Speaker 1: I'm Jason Flom, host of Wrongful Conviction. Over the years,
Speaker 1: hundreds of exonrees have told me their stories, and sadly,
Speaker 1: with the state of our criminal legal system, we're left
Speaker 1: with far more cases than I can possibly handle alone.
Speaker 1: So I've asked some axonrerees to handle some of these cases,
Speaker 1: bringing the kind of perspective to the interviews that could
Speaker 1: only come from living through their own wrongful convictions. This
Speaker 1: is one of those interviews. In the early morning hours
Speaker 1: of January, Stephen Fitch, Reginald Wilson, and Felicia Lewis were
Speaker 1: in Chicago driving in Wilson's car. They stopped at a
Speaker 1: gas station so the two men could use the restroom.
Speaker 1: When Fitch walked back to the car, he saw two
Speaker 1: men hijacking it, one driving and another in the back
Speaker 1: with Wilson and Lewis. Fitch ran across the street and
Speaker 1: called the police to report the car jacking. Later that day,
Speaker 1: the frozen bodies of twenty three year old Illinois state
Speaker 1: basketball star Reginald Wilson and his twenty year old girlfriend,
Speaker 1: Felicia Lewis were discovered in a large garbage ban in Chicago.
Speaker 1: Both had sustained multiple gunshot wounds. The stolen car was
Speaker 1: found idling in a nearby town after a chase. Two
Speaker 1: of the car jackers were identified as Scott Chambers and
Speaker 1: Stanley Hamilt. They were interviewed and admitted their involvements in
Speaker 1: the crime. They also named three more accomplices, including a
Speaker 1: guy named Carl. Through their investigation, the police were led
Speaker 1: to Carl Williams. The co defendants repeatedly said that Carl
Speaker 1: Williams wasn't involved and there was no physical evidence linking
Speaker 1: him to the carjacking and murders, but with a forced
Speaker 1: and false confession, Carl Williams was found guilty of a
Speaker 1: crime he did not commit and was since the natural
Speaker 1: life in prison. This is wrongful conviction. My name is
Speaker 1: Patrick Persley, also known as Free Patrick Pursley, as previously
Speaker 1: a guest on Wrang for Conviction as in Asnoree, but
Speaker 1: today I'm honored to be your guest host. It is
Speaker 1: a true privilege. We'll be talking to two people to
Speaker 1: Carl's actually attorney, Carl Leonard, and my good friend and
Speaker 1: brother Carl Williams. This interview was recorded in April, but
Speaker 1: Carl and I have known each other for a long time.
Speaker 1: We were at Stapo prison together where we both spent
Speaker 1: countless hours in the lawd liberry. We probably did what
Speaker 1: how many years you think we did together? Oh? Man
Speaker 1: um at least how how how many years? He was
Speaker 1: just twenty three? Yeah, see just and then I was
Speaker 1: there about twenty three years, so at least years a
Speaker 1: couple of decades. Yes, that's you. Hail from Cook County, Chicago.
Speaker 1: I doo born and raised um. The what they called
Speaker 1: the low wind, the lowing hell of a rep. The
Speaker 1: low wind definitely has a hell of a rep. But
Speaker 1: I think that the low wind gets an unfair rep. Well,
Speaker 1: but I don't even think it exists no more. And
Speaker 1: so it was so bad they knocked the buildings down.
Speaker 1: Then they definitely knocked the buildings down. But the spirit
Speaker 1: and the people are still the next community. They were
Speaker 1: serving that community, UM in a more productive and positive ways. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's beautiful thing. So going forward, right, like you you
Speaker 1: catch this just this horrific, horrific case. It's a very
Speaker 1: heavy story, right, it's a very so you had to
Speaker 1: carry this, can you like start us like at the beginning,
Speaker 1: what like what took place? So me growing up in
Speaker 1: that community. It was a community like I said that,
Speaker 1: I love that, I value that, I appreciate it, and
Speaker 1: at the same time, I also made some wrong decisions
Speaker 1: in that community. I come from street hustling, which allowed
Speaker 1: me to be able to gain material wealth. And you
Speaker 1: know how this operates in those communities. Very true, and
Speaker 1: it brings it brings a long attention in terms of
Speaker 1: girls and things. We're talking about starting from the age
Speaker 1: of like fifteen years old. And what it does is
Speaker 1: it brings you a ton of attention. Everybody knows your name,
Speaker 1: everybody wants to be connected to you. A few months
Speaker 1: after Carl's seventeenth birthday, a terrible crime happened in his neighborhood.
