"We would rather let 100 guilty men go free than to lock up a single innocent person" Unfortunately it appears to just be a feel good saying since it doesn't ever seem to be the case.
On my background there is a DUI that belongs to someone else. That person spells their first name differently, was born four years after me, in a different month, is a white guy and I’m black. The police department has known about this for over a decade; yet if you run my background it is still there. They won’t remove it. They gave me a piece of paper, official piece of paper, saying that that individual is not me, but haven’t removed it. I wasn’t even in the state at the time of that occurrence. And there it is, bureaucracy at it’s best.
That's so ridiculous. They can go through the hassle of making you an official paper but won't spend the time to give you a correct background. That's absolute BS. Sorry to hear that
As an attorney practicing 20 years - this confirms my continued loss of any faith in our legal systems …. Should be awarded $1 million for each year in prison …
Studies show that eye witness is only around 52% reliable. With two witness, that would increase to 75% With three witness, that would increase to 87% However, the fact it is a coin flip would seem like a due process violation. Further, the defense/prosecutors, never seem to test the witness's ability to remember faces, their vision with and without glasses, nor do they do the lineup in the same lighting condition. There is a case I am aware of (not by name) where a black man was identified based on the eye witness testimony. That witness was over 20 feet away in a car while it was a cold night (possibly raining slightly). The only source of light was a poorly working sodium halogen bulb (the yellow ones). There is no way in hell that eye witness could identify who the shooter was. There was no way the window wasn't fogged. And given that the shooter was wearing a hoodie, nope. I worked some years back with face matching technology (AI), and found that a linear transform of a face (making one face look like another) turned up disturbing results. Under bad lighting, false lighting, or purely on shape (without texture), a face can be changed up to 40% and would still be confused with the original. Even under ideal lighting, and proper photograph sourced textures, doing an AB Test, asking someone to compare, a face could vary up to 25% mathematically speaking, and a person may still not be able to identify the correct face. Using the new technologies for deep fakes, a defense attorney could create several hundred faces and ask a eyewitness to pick out the correct one and would fail by the numbers. On top of that, even security cameras are sketchy. At least the old ones. There should be a legal requirement that any facial image of a person must have a certain amount of objective fidelity prior to any enhancement before it can be allowed. With today's technology, and prosecutors altering images without telling the defense, it would be easy to use a deep fake to tweak the pixels just enough to convince a jury of "facts". The reality is that unless the images have a digital thumb print attached by the device that took the picture, then it will quickly become impossible to know if the image is genuine. A real joke would be to put the prosecutors, judges, or the witness's face using deep fake to make it evident to the jury that the imaging technology cannot be trusted anymore.
I lived in New Orleans during DA Harry Connick Sr's reign of terror. Sad that everyone saw what was happening but still kept voting him back into office.
@@desckUgah000 Not enough in this case. He can probably get more if he gets a damned good lawyer and sues the state instead of accepting standard restitution.
I'm 52, I can't even imagine life in prison since I was 20, not just for committing a crime, but 32 years and being innocent. Nothing gives this man that time back.
I'm in the same age bracket (plus a few years), I know you've been thinking about your retirement, looking closely at your bank account (probably regretting you didn't save more money, no offense) the man that was just released has none of that nor a skill to earn money with.
Just imagine all the things.you have done since you were twenty. I have been married, had children, watch them grow, even geld my granddaughter. All of this was denied to him.
I would rather just die. I do t think I could do that time. Just kill me. There is nothing they can do for this man that can equal the justice he deserves. That is the saddest part of all of this. Nothing will give him that time back.
@@desckUgah000 thats not nearly enough. you lose things worth more than any number can make up for.. I bet he would give up 100 million dollars if he could have his time back. Nobody knows how long they have to live. He might only have a few years left and theyre not even his best years.. poor man.
Plot twist: He goes to the bank to cash his inmate check...cops stop him and take his cash because they believe it was connected to illegal activity. (Civil assets forfeiture).
this basically happened but with a check for a civil injustice lawsuit against police... then he got the cops called on him cause the bank thought it was a fake check... infinite money!
"Calling all units, calling all units, we have a black man with money, all units in the area of Red State Bank on MLK Blvd please respond with force....don't forget to sprinkle some crack on him."
@@eve__________ I remember that a few years back...the guy had a legit check and they called the cops on him, and if memory serves they didn't even check to see if the check was good and arrested the guy. It was a while ago so details may have been confabulated with other stories.
The following in brief. Police are not government officials, they respond to RFPs with the government, which is observed with contract renewals. However, they are part of government unions and some benefits. Thus the governing body who contracts with them are liable for the actions of the police, thus political interference to protect the police. Courts, lawyers, judges who are still lawyers, prosecutors who are also still lawyers, etc. are extensions of local politics. Courts are an extension of politics. Judges are still practicing lawyers. All lawyers, including prosecutors are officers of the court first, and adhere to a governing body ultimately controlled by the "state". Judges have their own lawyer or legal team, who are able to advise a judge on information a judge cannot obtain about a case on their own. Supreme court rulings are clear, the police have no duty to serve and protect the civilian populations. They are also not obligated to protect personal and private information of people. This expands to police databases, such as CPIC "being broken" - such as but not limited to being misused, false and inaccurate information being put on it about individuals (and they may not even know it destroying lives), etc. And by law, they are allowed to lie, if under the guise of "police business". The police are an extension of government and have the monopoly on violence. Democracy = 51% can take away the rights of 49%. Democracy and capitalism go hand in hand, capitalism is corporations and corporations are dictatorships. All levels of government are corporations. Any recourse for wrong doing by police is an illusion, laws are cherry picked when applied and not, etc. Also for example. There are two versions of criminal criminal code charges. Both versions appear identical; however, a few words are changed in the (as a descriptive) "unknown version" and this is what police officers are charged with. The changing of a word makes all the difference if a conviction is imposed or not. How do I know this, I know one of the people who helped draft the unknown version. My career history and personal experiences gives insight to this. 80% of police funding goes towards pensions and salaries, despite someone being dishonorably discharged. The police make way more money than they will tell you. Working closely with them in the courts, many have said to me "this is the easiest job I ever had" and laughed - their jobs are not hard or life threatening as publically made out to be.
I had a friend falsely accused of a crime when we were teenagers. He was a little guy, so he got "affiliated" for protection. While he was in prison a guard was killed. Since he already had life with no parole they told him to take the blame, even though it was clear he couldn't have done it they accepted his confession. About four years later he was exonerated from the original crime, but he had to stay in prison for the guard's attack. He then tried to recant his confession for the guard, but they weren't having it. Sadly, he didn't last very long after it was "leaked" that he was going to snitch.
@@GeeTrieste Yeah, maybe he should have "known better", but believe it or not there are worse things in prison than trading one sentence for another. The worst part is it wasn't due to any action by the legal system that cleared him. It was one of the people involved in the original crime that got caught on something else and started telling on everybody to save himself. He's the one that gave them what they needed to prove he was innocent.
@@GeeTrieste Hindsight is 20/20. Someone who’s been in jail for years who knows they’re innocent is going to lose hope. They might not see a way out. Therefore they’re especially vulnerable to extortion and harassment.
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error. Not the police. Not the prosecutor
These cases are all too common. Steve, please address the issue we have in Tennessee. several years ago our State passed a law prohibiting DNA evidence from being entered in cases where the convicted person is still in prison.
It's probably a case of CYA as almost all all State and Federal legislators started out as lawyers, moved up to DA and don't want their skeletons dug up.
Yeah they fought tooth and nail to keep the case of some person who had already been executed from being reopened even though there was new evidence. Their reasoning was basically "it's over so drop it".
@@BDaltonYoung That makes sense for totally evil people whose job is to maintain the status quo. If the general public starts seeing evidence of innocent people being executed that would erode confidence in the system which would fuel the efforts to finally outlaw the death penalty on a permanent basis. Remember there are people in every society whose jobs is to make sure that nothing ever changes and this is one of those issues.
This is one of my biggest arguments against the death penalty. I also think people like James should get the necessary therapy and living expenses on the prosecuting office's dime for as long as they were wrongly imprisoned.
....but the problem is; locking a man up for 30 (plus) years is pretty much the same as the death penalty. This man's life is over. I don't care how much money he would get in a lawsuit. It's over. So, the people against the death penalty are also against long prison sentences for the same reason and we'll end up like Norway. A man murders 75 people and he gets sentenced to 25 years in prison. What a fucking joke.
@@Revkor The large problem with saying "some people need to die, but they have to be absolutely sure" is that being "absolutely sure" isn't a standard that is met almost all of the time. So the effect of "some people need to die, but they have to be absolutely sure" is effectively never executing anyone. "Absolute" surety doesn't exist in law.
4:53: "... for the family of the victim who no longer have justice." Objection! They never had justice in the first place. It's not justice if the wrong man is convicted of the crime. I know what the judge means, but AS a judge they should realize that wording is wrong and it rubs me the wrong way to hear them pphrase it like that.
@@TheGuruStud I don't think that's enough. Having read more than a few testimonies, it's apparent that quite a few people say they "saw" something even when it wasn't possible for them to, only to admit later they only heard about it from someone else.
@@chrisl4999 another reason perjury needs harsh sentences. There is no downside to lying in court. I've never seen anyone in a single high profile case charged. You have the plaintiff, defendant, their paid actors, cops, etc, all lying about every single detail and nothing happens. Literal video evidence proving entire testimonies to be false...just another day. Hell, prosecutors lie 24/7 to nab innocent poor people. The judges don't care. They're all beyond corrupt. Public executions outside need to come back. Get caught lying? The lynch mob present at every case is present. Guess what? Lying will go to zero overnight.
It's known from studies, that "eye witnesses" are the absolutely LEAST reliable form of evidence in court, and also that eye witness testimonies have the MOST effect on Juries. They have done test exercises where a "pretend robber" runs from a store in a shopping mall etc and then witnesses are asked by investigators to give descriptions. The descriptions don't even agree on the race of the actor/robber involved. I've observed several court trials and heard eye witness testimony which is very compelling, but I hope if I was on a jury, I would consider that testimony very carefully. However we mustn't just blindly accept whatever "scientific" evidence is presented by the Prosecution. Just over 100 years ago there was a whole field of science ("Phrenology"?) where a person's character and likelihood of being a violent criminal could be ascertained by feeling under their hair for bumps in the scalp. Later they decided that was NOT a valid science it was just utter cow shite. I wonder if in another 50 or 100 years some of our current scientific tests will be considered ? I remember some of the earliest DNA tests, simply gave the odds that "you were one of the 95% of the population, that could have left behind this DNA sample".
