because he was uncomfortable with the conversation Kirk and Jennifer had involving sex. Kirk confessed he had changed the subject right after Smithson left as he needed to discuss some papers with her. One of these was to force the sale of her beloved horse farm and the other was an affidavit from her first husband, saying their marriage had failed due to her obsessive love of horses. Priya said she watched an episode of “48 Hours” in which Kirk was on the stand being super apologetic and explaining he only took the papers to her to illustrate how awful the divorce process could become. Priya and Keith, having been divorced, think that’s bull and that he took the papers there to rile her up. Priya says that she’s mostly been concentrating on the science and the SBI aspect of this case in her research and it isn’t her place to say whether he’s guilty or innocent, but she’s been like “well why would she stab him”. Priya said there’s no chance that Kirk thought this woman, who cares more about horses than anything else, wouldn’t be beyond upset over the sale of her horse farm and that there’s a very good chance he wanted to use it to get her to drop the lawsuit against the woman he cheated on her with. Priya says she gets why Jennifer stabbed him and that she went for the leg, not the heart or head, and that on her second stab she got closer to his balls, and that that’s what she thinks she was aiming for. Priya goes on to say that she 100% believes Jennifer was provoked, reacted, and paid for it with her life. The ADA, Greg Brown, was upset about how long everything was taking. He and the prosecutors had a theory that Kirk killed Jennifer and then injured himself, and Keith said he had been thinking the same. Chief Deputy Hartman thought it was an argument gone wrong and that maybe Jennifer stabbed Kirk and tried to run and that he grabbed her killed her. The end result was the same either way, Kirk killed Jennifer, it’s all just a matter of whether or not it was in self-defense. The police and prosecutors were convinced it wasn’t, so the case was brought before a grand jury. Kirk was charged with murder on December 13th of 2007 with basically no evidence that it was anything but self defense. Grand juries are much easier to convince than trial juries so Gerald Thomas was going to have to prove to a trial jury that Kirk murdered Jennifer. In the next episode, we’ll learn what happened at the trial and what the SBI determined happened.
The Lab Is F'd Up Recap Written by Brandi Abbott. This week’s episode starts with a quick reminder of where Priya, Jess and Keith left off last week. Duane Deaver had just revealed that he hadn’t reported tests confirming that the spot on Greg Taylor’s truck was not blood. Deaver said that the systems that were in place told him to write his reports the way he did and he was just following protocol. We’re reminded that in the NC SBI Crime Lab there was a practice in place wherein analysts could and would withhold secondary tests that confirmed a substance initially believed to be blood… was not blood. The Attorney General at that time, Roy Cooper, ordered an audit of the lab but that would take months to complete. During that time investigative journalists for the News & Observer had begun looking into the lab and published a 4 part series called “Agent’s Secrets”. The SBI director was quoted as saying, “if any questions are raised, at the time the SBI goes backs and checks. Our goal is to be accurate and find the truth. There is no hidden agenda.” She stated this in response to three other convictions in 2005 where the SBI Crime Lab had bungled evidence - five years before Greg Taylor was released from prison. At this time, lawyers filed a complaint accusing the SBI of royally F’ing these three cases up. One of the lawyers who was a defense lawyer in one of the three capital cases, Diane Savage was the chairman of the Forensic Science Task Force in the criminal defense section of NC Academy of Trial Lawyers. She hoped that there would be a full investigation and that they would shut down the lab until they came up with better quality control. One of the three aforementioned capital cases was a woman named Leslie Lincoln who lived in North Carolina and moved back in with her mother, Arlene, after she went through divorce. In 2002, she had finally started getting her life back on track. She had a job and a new place and everything was really looking up. On March 17th of 2002, Leslie went to do some errands and her mom and brother, Duffy, were at Arlene’s home watching basketball. Duffy left around 4:30. After her errands, Leslie stopped back in to see her mom. She left around 7:30 and stopped at Walmart for dog food on the way home, which was confirmed by several surveillance cameras. The next night Duffy went to his mother’s house where he found the door unlocked and poor Arlene Lincoln’s body in her bedroom on the floor. She had been stabbed over 30 times. At this point we know that the SBI is not unbiased. Priya gives us some background into the establishment of the SBI lab and tells us that the lab’s link to law enforcement plays heavily into all of the cases F’d Up will cover, but especially into the case of Leslie Lincoln. Arlene led a pretty active life. When her neighbors noticed she hadn’t been in her yard, they thought it was weird and called Duffy. Duffy went to check on her, discovered her body and called 911. There were three footprints in the blood by her body and quite a bit of evidence left behind. The police took several things from her home for evidence. They later learned that her credit card was missing. They discovered there had been no forced entry and the killer had had an intense fight with Arlene, one of the stab wounds to her neck was fatal. The police didn’t