Speaker 1: Here's attorney Kyle Leonard, who worked on Carl's case. The
Speaker 1: evidence that the that the state collected was that there
Speaker 1: was carjacking confrontation at a gas station in Chicago. UH.
Speaker 1: Two individuals were kidnapped during the car jack king brought
Speaker 1: to another location. UH the woman was actually assaulted and
Speaker 1: both of them ended up murdered and in a dumpster.
Speaker 1: And there was there were some items that were stolen
Speaker 1: from the vehicle and the state alleged that that those
Speaker 1: items were divvied up among the offenders. The other person
Speaker 1: who had been in the car with the victims saw
Speaker 1: the car jacking and called the police. The police tracked
Speaker 1: down the vehicle in nearby town. They arrested two people
Speaker 1: running from it, Scott Chambers and Stanley Hamlin, who were
Speaker 1: both later convicted of the crime. Chambers and Hamlin then
Speaker 1: provided the police with three more names, so Riis Johnson,
Speaker 1: Anthony Brown, and a guy named Carl. They didn't give
Speaker 1: his last name, just Carl. It's really rare to have
Speaker 1: this manic defendants and it's a lot to sort through, right.
Speaker 1: This is a case that involves a lot of offenders
Speaker 1: and the police are obviously investigating. They're sort of big
Speaker 1: break is when they find the vehicle, which they they
Speaker 1: had brought to a south suburb out side Chicago, and
Speaker 1: that's how they made the initial arrests of who would
Speaker 1: become some of Carl's co defendants. There's an individual with
Speaker 1: them who does not end up becoming a co defendant,
Speaker 1: but who is the first one to sort of start
Speaker 1: talking and they he just starts saying names of people
Speaker 1: who were involved, gives the first name Carl. They decided
Speaker 1: that Carl Williams is the car that this person's referring
Speaker 1: to the name Carl came up being involved in this
Speaker 1: brutal cry. So with that name being coming up, then
Speaker 1: who was the most popular car in that area at
Speaker 1: that time? It was me based off the fact of
Speaker 1: the street hustling and the things that brought me the
Speaker 1: unwanted attention. Now, the description that they was given of
Speaker 1: this car was six one to six three, low hair,
Speaker 1: my skin, um full beard. I mean I was just
Speaker 1: a young kid who barely can still grow a beard
Speaker 1: to this day. About five seven. I mean, well not
Speaker 1: quite five seven, but I mean I'm about five, but
Speaker 1: you'll match the description skin tone or height or I
Speaker 1: was five seven at that time, stocky build, short hair,
Speaker 1: never had long hair. The description definitely didn't fit me.
Speaker 1: The police showed up at the home of Erica Wells,
Speaker 1: Carl's girlfriend at the time. The person that answered the
Speaker 1: door told the police that Carl was upstairs. The police
Speaker 1: entered the home and immediately got rough with him, taking
Speaker 1: me and throwing me onto the floor, slamming me onto
Speaker 1: the floor, grabbing me by the knack, putting the gun
Speaker 1: to my head, threatening to shoot me. And to kill
Speaker 1: me if I move. A lot of people don't really
Speaker 1: realize how like the tailor two America's like the treatment
Speaker 1: in the door. They absolutely so, it is so calm.
Speaker 1: The violations as far as what they would call civil
Speaker 1: rights violations, it's like we basically have no civil rights
Speaker 1: and at all. When you're at that point and just
Speaker 1: feeling that understanding, it feels like it takes some of
Speaker 1: your power away. You're powerless in that moment. And they
Speaker 1: take me downstairs and I have on nothing but my underwear,
Speaker 1: no other clothes on whatsoever. And I'm studied consistently actually
Speaker 1: them what's going on to people in the house are
Speaker 1: asking them what's going on? They take me out in handcuffs.