@@KiwiCatherineJemma "utter cow shite"...missed the chance at "udder". As for the legitimacy of evidence, I mostly agree. DNA really is unique to the person, aside from identical twins (and even those can have differences from mutations), but the DNA test AIUI does not do a full examination, just picks up on parts that are thought to be unusually varied among the population. Then there's what Steve talked about, with the fact that your DNA could be on the scene of a crime without you being involved. I suspect that the "certain crimes" he mentions would mainly be rape, but even then, finding your DNA doesn't mean you were the rapist, though it could mean you were sexually intimate with the victim. On the eyewitness testimony, for a moment I thought you were going to bring up the test where it was some sort of criminal justice class, and an actor ran in, "stole" the teacher's purse (or something like that), and ran out. Even in that situation, the witnesses had wildly varying descriptions of the perpetrator, some including a detail (hat?) that the teacher made up, saying something like "did you see that hat he was wearing?" That was enough for people to remember it, though it didn't exist. I also know someone who remembers events entirely differently from how others at the scene remembers them, creating details, etc. She's honest enough, just (apparently) suffered a brain injury in her youth that caused this. Jurors really need to heavily discount eyewitness testimony, take other evidence with some skepticism, and truly follow the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Of course, it would help in the US (and probably some other places) if we weren't loading up the system with people accused of "drug crimes".
Now imagine if you're got a common Arabic name. The "No Fly" list is JUST names, NOTHING ELSE, so there have been many instances of young children getting flagged and refused their flights.
A DA tried to give an Asian girl 6 years in prison for a small amount of ecstasy. .... Same DA ignored photographic proof of a rich guy driving through my mother's tent trying to kill her, assaulting, trespassing and vandalizing
I thought of it this way. Going to my 35 year high school reunion. Hard to fathom this man was in Jail for all those years for something he had nothing to do with. Hope he gets millions.
That's a serious chunk of someone's life. Just think about the things he missed out on, family, friends, career, all those Christmases with family, your children growing up. Nothing can ever get that back. I'm betting that one witness was primed by the detective to identify James.
He went in when George H.W. Bush (the father) was US President. Me was in during both Iraq wars, 9/11, the turn of the century, the rise of the internet and social media, the rise and collapse of cable television, all of the Marvel movies... But at least he missed the Star Wars sequels.
Oh, they've got such lowball numbers on that stuff... also, how much of his life may be left after the toll of 30+ years in prison, the poor conditions, stress, etc?
There was a case of something similar. There where some technicalities so the guy didn't get a dime, but was charged for "house and board". They agreed to let him keep prison wages of 10 cent per hour 😁
@@Oneofakind123 Some states have standard rates paid out for wrongful imprisonment. It is definitely better to be wrongfully convicted in some states than others.
2 года назад
@@andrewdolokhov5408 "better"… nah, it's definitely a tiny little bit less bad to be wrongfully convicted in some states than others. But just a basically infinitesimally tiny little bit. In other words: nope, it's just bad, it doesn't really make any fucking difference.
The job of a detective is to find someone that might be guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter if they are innocent or the evidence isn't there. The job of the prosecutor is to convince a jury of someone's guilt. It doesn't matter if they are innocent or the evidence isn't there. The way our Justice System is set up needs to change. Sad thing is, it likely never will.
As messed up as it it, it's still the best system in the world for the defense. Most nations don't even have a jury and instead one to three government judges hear both sides then declare you guilty, entire trials lasts minutes to hours with the prosecution having no limits on what evidence they can fabricate. In the USA the police and prosecutors have to be this corrupt to have a chance of beating the various protections of the Constitution. This guys biggest issue was his "free" lawyer who gave minimal effort. Our reform needs to be on the counsel provided to the defense, the state prosecution office should have to fund the defense as well as their own side.
It also seemed like the cops might have pressured or guilted the witness to positively ID the suspect. They could've said something like this for example: "Do you really want a man like that on the streets? Without your testimony that man will walk free and the family of the victim won't get any justice!" etc.
The year 1991 was a notable one for me also- I began my career with a state DOT from which I retired about two years ago. Very hard to fathom someone innocent being locked up for that long. Tragic.
Signing up for a socialist jobs program and leeching off the taxpayer for the rest of your life is not something you should be proud of, you're just as bad as the leeches of LE.
OK, the guy spends 32 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit, The prosecutor says “my bad you can go now”, what recourse does he have to get some compensation for the time and grief that he’s in tour in prison?
@@lrmackmcbride7498 not a single egregious error? Like investigating solely based on a tip and arresting the first person with that name in your database? I’d say that’s pretty egregious.
I believe the Gov (DA, Police, Judge...etc) KNEW he was innocent, but it was NOT until an honest person took up his case and an investigation/story was published did the Gov HAVE to admit he was innocent. ***The Gov just wanted to solve the case, innocent be damned.
just when im sure the ineptitude of government could not possibly be further exemplified, things like this prove me completely wrong. thank you as always Mr Lehto
The illusion of justice must be maintained especially when injustice is being done. During my placement prosecuting (offers followed), I recall being told... if people actually knew how things are done, they would lose complete trust in the system, it's a surprise anything gets done.
@@AnthonyRMaradin surprise, to be sure. your statement rings true of the financial system as well as in law, and health, and manufacturing, and on and on. yet, as far as i can tell, ours is still better than 90% of other countries systems. its no surprise then, that with much room for improvement, change is occuring as technology affords people to gain as much in terms of information as once previously held in trust
@@AnthonyRMaradin dude the first time that I went to traffic court I realized how corrupt the un-justice system was. The very same cops that lied on me had done it to several other innocent people. We had all been the victims of a monthly ticket quota scheme.
@@azza-in_this_day_and_age - More than 60% of people convicted of anything are innocent, this can be greatly expanded on. As for the financial institutions, I revolutionized the debt recovery world using litigation, using a traditional collections platform to facilitate mega volume. Example; a pilot project with a top credit grantor, prime or sub-prime, 10,000 files per quarter from one client's vertical and stream. 650 to get to judgement, most being default, was six and a half million per quarter just from that. Then was enforcement. I also brought back debtor prison via contempt by not obeying a court order to pay the debt. As for the real medical world, I did briefly walk with the elite types of the world and those behind them and learned things most deem as conspiracies. Such as cancer always having a cure. As for the liberal arts theoretical pseudosciences of psychology industry, where do I begin. From knowing people are experimented on firsthand and died from it, to working in the industry after law to wh1stl€bl0wing and exp0sing firsthand knowledge of the s€xu@l abuse of vulnerable women within, that led me to doing the same for p0l1ce / jud1c1al / p0l1t1cal corruption... which has left me literally destitute and crippled as I type these words.
I spent about 43 hours locked in a cell for a crime that never existed. I will tell you it's a life altering situation. I will never be the same again. People who say, I'll exchange some freedom for money have no idea what they are talking about. 43 hours may not seem like much, but I have lost all peace of mind. People who haven't the experience of having that cell door slam behind them do not understand the emotional aspects of being locked up and at the mercy of the legal system. Woe be to the person who requires daily medications to survive, the staff at the jail doesn't care if you receive your medications or not even if they have your medications in their possession. Along with improperly arresting innocent people and putting them in jail, they frequently do not provide proper medical treatment to the inmates, despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling saying that they must supply that care, under the 8th and 14th amendments. I was lucky, they didn't manage to kill me. Not all inmates are that lucky.
The issue I have with these sorts of cases is the fact they can never be truly righted. The State can pay its victim some money for the time wrongly spent in prison, the State can set an innocent person free...but the State can never give an innocent person the time spent behind bars back to the person. That time--not to mention whatever opportunities and/or experience--is gone forever.
There is no conceivable compensation for the injustice done to this man. Far too often winning a conviction takes precedence over finding the truth and delivering justice. It will likely never change, because no one is ever held accountable.
the cops on the case, prosecutors, judges on all appeals, witness all owe this man part of their pensions for the rest of his life, and then he should sue the state. 50% of the pensions sounds good to me
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error.
It just baffles me that this is an issue in the US, a country that prides itself on freedom. Depressing stuff to hear about but it's made worse by the fact that it's more common than people are led to believe. Thanks for sharing the story.
Especially since the court system in the US was founded on the principle of "its better that 10 guilty free persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
We had a man wrongfully imprisoned for murder based on DNA evidence here in Denmark - he got out on appeal after a more modern DNA test showed that the original DNA profile that let to him being found to begin with failed to match the sample from the crime scene. You can use DNA to rule out a suspect. but there is always the risk of getting a match with someone innocent.
They will not compensate him out of the goodness of their heart. He will have to take them to court for it. He could sue them for wrongful imprisonment, but it will be a difficult case. As the government can throw a lot of money at court cases when they are being sued, (it's not their money after all, it's what the taxpayers are giving them), if he does get any compensation, it will take years.
And what 32 years to be indisde for. While he's going to have some knowledge of the world, he won't have any idea of how the internet does everything these days. He won't likely know how half the technoliogical advances in simple home devices have changed. If this doesn't underline how bad things like this are....
Steve, what happened to "It's better to let 10 guilty people go free than convict 1 innocent person"? I read that Eye witness testimony is wrong 50% of the time. "The ripple effect " look it up
I remember the very first case in which DNA evidence was used in the defense of a suspected rapist in Washington, DC, back in the early 1980s. It is the U.S. Attorney's office that handles criminal cases in the District (as it was called). The victim gave a compelling testimony that, had it not been for the DNA evidence, would have sent the accused to prison. This evidence caught the U.S. Attorney's office by surprise and presented a thorny problem for the prosecution. But it was the U.S. Attorney's General's office that intervened and ordered the Dictrict's U.S. Attorney to drop the case as it would set a dangerous precedence in terms of using DNA evidenced in prosecuting future cases should the defendant be found not guilty. What really caught my attention when reading the story in the Washington Post was how sure the woman was raped about the identification of the man and without the DNA evidence, the case would have been a slam dunk for the prosecution.
And Yet to confuss us even more, they now know that some people can have 2 sets of different DNA. A Chimera. "A chimera is an individual whose body is composed of cells that are genetically distinct, as if they are from different individuals - and sometimes they really are from different individuals. Many people's bodies contain at least a few living cells from another person."
@@writerconsidered Google says "Feb 23, 2015 - DNA profiling first started out in the 1980s, and it has been extremely successful for testing in crime scenes, paternity testing, and ...
I wonder if the 'Witness' only made that their Claim, that they later recanted, was 'Leaned On' by the Cops to make an erroneous Claim. We have seen how some Police Interviews Go, where they they use Sleep Deprivation and lack of Food/Water all while berating people...and I could just imagine 30+ years ago the Cops have a person in an 'Interview Room' telling a 'Witness' "If you don't point us to the person who did it, we'll pin the whole crime on you" then 5 hours later come in with a single picture and say "Is this the Guy", and the Witness will say yes just to get away from the Cops.
