Innocence Project

Introduction

In a legal world, innocence is said to be the lack of legal guilt of the person concerning the crime in question or any wrongdoing. In another term, it’s the lack of experience relative to social peers. In criminal history, innocent individuals have served time in jails due to the wrong information about the crime committed. It is clear that the forensics can have wrong DNA and wrongfully detain someone for the crime (Hewitt, 2018). About this, the innocence project was brought into existence to take care of the wrongfully convicted individuals.

In the year 1992, Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld came together founded the Innocence Project. It’s a non-profit legal agency or organization that works with the justice system to exonerate the people who have been wrongly convicted tirelessly. It gets most of its funding from people’s contribution, foundation contributions, events, investments, and the corporations They work hand in hand with the forensic team to give proof of the DNA to prevent injustice in the future (Ware, 2019). According to the organization, America has a considerable number of convicts who are serving the wrong time in jail. They range between 2% to 5% of the total prisoners in American prisons. After founding of the project, it didn’t gain attention until later the century in 1992 since it was part of the dream team. The dream team was the defence team that helped in the famous O J Simpsons case, where he was accused of murdering the wife. Ever since that time, it has worked in several cases and all states of the united states.

Background information

Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld formed the organization in Cardozo School of law, Yeshiva University. It was founded in the time of states department of justice and senate formation. Together with a Jewish university, the two tried to show that the wrongful identification of eyewitnesses was among the contributing factors in wrongful convictions. The organization was incorporated in January 2003, under the united states law 501© and ever since it has maintained a close relationship with Cardozo university. It became well known throughout the country since it was using scientific data to get the wrongfully sentenced people of jail. Most of these activities were under the leadership of the project manager Madeline DeLone.

The basic mission of the project was to pay good attention to the DNA evidence available in the court labs, test them and give clear information about the convict’s DNA. According to criminal law, the DNA is evident in over about 5% of the criminal cases. It also got help from the innocence network, which is a well-established affiliation organization that works hard in giving pro bono investigative and legal services to people. The two come together in the exoneration of the people whose DNA is not found in the forensics report. Despite working for those wrongfully detained in the united states, they work on the legal corridors to ensure that the project does good advocacy and research which is related in the wrongful convictions. The other mission is to ensure that the people on death row don’t experience it unless proven guilty. Their success has had an impact on the highly debated American opposition to the death row penalty, helping formulate good policies to that connection.

Causes of wrongful convictions according to the Innocence project

There are several reasons why a person can be wrongfully detained or convicted. The major cause of wrongful conviction includes eyewitness’s identification error, false confessions, Mr. stings, false guilty pleas, tunnel vision, systematic discrimination, errors in forensic science evolution, jailhouse informant testimony, and misconduct in the professional sectors (Margolis, 2020, p.4).

Eyewitness identification error

Judges rely mainly on eyewitnesses to detain the convicts. An eyewitness is an individual who gives a first-hand description of what happened during the criminal occurrence. False eyewitness identification is documented to be 75% of wrongful convictions that have been overturned by the innocent project legal term. Eyewitness evidence can consider being unreliable due to several reasons, for instance, emotions, memory or recalling issues, stress, proximity issues, and clarity due to lighting. People tend to have limited knowledge about the implications of over-relying on false eyewitness evidence, putting most of their confidence in it. This creates issues in trials because juries are made up of people from the public; the effect of cross-racing increases the unreliability of eyewitness evidence. Scholars have documented the effect of cross-racing to have a probability of 1.4 times to remember, and identify correctly the real face of a person who is of a similar race to him or her especially when their abilities to remember are compared the people of a different race.

False Confessions

This happens when a person admits to the allegations. In a legal world, a confession is described as powerful guilt evidence. This makes a false confession to being among the major causes of detainment. Individuals are normally unwilling to concede to the thought that a person that confessed to a crime is likely to actually not commit. Regardless of having this information, there are no rules and guidelines laid down to give a good procedure of conducting interviews of people that would help in detecting wrong confessions. The only person allows to deny the confessions used in the prosecution or court is a judge. He is the only person with the power or authority to term the confession as evidence. The courts, on the other hand, are very reluctant to disregard the confessions brought in during intense interrogations, or the type of confessions that are made by people with intellectual disabilities or issues with mental health. An example of a false confession if in Phillion Rome case. He was detained for over 31 years due to false confession.

Mr Big Stings

This is the unfair game played by police or law enforcement to trick the innocent person into giving a confession. The “Mr Big” sting was developed in Canada in the early 1990s and brought in a lot of controversy in law enforcement sectors. This tactic has however been classified as unethical and has been banned in several countries, for example, Britain and the United States. Police officers have been known to spend days and weeks while undercover learning about their suspect, for example, their habits and daily routine. After gathering considerable information, they set up plots and picture and elaborate a fake operation. They use a lot of techniques to lure the criminals, for example befriending them. They go above the leadership hierarchy and arrests the gang head. This technique looks for a confession to the crimes to prove their royalty in the organization. A good example is in the case of Kyle Unger. Kyle had been the target of a famous Mr Big sting case after the police task force was unable to get substantial evidence to get him behind bars.