Speaker 1: Now it's January before. Do you know how cold Chicago
Speaker 1: could be to go outside and to step outside and
Speaker 1: the code it's aure. But when you think about it today,
Speaker 1: is it was a deliberate process of course, So it
Speaker 1: asked trauma that you have already experienced from from the
Speaker 1: moment that they entered into the house to accuse you
Speaker 1: of a crime that you didn't commit. So the person, um,
Speaker 1: they take me outside with the handcuffs on and just
Speaker 1: I guess for him to identify me. Now they're saying
Speaker 1: that he's identifying me, and I need to go down
Speaker 1: to the station. And this is where the rest of
Speaker 1: the trauma begins. You can feel the butterflies, you can
Speaker 1: feel the nervousness, you can feel the anxiety because of
Speaker 1: what just happened to you. So there's still trauma that's
Speaker 1: continuing to follow you and walk with you through the
Speaker 1: same path that they're taking you on, which is a
Speaker 1: brutal path. So and then presenting you in that way,
Speaker 1: having you handcuff, holding you by your arm and just
Speaker 1: jaking open the door and and pushing you there and
Speaker 1: say and the person you know this person at he's
Speaker 1: like no, and they all go And when you go
Speaker 1: to every room and they say no, it's like, oh man,
Speaker 1: but you don't understand that at the time. They put
Speaker 1: you back in that room and you're you know, and
Speaker 1: you're like, oh man, that you know that was that?
Speaker 1: That was it. But then hours to go by, or
Speaker 1: you don't know how much time going by because there's
Speaker 1: no clock, and you're like, what I am I still here?
Speaker 1: Then you see one of your co defendants come to you.
Speaker 1: They bring him back to you, and he still says no,
Speaker 1: But then they bring him back within a thirty minute
Speaker 1: or within the hour time frame, and now he's crying,
Speaker 1: and you know, and and and him, and then he
Speaker 1: says they asked him again, and he says, yeah, now
Speaker 1: you you know it's it's it's a concern and a worry. Um,
Speaker 1: that's starting to lose your grasp on reality to imagine,
Speaker 1: I couldn't explain to you that feeling. Now, can we
Speaker 1: just be clear, because it's not it's it's torture, the
Speaker 1: breaking of the will, the breaking of the psyche. And
Speaker 1: I'm glad that you recognized and identified it as that,
Speaker 1: because that's exactly what it is. It's no different from
Speaker 1: the mental um um torture that you put someone and
Speaker 1: what I'm talking to obey through. It's no different from
Speaker 1: torture that you put someone through in Vietnam. So you're
Speaker 1: absolutely right because the tactics are the same, you know,
Speaker 1: the objectives are the same. The objectives are definitely the same,
Speaker 1: just different people. And the facts can just be collateral damage.
Speaker 1: The facts are unfortuntime. At the time, the purpose is
Speaker 1: to be able to find um a person, to to
Speaker 1: accuse them and charge them with the crime, so so
Speaker 1: your day can be over with. I just want to
Speaker 1: remind you here, it's only seventeen years old at the
Speaker 1: time when all this is going down. The police interrogate
Speaker 1: him all day, like ten or twelve hours straight trying
Speaker 1: to get him to confess. So just going through that
Speaker 1: process hours on end, hours on end to where you
Speaker 1: just want to end it. It's just like, hey, you
Speaker 1: know what, well, we want you to sign this. If
Speaker 1: you don't, then this process will happen again. I couldn't
Speaker 1: tell you of the fear that I probably that I
Speaker 1: felt at that time. Well, I mean, it's a very
Speaker 1: sterile picture, but the reality is those interrogation rooms are
Speaker 1: full of blood, spit urine. They are on the wall
Speaker 1: saying here, they're right, they're hot there. You know, they're
Speaker 1: literally stuffed with the energy of the people that were
Speaker 1: in there just a few moments before you and you
Speaker 1: can end this process if you signed this statement. As
Speaker 1: naive as I was, I did think that was there
Speaker 1: a sense of relief, would have a sense of relief
Speaker 1: though after the fact, um, I think that some of
Speaker 1: my anxiety kind of went away because of I didn't
Speaker 1: see them anymore, not knowing that this has to has
Speaker 1: affected my entire life. At nine o'clock that evening, Assistant
Speaker 1: State's Attorney Nicholas grabs As wrote a handwritten confession for Carl.
Speaker 1: The statement said that he was in Anthony Brown's car
Speaker 1: when Carl and four other co defendants saw the victims
Speaker 1: Chevy Blazer at the gas station and then decided to
Speaker 1: hijack it, strip it, and sell the parts and split
Speaker 1: the money. The statement said that Carl was on the
Speaker 1: lookout while the hijacking took place, and that he was
Speaker 1: in Brown's car watching while Brown raped Felicia Lewis. They
Speaker 1: then allegedly returned Louis to the blazer and demanded money.