I've seen enough video of police interrogations where the person being badgered said something to the effect of "What do I have to say to get you to leave me alone, I'll say it." to agree with you completely.
It doesn't actually even need to be that, human memory isn't generally eidetic. And human adults don't actually remember events or people with high degrees of detail. Most of things you think you recall are actually constructions by your subconscious extrapolated from snippets of information you stored of the event. The construction is subconscious and so the "eye-witness" can think they are being truthful in identifying someone. And their identification is treated almost as if it was a tape played back in their brain. So the problem really is the unreasonable veracity that eye-witness testimony is assigned by juries and judges.
In medicine we are mandated to verify patients by full name and date of birth. We've been doing this since BEFORE he was arrested. How completely unprofessional of the police, the prosecutors, his defense, the jury and even the judge. I hope they are all haunted the rest of their lives for ruining an obviously innocent person's life.
Wow, a Florida man story where the guy is innocent, that's a new one. On the serious side, they should have to pay this guy through the nose on this one. Florida robbed him of his whole life and that's not right. Imagine sitting in prison all those years knowing you're innocent and nobody will listen to you. The police are incompetent and the DA should have his license revoked if he's still got one. An apology isn't going to do any good at this point.
Having been with another agency that often worked with MDPD in those days I saw the way they operated close up. They would make arrests and alter evidence to fit their needs This was a very troubled agency.
I had a friend that I worked with that claimed he was innocent of a murder penned on him. He served 8 years. When his attorney got a retrial setup the state immediately offered him parole or take his chance at the retrial. The guy took the parole because he was afraid of getting screwed the 2nd time around. At first i was kind of on the fence believing him. But after some research and them immediately offering him that parole I am convinced he was innocent. It was not 32 years but he lost 8 years of his life. It really opened my eyes to many things.
I was wrongfully convicted in 90, got out in 91, so that time era was life altering where I met others like him, locked up among others who were dangerous to the public, as this malicious profiteering prosecution was ramping up packing prisons. That said, it's mind racking to put this mans loss & suffering into perspective.
I had a friend that spent 8 years for something I really believe he was innocent for. The amount of times this crap happens is sickening. After knowing this happened to someone I got to know fairly well it gave me a bit of fear about it can happen to anyone.
The Florida judicial system is an assembly line of this charge equals that... Next! Unless you have money you will be found guilty of anything you're charged with.
Should start at $1million per year with the amount starting after the prosecutor's & cop's pension funds are drained to pay for it. Then adjust it upward for inflation by 1% for every year served. That states limit the liability shows how aware they are of the problem... but then again many start as prosecutors in order to run for public orifice afterward so it's not surprising they'd cover their tracks whenever possible.
They ought to simply legislate punitive damages. The wrongly convicted gets average year's wages for that state for each year in prison-- plus interest. Way less than millions from a lawsuit, but the poor person doesn't have to go to court just to get some kind of justice. Saves court expenses, too. And it should be enough money so the person can get job training, buy a car, and obtain housing.
@@orppranator5230 Let's suppose the average yearly wage over 30 years was $50,000. Multiply that number by the 30 years, and you get $1,500,000. That's before interest. The process of determining that a person was wrongly convicted should be sufficient to automatically trigger the payment. With the payment should come free financial management and job counseling. Add a simple application process to get the person set up with housing for at least 6 months, and transportation, if family or friends are not available to take him in. No amount of money is going to make up for lost freedom, lost time, lost relationships, and lost opportunities. Throwing millions at a person just because they "deserve" it won't help anyone. That kind of money tends to disappear with amazing speed, and often does more harm than good for the recipient. Plus, many local governments simply can't afford to pay mega millions.
I'm always fascinated by how a person totally not involved in a crime gets convicted of that crime. Usually there is no explanation of how that person got on the police radar to investigate. This one is pretty clear how that happened, except who phoned in this guys name. Still, not enough evidence to convict.
Incompetence in law-enforcement and the judicial system is extremely common. There are people that do a half assed job that have serious consequences on peoples lives. This man should be awarded millions of dollars and the people responsible for stealing 30 years of his life should go to prison for the same amount of time.
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error.
@@crjcrj8443 The key phrase there was "Along with similar photos". The main issue is that they grabbed the first person who had a matching name and looked for photos of people that looked like him. If you did that out in my area as an officer you would be fired for incompetence, and the trial would be declared a mistrial due to "tainted evidence." It's happened before in other areas. Rather than taking the time to do a detailed search and find the person who is properly involved, police just grabbed the first person who had a matching name/ description.
@@lynchkid003 Wrong. If someone made an anonymous phone call that someone did the crime, the detective should put that person’s photo in a photo array. If the witness is not behind setting up the person , they should not pick that photo. That’s investigating 101. The photo is mixed in with other similar photos. The photo array is available and given to the defense to challenge if they wish to do so. They did not. TgT falls on the defense
This might have been a case of the bad side of jury nullification. Juries will sometimes look at evidence they're presented, and they will assume that even though presented evidence doesn't provide enough to convict, there must be suppressed evidence that wasn't shown, and that evidence would cause a conviction. The reason it must exist is that they wouldn't bring these charges without it.
We need complete oversight of the government and every agency. Then businesses. Too much corruption for criminals that stole elections or worse nepotism.
really ridiculous the only key evidence they had, the names matched. seriously, the District Attorney and/or Prosecutors of this man's case or similar cases just like these need to go to jail. Prosecutors should have the sworn duty to dismiss prosecution of a case if they know the evidence is bogus, does not match, or shows the defendant's innocence, they should never attempt to continue to prosecute a man who they know are innocent just for the sake of their prosecution record, reputation, or ego.. Consequences for if they willingly choose to continue with prosecution of an innocent man, they are disbarred, banned from ever practicing law again, and/or fined and possibly jailed depending on the severity of the circumstances, negligence, or malicious prosecution.
This isn’t the fault of the detective or the prosecution. They put the photo of Tommy James in a photo array- in with a group of similar looking people - to the victim or witness to ask if the picture of the criminal is in the group of photos. The witness picked out this Tomas James and said this is the man who did the robbery. That simple, the witness is the one who made the mistake
@@yomommaahotoo264 The police did nothing wrong. It is the witness who pointed at the defendant and said “ that’s the man who did it”. The police did not coerce the testimony. They put the photo in a photo array( a group of photos). The witness picked the defendant. Then he was put in a line up. The witness picked him. Then the witness testified in court that it was him. Not the police, the witness. It is the defense that dropped the ball. An alibi? The defendant has to tell the police - which means he doesn’t take his right to be silent . That is the job of the defense lawyer
@@crjcrj8443 Defense lawyers are almost always in the pocket of the prosecutor, and line ups can be much like drug sniffing dogs falsely alerting. The crime boss prosecutor solely to blame.
I suggest a law to impose automatic financing of 1 million per year spent in prison if later found innocent or not charged (+ a percentage if a partial year spent in prison) which would be deducted from the arresting institution and would reduce future funding. I believe this would incentivise police with the cost of poor quality.
End absolute immunity for DAs, Prosecutors, and Judges . . . If conduct is wrong / illegal, or just plain stupid, then they should be able to be held accountable. If a builder, constructs a house/building/bridge/etc and it falls down and harms people, they can be held accountable if their work was flawed. If a surgeon makes a mistake, they can be sued. The list goes on and on. There shouldn't be any relief for this class of people (DAs, Prosecutors, Judges) especially in the case of malfeasance. DAs and Prosecutors in particular seem so intent on their conviction record and we often hear stories of them putting a thumb on the scale of justice just to insure a conviction to pad their record.
Because it IS a 'class of people'... ones with power over others, they will never be held accountable as they are a barrier between us plebs & those THEY serve - an even 'higher class' of people. Kings never shovel shit and their servants never worry about those below them - only those above.
Even uncommon-ish names can be common. Add to that a somewhat similar appearance and you've got a disaster if the other person is shady. It's another fear of how police and the prosecutors may fail at due diligence. I have a local doppelganger and have people mistake me as that person all the time.
When I Googled my name I found a doctor in Michigan and a politician in Arizona among others that share my name and it's not very common. I also have been mistaken for about 5 other men throughout my life so I apparently have 5 doppelgangers.
@@b_uppy - Not fun at all because the guy who looked like me was a crackhead and apparently took all his children's Christmas presents back to the stores and got the money back and spent it on crack cocaine. Another guy from his town thought I was the crackhead and wanted to beat the crap outta me. But once he heard me speak and I told him I have no children and was from Toledo he finally realized that I wasn't the crackhead guy. He said that I looked like his identical twin.
@@gregGould My doppelganger is relatively harmless at this point, but there is always the weird fear that things can go awry in a way that cause a lot of harm.
When I was in high school, I was one of three students who all had the same first and last name. There also was a member of the faculty who had the same first and last name as the three of us. Luckily none of the four of us ever became suspects in any crime that I am aware of.
We had four guys with the same first name, so we called them all by their last names. But same *both* names? What did y'all do? Richard, Rich, Richie, and Mr. White?
@@liamwayne6703 I went by Rich then (and still do). BTW, one of my present friends is the Richard White best known for providing the voice of "Gaston" in the animated movie "Beauty And The Beast". I am a professional jazz and cabaret vocalist and Richard is an opera singer. He and I often find ourselves mistaken by people for the other Richard White on social media such as Facebook.
My dad and brother both worked for a large aerospace corporation. At one time, the company phone directory listed six people who shared their same first and last name.
great video. Steve, I'd like to see you do a video on the Jan 6 "insurrectionists" who are being illegally held without trial for longer than their actual sentences would have been.
@@machintelligence WRONG. See Matthew Martin. Also, the overwhelming majority haven't had trials yet. If you think people should be jailed because none of their alleged peers have not been acquitted yet, you should self-terminate.
Think of the stress this put on the victims family knowing a innocent man was in prison for that many years and the guy who did the crime was probly free most the time
Who cares that the victim's family is unhappy or stressed? They were most likely happy to have the man convicted 32 years ago, even having heard the crappy "evidence" and testimony. Thomas James paid for their "happiness" with 32 irreplaceable years of his life in a Florida prison. If police and prosecutors were under threat of prosecution and prison if they knowingly convict innocent people, there would be fewer of these wrongful convictions.
Courts seem to do these mistakes a lot. Maybe we should start to require two separate and independent courts to find someone guilty before a verdict is valid. The trails must of course be isolated, carried out in parallell and with no communication between the judges and jurors.
In the 90s, there was a study done by a national association of law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys that found about a third of people in prison for felonies did not commit those felonies. Since then people in general in all professions have, I think, become less competent.
