Speaker 1: On the evening of September thirteenth, nineteen eighty three, beauty
Speaker 1: school owner Delbert Baker, known to his friends and customers
Speaker 1: as mister Dell, was found dead in the back room
Speaker 1: of his school in Auburndale, Florida. He had been shot,
Speaker 1: his throat was slashed, and the place was covered in blood.
Speaker 1: Witnesses gave police the names of a couple of locals
Speaker 1: whom they had seen with mister Dell that evening, but
Speaker 1: the case eventually went cold. A few months later, a
Speaker 1: man named David Luna Falcon told police that an acquaintance,
Speaker 1: Juan Melendez, had allegedly bragged about committing the murder with
Speaker 1: two accomplices. One of them, a man named John Berrion,
Speaker 1: admitted to police that he had been the accessory after
Speaker 1: the fact, giving him the vantage point to name the
Speaker 1: other accomplice and Juan Melendez as well. Law enforcement caught
Speaker 1: up with Juan in Pennsylvania, extradited him to Florida, and
Speaker 1: charged him with first degree murder. At trial, David Falcon
Speaker 1: and John Berrion testified that Juan shot mister Dell and
Speaker 1: stole a watch, a gold bracelet, four diamond rings, and
Speaker 1: fifty dollars in cash before fleeing the scene. When one
Speaker 1: of the original suspects who had been seen with mister
Speaker 1: Dell that night was called by the defense at trial,
Speaker 1: he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights not to testify. Clearly
Speaker 1: he had nothing important to add. But this is wrongful conviction.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to wrongful conviction. I'm Gilbert King and I'm
Speaker 1: filling in for Jason Flahm, and today we have a
Speaker 1: case out of Polk County, Florida, where I've spent so
Speaker 1: much time doing research for the last like four or
Speaker 1: five years, researching other cases, and so I'm very familiar
Speaker 1: with that prosecutor's office as well as some of the
Speaker 1: judges in that area. And these are the very same
Speaker 1: folks that sent Juan Melendez to death row. They kept
Speaker 1: them there for over seventeen years. So this is in
Speaker 1: a state. You know, Florida, for the last one hundred
Speaker 1: and two executions, has exonerated thirty people from death row.
Speaker 1: So you just doing the math on that Florida has
Speaker 1: admitted to condemning one innocent person at least every fifth
Speaker 1: time that they seek the death penalty. And you know,
Speaker 1: we're just so glad that our guest today survived and
Speaker 1: he's here with us now. Juan Melendez, welcome one.
Speaker 2: Thank you for having me.
Speaker 1: Jan thanks so much for joining me today. I really
Speaker 1: really appreciate it. And joining us is also Juan's habeas attorney,
Speaker 1: who at the time was with Florida's Office of the
Speaker 1: Capitol Collateral Representative and she eventually went on to private
Speaker 1: practice and she co founded the National Habeas Institute. Linda McDermott, Linda,
Speaker 1: welcome to the show.
Speaker 3: Thank you so much.
Speaker 1: Now. I became familiar with Polk County when I was
Speaker 1: digging into a really troubling case for my podcast Bone Valley.
Speaker 1: This is the story where myself and co host Kelsey
Speaker 1: Decker and I we covered the wrongful conviction of Leo Schofield,
Speaker 1: and you know, we continue obviously to hope for justice there.
Speaker 1: Leo's prosecutor, John Aguero rose up in the ranks with
Speaker 1: Wan's prosecutor Hardy Pickard. And by the end of this interview,
Speaker 1: I think that our audience is going to get a
Speaker 1: glimpse of what I've seen. But before we get to that,
Speaker 1: you know, one, can you just tell us about your
Speaker 1: life before you ever even knew who Hardy Pickard was.
Speaker 2: I'm born in Brooklyn, New York, but I was facing
Speaker 2: the island of Puerto Rico. It took back when I
Speaker 2: was just a little kid. But when I went to
Speaker 2: it to Florida. I went in nineteen seventy, it's still segreation,
Speaker 2: blacks in one side, white in another side. And I
Speaker 2: had the biggest outfro in town. So you know where
Speaker 2: they're gonna put me in the black side. And I
Speaker 2: loved it. I love every bitder of it, so I
Speaker 2: was happy. My work was mostly picking fruit, the gray fruits,
Speaker 2: the tanierines, the orange, all citral fruit. So that's what
Speaker 2: I used to do, mostly pick fruit. Migrate from Florida
Speaker 2: to the state of Pennsylvania and do some more, get
Speaker 2: the apples and the beaches and stuff.
Speaker 1: Now what the victim in this case Delbert Baker. He
Speaker 1: was known to many of his customers and friends as
Speaker 1: mister Dell. He owned a cosmetology school in Auburndale, Florida,
Speaker 1: which is right in Paul County. What have you ever
Speaker 1: been to Auburndale? Ever ever run into Dell? I mean
Speaker 1: maybe wenting there for a haircut or something.