Speaker 1: The statement said that afterwards all five co defendants met
Speaker 1: up and Scott Chambers told them they shot the victims
Speaker 1: and then Carl received thirty dollars as to share the
Speaker 1: hijacking money. After being subject to torture and relentless pressure
Speaker 1: from the police, Carl Williams signed this false confession, sealing
Speaker 1: his faith. During that time, I was still um in
Speaker 1: a state of confusion. I was still very hurt. I
Speaker 1: was also struggling in terms of defending myself here. I was,
Speaker 1: you know, early on you you're given a p D
Speaker 1: who's not putting forth an effort to be able to
Speaker 1: um actually highlight your innocence, but to shuffle you along
Speaker 1: to be to the next case. I was still, you know,
Speaker 1: you hear stuff like this when the judge is allowed,
Speaker 1: judge and this judgement see right through the police is nonsense,
Speaker 1: and then there bring your relief. Well, I actually hope
Speaker 1: that would be for me, that that's like the loss
Speaker 1: of innocence right there when we learned of what a
Speaker 1: freaking fairytale that one is right until and listen, let
Speaker 1: me go back just a little bit the first time
Speaker 1: when I'm arraigned in front of the judge, my co
Speaker 1: defendants says still that I wasn't involved in the case,
Speaker 1: that they that they have their wrong person. This is yes,
Speaker 1: you would think that at some point there was want
Speaker 1: to be an investigation. This is a continuing theme fair
Speaker 1: Belt right now. But things are continue to move forward,
Speaker 1: uh at a very rapid um fast pace and no
Speaker 1: one cares. So what actual evidence like was what what
Speaker 1: evidence that the state presenting? What was your side? The
Speaker 1: statement that's it? No code defenders to come testify. No
Speaker 1: one testify against me. The co defender who decided to
Speaker 1: testify against another. The co defendant refused to testify against
Speaker 1: me because he said to them that I was innocent
Speaker 1: and wasn't involved in the case. As a practice in
Speaker 1: jail house lawyer for twenty three years in Stateville, I've
Speaker 1: seen this way so much. Public defenders are often referred
Speaker 1: to imprison as public pretenders because they often dropped the ball.
Speaker 1: It happens more often than the general public has any
Speaker 1: idea of. And in this case, the public defender failed
Speaker 1: to get any exculpatory evidence to help free at client.
Speaker 1: The lawyer never went to witnesses. So, um, that was
Speaker 1: a witness in the case, and at that time, who
Speaker 1: was coming to court for me? And who was there
Speaker 1: in the audience in terms of my alibi every time
Speaker 1: I had a court date, and they just don't talk
Speaker 1: to him and they never talked and they never spoke
Speaker 1: to him. I've seen it. I've trust me, I've seen it.
Speaker 1: As a jail house lawyer. You already know that. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, not knocking lawyers right. However, when we're sitting
Speaker 1: inside and we're filing these complaints to the Attorney Registration
Speaker 1: Disciplinary Commission. Another lawyer answers them right, and basically all
Speaker 1: these claims are basically all the same as far as
Speaker 1: failure to reach out to get witnesses, failed you to investigate,
Speaker 1: FAILI to secure evidence right, maybe video surveilance or whatever,
Speaker 1: failure to get an expert to challenge any evidence. But
Speaker 1: here it is what the gap for you is a confession.
Speaker 1: You would think that he might have stepped up and
Speaker 1: did more. No physical evidence, no, no, nothing to connect
Speaker 1: me to the crime whatsoever. The jury deliberated for several
Speaker 1: days and eventually came to the conclusion that Carl Williams
Speaker 1: was guilty a first degree murder. Carl was convicted because
Speaker 1: of his you know, the so called confession of the
Speaker 1: statement that was the only evidence. And I think the
Speaker 1: police knew that they didn't have any evidence. That's why
Speaker 1: they beat you. That's why they need something. The only
Speaker 1: way they're closing this case against Carl Williams is if
Speaker 1: you confess. So they made sure to get a confession, correct,
Speaker 1: That's how they are you convicted. But yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: from the second I met Carl, I knew he's innocent.