check Leslie and Duffy for wounds until later that week but they fond none. Duffy’s wife, Sharla said she can remember the day when Leslie realized she was the prime suspect. Initially there had been an inexperienced investigator on the case but within a few days he was replaced by Detective Ricky Best. He had a reputation as a detective who saw the big picture. For some reason, he locked onto Leslie as a viable suspect and about six months after Arlene’s death, the Greenville PD arrested her. She thought she was going in for questioning - then the police chained her to a wall and told her she was under arrest. Soon after the DA filed notice that he would be seeking the death penalty. Leslie was jailed under no bond. She said that for the first three days, they put you in isolation to make sure you don’t hurt yourself and she cried for three days straight. Those three days turned into three years. Priya takes over to tell us about how she and Jess have spoken with a few former SBI agents from the lab. One of the agents told her that he had been in law enforcement for over thirty years and “insinuated things would happen to her if she wasn’t on the up and up”. Jess mentions that it’s telling that he considers himself a law enforcement agent instead of a lab technician. Jess also remembers him saying that “he’s the one who wears the white hat”. This isn’t comforting as he’s supposed to be the guy looking at the evidence and pulling out facts objectively. In 2009, the National Academy of Science issued a report with recommendations, one of which was that forensic labs shouldn’t be under the control of prosecution or law enforcement. The paper series mentioned earlier, “Agents Secrets” tells us that the job of analysts should be to look at the evidence and only state the facts. We learn that analysts are given all evidence from a crime scene but are often asked to check out specifics by the police - which can create bias. If the results of tests aren’t clear it’s possible that if the analyst is looking for a good review or some other incentive, they could find results that favor law enforcement’s theories on a case. The analysts were encouraged to call law enforcement to dig a bit and see where they are on a case. They were supposed to log these calls but that didn’t always happen. At the crime scene of Arlene Lincoln’s murder, a bloody handprint was found on the bedding. Detective Best kept this evidence for months and after Leslie’s arrest took it to the SBI lab to have it tested for DNA. Keith asks why he would have kept this evidence for that long and Priya tells us that she spoke with Leslie’s lawyer and he doesn’t know. No one knows. The DNA test from this bloodstain on the bed and one from the couch matched Leslie’s DNA. Leslie’s attorney, Buddy Conner, who was a family friend, didn’t believe the test results. He pointed out that she was checked for wounds and had none that would have caused her to bleed to create the stain and that she had passed the polygraph. Conner called the analyst who did the testing, Brenda Bissette, and asked her to recheck her work. Despite talking to both her and her supervisor for over an hour, he was informed that they would not rerun the tests unless a judge or prosecutor demanded it. He took the matter to court to ask the judge to demand a retest at an independent lab. The DA, Clark Everett, didn’t object and actually asked the SBI to retest the evidence. In March of 2004, Bissette called Everett to let him know she made a mistake in her testing. Law enforcement and prosecutors view the defense as their enemy and don’t want to disclose things to outsiders. Lab analysts are not considered outsiders. In 2007 (and still in use in 2010) there was a training manual for SBI analysts. The manual stated that a good reputation and calm demeanor also enhances an analysts conviction rate. The manual warned analysts that defense attorneys would often put words in an analyst’s mouth and stated that if there were any weaknesses in the case, the DA should be informed ahead of time to minimize the weaknesses impact. The SBI director, Robin Pendergraft claimed to have never seen the manual but when asked about these directions for analysts she said she found it “interesting”. Analysts were discouraged from speaking to defense attorneys about a case before trial and now are encouraged to speak with defense attorneys only after notifying the prosecutor so that they may choose whether or not to be present for the conversation. At this point the defense hire their own experts to double check evidence and so they can understand things but this has been met with resistance by the SBI. They have also resisted turning over material that the defense say is crucial to helping their clients. Included in the training manual is a memo for prosecutors by a district attorney, Michael Parker. In the memo, he warns against “defense whores.” Yes, that’s a quote. He goes on to promise that the SBI will vet the defense experts, finding background info on them for prosecutors. At this time a lawyer at the NC Department of Justice named John Waters who represented the SBI fought requests for information that weren’t specifically listed in the discovery law that ensures defense attorneys have access to investigative reports and resisted them being able to watch tests done in the SBI lab. In 2009, a policy was put into place banning any observers in the lab. This policy includes instances where every single bit of evidence is used in the test, which Priya tells us happened in one of the other three cases mentioned earlier. In May of 2009, Waters argued that the defense’s scientists could contaminate the lab and insisted that the lab isn’t equipped to have outside scientists observing their casework. There was