They'll say they have 'no conflicts' while playing golf with each other between trials. "Oh, yeah... heard about that case!... is he guilty?" "Yep. I ruled as such." "Ok! No problem! Guilty it is! ... Your turn to buy a drink."
This is one of those events like Sandy Hook that should have never seen the light of day. Hats off to all those who took the time to set him free and call attention to the dark side of bad work from the officers to the DA,s and the legal system. The public Defenders officer should have the same resources at their fingertips as the DA and police Dep, For this was a slap into the face of our founder fathers and all those working in the law from the new street officer to the person in the DA,s office who do there best each day not to make people into criminals but to make sure they are real criminals and facing life or death for murder should be a major red flag not to rush anyone through the system as if your picking up a happy meal for the kids.
Your public defender resources could be easily fixed. The prosecutor and public defenders office is the same office. No prosecutor is ever allowed to defend a suspect they ever prosecuted, and they cannot never prosecute a suspect they ever defended. The pool of defenders and prosecutors is the same. Each lawyer is judged based on "wins" that follow all rules. A win for defender is whether the accused says the lawyer won. The win as prosecutor is if they get a conviction based on evidence that a reasonable person would say was obtained properly and that there is no suppressed evidence. Then, both sides have equal funding since each lawyer takes on both roles, and they're judged on ability based on results.
@@werefrogofassyria6609 In that case almost every town would run out of Lawyers..... It is not uncommon for a criminal to have 15 or 20 charges over the course of their life... For example I lived in a place called Massachusetts in the town called Lynn there's a book there of who owes the court money for Trials from that year that book is 10" thick ....
@@werefrogofassyria6609 If the same lawyers were both the Da's and defense attorneys And they couldn't cross contaminate what about every person who's been arrested 5,10, or 15 times, you just keep hiring new lawyers?
@@justinbellio2285 Not really. You just wind up getting the same prosecutor and the same defender. When choosing, they take the one with the least workload who can handle the side they need to handle for you.
The legal system, including all lawyers, doesn't af about you and me, or about the constitution. If lawyers cared they'd be fighting for our right to carry cell phones into a courthouse. 10s of 1000s of lawyers walk into a courthouse daily. Every time they see the no cell phone signs. Yet, THEY are allowed to carry their cell phone inside, so they don't give af about the rest of us. Or care about the first ammendment right of citizens being violated!
This is one of the key points (among many) of why I'm totally against the death penalty. You can let an innocent person go if/when new evidence comes to light, you cannot resurrect a dead innocent person. I do not care how iron clad the case is against a person, up to and including actual video evidence of the 'capital' offense being committed, if you make exceptions for any reason then exceptions will creep and you get back to innocent people potentially on death row. there are some key cases I've followed over the years where there is enough evidence of doubt that I'm fairly convinced we have potentially executed innocent people.
Overall you save money by avoiding the endless appeal processes as well. I think it has worked in Iowa pretty well. The GOP wants to bring it back to Iowa though. Given the trend there is a good chance that this will happen eventually. We are working our way to becoming the Mississippi of the midwest.
By that logic you shouldn't have prison at all then. You can't throw out the death penalty because of an innocent person. What you do is investigate and if you find the person was framed, then you try and convict the framer. If successful, then you also execute the framer and publicly humiliate him/her. Now justice is served.
@@7F0X7 Would that be Red Herring or False Dichotomy? I"ll have to ponder that. But to give a straight answer. As of January 2020, the Innocence Project has documented over 375 DNA exonerations in the United States. Twenty-one of these exonerees had previously been sentenced to death. I'm not arguing that crime doesn't happen and that criminals don't need to be punished. But I am saying the criminal justice system has inherent flaws that are extremely hard to root out: *Witness testimony is sketchy at best for one, and completely unreliable at worst for many reasons the most innocent is that the human brain just fills in details on its own and the worst, the witness is getting tangible compensation to give an account favorable to the prosecution. *As has been showcased on this very channel, police and prosecutors are are allowed to lie and make up "facts" to coerce confessions and (again showcased here) innocent people have been driven to confess to crimes they have not done through trickery and hard interrogation. *Also as been showcased on this channel, prosecutors and police have withheld evidence and witness from defense teams when it has undermined their case. Something they are specifically not allowed to do, but do so just the same. There are too many problems in our justice system to trust it to only kill the guilty. Does all of this mean we need to just do away with prisons? No of course not and I find that that this is your takeaway suspicious. But having the state murder/kill people, I'm sorry execute people, on our behalf when the system itself has so many flaws is just morally wrong. My addendum that there be no exceptions now matter how iron clad is just a ways and means to keep the system balanced. As soon as one starts to say "well the death penalty is wrong \*except\* for this circumstance, then one starts finding more and more "well \*except for this\*" reasons. So long as innocent people might be put to death \*for us\* by the state, we cannot allow the state to put to death anyone \*for us\*. And that is what the death penalty is: the state killing on our behalf.
I wonder if he found it interesting that the clothes he was arrested in are now back in style.
🤣
Or just confused why fashion hasn’t changed in the last three decades.
I'm wondering about how the comments on fashion are from males. That wouldn't be the last thing on my mind, it would NEVER be on my mind.
His family brought him new clothing. Terrible attempt at a shitty joke
@@billmellater Dude's been in prison for 32 years (on BS no less)... I submit eventually dating is at least on his radar.
The state owes him for 32 years of his life and someone should be doing time for this lazy "mistake"
Thats how the systems work though, spread the responsibility so thin, noone is responsible
@@jhoughjr1 If everyone is responsible, then no one is responsible.
@@50jakecs How about the office who sentenced him is responsible for the years, and pain, and anguish.
No. he owes the state for 32 years of room and board.
"We would rather let 100 guilty men go free than to lock up a single innocent person"
Unfortunately it appears to just be a feel good saying since it doesn't ever seem to be the case.
On my background there is a DUI that belongs to someone else. That person spells their first name differently, was born four years after me, in a different month, is a white guy and I’m black. The police department has known about this for over a decade; yet if you run my background it is still there. They won’t remove it. They gave me a piece of paper, official piece of paper, saying that that individual is not me, but haven’t removed it. I wasn’t even in the state at the time of that occurrence. And there it is, bureaucracy at it’s best.
That's so ridiculous. They can go through the hassle of making you an official paper but won't spend the time to give you a correct background.
That's absolute BS.
Sorry to hear that
I don't know if it's possible to file a small claims suit against them. Small claims might just be for money damages.
Sounds like a defamation case to me. How about filing a complaint sounding in defamation and ask for injunctive relief?
Ask them if the person who did the crime on your record is a friend of theirs, if they deny that ask them then why are you protecting him.
That’s slander/defamation 😂 I wonder how many ppl or jobs turned you down after running your info not telling you why.
As an attorney practicing 20 years - this confirms my continued loss of any faith in our legal systems …. Should be awarded $1 million for each year in prison …
Should be awarded $1 million for every day in prison.
Studies show that eye witness is only around 52% reliable.
With two witness, that would increase to 75%
With three witness, that would increase to 87%
However, the fact it is a coin flip would seem like a due process violation. Further, the defense/prosecutors, never seem to test the witness's ability to remember faces, their vision with and without glasses, nor do they do the lineup in the same lighting condition. There is a case I am aware of (not by name) where a black man was identified based on the eye witness testimony. That witness was over 20 feet away in a car while it was a cold night (possibly raining slightly). The only source of light was a poorly working sodium halogen bulb (the yellow ones). There is no way in hell that eye witness could identify who the shooter was. There was no way the window wasn't fogged. And given that the shooter was wearing a hoodie, nope.
I worked some years back with face matching technology (AI), and found that a linear transform of a face (making one face look like another) turned up disturbing results. Under bad lighting, false lighting, or purely on shape (without texture), a face can be changed up to 40% and would still be confused with the original. Even under ideal lighting, and proper photograph sourced textures, doing an AB Test, asking someone to compare, a face could vary up to 25% mathematically speaking, and a person may still not be able to identify the correct face. Using the new technologies for deep fakes, a defense attorney could create several hundred faces and ask a eyewitness to pick out the correct one and would fail by the numbers.
On top of that, even security cameras are sketchy. At least the old ones. There should be a legal requirement that any facial image of a person must have a certain amount of objective fidelity prior to any enhancement before it can be allowed. With today's technology, and prosecutors altering images without telling the defense, it would be easy to use a deep fake to tweak the pixels just enough to convince a jury of "facts". The reality is that unless the images have a digital thumb print attached by the device that took the picture, then it will quickly become impossible to know if the image is genuine. A real joke would be to put the prosecutors, judges, or the witness's face using deep fake to make it evident to the jury that the imaging technology cannot be trusted anymore.
I lived in New Orleans during DA Harry Connick Sr's reign of terror. Sad that everyone saw what was happening but still kept voting him back into office.
I agree and it still would not be enough. He can never have that time back.
@@desckUgah000 Not enough in this case. He can probably get more if he gets a damned good lawyer and sues the state instead of accepting standard restitution.
I'm 52, I can't even imagine life in prison since I was 20, not just for committing a crime, but 32 years and being innocent. Nothing gives this man that time back.
I'm in the same age bracket (plus a few years), I know you've been thinking about your retirement, looking closely at your bank account (probably regretting you didn't save more money, no offense)
the man that was just released has none of that nor a skill to earn money with.
Just imagine all the things.you have done since you were twenty. I have been married, had children, watch them grow, even geld my granddaughter. All of this was denied to him.
I would rather just die. I do t think I could do that time. Just kill me. There is nothing they can do for this man that can equal the justice he deserves. That is the saddest part of all of this. Nothing will give him that time back.
@@PeterShipley1 wrongly incarcerated are from the gov entitled to 50,000 per year incarcerated.
@@desckUgah000 thats not nearly enough. you lose things worth more than any number can make up for.. I bet he would give up 100 million dollars if he could have his time back. Nobody knows how long they have to live. He might only have a few years left and theyre not even his best years.. poor man.
Plot twist:
He goes to the bank to cash his inmate check...cops stop him and take his cash because they believe it was connected to illegal activity. (Civil assets forfeiture).
Cops Should Be Executed At That Point. This Is Enough. XD
this basically happened but with a check for a civil injustice lawsuit against police... then he got the cops called on him cause the bank thought it was a fake check... infinite money!
@@eve__________ Truly messed up.
"Calling all units, calling all units, we have a black man with money, all units in the area of Red State Bank on MLK Blvd please respond with force....don't forget to sprinkle some crack on him."
@@eve__________ I remember that a few years back...the guy had a legit check and they called the cops on him, and if memory serves they didn't even check to see if the check was good and arrested the guy. It was a while ago so details may have been confabulated with other stories.
