The Innocent Man (Netflix)

[Neonmoon 38130]

Documentary series bases on true crime in Ada, Oklahoma. John Grisham wrote a true crime book about it. 

Anorher series that shows how some people on the “good” side of the law that are complete corrupt pieces of shit. The DA Bill Peterson is human garbage, and his deposition proves as much. 

Good Doc though. 

 

[Celery Man 21076]

after 1 episode, I'm in.

[Neonmoon 38130]

After Grisham’s book came out, fuckface Peterson started a website http://www.billpetersondistrictattorney.com/ to explain how Grisham misconstrued the evidence, and he didn’t do anything wrong. Sadly, it has been taken down since then

 

[Pato del Muerto 53331]

@henrygandorf started a thread about this because his friend produced it, I think. 

[Hugh G. Rection 156]

Ha, all those Okies sound like Boomhower

[seven 1368]

Everyone involved in either of those murders has 2, sometimes even 3, first names 

[Scraps 13745]

Watched the whole thing this weekend since I am all about these as well.  Was ok....thought The Staircase and Making a Murderer were far better 

[bschoolprof 6335]

1 minute ago, Scraps said:

Watched the whole thing this weekend since I am all about these as well.  Was ok....thought The Staircase and Making a Murderer were far better 

except Avery and Peterson are guilty af and Ward and Fontenot are not.  

[ocugolf 1220]

I’ve talked several times with Ross (the assistant DA), Landrith (the judge they interview) about the cases, and dated Bill Peterson’s neice and was around him for 10 years. Fritz and Williams are probably innocent but all the DNA proves is that they didn’t rape her. They definitely could have been there and just not raped her. They all ran in the same circles. Not sure what to think about Ward and Fontenot, but the people I’ve talked to that would know, feel good about the convictions. Southeastern Oklahoma is weird place. If Ward and Fontenot didn’t do it, we need to prove it ASAP to get them out. It’s been too long. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

1 hour ago, ocugolf said:

Fritz and Williams are probably innocent but all the DNA proves is that they didn’t rape her. They definitely could have been there and just not raped her.

This is why small town justice isn’t a good idea 

[bschoolprof 6335]

9 hours ago, ocugolf said:

I’ve talked several times with Ross (the assistant DA), Landrith (the judge they interview) about the cases, and dated Bill Peterson’s neice and was around him for 10 years. Fritz and Williams are probably innocent but all the DNA proves is that they didn’t rape her. They definitely could have been there and just not raped her. 

Well, by that logic, so could have Bill Peterson.  "Could have done it" is no standard for justice in any civil society. Without DNA, the evidence connecting them to the crime is virtually non-existent.  

9 hours ago, ocugolf said:

 Not sure what to think about Ward and Fontenot, but the people I’ve talked to that would know, feel good about the convictions. Southeastern Oklahoma is weird place. If Ward and Fontenot didn’t do it, we need to prove it ASAP to get them out. It’s been too long. 

Why don't you actually look at the evidence in the case instead of just asking locals?  At this point, there is a very low likelihood of proving they are innocent. 

The big issue is we never should have gotten to this point because the "evidence" used to convict them was so woefully inadequate.  In some sense, I can't really blame the 1st jury.  They had both suspects confessing, and the body had not yet been found, so most folks (incorrectly) thought "well if they confessed, they musta done it." Of course, they didn't know then what we know now: false confessions are real and happen all the time.  I do place blame on the 2nd jury, who knew that not a single substantive thing from the confessions was corroborated by the state of the body; in fact, most things they confessed to we know did not happen. I also blame the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (https://law.justia.com/cases/oklahoma/court-of-appeals-criminal/1994/11525.html) for bending over backward and ignoring basic common sense in ruling that the confessions were "competent" evidence.  It's horrifying they let these convictions stand.  

Edited December 21, 2018 by bschoolprof

[ocugolf 1220]

And they all had tremendously ineffective counsel. I’m pretty sure both have The Innocence Project representing them now. If Ward and Fontenot are truly innocent, the Innocence Project is the best hope they have had in decades 

[bschoolprof 6335]

Actually, their attorneys mounted a rather vigorous defense, as documented in the book "The Dreams of Ada" (Link) which goes into (almost too much) detail about the legal proceedings.  It's a fairly even-handed account of what happened and has more detail about the case than what was shown in the doc.  It's a somewhat dry read, but I'd recommend it for anyone truly interested in the case.

Heart-breakingly, I think both men will likely die in prison. The burden is on them to prove their innocence, and without DNA I see no way to do that.  Their only hope is a Federal court IMO.  

[Helobious 9755]

On 12/17/2018 at 9:37 AM, bschoolprof said:

except Avery and Peterson are guilty af and Ward and Fontenot are not.  

You think Peterson from the staircase is guilty? The prosecution in that case gave the most nonsensical description of a murder I’ve ever heard. Can’t believe he was ever convicted.