evidence that Arlene viciously fought her attacker. In her home there were three dollar bills on the couch which indicates that someone wasn’t there to rob her. There was a drawer placed on the floor near her dresser. Though the police took her purse they didn’t process it as evidence or check fingerprints before giving it back to Duffy. The bed next to Arlene’s body was covered in a bed sheet that contained significant amounts of blood. The footprints left in the blood were never measured by police. At 3:15 in the morning on March 18th, 2002 Arlene’s credit card was used at a gas station. Video was recovered from the store but the police either lost or destroyed the video. There was no evidence linked to Leslie except for the DNA test, which was wrong. At this point Leslie has been in jail about three years without bond, though Bissette had called the DA after a year and a half to inform him she had made a mistake. Bissette had mislabeled Leslie’s DNA and the blood found at the crime scene was Arlene’s. Priya tells us that “Agent’s Secrets” revealed that DNA is an exact science because everyone’s DNA belongs to only them but perfect samples can be hard to find at crime scenes. The evidence is often degraded or mixed with another persons and it’s hard for scientists to get a good look at all 16 unique identifiers that make up someone’s DNA profile. Crime labs have their own protocol for what construes a match between a suspect or mixed or partial sample. At the SBI’s lab, there are no minimum standards on how many of the identifiers are enough. According to an administrative order, seeing just one of these identifiers is enough. These standards are lower than other lab’s and it’s irresponsible to make conclusions with this little evidence. Most labs won’t consider anything a viable match unless three or four identifiers match between the suspects DNA profile and the sample from the crime scene. According to the SBI, it’s up to prosecutors to decide how much weight to give to the DNA evidence. Priya, Jess, and Keith joke that they’re scientists now, and honestly, I’m sure they’d do a much better job than these SBI analysts. The SBI removed Brenda Bissette from her lab duties and she retired in May of 2005. There’s a very good chance this was just human error and the SBI said they would review all 50 cases that Bissette had worked on since 2002 but wouldn’t redo the work unless requested by the prosecution or defense. However, they didn’t send out any notice to lawyers about this. Leslie Lincoln, with no evidence, murder weapon, or witnesses is offered a deal by the prosecution that says that if she pleads guilty to manslaughter, she can walk out of jail. Leslie said she couldn’t do it and she didn’t kill her mother. She was released on a $500,000 bond and placed on house arrest because she was still the primary suspect in Best’s eyes. Leslie, having found out about the lab’s mistake, asked for the report on the tests and was provided with a 700 page report of additional discovery. This discovery didn’t include any information involving the incorrect DNA test or law enforcement procedures that led to it. In short, there’s no paper trail of the mistake made by the SBI. The prosecutor took the death penalty off of the table and the evidence was retested and the results showed no evidence linking Leslie to her mother’s murder. Detective Best, magically produced three jailhouse informants, however. Leslie remained under house arrest for two more years, making it five years since the whole ordeal began. In 2007, the case went to trial and Leslie was found not guilty. This doesn’t mean hard times were over, however. Her house was foreclosed upon and her brother had had to sell her horses. She was homeless for two years before she was able to find a job, was diagnosed with PTSD and still struggles to this day. Jess says that this is exactly her and Priya’s issue with all of this, that the systems are fucked up, yes, but more importantly how people’s lives are destroyed by it on an individual level. Priya says the SBI should have made a statement, saying that the mistake happened and how they would prevent it going forward. In 2005, the Journal Newspaper requested public records about lab errors and the SBI did not disclose the error. When asked about it the SBI director, Robin Pendergraft said it must have been an oversight. Leslie says that even though she was acquitted, there is still someone out there who knows what happened and they need to come forward. She hired a private investigator who turned up a suspect for her mother’s murder but Greenville Police stopped investigating and maintain that they arrested the right person for the crime. Next week on F’d Up we’re going to get a look at the progress of the audit, more info on the SBI lab, and another case.
The System is F'd Up Part 2 - Recap Written by Brandi Abbott This week on F’d Up, the story of how Greg Taylor was wrongfully convicted continues. Priya begins by telling us that in the late 1990s North Carolina had two student ran “Innocence Projects,” these were the University of North Carolina Innocence Project and the Duke Innocence Project. The projects were receiving a lot of the same letters so some people had the idea to start The Center on Actual Innocence to coordinate the work done by each innocence project. In 2000, it was incorporated as “The North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence or the NCCAI. Keith asked if they only deal with death penalty cases to which Priya and Jess say no. Jess begins telling us about Chris Mumma. When Chris was younger she was a juror on a death penalty case and had never really given much thought to the death penalty before then. After she had her three kids, she decided to go to law school to study