Speaker 2: First of all, I had to tell you, I've never
Speaker 2: been in a Cote mestology school, you know where their
Speaker 2: fitst hair and all that stuff, and been in one
Speaker 2: of them. I've seen them in TV. I've been in
Speaker 2: in Abunda, in the little town where that crime happened.
Speaker 2: Like I told you, picking foot, that's it. Never know
Speaker 2: that man was Knittin and heal who he.
Speaker 1: Was, and mister Dell. He had been brutally attacked on
Speaker 1: the evening of September thirteenth, nineteen eighty three. He was
Speaker 1: discovered in the back room of his hair salon by
Speaker 1: his own sister. His throat had been slashed, he'd been shot.
Speaker 1: Blood obviously was everywhere. Linda, what do we know about
Speaker 1: the initial investigation? Were there any leads or any obvious
Speaker 1: motivations into this crime.
Speaker 3: The investigation started that next day and it appeared the
Speaker 3: motivation may be a robbery because jewelry was missing, money
Speaker 3: was missing from his workplace. It was unclear if there
Speaker 3: was a motive beyond the robbery, and there were quickly
Speaker 3: some leads.
Speaker 1: Now from what I've read, one of those leads was
Speaker 1: a man named Vernon James.
Speaker 3: That right, there was an individual named Terry Barber, who
Speaker 3: had told law enforcement he had seen Vernon James with
Speaker 3: another man named Harold Lamb at mister Dell's place of
Speaker 3: business on the evening of the crime. However, according to
Speaker 3: law enforcement, they checked with Harold Landrum's employer and he
Speaker 3: had an alibi for that evening, so the James and
Speaker 3: Landrum lead didn't get pursued.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what strikes me funny about that is this You
Speaker 1: mentioned Landrum's alibi, but not one for Vernon James. And
Speaker 1: we've seen even like rock solid alibis get completely ignored
Speaker 1: by police and prosecutors. Well, let's take wand for instance.
Speaker 2: I had an alibi and I had three people, Corribo,
Speaker 2: Raven the alibi. All I know that Bena James was
Speaker 2: a police informer. I think Landrow was two.
Speaker 1: So potentially these were both police informants. We know that
Speaker 1: Vernon James was for sure. And then the police ignored
Speaker 1: your alibi, but not Landrums, whose alibi was apparently strong
Speaker 1: enough to cover for Vernon James as well. And then
Speaker 1: the case went cold allegedly until five thousand dollars was
Speaker 1: offered for information. And this is five thousand dollars in
Speaker 1: nineteen eighty four, you know, February nineteen eighty four to
Speaker 1: be exact. Just like that, the police received a tip.
Speaker 3: One individual came forward and his name was David Luna Falcon,
Speaker 3: and he said that in January of nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 3: he and mister Melendez had been you know, drinking and
Speaker 3: enjoying themselves in a nightclub, and mister Melendez had been
Speaker 3: very you know, specific detail told mister Falcon what had
Speaker 3: happened that night. Falcon had said that someone had taken
Speaker 3: mister Melendez and another individual to the hair salon, and
Speaker 3: he mentioned the name John in his original statement to police,
Speaker 3: but he didn't have any particular names, and that mister
Speaker 3: Melendez and another individual went to mister Dell's and robbed him.
Speaker 1: And from crime scene photos we know that whoever actually
Speaker 1: did this had slashed Delbert Baker's throat and shot him
Speaker 1: in the head. And although Falcon was not clear about
Speaker 1: who was wielding the knife, he alleged that Wan had
Speaker 1: claimed to have pulled the trigger.
Speaker 3: And there was this odd detail in his testimony that
Speaker 3: before mister Melendez allegedly shot mister Baker, mister Baker had
Speaker 3: started throwing blood at mister Melendez and this other unknown
Speaker 3: person and begging, begging mister Melendez to take him to
Speaker 3: the hospital. And at that point, allegedly mister Melendez said
Speaker 3: that he shot mister Baker.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: And now Linda Wan wasn't even a suspect until he
Speaker 1: came forward, Is that correct? Correct?
Speaker 3: I mean, there was no evidence linking Wan at all
Speaker 3: to this crime.
Speaker 1: Now, Wan, did you know this David Luna Falcon gentleman.
Speaker 2: Yes, I did I know him. I know he was
Speaker 2: a paid police informan. I know it was some kind
Speaker 2: of guns against me and him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what I read. In addition to receiving five
Speaker 1: thousand dollars, it was known that David Falcon did not
Speaker 1: like you. In fact, several witnesses they later testified a
Speaker 1: trial that they had overheard Falcons say that he would
Speaker 1: quote get you. But at this point the police, I guess,
Speaker 1: looked you up and they must have seen that you
Speaker 1: had an armed robbery charge on your record.
Speaker 2: And I'm not gonna lie to you. I had a
Speaker 2: prior rikle.