[bschoolprof 6335]

2 hours ago, Helobious said:

You think Peterson from the staircase is guilty? The prosecution in that case gave the most nonsensical description of a murder I’ve ever heard. Can’t believe he was ever convicted.

Yes. The doc was very one-sided and left out key information presented at trial.  For me, this is all very incriminating (spoilered for length):

Spoiler

--An EMT testified Peterson's wife appeared she had been dead for a while when they got there.  He also testified much of the blood was partially dried and had started to coagulate - like it had been there for a while. He also said he has been called to dozens and dozens of falls over the years and had never seen anything like that in terms of blood volume.  

-- The EMT also testified that Peterson said he had just gone outside to turn off the pool lights and when he came back, her found her there at the bottom of the stairs.

--However, a pathologist testified that red neurons in her brain indicated it took some time for her to bleed out and for her brain to die - about 2 hours.

--All of the above are inconsistent with his initial story and the timing of the 911 call (the EMTs arrived about 5 minutes after the call).  Only later did Peterson change his story to the "smoking outside in the 50 degree weather for 45 minutes before I found her" version he tells us in the doc.  

--His wife had his shoeprint in blood on her back.  But when EMTs and police arrived, he was barefoot.  He had taken his shoes off and started to clean up.  His shoes and a roll of paper towels can be seen next to her body in the crime scene photos.  

--Luminol tests showed bloody footprints from the staircase to the kitchen sink that had been cleaned up and wiped away, as if someone had tried to clean up the crime scene.

-- He had blood spatter on the inside leg of his shorts.

--There was blood spatter 9-10 feet up one of the walls.

--I don't need Duane Deaver or Henry Lee or any other "expert" to tell me whether the injuries or blood spatter was "consistent" with a fall.  It wasn't.  Look at the photos and use common sense.  When asked after the trial about their verdict, one juror said the most convincing thing was visiting the crime scene and seeing the amount of blood with his own eyes.  All of the expert testimony seemed moot at that point.  "No way that was a fall" was the common sentiment among the jurors.  

She had 7-8 lacerations on her head. You think the prosecution's story was hard to believe?  What about the defense story that she fell, got up, fell, got up,  . . .?  Does that in any way seem plausible?  What about Henry Lee's ridiculous ketchup gargling/spitting to explain the blood spatter?    What a clown show.  

Happy to talk about this more, but it should probably happen on another thread.  

[Helobious 9755]

1 hour ago, bschoolprof said:

Yes. The doc was very one-sided and left out key information presented at trial.  For me, this is all very incriminating (spoilered for length):

  Hide contents

--An EMT testified Peterson's wife appeared she had been dead for a while when they got there.  He also testified much of the blood was partially dried and had started to coagulate - like it had been there for a while. He also said he has been called to dozens and dozens of falls over the years and had never seen anything like that in terms of blood volume.  

-- The EMT also testified that Peterson said he had just gone outside to turn off the pool lights and when he came back, her found her there at the bottom of the stairs.

--However, a pathologist testified that red neurons in her brain indicated it took some time for her to bleed out and for her brain to die - about 2 hours.

--All of the above are inconsistent with his initial story and the timing of the 911 call (the EMTs arrived about 5 minutes after the call).  Only later did Peterson change his story to the "smoking outside in the 50 degree weather for 45 minutes before I found her" version he tells us in the doc.  

--His wife had his shoeprint in blood on her back.  But when EMTs and police arrived, he was barefoot.  He had taken his shoes off and started to clean up.  His shoes and a roll of paper towels can be seen next to her body in the crime scene photos.  

--Luminol tests showed bloody footprints from the staircase to the kitchen sink that had been cleaned up and wiped away, as if someone had tried to clean up the crime scene.

-- He had blood spatter on the inside leg of his shorts.

--There was blood spatter 9-10 feet up one of the walls.

--I don't need Duane Deaver or Henry Lee or any other "expert" to tell me whether the injuries or blood spatter was "consistent" with a fall.  It wasn't.  Look at the photos and use common sense.  When asked after the trial about their verdict, one juror said the most convincing thing was visiting the crime scene and seeing the amount of blood with his own eyes.  All of the expert testimony seemed moot at that point.  "No way that was a fall" was the common sentiment among the jurors.  

She had 7-8 lacerations on her head. You think the prosecution's story was hard to believe?  What about the defense story that she fell, got up, fell, got up,  . . .?  Does that in any way seem plausible?  What about Henry Lee's ridiculous ketchup gargling/spitting to explain the blood spatter?    What a clown show.  

Happy to talk about this more, but it should probably happen on another thread.  

Well now I know you never saw the doc, virtually all of that was thoroughly addressed.

[BigOrange1 6607]

finished this up this afternoon.  agree that it's not as gripping as the staircase or making a murderer, but it was definitely worth the watch and it's infuriating that those two men are still in prison.  

fuck most of law enforcement, but especially fuck small town law enforcement.