corporate law. However, a death penalty case really stuck with her so she interviewed her fellow jurors and wrote a paper on it. After law school, she clerked at the North Carolina Supreme Court, during which, she became friends with Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake Jr. While there, Chris saw a lot of cases come through, and was concerned about whether some people were actually guilty. She tried bringing it up with one of the Justices and a few clerks but it became clear that after the case is over, the idea of guilt or innocence is off the table. One case in particular stood out to her, she was concerned about how someone could be in jail for 30 years for a crime they didn’t commit. With her background in finance and efficiency, she was surprised at how chaotic the justice system is and the major lack of checks and balances. In 2001, she found out that the two universities were starting the NCCAI and she ended up running the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence – and still does. The NCCAI receives about 650 applications per year - either from inmates or from the family of inmates. When Chris receives all of the materials, she goes over them and decides whether they’ll be taking the case into “Further Review” which would involve obtaining all court files from the case. Once those are reviewed if it’s still looking like the convicted person is innocent it goes into “Investigation”. This stage is about more hands on work like going out interviewing people, tracking down anything that may help them understand all aspects of the case – and whether they may encounter any issues if they choose to pursue it further. In 2002, Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake Jr., Chris’ friend from the North Carolina Supreme Court established The Criminal Justice Study Commission after some highly publicized exonerations. Jess says he realized some shit was going down. This study commission reviewed police and prosecution procedures for factors that contributed to wrongful convictions in an effort to see why these wrongful convictions were happening. Within a few years they decided that what they needed was to establish an independent state innocence inquiry commission. Priya jokes that they really needed to establish another acronym. They established the Innocence Inquiry Commission, the purpose of which is to review credible post conviction cases wherein the convicted person claims wrongful conviction. Jess takes us back to Greg Taylor and reminds us that where they left off in the last episode is with Ed Taylor having gone to visit his son in prison and he’d told him they were out of resources and options – and it was likely Greg would not be getting out of prison. Around this time in 2006, Ed went to the general assembly hearing that was determining if the Independent State Innocence Inquiry Commission would be created. It passed and was created, officially going into operation in 2007. Because everything is connected in North Carolina, the NCCAI sends their cases to the Independent State Innocence Inquiry Commission. Priya tells us that according to the website the Commission is separate from the appeals section of the justice system and that when a person is declared innocent through it they can not be re-tried at any point for the same crime. When the commission was established Ed Taylor managed to get a written document into the hands of someone having dinner with Chris Mumma. Chris started reading Greg’s story and was blown away, she realized he had applied to the NCCAI but because they had such a large stack of applications, they just hadn’t gotten to his yet. When she reviewed his case she noticed all of the red flags from the way his case was processed. It was clear to her that though Greg and Johnny were just together by chance, law enforcement had actually been after Johnny Beck, but were trying to get to him through Greg. Keith asks if it was because Johnny was a big time drug dealer and Priya and Jess answer that they didn’t think he was “big time”, that he was just a drug dealer. When Chris was going through Greg’s file, she found out about all of the plea offers he had received that said he could go home if he just told them Johnny killed Jacquetta Thomas. Jess points out that if Greg was guilty he probably would have definitely said Johnny did it, and that even as an innocent person it had to be extremely tempting. She says that Greg just remained consistent the entire time. He knew that he had been with Johnny the entire night, from 10 PM to 6 the following morning, that the victim was last seen at 1 AM in her apartment, they saw the body around 3:30 AM, and that Johnny was just as innocent as Greg was. Greg turned down a plea before his trial, during his trial, and five years after his sentence. Chris thought that if he had been involved there was no way he would have passed up those opportunities. Keith says that he could understand before the trial and during because you would be hoping to not be convicted but after you’ve been in prison for five years it would take real conviction to not take the deal and he doesn’t know if he would have been able to do the same. Chris said whoever attacked Jacquetta Thomas, it wasn’t like they were just trying to stop her or like they were just trying to have control for sexual reasons, which is what was presented at the trial. The way Chris interprets the scene is that it was personal. There was no evidence transferred to either Greg or Johnny, even if the blood on the truck was hers, there were other explanations for how it could have gotten there, but if happened during the attack especially as violent and bloody as the scene was, there was no way it would have been just one spot. Priya points out that Barbara