False Guilty Pleas

This technique is also known as the bargain for freedom. Guilty and bargaining pleas are severally cited as necessary for the system of criminal justice proper and timely functioning. To add to this, the majority of trial cases brought to the judges are plea bargains. Scholars and researchers put the trails cases to be above 95%. It’s nearly hard to comprehend why innocent people would beg for a guilty plea. There are also a lot of reasons why people take a plea deal. About facing full-time imprisonment in jail, they may decide to reduce or accept the sentence or get a lesser charge, for example, manslaughter. A good example is in the Maria Shepherd case. A non-true guilty plea is a reason she spent most of her life in jail. The Crown had already planned to call the former pathologist, Charles Smith as a key witness in the case. At this time, the pathologist was regarded as one of the head pediatric pathologists. The plea deal meant that Maria Shepherd would serve less time in jail near her family.

Tunnel Vision

This is a technique used to focus on one suspect from the rest. This technique is a big problem in the field of professional misconduct. Tunnel vision is described as a narrow and single-minded focus on a specific prosecutorial or investigative theory, to cover the examination of information obtained and the person’s conduct about the information. In many cases, prosecutors and police look for evidence that best fits their information and theory compared to the developing evidence. A good example if a tunnel vision case is in Thomas Sophonow’s trial and wrongful conviction. The police knew who the actual killer was but Thomas that they lost a bearing of the potential suspects.

Systemic Discrimination

This technique looks into gender basis, race or socioeconomic status. Scholars and researchers have given a clear significance role played by gender or race in wrongful convictions. A good example is in Marshal Donald Jr. from Scotia. He was wrongly put into jail for killing his friend. After exoneration, they realized he had been put into jail due to his race.

Evolution of errors in forensic science

The analysis of DNA was brought in to the system of criminal justice in the early 1980s and has played a big part in the exonerate of many innocent convicts. The results from forensic evidence are obtained from the comparison of bite marks, microscopy of hair, analysis of the firearm or tool used, comparison of the feet and shoe, and last type of blood. Most of the information is inadmissible and unreliable to be termed as evidence. These techniques have a major potential for error. A good example is in the evidence against James Driskell. Hair microscopy was done in the case resulted in wrongful convictions. The judge was convinced that the hair sample found in the jeans matched those of the victims. DNA, later on, revealed that the hair belonged to the victim.

Jailhouse Informant Testimony

This method mostly involves testimonies from other convicts. Incorrect or untrue testimonies have in history put people into the death row, especially when there is minimal or no good physical evidence. The Innocence Project states that more than1 5% of incorrect convictions are overturned through testing of the DNA, testimony and from informants. The most famous case in this category is the “jailhouse snitch. The prison management gave incentives in the form of lighter sentence, money or tokens, or criminal charges withdrawal to get the testimonies from the convict.

Professional Misconduct

This is the last technique, and it involves wrongdoings of the professional taskforce, for example, the police, lawyers, or forensic experts. Police often face a lot of pressures in the investigation of high-profile people and cases. While scholars show that exerting pressure on people is beneficial due to productivity, a lot of pressure has negative effects in this case. The most famous case is the Stephen Truscott’s conviction. There was no evidence of sexual harassment conviction, and therefore he was wrongfully arrested.

Innocent project Case criterion

The innocent project does not accept all the cases presented to them for legal assistance. For a case to be taken for by the innocent project, it has to follow a particular selection criterion. Once it has satisfied one of the criteria, it is then adopted by the innocent project for legal representation. The cases taken by must either be post-conviction, there’s is the presence of physical evidence such as traces of DNA that can prove that the defendant is actually innocent, the defendant must also have been convicted of the crime, and the crime must have been committed in the United States.

The first criterion is for the post-conviction. Post-conviction is a term that is used in law to refer to the legal process which takes place after trial results in the conviction of the defendant, including the sentencing. In the innocent project, they only take cases that have already passed the trials, and direct appeal have been exhausted, and the risks are final (Toglia & Lovvas, 2019). Cases that have not yet been convicted or cases that have already lost an appeal cannot be picked for legal representation.

The second criterion is the presence of physical evidence; for instance, DNA proving that the defendant is innocent of the crimes they are being accused of. Under this criterion, physical evidence is expected to be collected. Physical evidence includes body fluids such as blood or semen, or clothing and hair. This physical evidence can be taken in for tests where they can be used to determine if the defendant committed the crime or not. This type of biological evidence is useful in the solving of crimes that include sexual assaults, homicides and assaults that involved close contact. Physical evidence includes the cloths that the defendant had worn on the day of the commission of the charged offence can also be useful for the defence of the defendant.

The third and the last criterion is that the cases submitted must involve a defendant who has been convicted within the United States. The innocent project, however, does not take cases from the states of Arizona, California, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin or Puerto Rico as they closed intake in the respective states. The services offered by the Innocent project are rendered free of charge.

Cases that the innocent project solved

The number of cases that had been resolved by Innocent project as of November 2019 was 367. Of these cases, about 99% were male who had been wrongfully convicted, and they comprised of African Americans and basically Latinos (Courtroom, 2019). The exonerations majorly happened after the presentation of DNA evidence. Some of the notable exonerations include Steve Avery in 2003, Darryl Hunt 2004, James Calvin 2007, Glenn Ford 2014 among many others.