Speaker 1: And even though that had nothing to do with what
Speaker 1: happened to mister Dell, it's really not out of the
Speaker 1: ordinary for that a criminal record can act as a
Speaker 1: motivator for police to focus on someone. But what about
Speaker 1: these two other men, the alleged accomplices. Falcon had only
Speaker 1: said the name John, and then a friend of yours
Speaker 1: named John Berryon was arrested. So other than his friendship
Speaker 1: with you, there doesn't appear to be anything else that
Speaker 1: led them to this particular John now Linda in Florida
Speaker 1: with felony murder. The threat of the death penalty was
Speaker 1: looming over John Berrion, and he agreed to implicate one
Speaker 1: as well as his cousin, George Barrion. But to even
Speaker 1: have this alleged firsthand knowledge, he had to implicate himself
Speaker 1: to some degree.
Speaker 3: He implicates himself to the extent that he says he
Speaker 3: drove George barrion friend mister Melendez to the studio, but
Speaker 3: he also says I didn't know anything that was going
Speaker 3: to happen. And so John Barron is originally charged with
Speaker 3: first degree murder and ultimately agrees to testify against Juan
Speaker 3: in exchange for a nolo contendre plea to accessory after
Speaker 3: the fact, which would immediately allow him to be released
Speaker 3: from jail and to have served any sentence that he
Speaker 3: would have with that particular charge.
Speaker 1: So John Baryon escaped the electric chair in exchange for
Speaker 1: a story in which he was an accessory after the fact.
Speaker 1: Now Falcon had said mister Dell had allegedly thrown blood
Speaker 1: at Wan in his accomplice, but that didn't match up
Speaker 1: with John Berrion's story.
Speaker 3: It certainly didn't match up in that John Barrion said
Speaker 3: that mister Melendez and George Baron left the hair salon
Speaker 3: without any blood on them. You know, there was nothing
Speaker 3: unusual about them other than he started suggesting that they
Speaker 3: had some jewelry and things that could have been obtained
Speaker 3: during this robbery. And then he goes on to tell
Speaker 3: another piece of the story where he says the next
Speaker 3: day or two days later, he gives George Barrion a
Speaker 3: ride to the train station, mister Melendez is again with them,
Speaker 3: and at that point he sees mister Melendez give George
Speaker 3: Barrion a watch and some rings and tell him to
Speaker 3: take them to Delaware and to pawn those and obtain
Speaker 3: money for them. And the law enforcement did find out
Speaker 3: that mister Barry and George Barrion did in fact purchase
Speaker 3: a ticket to go to Delaware within a day or
Speaker 3: two after the Baker homicide. So John Baryon's story did
Speaker 3: have some pieces that the law enforcement believed could corroborate
Speaker 3: what he was saying.
Speaker 1: It actually only corroborated that George Barrion's children lived in Wilmington, Delaware.
Speaker 1: Now George Barrion he later testified that he'd only met
Speaker 1: Wan once at John Berrion's house and denied any involvement
Speaker 1: in mister Dell's murder or this alleged train station jewelry handoff.
Speaker 1: And ultimately George Barrion was never charged with anything, but
Speaker 1: the police continued with these two conflicting statements from Falcon
Speaker 1: and John Barrion that did match up on the one
Speaker 1: detail that they needed that Wan was involved. And so
Speaker 1: they found out that you were in Pennsylvania working in
Speaker 1: the fruit orchards, which was misconstrued as fleeing. Had you
Speaker 1: like ever heard that this you know, murder had even taken.
Speaker 2: Place, never heard about, So you were completely.
Speaker 1: Unaware that you were a suspect, you know, let alone
Speaker 1: about to be arrested.
Speaker 2: And I never forget this day made a second nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty four, why we was working it was by a
Speaker 2: police card and they stopped in front of us and
Speaker 2: they told us to hit put a weapon on us.
Speaker 2: Then they ordered me to get up. Then they said
Speaker 2: you are on the arrest for first degree murder and
Speaker 2: i'm robbery in the state of Florida.
Speaker 1: You were then extradited back to Florida. And at the
Speaker 1: time I understand you could not even speak that much English.
Speaker 2: The true is I know at that time, if I
Speaker 2: say five words in English, believe in my friends, three
Speaker 2: of them would because words. So they brought interpreted to
Speaker 2: explain to me what es tradition mean. And all he
Speaker 2: told me in Spanish was you either wave it or
Speaker 2: fight it. They can take you back anyway. I start thinking,
Speaker 2: I'm not a killer. My mama did not raise no
Speaker 2: kill us. I'm going to wave it. As soon they
Speaker 2: see this ugly face in Florida, they will let me go.
Speaker 2: But I was wrong. When I go back, they took
Speaker 2: me in front of the George, and the George he
Speaker 2: read the charges to me. He said, you being be
Speaker 2: indicted for first degree murder and I'm bravri in the
Speaker 2: state of Florida is sinking the death penalty against you.
Speaker 2: The elected chair.