Speaker 1: I still believe He's innocent, no doubt about it. The
Speaker 1: way I kind of like, look at it's like you
Speaker 1: know the Zamboni machine. That's the thing. It's like a
Speaker 1: slow like it's just running you over slow motion, right,
Speaker 1: And you're just getting to this process where you know
Speaker 1: you're being run over by the system and you can't
Speaker 1: do it. You just can't do anything about it because
Speaker 1: a lot of times if the council does not do
Speaker 1: the work, the judge does not suit Sponte on his own. Hey,
Speaker 1: I call Radishes correct. The prosecutor is just here for
Speaker 1: the slam dunk, right, So now you, um, you get
Speaker 1: found guilty. What is this um like? For myself? I
Speaker 1: just I don't even remember how I got back to
Speaker 1: my debt. What happened? What was your processing? I cried
Speaker 1: the entire way. I can remember walking back and asking
Speaker 1: them to speak to a counselor because my mind couldn't function.
Speaker 1: My mind couldn't tell you, Um, I couldn't even figure
Speaker 1: out where I was at at the time. And uh,
Speaker 1: And I'm getting emotional about it now because I'm thinking
Speaker 1: about my young self at that time trying to walk
Speaker 1: through that tunnel and you know you can't you can't
Speaker 1: protect that, you know what I'm saying. And you walk
Speaker 1: through that tunnel and you're and you're thinking to yourself,
Speaker 1: they just took my life. How could you reconcile with
Speaker 1: with that? When you when you believed in something, you
Speaker 1: believed in something more importantly that you trusted in the process,
Speaker 1: and then the process fails you. I sat by myself
Speaker 1: on that deck. I can remember just being in the
Speaker 1: room for days and people coming to check on me
Speaker 1: because they was afraid that, you know, trying to harm himself.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, and you know, but immediately, immediately, UM, my mom.
Speaker 1: You know my mom made she rest in peace now
Speaker 1: you know. She She passed away um this year from
Speaker 1: COVID on January the second. I can remember her calling
Speaker 1: one of my friends who was on that deck with me,
Speaker 1: and he's like, man, your mom's saying, call her, call her.
Speaker 1: And I called her and she says, you know, UM,
Speaker 1: I can't imagine what you're going through. My heart is broken,
Speaker 1: but we need to get focused real quick. What is
Speaker 1: it that we need to do to fight for your life.
Speaker 1: I just started to go and write letters immediately. That's
Speaker 1: where it all begins for me from I never stopped
Speaker 1: writing letters asking for help. I've probably sent out over
Speaker 1: four thousand letters. Good god, I actually sent so many
Speaker 1: letters out. We used to send a hundred letters out
Speaker 1: in the box for those who don't know. For those
Speaker 1: don't know. Stateville Prison lost the lawsuit and in part
Speaker 1: of a an agreement was they had to send all
Speaker 1: of our legal mail out and we would take full avenge.
Speaker 1: I would put them in colorful envelopes. I would put
Speaker 1: them in peppermint looking envelopes, pink envelopes, green envelopes, just
Speaker 1: to make them try to stand out. And you name them.
Speaker 1: I wrote them. I said, do you know do you
Speaker 1: know anyone who would be interested in looking into a
Speaker 1: role for conviction. I've written many letters, I've written many people.
Speaker 1: And Mike responded, and that changed the narrative for me.
Speaker 1: That Mike is his lawyer, Michael Scolar, who took on
Speaker 1: the case pro bono on seven. Before Mike got involved
Speaker 1: in the case, Carl had already filed to post conviction
Speaker 1: petitions and both were denied. Together they filed two more petitions.
Speaker 1: He started working on the case and he said, Carl,
Speaker 1: I believe you're innocent, but this is gonna be an
Speaker 1: uphill battle. I just wanted to check right because this
Speaker 1: is uh, this is the turnaround, right, So, um, you're
Speaker 1: thrown down this deep dark well, right, that's basically what
Speaker 1: it is. It's like a Stateville's like a little like
Speaker 1: a little hell, and time is frozen. Right. You have
Speaker 1: the same people reciting the same rap song that they
Speaker 1: were citing when they kind of locked up. Right, So
Speaker 1: you're in this like this pocket universe of hell, and
Speaker 1: everything is going against you to prevent you from getting
Speaker 1: to that law library, right, getting copies, right, having any
Speaker 1: peace to read your case. Right. However, the hope comes
Speaker 1: because you see other people getting out right, So me
Speaker 1: and you we got your witnessed several people, So that
Speaker 1: gives you hope, right, like even right now, like I
Speaker 1: really feel like the exhilaration, Like, um, one day we're
Speaker 1: going to hard and talking to baby Stone. Right, next day,
Speaker 1: baby Stone is out, the next day baby Stone is
Speaker 1: all sixty minutes. That is a hell of a message
Speaker 1: to us, and it's very encouraging, and it's very supportive
Speaker 1: in terms of your spirit, your energy, and your peace
Speaker 1: and your effort to continue to push forth and dry
Speaker 1: the narrative of your innocence. And when we get the
Speaker 1: lawyers right, because we know pro say gets no play.