Police sure seem fine with doing their job poorly as long as they can blame someone else.
You See The Cops? You Walk The Other Way. Troublemakers.
Only here to tax incarcerate period they lack a moral compass
The following in brief. Police are not government officials, they respond to RFPs with the government, which is observed with contract renewals. However, they are part of government unions and some benefits. Thus the governing body who contracts with them are liable for the actions of the police, thus political interference to protect the police. Courts, lawyers, judges who are still lawyers, prosecutors who are also still lawyers, etc. are extensions of local politics.
Courts are an extension of politics. Judges are still practicing lawyers. All lawyers, including prosecutors are officers of the court first, and adhere to a governing body ultimately controlled by the "state". Judges have their own lawyer or legal team, who are able to advise a judge on information a judge cannot obtain about a case on their own.
Supreme court rulings are clear, the police have no duty to serve and protect the civilian populations. They are also not obligated to protect personal and private information of people. This expands to police databases, such as CPIC "being broken" - such as but not limited to being misused, false and inaccurate information being put on it about individuals (and they may not even know it destroying lives), etc. And by law, they are allowed to lie, if under the guise of "police business".
The police are an extension of government and have the monopoly on violence. Democracy = 51% can take away the rights of 49%. Democracy and capitalism go hand in hand, capitalism is corporations and corporations are dictatorships. All levels of government are corporations.
Any recourse for wrong doing by police is an illusion, laws are cherry picked when applied and not, etc. Also for example. There are two versions of criminal criminal code charges. Both versions appear identical; however, a few words are changed in the (as a descriptive) "unknown version" and this is what police officers are charged with. The changing of a word makes all the difference if a conviction is imposed or not. How do I know this, I know one of the people who helped draft the unknown version. My career history and personal experiences gives insight to this.
80% of police funding goes towards pensions and salaries, despite someone being dishonorably discharged. The police make way more money than they will tell you. Working closely with them in the courts, many have said to me "this is the easiest job I ever had" and laughed - their jobs are not hard or life threatening as publically made out to be.
They went with the judge dread approach. Better a 100 innocent men go to Jail for life than one guilty man go free.
@@AnthonyRMaradin Even considering you are a sovereign citizen, you don't have a freaking clue what you are babbling about.
I had a friend falsely accused of a crime when we were teenagers. He was a little guy, so he got "affiliated" for protection. While he was in prison a guard was killed. Since he already had life with no parole they told him to take the blame, even though it was clear he couldn't have done it they accepted his confession. About four years later he was exonerated from the original crime, but he had to stay in prison for the guard's attack. He then tried to recant his confession for the guard, but they weren't having it. Sadly, he didn't last very long after it was "leaked" that he was going to snitch.
Sounds about right. Cool civilization we have here. At least the elites are living their lives free of fear from jackboots, right? 😒
very sad story
If he knew there was a shot of overturning the original crime, he should have known better than to catch a new conviction voluntarily.
@@GeeTrieste Yeah, maybe he should have "known better", but believe it or not there are worse things in prison than trading one sentence for another.
The worst part is it wasn't due to any action by the legal system that cleared him. It was one of the people involved in the original crime that got caught on something else and started telling on everybody to save himself. He's the one that gave them what they needed to prove he was innocent.
@@GeeTrieste Hindsight is 20/20. Someone who’s been in jail for years who knows they’re innocent is going to lose hope. They might not see a way out. Therefore they’re especially vulnerable to extortion and harassment.
Once convicted. The system has no interest to taking blame by admitting they made a mistake.
They are also strangely willing to allow the actually guilty party to escape justice...
The prosecutors who put him there should be imprisoned themselves for 32 years. Scumbags.
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error. Not the police. Not the prosecutor
These cases are all too common. Steve, please address the issue we have in Tennessee. several years ago our State passed a law prohibiting DNA evidence from being entered in cases where the convicted person is still in prison.
So they want to make sure once you're in prison that you stay there no matter what.
It's probably a case of CYA as almost all all State and Federal legislators started out as lawyers, moved up to DA and don't want their skeletons dug up.
This is immoral. Shame on TN!
Yeah they fought tooth and nail to keep the case of some person who had already been executed from being reopened even though there was new evidence. Their reasoning was basically "it's over so drop it".
@@BDaltonYoung That makes sense for totally evil people whose job is to maintain the status quo. If the general public starts seeing evidence of innocent people being executed that would erode confidence in the system which would fuel the efforts to finally outlaw the death penalty on a permanent basis. Remember there are people in every society whose jobs is to make sure that nothing ever changes and this is one of those issues.
This is one of my biggest arguments against the death penalty. I also think people like James should get the necessary therapy and living expenses on the prosecuting office's dime for as long as they were wrongly imprisoned.
....but the problem is; locking a man up for 30 (plus) years is pretty much the same as the death penalty. This man's life is over. I don't care how much money he would get in a lawsuit. It's over. So, the people against the death penalty are also against long prison sentences for the same reason and we'll end up like Norway. A man murders 75 people and he gets sentenced to 25 years in prison. What a fucking joke.
sorry some people do need to die. but they have to be absolutely sure. and frankly every person invovled in this should face punishments
Oh no the death penalty should be for the prosecutors of this crime against this man.
@@Revkor The large problem with saying "some people need to die, but they have to be absolutely sure" is that being "absolutely sure" isn't a standard that is met almost all of the time. So the effect of "some people need to die, but they have to be absolutely sure" is effectively never executing anyone. "Absolute" surety doesn't exist in law.
@@mikepalmer1971 Agreed.
4:53: "... for the family of the victim who no longer have justice."
Objection! They never had justice in the first place. It's not justice if the wrong man is convicted of the crime. I know what the judge means, but AS a judge they should realize that wording is wrong and it rubs me the wrong way to hear them pphrase it like that.
Yep. The family didn't have "justice". They had "peace of mind". Predicated on a lie. Ignorant bliss.
But You Must Understand Something, In Their Minds He Did It!! IT WAS REAL IN THEIR MINDS!! Don't Get Caught In That Part Of Florida.
Can we please downgrade “eye witness” testimony to the same level as hearsay?
Unless there's 3 unrelated witnesses, yep.
@@TheGuruStud No. Even if.
Not by legal definition.
@@TheGuruStud I don't think that's enough. Having read more than a few testimonies, it's apparent that quite a few people say they "saw" something even when it wasn't possible for them to, only to admit later they only heard about it from someone else.
@@chrisl4999 another reason perjury needs harsh sentences. There is no downside to lying in court. I've never seen anyone in a single high profile case charged. You have the plaintiff, defendant, their paid actors, cops, etc, all lying about every single detail and nothing happens. Literal video evidence proving entire testimonies to be false...just another day. Hell, prosecutors lie 24/7 to nab innocent poor people.
The judges don't care. They're all beyond corrupt.
Public executions outside need to come back. Get caught lying? The lynch mob present at every case is present. Guess what? Lying will go to zero overnight.
I've served on 3 juries. I would NEVER convict anyone of anything (including jaywalking) based solely upon eye witness testimony.
Never make that statement during jury selection.
It's known from studies, that "eye witnesses" are the absolutely LEAST reliable form of evidence in court, and also that eye witness testimonies have the MOST effect on Juries. They have done test exercises where a "pretend robber" runs from a store in a shopping mall etc and then witnesses are asked by investigators to give descriptions. The descriptions don't even agree on the race of the actor/robber involved. I've observed several court trials and heard eye witness testimony which is very compelling, but I hope if I was on a jury, I would consider that testimony very carefully. However we mustn't just blindly accept whatever "scientific" evidence is presented by the Prosecution. Just over 100 years ago there was a whole field of science ("Phrenology"?) where a person's character and likelihood of being a violent criminal could be ascertained by feeling under their hair for bumps in the scalp. Later they decided that was NOT a valid science it was just utter cow shite. I wonder if in another 50 or 100 years some of our current scientific tests will be considered ? I remember some of the earliest DNA tests, simply gave the odds that "you were one of the 95% of the population, that could have left behind this DNA sample".
@@KiwiCatherineJemma "utter cow shite"...missed the chance at "udder". As for the legitimacy of evidence, I mostly agree. DNA really is unique to the person, aside from identical twins (and even those can have differences from mutations), but the DNA test AIUI does not do a full examination, just picks up on parts that are thought to be unusually varied among the population. Then there's what Steve talked about, with the fact that your DNA could be on the scene of a crime without you being involved. I suspect that the "certain crimes" he mentions would mainly be rape, but even then, finding your DNA doesn't mean you were the rapist, though it could mean you were sexually intimate with the victim. On the eyewitness testimony, for a moment I thought you were going to bring up the test where it was some sort of criminal justice class, and an actor ran in, "stole" the teacher's purse (or something like that), and ran out. Even in that situation, the witnesses had wildly varying descriptions of the perpetrator, some including a detail (hat?) that the teacher made up, saying something like "did you see that hat he was wearing?" That was enough for people to remember it, though it didn't exist. I also know someone who remembers events entirely differently from how others at the scene remembers them, creating details, etc. She's honest enough, just (apparently) suffered a brain injury in her youth that caused this. Jurors really need to heavily discount eyewitness testimony, take other evidence with some skepticism, and truly follow the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Of course, it would help in the US (and probably some other places) if we weren't loading up the system with people accused of "drug crimes".
I was traveling internationally, and detained at the Atlanta Airport, for having a common name.... and nothing more
Maybe they didn't like one of the documentaries you directed?
Now imagine if you're got a common Arabic name. The "No Fly" list is JUST names, NOTHING ELSE, so there have been many instances of young children getting flagged and refused their flights.
I would loathe have a great name like Michael Moore get ruined by that megalomaniac moviemaker.
Now imagine some fan belt inspector puts your name on the no-fly list because he doesn't like the book review you wrote.
im only 20... this man spent 1.5x my lifetime in prison cause of what his parents called him when he was born. i cant even fathom that
A DA tried to give an Asian girl 6 years in prison for a small amount of ecstasy.
.... Same DA ignored photographic proof of a rich guy driving through my mother's tent trying to kill her, assaulting, trespassing and vandalizing
I thought of it this way. Going to my 35 year high school reunion. Hard to fathom this man was in Jail for all those years for something he had nothing to do with. Hope he gets millions.
I'm 30 years old. This man was arrested and convicted a year before I was born.
Ben is laying on top of the red Viper
🖐 5 Seconds, Damn you're fast😊
There is no amount of money that can make up for taking so much of this man’s life, but Florida should be made to try.
1 Billion Atleast.
@@lastdayonearth8381 Better than spending that amount to punish a corporation that doesn't agree with your governor...
@@MonkeyJedi99 You mean a corporation that wants to groom children?