Speaker 4: This episode is underwritten by global law firm Greenberg Trawig
Speaker 4: through its pro bono program. Greenberg Trowig leverages its more
Speaker 4: than twenty six hundred lawyers across forty four offices to
Speaker 4: serve the greater good of our communities and provide equal
Speaker 4: access to justice for all. In the field of criminal justice,
Speaker 4: Greenberg Trowrig attorneys have exonerated and free demanded Philadelphia represent
Speaker 4: numerous individuals previously sentenced to life for crimes committed as
Speaker 4: juveniles and resentencing hearings, and receive the American Bar Association's
Speaker 4: twenty twenty one Exceptional Service Award for Death Penalty Representation
Speaker 4: for their work on five death penalty cases. GT is
Speaker 4: reimagining what big law can be because of a more
Speaker 4: just world. Only happens by design.
Speaker 1: So, meanwhile, in that same month, from what I've read,
Speaker 1: it appears that in order to ensure that your prosecution
Speaker 1: went smoothly, the lead detective Gary Glisten, chose to go
Speaker 1: to these extraordinary lengths to protect the initial informant in
Speaker 1: this case, David Falcon, from himself from damaging his own credibility.
Speaker 3: When Falcon committed a home invasion in I believe it
Speaker 3: was in May of nineteen eighty four, Glisten went to
Speaker 3: the victims of that home invasion and put pressure on
Speaker 3: them not to prosecute. According to one of those victims,
Speaker 3: the woman who had been at the house, she was
Speaker 3: told that if we arrest Falcon, all that's going to
Speaker 3: happen is he's going to make bail and he's going
Speaker 3: to come back and he's going to harm you. And
Speaker 3: so rather than protecting her, they were basically telling her
Speaker 3: the only way she could protect herself was to waive
Speaker 3: prosecution and then they would sort of tell Falcon to
Speaker 3: back off.
Speaker 1: Which seems, you know, completely antithetical to his duty as
Speaker 1: a police officer. He chose to protect the credibility of
Speaker 1: the state's dubious star witness, David Falcon instead of Falcons
Speaker 1: victims both you know, past and future. So did Hardy Picker?
Speaker 1: Did he know about this home invasion cover up?
Speaker 3: His response to that was to tell Detective Glisson and
Speaker 3: others to stop using Falcon for the time being as
Speaker 3: your informant, because he didn't want to have any more
Speaker 3: of these types of issues occur before the trial.
Speaker 1: So he was willing to accept Falcons were you know
Speaker 1: just this once though, so Wan's court, a pointed attorney
Speaker 1: Roger Alcott did not have the benefit of this impeachment evidence.
Speaker 1: And now there's just four months to prepare for a
Speaker 1: death penalty trial.
Speaker 3: Mister Alcott and his trial investigator, Cody Smith, they started
Speaker 3: to follow up on some of the leads that law
Speaker 3: enforcement didn't find fruitful when they were following up on things,
Speaker 3: and mister Elcott sent his investigator to speak to Vernon James,
Speaker 3: and ultimately mister Elcott lists mister James as a witness
Speaker 3: for the defense, and he tells the state that mister
Speaker 3: James is going to come in and say that he
Speaker 3: committed the murderer or that he was there and that
Speaker 3: mister Melendez was not there.
Speaker 2: My attorney used to pat me in the back. You say, no,
Speaker 2: what about it, mister Melendez? You going home and I
Speaker 2: soon go home. I did not commit the crime.
Speaker 1: You know, perhaps Pickard should have looked at this evidence,
Speaker 1: the Vernon James interview, as well as the home invasion
Speaker 1: cover up for star witness, and just let you go home.
Speaker 1: But instead Falcon and James were free to commit more
Speaker 1: crimes while Wand's prosecution went on as scheduled, and that happened.
Speaker 1: In September nineteen eighty four, the state had what we
Speaker 1: now know to be the false, incentivized or coerced testimonies
Speaker 1: of David Luna Falcon and John Berrion. To recap this,
Speaker 1: Falcon alleged that you had bragged that a man named
Speaker 1: John dropped you and another man off at Delbert Baker's salon.
Speaker 1: Baker's throat had been slashed. According to Falcon, mister Dell
Speaker 1: got blood on you. He begged you for help, but
Speaker 1: you shot him. Then John Berrion corroborated Falcon's allegation that
Speaker 1: he had dropped you and his cousin, George Barrion at
Speaker 1: the salon. But Barrion, you know, in contrast to Falcon,
Speaker 1: when he picked you up, neither of you were covered
Speaker 1: in blood. So your attorney pointed out that inconsistency, which
Speaker 1: implies that at least you know, one of them was
Speaker 1: lying or mistaken, and then all caught. Put George Brion
Speaker 1: on the stand.
Speaker 2: George Berry tessify. He said that I only met won once,
Speaker 2: And Mike colsun Is said, Patolcolah, I know way he
Speaker 2: lies all the time.
Speaker 3: So mister Elcott had put together an alibi defense with
Speaker 3: several witnesses, mister Melendez's girlfriend and her family, and they
Speaker 3: had been together that evening. And then in addition to that, though,
Speaker 3: mister Elcott had Vernon James to undermine the credibility of
Speaker 3: John Barrion and David Luna Falcon Right.