picked them up and says that she wouldn’t pick up someone at three in the morning who was covered in blood. Keith agrees and says if you look like a Jackson Pollock he’s going to keep on driving. Jess says Chris felt like this case had enough red flags to take on and the NCCAI officially agreed to review Greg’s case in February of 2006. The NCCAI gathered all of the necessary info on the case and, in July of 2007, referred it to the Innocence Inquiry Commission. Priya says that the IIC’s process is more in-depth than a pre-trial investigation and they take a no stone unturned approach. Priya says it’s still a very slow process. So two years later, August of 2009, Greg got a visit from them saying there had been a major revelation in his case. The IIC discovered that a man named Craig Taylor, yes CRAIG Taylor, confessed to selling drugs to Johnny the night of Jacquetta’s murder, but not just that, he confessed to killing her. Keith asked if the confession had been there the whole time, and Jess said no, that it had just came about. In September of 2009, the IIC’s eight-person panel unanimously voted to send Greg’s case to a three-judge panel to decide if he’s innocent. In October of 2009, Chris teams up with two other attorneys Mike Klinkosum and Joe Cheshire and everyone knows this is Greg’s last chance at freedom. In January of 2010, Chris was going through boxes of evidence, specifically the lab notes that SBI analyst Duane Deaver had taken of the blood evidence found on Greg’s truck. She found something in his notes that completely changed the case, but Jess won’t tell us what that is yet. Keith yells that that’s bullshit and she placates him by saying that what we can know now was that Deaver’s reports had never been shared with the defense. We’re reminded that the blood evidence was the only thing that linked Greg to Jacquetta Thomas’ brutal murder - and that this “evidence” was mentioned 17 times in Tom Ford’s closing arguments. Priya points out that if you’ve seen “The Staircase”, you’ve definitely seen this before (though not in the detail they’ve gone into) and you just may not remember it. In February of 2010, the evidentiary hearing started and Greg testified, still maintaining his innocence. The DA Colin Willoughby claimed that Craig Taylor’s confession was falsified. Keith says that this all just sounds like shady bullshit - and it really does. The DA had investigated a confession of Craig’s on another murder. Keith asks how many murders this guy confessed to and Priya tells us that it had been a bunch and this was apparently his thing. She also tells us that the DA did not like the IIC, and he knew that a lot of their case hinged on this confession and he wanted to bring it up in court maybe to set them up or afterwards to use it as an example of how the process didn’t work. A police search and rescue dog trainer, testified on Sadie’s (the adorable bloodhound from episode one) behavior. Sadie was not trained to do what the police had her doing. The handler specifically told the Raleigh PD that Sadie was not trained to do the things that were asking and the officers instructed the handler to try anyway. Barbara, the woman who picked up Greg and Johnny, testified. She said that they didn’t have a weapon or any blood on them, despite the fact that she picked them up so close to the crime scene. She said they were acting perfectly normal. Priya does want to ask her, though, how normal folks act at three AM after smoking crack all night. Keith points out there’s no way if they bludgeoned someone to death, that they would have no blood on them, especially since they were so high and wouldn’t have had the forethought to bring a change of clothes. Johnny Beck, himself, also testified. Jess says this was huge because Johnny had been out of jail for a long time and there was a risk someone could flip something around on him. He says that Greg did not kill Jacquetta Thomas. Ernest Andrews, the jailhouse informant who said Greg had confessed to him, came forward and admitted he lied. At this point, the state called Duane Deaver to the stand. Priya stops Jess to say the IIC hear testimonies from witnesses and various other people to really get a sense of what’s going on with everything during their investigation process. This is relevant because they had talked to Duane Deaver and he said that his testing was all accurate and true and he did things correctly. On the stand during the hearing when Deaver was questioned about his tests and results, he revealed that they hadn’t stopped at the preliminary tests. What Chris has found in those boxes was evidence of the fact that Deaver had conducted secondary tests on the sample and the results were negative. The spot/substance they found was not human blood. Jess says that when you do these tests, you do several tests – that’s science. Priya tells us that preliminary tests establish the possibility that specific bodily fluids are present. There is the possibly of a false positive, but these tests help determine which tests to do next. The next tests are confirmatory tests. When doing the first test, in this case, luminol and phenolphthalein, they got a positive reaction, which can happen when blood is present. However, Priya tells us you can get a positive reaction for many other things including cauliflower and broccoli. Keith asks if that means there’s blood in broccoli and Priya says no, it means that it can detect a number of things which is why confirmatory tests are done. Deaver performed confirmatory tests on the spot found on Greg’s truck, using the Takayama test. This test did not deliver the results that indicate human blood. At the hearing, a woman named Megan Clement a forensic technician for Lab Corp testified that she did her own testing of the DNA and