That's a serious chunk of someone's life. Just think about the things he missed out on, family, friends, career, all those Christmases with family, your children growing up. Nothing can ever get that back. I'm betting that one witness was primed by the detective to identify James.
He went in when George H.W. Bush (the father) was US President.
Me was in during both Iraq wars, 9/11, the turn of the century, the rise of the internet and social media, the rise and collapse of cable television, all of the Marvel movies...
But at least he missed the Star Wars sequels.
And now he is institutionalized. He lost everything in my opinion. These are the things that should be severely punished.
It's even uglier. How is he to retire? He'll never be able to save enough in a 401k or social insecurity, so he'll work until he drops dead.
@@spvillano he will get a fat compensation from state hopefully
@@spvillano With no work experience other than his prison stay he will be lucky if he can even find a job. Might end up homeless.
Sounds like cops wanting to close the case quickly and perhaps pressuring the witness
There aren't enough words or enough money in the world to repay a miscarriage of justice like this.
Nothing short of a fuctional time machine can properly repay this man.
Ben trying to improve the aerodynamics of the Red Viper, Steve's RHS
Every single judge who denied his appeals, every prosecutor involved, every officer needs to be held personally accountable
I wonder how much money he is going to get for 32 years of wrongful imprisonment. He shouldn't have to work a day after that.
Oh, they've got such lowball numbers on that stuff... also, how much of his life may be left after the toll of 30+ years in prison, the poor conditions, stress, etc?
@@cycleboy8028 No matter how much money he gets, there would be something missing.
There was a case of something similar. There where some technicalities so the guy didn't get a dime, but was charged for "house and board". They agreed to let him keep prison wages of 10 cent per hour 😁
@@Oneofakind123 Some states have standard rates paid out for wrongful imprisonment. It is definitely better to be wrongfully convicted in some states than others.
@@andrewdolokhov5408 "better"… nah, it's definitely a tiny little bit less bad to be wrongfully convicted in some states than others. But just a basically infinitesimally tiny little bit. In other words: nope, it's just bad, it doesn't really make any fucking difference.
The job of a detective is to find someone that might be guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter if they are innocent or the evidence isn't there. The job of the prosecutor is to convince a jury of someone's guilt. It doesn't matter if they are innocent or the evidence isn't there. The way our Justice System is set up needs to change. Sad thing is, it likely never will.
This is 100% true and very sad they just want a guy it doesn't matter if its the right guy
As messed up as it it, it's still the best system in the world for the defense. Most nations don't even have a jury and instead one to three government judges hear both sides then declare you guilty, entire trials lasts minutes to hours with the prosecution having no limits on what evidence they can fabricate. In the USA the police and prosecutors have to be this corrupt to have a chance of beating the various protections of the Constitution. This guys biggest issue was his "free" lawyer who gave minimal effort. Our reform needs to be on the counsel provided to the defense, the state prosecution office should have to fund the defense as well as their own side.
It also seemed like the cops might have pressured or guilted the witness to positively ID the suspect. They could've said something like this for example: "Do you really want a man like that on the streets? Without your testimony that man will walk free and the family of the victim won't get any justice!" etc.
We have a legal system. I don't call it a justice system.
@@palladin9479 How can you call a system as corrupt as the US the best? And what makes you think you know about other nations legal systems?
The year 1991 was a notable one for me also- I began my career with a state DOT from which I retired about two years ago. Very hard to fathom someone innocent being locked up for that long. Tragic.
Signing up for a socialist jobs program and leeching off the taxpayer for the rest of your life is not something you should be proud of, you're just as bad as the leeches of LE.
More than tragic, it's criminal. At some point bureaucrats have to be held responsible.
@@ickster23 Agreed.
OK, the guy spends 32 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit, The prosecutor says “my bad you can go now”, what recourse does he have to get some compensation for the time and grief that he’s in tour in prison?
Likely none because there was no single egregious error.
That totally depends on the state. Different states have different procedures.
@@lrmackmcbride7498 not a single egregious error? Like investigating solely based on a tip and arresting the first person with that name in your database? I’d say that’s pretty egregious.
He'll be lucky if he can even get a sorry note. At this point the state owes him millions.
At this point, his lawyers will negotiate with the State and City representatives and in the end the Miami City insurance will pay him some big bucks.
I believe the Gov (DA, Police, Judge...etc) KNEW he was innocent, but it was NOT until an honest person took up his case and an investigation/story was published did the Gov HAVE to admit he was innocent.
***The Gov just wanted to solve the case, innocent be damned.
More people in jail means more money from the state. It's very simple
just when im sure the ineptitude of government could not possibly be further exemplified, things like this prove me completely wrong. thank you as always Mr Lehto
The illusion of justice must be maintained especially when injustice is being done. During my placement prosecuting (offers followed), I recall being told... if people actually knew how things are done, they would lose complete trust in the system, it's a surprise anything gets done.
@@AnthonyRMaradin surprise, to be sure. your statement rings true of the financial system as well as in law, and health, and manufacturing, and on and on. yet, as far as i can tell, ours is still better than 90% of other countries systems. its no surprise then, that with much room for improvement, change is occuring as technology affords people to gain as much in terms of information as once previously held in trust
@@AnthonyRMaradin dude the first time that I went to traffic court I realized how corrupt the un-justice system was.
The very same cops that lied on me had done it to several other innocent people.
We had all been the victims of a monthly ticket quota scheme.
@@azza-in_this_day_and_age - More than 60% of people convicted of anything are innocent, this can be greatly expanded on.
As for the financial institutions, I revolutionized the debt recovery world using litigation, using a traditional collections platform to facilitate mega volume. Example; a pilot project with a top credit grantor, prime or sub-prime, 10,000 files per quarter from one client's vertical and stream. 650 to get to judgement, most being default, was six and a half million per quarter just from that. Then was enforcement. I also brought back debtor prison via contempt by not obeying a court order to pay the debt.
As for the real medical world, I did briefly walk with the elite types of the world and those behind them and learned things most deem as conspiracies. Such as cancer always having a cure.
As for the liberal arts theoretical pseudosciences of psychology industry, where do I begin. From knowing people are experimented on firsthand and died from it, to working in the industry after law to wh1stl€bl0wing and exp0sing firsthand knowledge of the s€xu@l abuse of vulnerable women within, that led me to doing the same for p0l1ce / jud1c1al / p0l1t1cal corruption... which has left me literally destitute and crippled as I type these words.
@@azza-in_this_day_and_age 90% not so sure there. 50% prob more correct
"Guilty until proven innocent" is FAR more accurate over, "Innocent until proven guilty"
Innocent until proven guilty has always been a fairy tale or as Carlin said a dream because you have to be asleep to believe it.
I spent about 43 hours locked in a cell for a crime that never existed. I will tell you it's a life altering situation. I will never be the same again. People who say, I'll exchange some freedom for money have no idea what they are talking about. 43 hours may not seem like much, but I have lost all peace of mind. People who haven't the experience of having that cell door slam behind them do not understand the emotional aspects of being locked up and at the mercy of the legal system. Woe be to the person who requires daily medications to survive, the staff at the jail doesn't care if you receive your medications or not even if they have your medications in their possession. Along with improperly arresting innocent people and putting them in jail, they frequently do not provide proper medical treatment to the inmates, despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling saying that they must supply that care, under the 8th and 14th amendments. I was lucky, they didn't manage to kill me. Not all inmates are that lucky.
Curious what was the crime that never existed?
They did manage to kill my oldest daughter...tough for us.
The issue I have with these sorts of cases is the fact they can never be truly righted. The State can pay its victim some money for the time wrongly spent in prison, the State can set an innocent person free...but the State can never give an innocent person the time spent behind bars back to the person. That time--not to mention whatever opportunities and/or experience--is gone forever.
There is no conceivable compensation for the injustice done to this man. Far too often winning a conviction takes precedence over finding the truth and delivering justice. It will likely never change, because no one is ever held accountable.
the cops on the case, prosecutors, judges on all appeals, witness all owe this man part of their pensions for the rest of his life, and then he should sue the state. 50% of the pensions sounds good to me
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error.
The OJ trial took more than two and a half days and that didn't help achieve justice.
Sold a lot of Broncos, though.
Whack-a-Mole justice at its finest. So sad this still goes on.
It just baffles me that this is an issue in the US, a country that prides itself on freedom. Depressing stuff to hear about but it's made worse by the fact that it's more common than people are led to believe. Thanks for sharing the story.
Especially since the court system in the US was founded on the principle of "its better that 10 guilty free persons escape than that one innocent suffer"
Thank God for DNA analysis. I think it has saved a lot of innocent people and trapped a lot of guilty.
We had a man wrongfully imprisoned for murder based on DNA evidence here in Denmark - he got out on appeal after a more modern DNA test showed that the original DNA profile that let to him being found to begin with failed to match the sample from the crime scene.
You can use DNA to rule out a suspect. but there is always the risk of getting a match with someone innocent.
Steve this is pure negligence! The police and prosecutors didn't do their proper diligence.
There's got to be a way to get this person compensation. Brilliant Florida!
My brother in-law was an attorney, I once asked him what is the most difficult part of your job, he said , watching innocent people go to jail .
Is he going to be compensated for all that time, emotional damage, and slander?
no. not unless he sues.
They will not compensate him out of the goodness of their heart. He will have to take them to court for it.
He could sue them for wrongful imprisonment, but it will be a difficult case. As the government can throw a lot of money at court cases when they are being sued, (it's not their money after all, it's what the taxpayers are giving them), if he does get any compensation, it will take years.
And what 32 years to be indisde for.
While he's going to have some knowledge of the world, he won't have any idea of how the internet does everything these days. He won't likely know how half the technoliogical advances in simple home devices have changed.
If this doesn't underline how bad things like this are....
Steve, what happened to "It's better to let 10 guilty people go free than convict 1 innocent person"? I read that Eye witness testimony is wrong 50% of the time. "The ripple effect " look it up
With woke prosecutors no one goes to jail.
It acts more like "better to let 10 innocent people get jailed than to let one guilty person avoid prosecution"
@@dwgray9000 Yes dear, the sky is blue because it matches your eyes.
It is truly disgusting how many times we hear of innocent people spending decades in prison .
Well, I’m pleasantly surprised that FL would actually admit the innocence of anyone.
Now if we can only get them to give IQ tests before issuing driver licenses.
What's worse is when they are found innocent and they still have to spend months in for paperwork to catch up
I want to know how the hell they convicted him when they didn't even have enough to charge their actual suspect.
I'm guessing that skin color was involved.
@@Le_Comte_de_Monte_Felin -- Actual suspect had same skin color. It was just laziness. This time.
there it is! it takes MSM to air the story before an innocent victim gets anyone to listen!