Speaker 1: But what happened when Vernon James is called to the stand.
Speaker 3: He takes the fit amendment. And it's an interesting sort
Speaker 3: of legal maneuver that the state makes because they tell
Speaker 3: trial council just a few days before the trial that
Speaker 3: Vernon James has made some statements that he committed the
Speaker 3: crime to his cellmate named Roger Mims. And so at
Speaker 3: that point they say, Vernon James needs to be advised
Speaker 3: of his rights because there's this other individual pointing to
Speaker 3: him as the person who committed the crime. So had
Speaker 3: they not had Roger Mimms and mister Elcott just put
Speaker 3: James on the stand, he could have extracted the information
Speaker 3: that he wanted to extract without having this weird fitth
Speaker 3: amendment issue be raised and James essentially being able to
Speaker 3: absent himself from the trial and not have to confess
Speaker 3: in front of the jury, and then sort of the
Speaker 3: dominoes fall, because then after Mims testifies, the state undermines
Speaker 3: his credibility by saying, oh, isn't this fortunate? You come
Speaker 3: forward a week before the trial and suddenly you know,
Speaker 3: this guy supposedly confesses to you.
Speaker 1: But unlike so many other police or jailhouse informants, Roger
Speaker 1: Mims wasn't testifying in exchange for anything. He said that
Speaker 1: Vernon James had said that he and Delbert Baker were
Speaker 1: lovers and had he was involved in his death. But
Speaker 1: since James had pleaded the fifth and he was a
Speaker 1: defense witness, Alcott could not offer the recordings or transcripts
Speaker 1: of the conversations with Vernon James, so the jury only
Speaker 1: heard this from Mims.
Speaker 3: Clearly they were not finding mister Mims credible because of
Speaker 3: this sort of he's so late to the game. And
Speaker 3: it was a really effective way to make sure that
Speaker 3: the jury didn't hear a confession from the actual the
Speaker 3: person who was actually saying that he had committed the crime.
Speaker 1: So it appears that you know, without Vernon James, and
Speaker 1: despite witnesses that testified the Falcon's grudge against you, Falcon
Speaker 1: had not been sufficiently impeached. So one, I understand you
Speaker 1: decided to take the stand in your own defense.
Speaker 2: Probably the worst mistake I made in my life, and
Speaker 2: it was against my attorney. He told me, one, if
Speaker 2: you take this stand, prior REGOs will come. But I said, alka,
Speaker 2: I did not do this. I wondered you just to
Speaker 2: know from my mouth that I didn't commit this crime.
Speaker 2: Since I didn't do it, everything that ahka come to
Speaker 2: me is going to be no that you ever been
Speaker 2: done in me deble place? No, did you know me
Speaker 2: to deb No?
Speaker 1: All right? But what did the prosecutor ask across you say?
Speaker 2: Did you committed i'm robbery before? Yes? I had. Did
Speaker 2: you ever carry going before?
Speaker 1: Yes?
Speaker 2: I had? But that don't mean that I killed in
Speaker 2: the debble.
Speaker 3: You know. Certainly, not having a prior conviction for robbery,
Speaker 3: having having been in possession of a firearm, those types
Speaker 3: of things certainly hurt him.
Speaker 2: I got real scared and I failed that I was
Speaker 2: in trouble. When I was in Trout and they showed
Speaker 2: the bloody crime scene photographs, and when the juniors saw
Speaker 2: that crime scene them pictures, they look straight to me,
Speaker 2: and I can see that hate in their eyes, and
Speaker 2: I know right then and then that I wasn't so big,
Speaker 2: big trouble.
Speaker 3: After mister Melendez was exonerated and some of the jurors
Speaker 3: were spoken to, you realize that there were some considerations
Speaker 3: in that jury room that don't appear in the transcript.
Speaker 3: Seeing those horrific pictures looking at Wan, he doesn't look
Speaker 3: like them, he doesn't speak their language, has a two
Speaker 3: foot high afro, and all of his witnesses are people
Speaker 3: of color. Someone specifically pointed out Juan's afro and how
Speaker 3: that influenced their verdict.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, that's a really great point, lind And
Speaker 1: I think if you look at the history of Polk County,
Speaker 1: I mean, one year after this trial, they elect a
Speaker 1: known white supremacist as Sheriff Dan Daniels. This was a
Speaker 1: big problem in Polk County. So you finished the trial,
Speaker 1: do you remember when you heard that verdict?
Speaker 2: Ah me, that was something there, Betty, Betty, Betty inguadh
Speaker 2: that the whole will But at the same time, I
Speaker 2: was scared that same man, these people can kill me.
Speaker 2: And then I go back in the sale, I'm talking
Speaker 2: to it to all the dudes there, and then they
Speaker 2: telling me one with the dead enity, you might get
Speaker 2: publicity and you can show you innocent and get out
Speaker 2: of there. I may go. I will not give that
Speaker 2: advice to.