Speaker 1: Once we get the lawyers right, it gives us such
Speaker 1: a shot in the arm. I look at it very
Speaker 1: much like I sent my words out to fight for
Speaker 1: me mhm. And over time other people added their words
Speaker 1: to fight for me, and becomes an undeniable, undeniable force,
Speaker 1: and it literally sets us free. Long before I was
Speaker 1: ever even involved, Mike had done a ton of investigation
Speaker 1: and got an affidavits from the co defendants from a
Speaker 1: number of people attesting to Carl's innocence. Meanwhile, there's a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court case called Miller versus Alabama that was decided
Speaker 1: which talks about how it can be unconstitutional to give
Speaker 1: life sentences or de facto life sentences to juveniles. Carl
Speaker 1: falls into that category, so they file another post conviction
Speaker 1: petition raising that issue separately. The judge dismissed both of
Speaker 1: them and went up on appeal, and Mike and his
Speaker 1: team won the appeal sent it back to the Child
Speaker 1: Court to have a hearing on these issues. That's the
Speaker 1: point at which I got involved, was getting ready to
Speaker 1: have that hearing. I don't like popular opinion is very
Speaker 1: weighty on lawyers as far as you know, a lot
Speaker 1: of people give you like jeers for helping prisoners. As
Speaker 1: far as yourself and going into this process, what were
Speaker 1: someone challenges. I think one of the hardest parts about
Speaker 1: these cases in general is just how old they are,
Speaker 1: and like it's it's terrible for you guys who were
Speaker 1: in prison for what was it, twenty four years, twenty
Speaker 1: six years, But during that time, memories fade, witnesses die,
Speaker 1: witnesses move, and so we're trying to piece back together
Speaker 1: something that happened a very long time ago, involving people
Speaker 1: who have moved on with their lives and want nothing
Speaker 1: to do with you. So I think that tends to
Speaker 1: be one of the bigger challenges with all of these
Speaker 1: cases is that we're not the place. We can't show
Speaker 1: up with a badge and say you need to talk
Speaker 1: to us, so you're you're just trying to convince people
Speaker 1: that you're worth their time. So I think just the
Speaker 1: passage of time and the lack of any real power
Speaker 1: makes it really hard to sort of reinvestigate these these
Speaker 1: types of cases. Our goal is to get Carl home,
Speaker 1: and the way we were able to get him home.
Speaker 1: The quickest was to reach an agreement with the state
Speaker 1: about the the Miller claimed the juvenile life without parole claim.
Speaker 1: Agreed to a sentence, and we did a sentencing hearing
Speaker 1: instead of doing an evidentiary hearing, and convinced the judge
Speaker 1: to impose a sentence that got Carl home pretty quickly
Speaker 1: after that. A lot of people don't really realize how
Speaker 1: long it takes for a post conviction petition to matriculate
Speaker 1: through the circuit courts. The whole process in this case
Speaker 1: was definitely not quick. In twelve and Impellet Court ruled
Speaker 1: that he was entitled to a new evidentury hearing and
Speaker 1: if he were denied a new trial after that, he
Speaker 1: should at least deserve a nuisance based on the president
Speaker 1: set by Miller versus Alabama. It always was one thing
Speaker 1: and after another and saying, oh, um, well, we're looking,
Speaker 1: we're waiting on these documents, or I didn't read this,
Speaker 1: or she would give me these long continuouces. So it
Speaker 1: went on and on and on, and it dragged out
Speaker 1: from November of on the way to August one. Do
Speaker 1: you see or do you believe that this using time
Speaker 1: as a weapon it is and household. It's being used
Speaker 1: as a weapon because it wears you down. Imagine the
Speaker 1: psychological effects that that has upon you. You're going to
Speaker 1: court or you're having a court date, and then it's
Speaker 1: another continuous I think thinking about the how much time
Speaker 1: went by there, and I think you're absolutely right that
Speaker 1: there is a strategic reason for the state to delay
Speaker 1: things and things like that. I think also, and this
Speaker 1: is much more depressing, is that the delays I don't
Speaker 1: think are necessarily because this is the way we're going
Speaker 1: to win the case. I think a lot of the
Speaker 1: times delays are you guys don't matter. There are more
Speaker 1: important things for these judges to be working on. There's
Speaker 1: more important things for the prosecutors to be working on.