got a 0.00% chance of it being blood. At this point Deaver admits that in the lab, reporting on the results of confirmatory tests is not required and that the decisions on procedure were made by people higher up than him - he claimed it wasn’t on him to question it and he was following protocol. Chris confirmed to Jess and Priya that the state lab had a policy that they only had to report the positive tests. If they received a negative, they were not required to report it. Keith remarks that they’re not just cheating, it’s in their handbook to cheat. On February 17th, 2010, Greg Taylor is finally free. Tom Ford, the DA, apologized to Greg Taylor. Jess says he shook his hand like it was a soccer match and not 17 years of his life ruined. Priya rants that it’s not a fucking game and she’s right. Tom Ford was quoted saying that if he thought he’d put an innocent person in jail it would tear him up, but he hadn’t lost a minute of sleep over it. Jess tells us that that was nine years ago and they still haven’t caught the person who murdered Jacquetta Thomas. Chris gave them suggestions on some people to look into but they’re so convinced Greg and Johnny did it that they haven’t tried. Word spread around North Carolina really quickly and people were understandably upset, thinking if it happened to Greg, it could happen to them. Because of this, Attorney General Roy Cooper called for a complete audit of the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation Crime Lab, bringing in two former FBI agents to complete the audit. Next week on F’d Up, Priya and Jess are gonna get into some more of the F’d Up stories that they discovered.
Recap of The System Is F'd Up - Part One Written by Brandi Abbott The episode starts off with how Priya, Jess, and Keith became F’d up. We get a nice taste of Priya, Jess, and Keith’s chemistry together as well as a bit of backstory. They all worked together in Reality TV production, and clicked instantly. Priya and Jess knew they wanted to keep working together and more than that, they wanted to make their own shows and maybe change the world a little bit. The idea for the podcast came to Priya when she was watching "The Staircase," a true crime documentary series about the trial of Michael Peterson. Particularly, the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) Crime Lab bloodstain pattern analyst, Duane Deaver piqued her interested as he seemed more interested in theatrics than forensic science. If you watched “The Staircase”, you know it eventually turns out that Deaver is full of shit, and Priya wanted to know how often something like this happens. She began researching the SBI Crime Lab, and it quickly became obvious that Duane Deaver was just the tip of the corruption iceberg - that there was a much larger issue with the entire system. “The Staircase” sort of touched on this when they quickly covered another man affected by Duane Deaver’s shoddy forensic science. The more Priya researched, the more she realized how much bigger the story was and how many people’s lives could have been (and were) affected. Priya went to Jess and told her she had found their show. Jess was completely shocked at the extent of the corruption and they immediately tried pitching it as a television docuseries, but they realized that because of everything they wanted to do (expose corruption, and highlight issues with the SBI Crime Lab to hopefully enact change), F’d Up might be better suited as a podcast. Plus, in doing a podcast they realized they could invite their friend Keith over and tell him everything they learned. In this way, Keith will be hearing everything for the first time on the podcast and will be learning and gasping along with listeners. Another man “The Staircase” quickly covered was Greg Taylor, a regular guy from the suburbs of Raleigh, North Carolina who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Priya tells us that Greg liked to “party” by which she meant, he used to partake in drugs. One night in September of 1991, Greg left a friend's house to procure drugs - on his way, he ran into an acquaintance named Johnny Beck who wanted to get high as well. At some point that night, they ended up parked in an industrial complex near a cul-de-sac. While Johnny was getting high, Greg became worried a cop may see them so he drove off-road and the truck accidentally ended up stuck in the mud. Greg and Johnny were forced to abandon the truck and decided to walk back - that’s when they saw something weird in the middle of the cul-de-sac. Greg thought it might be a mannequin, but Johnny thought it might be a body. Johnny was right as it turned out to be the body of a young woman named Jacquetta Thomas. Greg, a white guy, wanted to call the cops, whereas Johnny Beck, being a black man with a lifetime of racial profiling just wanted to get out of there. They ended up catching a ride from a woman, who happened to be driving by, and continued partying with her until early morning. Greg needed to get home and get cleaned up before going to work, so he called his wife to come pick him up. Greg and his wife planned to get his truck back from where it was stuck, but when they arrive at the cul-de-sac, they found that the area was swarming with police - it appeared to be a crime scene at that point. They decided to just get Greg to work and go back for the truck later. At work, Greg mentioned this to his boss and his boss wanted to check it out. Greg’s boss, Greg, and his wife headed over to the crime scene. At the crime scene, Greg approached the cops and told them he needed to get his truck. A detective told Greg to meet him at the station so they could talk, but didn’t let Greg take the truck. Later at the station, Detective Johnny Howard was questioning Greg and the questions seemed