In Steve Avery 2014 case Steve Allan Avery had been wrongfully convicted in 1986 of sexual assault and attempted murder. He had served 18 years in the 32 years sentence that he had been convicted. When Innocent Project took over his case, the was exonerated following the presentation DNA testing evidence and was subsequently released in 2003. He later filed for compensation lawsuit for the 18 years that he had been wrongfully convicted against the then Manitowoc County sheriff and the attorney general.

The second exoneration that was notable was that of Darry Hunt in 2004. Darry Hunt was an African American from Winston Salem North Carolina in 1984. He had been sentenced life imprisonment for rape and murder of Deborah Sykes, who was a newspaper copy editor. He was also convicted of the murder of a black man Arthur Wilson in Wilson Salem. Both convictions were overturned in 1989 by an all-white bench. He was however tried in 1991 on the Sykes charges and was convicted. Later in the year 1994, his defence gained DNA physical evidence in the case of Sykes, and the results proved that he could not have committed the offence of raping Sykes. This evidence was, however, overruled by a judge citing that DNA was insufficient evidence to prove that the defendant needed acquittal as he was still capable of commuting the murder. However, in the year 2004, he was exonerated and later released having served 19 ½ years in prison following the confession of Willard E Brown to the crimes, and later his DNAs tests of Brown matches with those of Sykes case.

The third case was the case against James Calvin Tillman in the year 2007. James Calvin Tillman had been wrongfully convicted for 45 years for charged for first-degree kidnapping, first-degree sexual assault, and third-degree robbery and assault in 1986. He had served 18 ½ years in prison by the time he was exonerated. His defence presented evidence of DNA testing on the 11^th of July 2006. He was released in 2007.

The last notable exoneration was that of Glenn Ford 2014. In this case, Glenn Ford had been convicted of murder in 1984. He was born in Louisiana, and he was the arguable the longest-serving convict. He was convicted majorly because he had a weak defence as his defence comprised of inexperienced lawyers who had been assigned to him by the state following his inability to pay one. He was exonerated in the year 2014, but the state of Louisiana denied him compensation for wrongful conviction.

Impact of the Innocence project in different cultures

The innocence project has been widely applied in different sectors. Some of the cultures that have been impacted include the film literature, podcast stage production and on the television. In the film industry, it has led to the development of documentaries that deal with the stories of victims that were wrongfully convicted and their subsequent exonerations (Zalman, 2020). Some of the notable documentaries include the Trials of Darryl Hunt 2006, after innocence in 2005 and conviction in 2010.

In the field of literature, Innocent Project had led to the publishment of literature that revolves on the stories of individuals who had passed down the road of wrongful convictions and later exonerated. Some of the notable literature under this genre are the non-fiction books such as the innocent man, Murder and Injustice in a small town 2006 where the author John Grisham recounts the cases of Ron Williamson and Dennis Fritz who were assisted in appealing by the innocence project and later exonerated the charges of murder of Debra Ann Carter.

In the field of Podcast serial series have been produced concerning innocence project in the 7^th episode where the director of the investigation of the innocent project at the University of Virginia school of law and a team of students analyzed the Adnan Syed case. The impact has extended even to the stage productions where plays like those by Erik Jensen Blank about six people who had been wrongfully convicted were exonerated despite their death sentences.

The television cultures have also been impacted with the development of television series like the series suits, the innocence project and many more. This televisions programs as well as series revolve around the criminal justice system and in particular involve the cases where the victims were wrongfully sentenced. For instance, a series like Making a murder that has two seasons each having around seven episodes the storyline is about the wrongful conviction of one Steven Avery.

Conclusion

The innocence project was established to exonerate the innocent convicts and change the future of the justice system. Under the able management, it observed that it had achieved much through several solved cases. These cases include Steven Avery, Darryl Hunt, and Calvin Tilman, Glen Ford. It has also inspired the rise of other projects, for example, California innocence project, innocence Canada, the justice project of Australia, Medill Innocence project of Illinois, Nebraska innocence project and investigating innocence. Therefore, forensics results have been used to the advantage of the innocent victims.

Reference

The courtroom, J. B. M. 25 Years of The Innocence Project: Impact on Law, Policy and the Courts.

Hewitt, L. (2018). Learning by experience on the Innocence Project in London: the employer/employee environment. Int’l J. Clinical Legal Educ., 25, 173.

Margolis, S. (2020). The Innocence Project: Future Generations from the Founders to The Village. Arizona Quarterly: A Journal of American Literature, Culture, and Theory, 76(3), 1-24.

Toglia, M. P., & Lovaas, A. N. (2017). The Innocence Project: Promoting social justice by coding mistaken lineup identification cases.

Ware, M. (2019). Innocence Project of Texas. S. Tex. L. Rev., 60, 453.

Zalman, M. (2020). Edwin Borchard’s Innocence Project: The Origin and Legacy of His Wrongful Conviction Scholarship. Wrongful Conv. L. Rev., 1, 124.