I remember the very first case in which DNA evidence was used in the defense of a suspected rapist in Washington, DC, back in the early 1980s. It is the U.S. Attorney's office that handles criminal cases in the District (as it was called). The victim gave a compelling testimony that, had it not been for the DNA evidence, would have sent the accused to prison.
This evidence caught the U.S. Attorney's office by surprise and presented a thorny problem for the prosecution. But it was the U.S. Attorney's General's office that intervened and ordered the Dictrict's U.S. Attorney to drop the case as it would set a dangerous precedence in terms of using DNA evidenced in prosecuting future cases should the defendant be found not guilty. What really caught my attention when reading the story in the Washington Post was how sure the woman was raped about the identification of the man and without the DNA evidence, the case would have been a slam dunk for the prosecution.
And Yet to confuss us even more, they now know that some people can have 2 sets of different DNA. A Chimera. "A chimera is an individual whose body is composed of cells that are genetically distinct, as if they are from different individuals - and sometimes they really are from different individuals. Many people's bodies contain at least a few living cells from another person."
God is real unless declared integer :)
You would be amazed at the number of people who can, with a minimal amount of suggestion, adamantly insist that they saw Bugs Bunny at Disney World.
You have a problem with your story. There was no DNA technology in the 80s. It didn't start until the mid 90s.
@@writerconsidered Google says "Feb 23, 2015 - DNA profiling first started out in the 1980s, and it has been extremely successful for testing in crime scenes, paternity testing, and ...
This is why I will never convict someone on circumstantial evidence if I am chosen for jury. We need hard evidence.
I wonder if the 'Witness' only made that their Claim, that they later recanted, was 'Leaned On' by the Cops to make an erroneous Claim. We have seen how some Police Interviews Go, where they they use Sleep Deprivation and lack of Food/Water all while berating people...and I could just imagine 30+ years ago the Cops have a person in an 'Interview Room' telling a 'Witness' "If you don't point us to the person who did it, we'll pin the whole crime on you" then 5 hours later come in with a single picture and say "Is this the Guy", and the Witness will say yes just to get away from the Cops.
I've seen enough video of police interrogations where the person being badgered said something to the effect of "What do I have to say to get you to leave me alone, I'll say it." to agree with you completely.
It doesn't actually even need to be that, human memory isn't generally eidetic. And human adults don't actually remember events or people with high degrees of detail. Most of things you think you recall are actually constructions by your subconscious extrapolated from snippets of information you stored of the event. The construction is subconscious and so the "eye-witness" can think they are being truthful in identifying someone. And their identification is treated almost as if it was a tape played back in their brain.
So the problem really is the unreasonable veracity that eye-witness testimony is assigned by juries and judges.
In medicine we are mandated to verify patients by full name and date of birth.
We've been doing this since BEFORE he was arrested.
How completely unprofessional of the police, the prosecutors, his defense, the jury and even the judge.
I hope they are all haunted the rest of their lives for ruining an obviously innocent person's life.
Wow, a Florida man story where the guy is innocent, that's a new one.
On the serious side, they should have to pay this guy through the nose on this one. Florida robbed him of his whole life and that's not right. Imagine sitting in prison all those years knowing you're innocent and nobody will listen to you. The police are incompetent and the DA should have his license revoked if he's still got one. An apology isn't going to do any good at this point.
In American we ABSOLUTELY do not believe in the whole 10 innocent men going free thing. But we LOVE to say we do. It disgusts me.
I Wouldn't Call Incompetence Believing In jailing The Innocent. They Simply Don't Give A F.
that retired cop knew first hand the guy was screwed over
After living so many years in prison now the hard part begins,good luck sir.
Having been with another agency that often worked with MDPD in those days I saw the way they operated close up. They would make arrests and alter evidence to fit their needs This was a very troubled agency.
Troubled , or criminal ?
Your public defender stands quietly to make sure your railroading follows due process.
I hope he sues the shit out of them. Jesus weeps.
Eye for an eye
There isn’t enough money in the world to compensate for the amount of trauma this man experienced
I had a friend that I worked with that claimed he was innocent of a murder penned on him. He served 8 years. When his attorney got a retrial setup the state immediately offered him parole or take his chance at the retrial. The guy took the parole because he was afraid of getting screwed the 2nd time around. At first i was kind of on the fence believing him. But after some research and them immediately offering him that parole I am convinced he was innocent. It was not 32 years but he lost 8 years of his life. It really opened my eyes to many things.
And this is why I say that the death penalty is unacceptable.
Wrongful convictions are more common than most folks realize.
I was wrongfully convicted in 90, got out in 91, so that time era was life altering where I met others like him, locked up among others who were dangerous to the public, as this malicious profiteering prosecution was ramping up packing prisons. That said, it's mind racking to put this mans loss & suffering into perspective.
Packing prison is BIG MONEY!!!
I had a friend that spent 8 years for something I really believe he was innocent for. The amount of times this crap happens is sickening. After knowing this happened to someone I got to know fairly well it gave me a bit of fear about it can happen to anyone.
Every one of those prosecutors involved should be sentenced to 32 years in fail - no parole. Throw the judge in while you're at it.
Technically the victim's family never had justice.
The Florida judicial system is an assembly line of this charge equals that... Next! Unless you have money you will be found guilty of anything you're charged with.
Thankfully he has family to help him adjust. He has a long road to go.
the eye witness and cop should pay for this
Sad part of these ordeals are that they happen so often, states have passed laws against or limiting punitive damages to the freed innocent prisoners
The state will argue that since he did not file a claim under the Tort Claims Act withing 45 days of his conviction, his action is barred.
Should start at $1million per year with the amount starting after the prosecutor's & cop's pension funds are drained to pay for it. Then adjust it upward for inflation by 1% for every year served. That states limit the liability shows how aware they are of the problem... but then again many start as prosecutors in order to run for public orifice afterward so it's not surprising they'd cover their tracks whenever possible.
They ought to simply legislate punitive damages. The wrongly convicted gets average year's wages for that state for each year in prison-- plus interest. Way less than millions from a lawsuit, but the poor person doesn't have to go to court just to get some kind of justice. Saves court expenses, too. And it should be enough money so the person can get job training, buy a car, and obtain housing.
@@exrobowidow1617 No. The wrongfully imprisoned deserve millions.
@@orppranator5230 Let's suppose the average yearly wage over 30 years was $50,000. Multiply that number by the 30 years, and you get $1,500,000. That's before interest. The process of determining that a person was wrongly convicted should be sufficient to automatically trigger the payment. With the payment should come free financial management and job counseling. Add a simple application process to get the person set up with housing for at least 6 months, and transportation, if family or friends are not available to take him in.
No amount of money is going to make up for lost freedom, lost time, lost relationships, and lost opportunities. Throwing millions at a person just because they "deserve" it won't help anyone. That kind of money tends to disappear with amazing speed, and often does more harm than good for the recipient. Plus, many local governments simply can't afford to pay mega millions.
That man should never have to work a day in his life again. Ever.
I'm always fascinated by how a person totally not involved in a crime gets convicted of that crime. Usually there is no explanation of how that person got on the police radar to investigate. This one is pretty clear how that happened, except who phoned in this guys name. Still, not enough evidence to convict.
Incompetence in law-enforcement and the judicial system is extremely common. There are people that do a half assed job that have serious consequences on peoples lives. This man should be awarded millions of dollars and the people responsible for stealing 30 years of his life should go to prison for the same amount of time.
The police did nothing wrong in this case. Someone reported that Tommy James did it. The detective put Tommy James’s photo in a photo array - a group of photos of similar looking people- and showed the photo array to the witness who said this is the photo of the man who did the crime. The police arrested him. It was the witness who made the error.
@@crjcrj8443
The key phrase there was "Along with similar photos".
The main issue is that they grabbed the first person who had a matching name and looked for photos of people that looked like him. If you did that out in my area as an officer you would be fired for incompetence, and the trial would be declared a mistrial due to "tainted evidence." It's happened before in other areas. Rather than taking the time to do a detailed search and find the person who is properly involved, police just grabbed the first person who had a matching name/ description.
@@lynchkid003
Wrong. If someone made an anonymous phone call that someone did the crime, the detective should put that person’s photo in a photo array. If the witness is not behind setting up the person , they should not pick that photo. That’s investigating 101. The photo is mixed in with other similar photos. The photo array is available and given to the defense to challenge if they wish to do so. They did not. TgT falls on the defense
This might have been a case of the bad side of jury nullification. Juries will sometimes look at evidence they're presented, and they will assume that even though presented evidence doesn't provide enough to convict, there must be suppressed evidence that wasn't shown, and that evidence would cause a conviction. The reason it must exist is that they wouldn't bring these charges without it.
Which is bad in an adversarial justice system, because largely prosecutors aren't out for justice, they are out to win cases.
That witness should be able to be sued for negligence.
We need publicly accessible video feed in courtrooms!
Not during certain trials, and not on jurist and witnesses of course.
We need complete oversight of the government and every agency. Then businesses. Too much corruption for criminals that stole elections or worse nepotism.
We need it on witnesses except in a tiny set of circumstances.
really ridiculous the only key evidence they had, the names matched. seriously, the District Attorney and/or Prosecutors of this man's case or similar cases just like these need to go to jail. Prosecutors should have the sworn duty to dismiss prosecution of a case if they know the evidence is bogus, does not match, or shows the defendant's innocence, they should never attempt to continue to prosecute a man who they know are innocent just for the sake of their prosecution record, reputation, or ego.. Consequences for if they willingly choose to continue with prosecution of an innocent man, they are disbarred, banned from ever practicing law again, and/or fined and possibly jailed depending on the severity of the circumstances, negligence, or malicious prosecution.
I am sure Florida will bill him for 32 years free room and board!
Hey Loie Athanasiadis@ well with Ron DeSatan running Florida into the ground this is just another tax payer problem.
🤣😂😄😆
-free-
There is no way to compensate completely for this. The people who are responsible will never get the consequences they deserve.
Isn't prosecutor immunity wonderful?
Delusional Bastards.
This isn’t the fault of the detective or the prosecution. They put the photo of Tommy James in a photo array- in with a group of similar looking people - to the victim or witness to ask if the picture of the criminal is in the group of photos. The witness picked out this Tomas James and said this is the man who did the robbery. That simple, the witness is the one who made the mistake
@@crjcrj8443 Nope - the buck stops at the crime boss's office. He had a responsibility to apply justice...not justus.