Speaker 1: Nobody prison lawyers. So after the verdict, you come out,
Speaker 1: you address the jury.
Speaker 2: I did make their judus angry because I literally called
Speaker 2: them racists right there, and I mean they've gone in
Speaker 2: there to both for life and death. That as I'm
Speaker 2: making angry a person that cooked for you, you can
Speaker 2: you can put some post in the food. You said
Speaker 2: what I'm saying. So I should never say what I
Speaker 2: said as I told the judus say I know the
Speaker 2: reason why do people found me guilt because all my
Speaker 2: witnesses were black. But I be back because I mean say,
Speaker 2: and in the name of Jesus, I be back. I
Speaker 2: was playing with my life, let's put it like that.
Speaker 2: It was the worst day in my life. I never
Speaker 2: forget the day. It was on a Tuesday, November the second,
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty four. I got in there the nest jerday
Speaker 2: they executed the ten person. Now I'm super scared. I
Speaker 2: do not know the language that well, I do not
Speaker 2: know the process. I do not know anything about law.
Speaker 2: So I'm thinking they're kidding people here every week how
Speaker 2: long it's going to be before they take me. The
Speaker 2: first ten years, right, it was very rough. I'm telling
Speaker 2: your mammy. A lot of people have hanged themselves in there,
Speaker 2: what I was in there. So when my friend named
Speaker 2: Simon Rivera, he just hang himself and that hit me
Speaker 2: Rayal real real bear amago, thinking if he can do it,
Speaker 2: I can do it. So I'm going to tell you
Speaker 2: how they do it, exactly how they do it. The
Speaker 2: guy they call it Rona e Verna said, hey, may
Speaker 2: he's doing time in prison population, but he's not sending
Speaker 2: it to death. They get him out of there so
Speaker 2: he can do the work in the devil place. He's
Speaker 2: the one that suppliers with the two page, the two bros,
Speaker 2: the map in the boom, so you can clean yourself.
Speaker 2: But he also can supply you will the tool that
Speaker 2: you can take your life with. And he knows it.
Speaker 2: All you got to do is give him four post
Speaker 2: stamps or a packaging can, rolling paper, tobacco the cheap kind,
Speaker 2: and he will give you this tool. Maybe he do
Speaker 2: it because he need these items, or maybe he do
Speaker 2: it because he called himself assisting you, helping you he
Speaker 2: knows you when out of there, he knows that the
Speaker 2: road is hell. The two is real simple, he said,
Speaker 2: guy is plastic bag. You give him four stamps, and
Speaker 2: when the garden looking, he will swing that bag inside
Speaker 2: the cell. Take that bag, you twist it up. You
Speaker 2: make a rope, put the noose in it. Put the
Speaker 2: noose in your neck, throw yourself down, your dead, put
Speaker 2: you free. And this is what the demons used to
Speaker 2: tell me. Why why you don't why you got to
Speaker 2: go to all of this? You're supposed to be a
Speaker 2: Puerto Rican man as real match your man. Don't satisfy THEMN.
Speaker 2: Satisfy yourself. You say you didn't do it. So now
Speaker 2: I want to take this trip. So I tell that
Speaker 2: Rona to give me that gob is bad again four stamps.
Speaker 2: And when the guy would look, its wing the bag
Speaker 2: inside myself. I twisted, made the rope, put the noose,
Speaker 2: put the news in the rope, and I say to myself,
Speaker 2: I better lay loving think about this a little bit more.
Speaker 2: When I lay down, I may go. Almost immediately I
Speaker 2: fell in a deep de sleep, and then I started dreaming.
Speaker 2: Then I'm a little kid again that was raising the
Speaker 2: island of Puerto Rico. So here I am dreaming. Then
Speaker 2: I'm swimming in the beautiful Caribbean sea and believing, my friend,
Speaker 2: the water is warm, the sun was so bright, the
Speaker 2: sky was so blue, and the palm trees looked so good.
Speaker 2: It's a beautiful day. Then in this dream, I see
Speaker 2: four dolphins coming to me, A pair got on one
Speaker 2: side and a pear gant in another one. Then they
Speaker 2: start flipping and jumping like dolphins too. Amygo, I'm having
Speaker 2: a boat in there. Then I looked to the shore
Speaker 2: and he said, beautiful lady waving at me, throwing kisses
Speaker 2: at me, and she seems so happy. She's happy because
Speaker 2: I'm happy. That's my mother. Then I wake up and
Speaker 2: that was one of the most beautiful dreams in my life.
Speaker 2: And right today, if I'm depressed or I get kind
Speaker 2: of angry about something, I started thinking about the dreaming
Speaker 2: in this go away. Every time I got kind of depressed,
Speaker 2: and every time I think that the war was going
Speaker 2: to end up on me, they created the beautiful dream.