a bit more serious than the standard “what did you see?” type questions one would reasonably expect if caught in this situation. However, Priya tells us that because Greg was innocent and his entire knowledge of police was from cop TV shows, he was happy to help and it never occurred to him that he could be a suspect. He trusted the system and believed it was in place to help the good guys like him. She goes on to tell us that the police asked Greg if Johnny was black or white. Jess tells us the detective was creating the narrative he wanted and that Greg was getting really confused - as anyone would be. Keith asks why Greg hadn’t asked for a lawyer and Jess and Priya explain that he attempted to contact an attorney, but that when Greg couldn’t get in contact with him, he didn’t try anything else because he was still so confident in the police and his innocence. Jess says that Greg did notice a “shift” in the detectives eyes when he answered the detective that Johnny Beck was black. Greg said he could start to see where everything was going but still was sure he that just needed to cooperate to clear everything up. He agreed to take a polygraph test (this was never done) and gave them the keys to his truck and full permission to check it out. Jess tells us that the Raleigh police decided that what must have happened was Jacquetta Thomas’ murder was a “drugs for sex” deal gone wrong which the news outlets quickly picked up on - this story was completely untrue, however. Priya tells us that they spoke to Chris Mumma (who ultimately ended up representing Greg) and she said that the crime scene was extremely bloody and violent which is much more in line with a crime of passion - not a drug deal gone wrong. In a ridiculous turn of events, despite there being zero evidence, Greg was arrested for first degree murder. While in jail Greg hired an internationally well-known lawyer named Jim Blackburn. Priya mentions that some of us listeners may remember him from the book “Fatal Vision” and says those that do, wouldn’t be wrong to think hiring Blackburn, a defense lawyer with a very public defeat on record, wasn’t the best idea. In 1993, while Greg was out on bond, he was informed that his lawyer had been embezzling money and surrendered his law license. Greg had to find a new lawyer stat, and this new attorney, Mike Dodd, realized very quickly that the case against Greg was weak - Dodd decided that the best defense was no defense. Keith vocalized what everyone listening is probably thinking “that seems like a mistake”. Keith wanted to know why Greg went along with it and Priya says that if it were her she would probably be skeptical but put her trust in Dodd since one would think he knew what he was doing. Evidently not. In April of 1993, Greg’s trial began and Dodd stuck to his “do nothing” plan. During the trial, the prosecution’s entire case hinged on a forensic test done on a spot - a substance found on Greg's truck. The SBI Crime Lab determined the spot to be blood. Priya spoke with Marilyn T. Miller, an associate professor of forensic science at Virginia Commonwealth University to help with understanding the forensic science that comes into play throughout this season of F’d Up and, in this episode specifically, understanding luminol and the other chemicals discused. Priya says Marilyn explained that luminol is used to identify bloodstain patterns or any bodily fluids. She starts to use a hotel room as an example, because where better to find random fluids, but Keith is staying in one soon and doesn’t want to know anything about it. Priya goes on to say that to use luminol one would need to spray the luminol, use a black light to see the bloodstain patterns, and photograph them in about 8 seconds before they disappear. Jess jokes that you would need a pit crew and Priya decides that Luminol Pit Crew is going to be the name of her future death metal band. She tells us that SBI analysts used luminol initially to identify the spot on Greg’s truck. They then used phenolphthalein - the way phenolphthalein works, is one would be able to take a very small sample, add it to the mixture - and if it turns pink: it’s potentially blood. Jess tells us that this test determined that there was a tiny spot of blood under the fender wall of the truck. She also says they brought in a bloodhound named Sadie to the crime scene. Priya says that Sadie sniffed around the truck and determined that there was blood on, around, or in the truck. Priya reads directly from her notes to us “I’m sure Sadie is the best doggo, but that bitch was wrong”. Keith remarks that the Sadie part seems like a ridiculous subplot in a cozy British mystery to which Priya tells him that that isn’t the ridiculous subplot. The actual ridiculous subplot is that neither the prosecution or the defense brought in Barbara, the woman Greg Taylor and Johnny Beck got a ride from the night the truck got stuck and they saw Jacquetta’s body. The prosecution claimed they couldn’t find her and I guess even trying would be against the defense’s entire plan to do nothing. Priya and Jess now tell us about a jailhouse informant named Ernest Andrews who claimed and then testified that Greg confessed the murder to him. Priya says she’s unclear if he Greg even knew Ernest Andrews. Jess mentions that Ernest used this false information to try and get time off his sentence. Still the defense lawyer, Dodd, did absolutely nothing. Priya, Jess, and Keith speculate what Dodd could have been doing instead of his job, such as maybe tending a garden... On April 15th 1993, the state rested with their entire case built on Ernest’s testimony, the presumptive blood tests, and Sadie, the adorable bloodhound. Dodd presented no case. The next day, Friday the 16th, Dodd finally spoke and motioned