Speaker 1: These guys were convicted, they don't matter. Kyle was released
Speaker 1: from prison in but not based on his innocence, but
Speaker 1: because in the new sentence that was imposed, it's a
Speaker 1: chance to get out, but it also means you won't
Speaker 1: officially be exonerated, and that's a very heavy cross to
Speaker 1: carry for someone who's actually innocent. For me, Um, it
Speaker 1: was very bittersweet. It's something that I was like, you
Speaker 1: know what, Um, I didn't want to do, but I
Speaker 1: was forced to do. I wasn't gonna die in somebody's prison.
Speaker 1: My mom was older. I lost a son. It's one
Speaker 1: of the things that I that I kicked myself over,
Speaker 1: and I've gone back over if there's anything I could
Speaker 1: have done to make this go faster. Because your son
Speaker 1: died right before you got out, I've gone back over
Speaker 1: it and wondered, is there any place I could have
Speaker 1: made this go a month faster or something like that.
Speaker 1: I am beyond grateful that you were home to be
Speaker 1: with your mom, but you're the fact that your son
Speaker 1: died right before you got out, and and and I
Speaker 1: want to just make this clear, not that he died
Speaker 1: as if he died from natural causes, he was murdered
Speaker 1: in broad daylight. I need to touch on this. How
Speaker 1: many times did you see guys our age lose sons
Speaker 1: to the streets while we were inside? Oh man, I
Speaker 1: lost count I probably I don know about forty people
Speaker 1: who's probably lost a son. The father's not there, were
Speaker 1: locked up. The mother is doing her best, is put
Speaker 1: cultural best effort, but the culture is drawing them out.
Speaker 1: The culture is drawing them out. That is very true.
Speaker 1: The culture is definitely drawing them out, reshaping their frame
Speaker 1: of mind, changing their free features. Really hard for them
Speaker 1: to give absolutely, because it's like speaking a foreign language,
Speaker 1: it is. And you're still trying to be a father
Speaker 1: and a parent from from prison, which you know you
Speaker 1: wish there was a such thing. I mean, I literally
Speaker 1: like hashtag Confessions of a jail Daddy. It's an oxymoron.
Speaker 1: You're in jail. You can write all the letters and
Speaker 1: all the money, but the culture is still going to
Speaker 1: get a hold to our children, it is. But in
Speaker 1: returning back into society, you know, I've took in every
Speaker 1: educational course that I possibly could in that prison, only
Speaker 1: because I've always seen a better future and the opportunity
Speaker 1: for me upon my return. So in the name of
Speaker 1: my son, in the name of myself, I was definitely
Speaker 1: going to upon my return, whatever day that was going
Speaker 1: to be, I was gonna do something and make something
Speaker 1: better of myself and highlighted to to do better in
Speaker 1: the community that I grew up in. I feel like
Speaker 1: I have been taking that journey. I feel like I
Speaker 1: have been walking that journey with the work that I've
Speaker 1: been doing. I now teach um kids in the neighborhood
Speaker 1: who fathers were in conserrated or who mothers were in concerrated.
Speaker 1: I teach them corpentry. I own a furniture business as
Speaker 1: building custom cabinets as well as selling furniture and the
Speaker 1: Royal Man Solutions and you can find that on royal
Speaker 1: Man Solutions dot com and um. One of the things
Speaker 1: that um Um I do is that I take some
Speaker 1: of these these kids from the community, take them on
Speaker 1: deliveries with me and I pay them. It's it's an
Speaker 1: opportunity for them to learn the trade and the craft.