@@yomommaahotoo264
The police did nothing wrong. It is the witness who pointed at the defendant and said “ that’s the man who did it”. The police did not coerce the testimony. They put the photo in a photo array( a group of photos). The witness picked the defendant. Then he was put in a line up. The witness picked him. Then the witness testified in court that it was him. Not the police, the witness. It is the defense that dropped the ball. An alibi? The defendant has to tell the police - which means he doesn’t take his right to be silent . That is the job of the defense lawyer
@@crjcrj8443 Defense lawyers are almost always in the pocket of the prosecutor, and line ups can be much like drug sniffing dogs falsely alerting.
The crime boss prosecutor solely to blame.
The only way that it is possible for this to happen is if the entire LE and Judicial system in this case are endemically corrupt and incompetent.
Fundamentally broken. The rules need to be changed. The judge and prosecutor should not have been able to do this.
I suggest a law to impose automatic financing of 1 million per year spent in prison if later found innocent or not charged (+ a percentage if a partial year spent in prison) which would be deducted from the arresting institution and would reduce future funding. I believe this would incentivise police with the cost of poor quality.
I very much agree!!
End absolute immunity for DAs, Prosecutors, and Judges . . .
If conduct is wrong / illegal, or just plain stupid, then they should be able to be held accountable.
If a builder, constructs a house/building/bridge/etc and it falls down and harms people, they can be held accountable if their work was flawed.
If a surgeon makes a mistake, they can be sued.
The list goes on and on.
There shouldn't be any relief for this class of people (DAs, Prosecutors, Judges) especially in the case of malfeasance. DAs and Prosecutors in particular seem so intent on their conviction record and we often hear stories of them putting a thumb on the scale of justice just to insure a conviction to pad their record.
Because it IS a 'class of people'... ones with power over others, they will never be held accountable as they are a barrier between us plebs & those THEY serve - an even 'higher class' of people.
Kings never shovel shit and their servants never worry about those below them - only those above.
Even uncommon-ish names can be common. Add to that a somewhat similar appearance and you've got a disaster if the other person is shady. It's another fear of how police and the prosecutors may fail at due diligence.
I have a local doppelganger and have people mistake me as that person all the time.
When I Googled my name I found a doctor in Michigan and a politician in Arizona among others that share my name and it's not very common. I also have been mistaken for about 5 other men throughout my life so I apparently have 5 doppelgangers.
@@gregGould
How fun is that!??? Lol.
@@b_uppy - Not fun at all because the guy who looked like me was a crackhead and apparently took all his children's Christmas presents back to the stores and got the money back and spent it on crack cocaine. Another guy from his town thought I was the crackhead and wanted to beat the crap outta me. But once he heard me speak and I told him I have no children and was from Toledo he finally realized that I wasn't the crackhead guy. He said that I looked like his identical twin.
@@gregGould
My doppelganger is relatively harmless at this point, but there is always the weird fear that things can go awry in a way that cause a lot of harm.
Give him 32 million and send those responsible to prison for 32 years.
When I was in high school, I was one of three students who all had the same first and last name. There also was a member of the faculty who had the same first and last name as the three of us. Luckily none of the four of us ever became suspects in any crime that I am aware of.
Having the first and last name of someone who has committed a crime can be problematic.
We had four guys with the same first name, so we called them all by their last names. But same *both* names? What did y'all do? Richard, Rich, Richie, and Mr. White?
@@liamwayne6703 I went by Rich then (and still do). BTW, one of my present friends is the Richard White best known for providing the voice of "Gaston" in the animated movie "Beauty And The Beast". I am a professional jazz and cabaret vocalist and Richard is an opera singer. He and I often find ourselves mistaken by people for the other Richard White on social media such as Facebook.
My dad and brother both worked for a large aerospace corporation. At one time, the company phone directory listed six people who shared their same first and last name.
Far better for ten criminals to go free than to have one innocent person to have their life ruined.
great video. Steve, I'd like to see you do a video on the Jan 6 "insurrectionists" who are being illegally held without trial for longer than their actual sentences would have been.
Mark Johnson@ dude...go on Trumps failing Truth Social with your sad story.
Steve is speaking about actual innocent people.
Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time. No sympathy here. There have been no acquittals to date.
@@madmaximilian5783 If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him.
@@machintelligence WRONG. See Matthew Martin.
Also, the overwhelming majority haven't had trials yet. If you think people should be jailed because none of their alleged peers have not been acquitted yet, you should self-terminate.
@@madmaximilian5783 you're just another dope with his head in the ground. Your founding father John Adams is rolling his grave. Citizenship revoked.
Your explanation was was so clear that I would go so far as to describe it as "Crystal Blue Persuasion".
Think of the stress this put on the victims family knowing a innocent man was in prison for that many years and the guy who did the crime was probly free most the time
Who cares that the victim's family is unhappy or stressed? They were most likely happy to have the man convicted 32 years ago, even having heard the crappy "evidence" and testimony. Thomas James paid for their "happiness" with 32 irreplaceable years of his life in a Florida prison.
If police and prosecutors were under threat of prosecution and prison if they knowingly convict innocent people, there would be fewer of these wrongful convictions.
I hope he sues the crap out of the state of Florida for the gross negligence of his conviction.
Courts seem to do these mistakes a lot. Maybe we should start to require two separate and independent courts to find someone guilty before a verdict is valid. The trails must of course be isolated, carried out in parallell and with no communication between the judges and jurors.
In the 90s, there was a study done by a national association of law enforcement and prosecuting attorneys that found about a third of people in prison for felonies did not commit those felonies. Since then people in general in all professions have, I think, become less competent.
They'll say they have 'no conflicts' while playing golf with each other between trials. "Oh, yeah... heard about that case!... is he guilty?" "Yep. I ruled as such." "Ok! No problem! Guilty it is! ... Your turn to buy a drink."
Another outstanding story
This is one of those events like Sandy Hook that should have never seen the light of day.
Hats off to all those who took the time to set him free and call attention to the dark side of bad work from the officers to the DA,s and the legal system.
The public Defenders officer should have the same resources at their fingertips as the DA and police Dep, For this was a slap into the face of our founder fathers and all those working in the law from the new street officer to the person in the DA,s office who do there best each day not to make people into criminals but to make sure they are real criminals and facing life or death for murder should be a major red flag not to rush anyone through the system as if your picking up a happy meal for the kids.
Your public defender resources could be easily fixed. The prosecutor and public defenders office is the same office. No prosecutor is ever allowed to defend a suspect they ever prosecuted, and they cannot never prosecute a suspect they ever defended. The pool of defenders and prosecutors is the same. Each lawyer is judged based on "wins" that follow all rules. A win for defender is whether the accused says the lawyer won. The win as prosecutor is if they get a conviction based on evidence that a reasonable person would say was obtained properly and that there is no suppressed evidence.
Then, both sides have equal funding since each lawyer takes on both roles, and they're judged on ability based on results.
@@werefrogofassyria6609 In that case almost every town would run out of Lawyers..... It is not uncommon for a criminal to have 15 or 20 charges over the course of their life... For example I lived in a place called Massachusetts in the town called Lynn there's a book there of who owes the court money for Trials from that year that book is 10" thick ....
@@werefrogofassyria6609 If the same lawyers were both the Da's and defense attorneys And they couldn't cross contaminate what about every person who's been arrested 5,10, or 15 times, you just keep hiring new lawyers?
@@justinbellio2285 Not really. You just wind up getting the same prosecutor and the same defender. When choosing, they take the one with the least workload who can handle the side they need to handle for you.
How could he have been convicted in the first place? What evidence would they have to prosecute him?
The legal system, including all lawyers, doesn't af about you and me, or about the constitution.
If lawyers cared they'd be fighting for our right to carry cell phones into a courthouse. 10s of 1000s of lawyers walk into a courthouse daily. Every time they see the no cell phone signs. Yet, THEY are allowed to carry their cell phone inside, so they don't give af about the rest of us. Or care about the first ammendment right of citizens being violated!
Yeah, because that wouldn’t be fucking chaos or anything.
@@Saje3D life is chaos, get over it whimp
Lehto, included. Lawyers are part of a fraternity and only the brave dare to stand up to it.
Hundo, unfolded, across the top of the red viper, on the left top of the main cabinet. 219.
This is one of the key points (among many) of why I'm totally against the death penalty. You can let an innocent person go if/when new evidence comes to light, you cannot resurrect a dead innocent person. I do not care how iron clad the case is against a person, up to and including actual video evidence of the 'capital' offense being committed, if you make exceptions for any reason then exceptions will creep and you get back to innocent people potentially on death row.
there are some key cases I've followed over the years where there is enough evidence of doubt that I'm fairly convinced we have potentially executed innocent people.
Overall you save money by avoiding the endless appeal processes as well. I think it has worked in Iowa pretty well. The GOP wants to bring it back to Iowa though. Given the trend there is a good chance that this will happen eventually. We are working our way to becoming the Mississippi of the midwest.
By that logic you shouldn't have prison at all then. You can't throw out the death penalty because of an innocent person. What you do is investigate and if you find the person was framed, then you try and convict the framer. If successful, then you also execute the framer and publicly humiliate him/her. Now justice is served.
@@7F0X7 Nice fail with that appeal to absurdity debate tactic.
@@7F0X7 Would that be Red Herring or False Dichotomy? I"ll have to ponder that.
But to give a straight answer. As of January 2020, the Innocence Project has documented over 375 DNA exonerations in the United States. Twenty-one of these exonerees had previously been sentenced to death. I'm not arguing that crime doesn't happen and that criminals don't need to be punished. But I am saying the criminal justice system has inherent flaws that are extremely hard to root out:
*Witness testimony is sketchy at best for one, and completely unreliable at worst for many reasons the most innocent is that the human brain just fills in details on its own and the worst, the witness is getting tangible compensation to give an account favorable to the prosecution.
*As has been showcased on this very channel, police and prosecutors are are allowed to lie and make up "facts" to coerce confessions and (again showcased here) innocent people have been driven to confess to crimes they have not done through trickery and hard interrogation.
*Also as been showcased on this channel, prosecutors and police have withheld evidence and witness from defense teams when it has undermined their case. Something they are specifically not allowed to do, but do so just the same.
There are too many problems in our justice system to trust it to only kill the guilty. Does all of this mean we need to just do away with prisons? No of course not and I find that that this is your takeaway suspicious. But having the state murder/kill people, I'm sorry execute people, on our behalf when the system itself has so many flaws is just morally wrong. My addendum that there be no exceptions now matter how iron clad is just a ways and means to keep the system balanced. As soon as one starts to say "well the death penalty is wrong \*except\* for this circumstance, then one starts finding more and more "well \*except for this\*" reasons. So long as innocent people might be put to death \*for us\* by the state, we cannot allow the state to put to death anyone \*for us\*. And that is what the death penalty is: the state killing on our behalf.
sorry i don't want my money to feed a guy for the rest of his life.
So, the false witness has no consequences?