for dismissal because of a lack of evidence. As Priya tells us, he wasn’t wrong. Greg’s wife called Dodd to discuss the case and completely in character for him, he told her he was tired of talking about the case (all of that nothing he did must have been exhausting) and he wanted to forget about the case for the weekend. Keith hopes Dodd ended up with a terrible garden. The following Monday in court, the prosecutor and defense made their closing arguments. The prosecutor, Tom Ford, mentioned the blood evidence seventeen times in his closing argument, hanging the entire case on it. According to Priya, Dodd did present an argument but there’s no record of it in the transcripts. This seems highly suspicious, but Priya tells us that this doesn’t come up later in the series, it’s just missing and they don’t know what was said. A dog, a spot that may have been blood, and an unreliable witness seem like a very small amount of nothing to sentence a man to life in prison over, but after a very short deliberation by the jury, that’s exactly what happened. Greg Taylor and his lawyer planned to appeal and were optimistic about it. He thought he’d just have to spend 12 months in jail, then they’d appeal, and in his eyes, of course he’d get out because he’s innocent. Priya tells us that Greg is one of the most optimistic people on earth and that every time they’ve spoken, his optimism just shines through. Jess mentions that meanwhile, Johnny Beck spent two years and prison and then was released because there was no evidence at all against him at all. She tells us that Greg was approached numerous times and was asked to confess that Johnny Beck was the murderer. He was given multiple offers to get out of prison in exchange for his testimony, but Greg never agreed because Johnny didn’t commit the murder and neither did he! In 1998, Greg appealed to have the charges dropped and cited ineffective council as the reason. His motion to appeal is denied. In 2000, his habeas corpus is also denied. In 2003, North Carolina Supreme Court refused to hear Greg’s request for DNA testing. Priya tells us at the point that Greg’s request for DNA sampling was denied, it had been 3,644 days since he’d been in prison, many attempted appeals, and his family and friends had done anything they could with every resource they could use. Greg was aware of the fact that life was passing while he was in prison. When he went in, his daughter was 9. He missed his daughter growing up, her graduation, her wedding, over half of her life. His daughter told him she wouldn’t allow anyone to walk her down the aisle, because her father couldn’t do it. Greg also completely refused to meet her significant other, the entire time he was in prison because he didn’t want him to see him behind bars. Keith says that the truly fucked up part of this is how completely Greg’s life was destroyed as well as how everyone around him’s life was destroyed for something he didn’t do. Through all of this however, Jess says that Greg was still holding on to hope and that even when he speaks about it now, he’s calm. Priya tells us that one day in 2003, about ten years after Greg went to prison, his father, Ed, came to see him and told him they were completely out of resources and options. Keith echoes everyone’s thoughts when he says “that’s fucked up” and Priya says only that there’s so much more fucked up shit to come next week when Greg’s story continues - but also throughout the entire F'd Up season.
Effed Up Preview Recap Written by Brandi Abbott The beginning of this special preview episode is all about how Priya, Jess, and Keith became F’d up. We get a nice taste of Priya, Jess, and Keith’s chemistry together as well as a bit of backstory. They all worked together in Reality TV production, and clicked instantly. Priya and Jess knew they wanted to keep working together and more than that, they wanted to make their own shows and maybe change the world a little bit. The idea for the podcast came to Priya when she was watching “The Staircase”, a true crime documentary series about the trial of Michael Peterson. Particularly, the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (SBI) Crime Lab bloodstain pattern analyst, Duane Deaver piqued her interested as he seemed more interested in theatrics than forensic science. If you watched “The Staircase”, you know it eventually turns out that Deaver is full of shit, and Priya wanted to know how often something like this happens. She began researching the SBI Crime Lab, and it quickly became obvious that Duane Deaver was just the tip of the corruption iceberg - that there was a much larger issue with the entire system. “The Staircase” sort of touched on this when they quickly covered another man affected by Duane Deaver’s shoddy forensic science. The more Priya researched, the more she realized how much bigger the story was and how many people’s lives could have been (and were) affected. Priya went to Jess and told her she had found their show. Jess was completely shocked at the extent of the corruption and they immediately tried pitching it as a television docuseries, but they realized that because of everything they wanted to do (expose corruption, and highlight issues with the SBI Crime Lab to hopefully enact change), F’d Up might be better suited as a podcast. Plus, in doing a podcast they realized they could invite their friend Keith over and tell him eve-rything they learned. In this way, Keith will be hearing everything for the first time on the pod-cast and will be learning and gasping along with listeners. Priya and Jess hint that there are a lot more F’d Up stories to come and we’re promised a sea-son of puns, true crime, cats, injustice, rosé and F’d Up forensic science.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