Speaker 1: But UM also UM learned the experience of working a
Speaker 1: job to be able to provide for themselves UM today,
Speaker 1: tomorrow into the future. I think it's really beautiful how
Speaker 1: he's carrying on with his life with without the bitterness
Speaker 1: and the baggage. He's very much radiant soul. He's given
Speaker 1: back to his community. And we'll have links to Carl's
Speaker 1: work in the Bile so you can flood him with
Speaker 1: love there. And now we'll go to closing part of
Speaker 1: our show. I want to thank the listeners for having
Speaker 1: me as your guest host, and of course thanks to
Speaker 1: the two Carl's Carl Williams for allowing me the honor
Speaker 1: to tell this story, and Carl Leonard for his work
Speaker 1: on behalf of the wrongfully Convicted. This last bit of
Speaker 1: the show we call closing arguments. I'm gonna step away
Speaker 1: from the mic and let Carl and Carl have the
Speaker 1: last words. The way to avoid wrongful convictions in the
Speaker 1: first place. The way to fix the wrong force convictions
Speaker 1: that we have is for the people who are listening
Speaker 1: to the program to vote. Vote for prosecutors who are
Speaker 1: going to change the way these officers work. Vote for
Speaker 1: mayors who are going to appoint police cheeks. So we're
Speaker 1: gonna change the way police departments work. It's a slow process.
Speaker 1: It doesn't help people like Carl, but hopefully it helps
Speaker 1: prevent more people like Carl. It get the people out
Speaker 1: who are locked up wrongfully, stop sending around people to prison.
Speaker 1: And I think the only way that we can do
Speaker 1: that is to vote for better leaders. I certainly agree.
Speaker 1: I'm reaching out to UM different legislators UM making the
Speaker 1: argument about how the narrative surrounding role for convictions needs
Speaker 1: to change, how they need to be a calling for
Speaker 1: people being held responsible for allowing role for convictions and
Speaker 1: annoyingly committing crimes with prosecure the misconduct with police brutality
Speaker 1: where there be charges brought against them because their crimes.
Speaker 1: If I committed the crime, you will bring your charge
Speaker 1: against me. They It shouldn't be no difference. The other
Speaker 1: thing is is that I thank y'all for being able
Speaker 1: to tell the stories of those who are wrongfully convicted.
Speaker 1: This allows an audience to um hear the story, make
Speaker 1: a decision, and hopefully be active to change the narrative
Speaker 1: as well. It's important to inform the public so they
Speaker 1: can definitely be involved and get involved. It makes them
Speaker 1: more capable, more able, and more fit in terms of
Speaker 1: serving to change the narrative of our wrongful convictions. Thank
Speaker 1: you for listening at Wrongful Conviction. I'd like to thank
Speaker 1: our executive producers Jason Flynn and Kevin Wardis. The Senior
Speaker 1: producer for this episode is Jackie Polly, and our producers
Speaker 1: are Lila Robinson, Connor Hall and Jeff clad Barn. Our
Speaker 1: editor is Roxander Guidi and special thanks to Jillian Forstad
Speaker 1: for help on this episode. The music and this production
Speaker 1: is by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be
Speaker 1: sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction, on
Speaker 1: Facebook at Wrongful Conviction podcast as, and on Twitter at
Speaker 1: wrong Conviction, as well as Lava for Good. On all
Speaker 1: three platforms, you can also follow me on Facebook and
Speaker 1: Instagram at free Patrick Pursley at I Am Kid Culture Too,
Speaker 1: and online at i Am Kid Culture dot org. Wrangful
Speaker 1: Conviction is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts and
Speaker 1: association with Signal Company Number one. Next week, on the
Speaker 1: guest hosted episodes of ronfl Conviction, Patrick Persley will interview
Speaker 1: Eric Blackman, a fellow aux HONERI and someone he knew
Speaker 1: well inside prison. They're going to talk about the toxic
Speaker 1: criminal justice system in Chicago and how Eric ended up
Speaker 1: in prison for a crime he didn't commit. I mean,
Speaker 1: he couldn't have committed it. The guy had dozens, literally
Speaker 1: dozens of alibi witnesses. Now, Patrick, by the way, is
Speaker 1: someone I mean, this guy is such an incredible human.
Speaker 1: During his almost three decades wrongly convicted in some of
Speaker 1: the most dangerous, deadly prisons in America, he somehow figured
Speaker 1: out how to change the law that allowed for the
Speaker 1: evidence in his case to be tested, which ultimately proved
Speaker 1: his innocence and led to his exoneration. So this is
Speaker 1: going to be an incredible conversation. Listen next Monday in
Speaker 1: the Wrongful Conviction podcast feed