Speaker 2: And I was wise, God them, that's a sign and
Speaker 2: hope that everything is going to be all right.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 1: I don't even know what to say other than to
Speaker 1: recognize that eventually everything was all right. And even though
Speaker 1: it took a long while, long enough for you to
Speaker 1: learn English from your fellow inmates, we're all so grateful
Speaker 1: that you decided to fight your case. Linda, Can you
Speaker 1: tell us a little bit about the fight that was
Speaker 1: ahead of him?
Speaker 3: In Florida? At the time when mister Melendez arrived on
Speaker 3: death row, there was no state funded defense system. It
Speaker 3: was all run through volunteers, and so there were tended
Speaker 3: to be delays and getting people attorneys, and if there
Speaker 3: were delays in starting the process, there were going to
Speaker 3: be delays in executing people. So that seemed to be
Speaker 3: a big motivator for the Florida lifelegislature to actually fund
Speaker 3: an agency to represent people like mister Melendez.
Speaker 1: And that agency was called the Office of the Capital
Speaker 1: Collateral Representative, where you eventually worked. Now, given what we
Speaker 1: know about the evidence in this case, can you give
Speaker 1: me some kind of idea about why they were able
Speaker 1: to deny his appeals?
Speaker 3: Sure, so, the attorneys at that time did what they
Speaker 3: believed they needed to do. They requested records, they spoke
Speaker 3: to the trial attorney. They put together what's called the
Speaker 3: thirty eight to fifty motion, which is a motion to vacate.
Speaker 3: And at that time they had some fairly good information.
Speaker 3: They certainly did indicate that Vernon James was a suspect
Speaker 3: in the crime, but they didn't have anything all that
Speaker 3: different or new from what was presented at the trial
Speaker 3: through Roger Mimms, So that appeal ended up in a
Speaker 3: summary denial. What is also remarkable on direct appeal is
Speaker 3: that Justice Rosemary Barquette, in her dissent, believed that the
Speaker 3: death penalty should be dismissed because she thought the evidence
Speaker 3: of guilt was so weak that it shouldn't substantiate a
Speaker 3: death penalty. So I do think that that is also
Speaker 3: really telling that when that justice reviewed his case that
Speaker 3: she made that comment.
Speaker 1: But unfortunately, the lack of strength in this evidence wasn't
Speaker 1: enough to make a difference. And there's another problem. Wand's
Speaker 1: appellet attorneys didn't have the recording or transcript of the
Speaker 1: trial investigator's interview with Vernon James, and he had passed
Speaker 1: away by then, right.
Speaker 2: He was maurder two or three years after I was
Speaker 2: in dev Roue, you know.
Speaker 1: But it does seem that all roads still led to
Speaker 1: Vernon James. So there was more investigation done and an
Speaker 1: evident Sherry hearing was held in May of nineteen ninety six.
Speaker 1: So what happened there?
Speaker 3: Five different witnesses testified at that Evidentry hearing, four of
Speaker 3: whom said that Vernon James had confessed to the crime.
Speaker 3: And then also John Barrant testified at that hearing and
Speaker 3: said that what he had said at trial wasn't true.
Speaker 3: All of those witnesses, other than one who was John
Speaker 3: Barrion's attorney at the time of his trial, all four
Speaker 3: of the witnesses were dismissed as being not credible.
Speaker 1: You know, this has just got to be so frustrating.
Speaker 1: I mean, it seems like an arbitrary and very subjective
Speaker 1: way to be denied, you know, especially in light of
Speaker 1: what was about to be revealed in this case. Linda,
Speaker 1: you're now working Jan's case along with Martin McLain, who
Speaker 1: you later opened to practice with, and in two thousand
Speaker 1: you were preparing for a federal habeas When there was
Speaker 1: a pretty significant discovery.
Speaker 3: Made, we decided we were going to just start talking
Speaker 3: to witnesses again, and one of those individuals was the
Speaker 3: trial investigator Cody Smith, and we also wanted to speak
Speaker 3: to mister Alcott, who at that time was a judge,
Speaker 3: and so we contacted Judge Alcott and it was during
Speaker 3: that conversation where he said that he may have some
Speaker 3: files that had not been disclosed previously to counsel, and
Speaker 3: so Judge Alcott allowed Cody Smith to go to his
Speaker 3: storage center and lo and behold. Within that storage center
Speaker 3: surfaced four tapes sort of those old cassette tapes, and
Speaker 3: a paper copy of a transcript of an interview with
Speaker 3: Vernon James back in nineteen eighty four, and mister James
Speaker 3: had stated that he was president at the time mister
Speaker 3: Baker was killed, and it was two other individuals that
Speaker 3: had actually done the killing and the robbery, and mister
Speaker 3: Melendez was not one of those people. So we started
Speaker 3: really taking from that information a whole new investigation about
Speaker 3: Vernon James.
Speaker 1: Right, and that led you to Marty Lake, the man
Speaker 1: who had been convicted of killing Vernon James, which then,
Speaker 1: of course led you to five more witnesses.
Speaker 3: Two of whom saw mister James on the night of
Speaker 3: the murder at a motel the Scottish Inn in Auburndale,
Speaker 3: and one of whom saw Vernon James almost immediately after
Speaker 3: the murder and said he was covered in blood, and
Speaker 3: she helped him find clothes he could wear, took him
Speaker 3: over to the motel, and to both her and another individual,
Speaker 3: he confessed that he had been involved in the murder
Speaker 3: of mister Baker. Ultimately, what we found out was that
Speaker 3: not only did Vernon James confess to multiple individuals with
Speaker 3: whom he was friends related to dating things like that,
Speaker 3: he also confessed to several people in law enforcement, including
Speaker 3: the state Attorney investigator who had seen him the week
Speaker 3: before mister Melendez his trial, and he had actually told
Speaker 3: him that he had been there when the murder was committed.
Speaker 1: So it's hard to imagine a world in which Hardy
Speaker 1: Pickard didn't know this while he was trying to send
Speaker 1: Wand to death row, or while he fought to keep
Speaker 1: him there. I mean, he didn't retire until two thousand
Speaker 1: and nine.
Speaker 3: Well, Hardy Pickard had remained with the case all of
Speaker 3: the post conviction proceedings, so he was present at the
Speaker 3: second post conviction proceeding when John barry And testified and
Speaker 3: the various witnesses, and ultimately what he testified to at
Speaker 3: our proceeding in two thousand and one was that he
Speaker 3: had had a copy of this statement at the time
Speaker 3: of that hearing, and he did not reveal that to
Speaker 3: the court, and he did not reveal that to defense counsel.
Speaker 1: Right, So he was admonished by that, but by the
Speaker 1: judge later on. And he also said something that you know,
Speaker 1: David Lunafalcon had nothing to gain by his testimony, when
Speaker 1: that wasn't true either, right, correct.
Speaker 3: You know, it became clear that he had been working
Speaker 3: with law enforcement. They were using him quite extensively in
Speaker 3: drug transactions. He was paid for his testimony. He had
Speaker 3: a grudge against Swan and mister Pickard had made it
Speaker 3: seem at the trial like if he was getting paid,
Speaker 3: it wasn't a significant amount. And the fact that they
Speaker 3: protected Falcon in relation to his criminal conduct, you know,
Speaker 3: it just kept coming out a little little piece. But
Speaker 3: by the end of this it was very clear that
Speaker 3: Falcon was not a credible witness. He had quite a
Speaker 3: lot of motive to be involved in this case and
Speaker 3: to testify against mister Melendez.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and really there's like zero accountability for this obviously.
Speaker 1: I mean, Hardy Pickard went on to continue to prosecute
Speaker 1: people still had similar problems Brady violations that he was
Speaker 1: dealing with in later cases, and yet there's never anything
Speaker 1: done about these prosecutors.
Speaker 3: I mean, as Judge Fleischer, who was the judge at
Speaker 3: our hearing, found, there was quite a bit of evidence
Speaker 3: that was suppressed, but there was also rules that were violated,
Speaker 3: discovery rules, cases that were clear black letter law that
Speaker 3: mister Pickard was calling in witnesses and to his office,
Speaker 3: taking swarm statements from individuals, and then not disclosing his notes,
Speaker 3: even though those notes may have had exculpatory information, they
Speaker 3: may have had impeachment evidence in them, which Judge Fleischer found.
Speaker 3: And so when I look at Fleischer's order, it's clear
Speaker 3: to me that there's more going on here than just
Speaker 3: an inadvertent I forgot to, you know, disclose a particular
Speaker 3: piece of documentation. It just seemed like, even from the
Speaker 3: way that Mims, Roger Mims surfaces on the eve of
Speaker 3: the trial, there was just a pattern of behavior that
Speaker 3: was designed to me to win this case rather than
Speaker 3: to see that justice was done here.
Speaker 1: But the good news is that eventually justice was done.
Speaker 1: On December fifth, two thousand and one Judge, Barbara Fleischer,
Speaker 1: vacated Wan's conviction and granted a new trial, and then
Speaker 1: the state decided to drop the charges.
Speaker 2: They took the handkofs off of me, the chains over
Speaker 2: my foot. They offered me sola, and they offered me
Speaker 2: a hamburger. I don't want to hamburger. I mean, I
Speaker 2: just want to go back to myself, back everything and
Speaker 2: get the hell out of here. That's what I told her.
Speaker 2: So I want to say bye to my friend. His
Speaker 2: name is Gladden here. So I got tear this running down.
Speaker 2: I got to smile. He smile and me, see, don't
Speaker 2: forget about us. And now I'm gonna lie you, amigo.
Speaker 2: I hit a clap, then I hit another clap, and
Speaker 2: then they start bagging the bars and whistling. The gods
Speaker 2: got angry, told them to shut up, to be quiet.
Speaker 2: They didn't stop. Who I got out of there. They
Speaker 2: was real happy to see me go.
Speaker 1: Well, I just want to talk about you know, what's
Speaker 1: life like for you? Now? How is this whole experience,
Speaker 1: because it had to be life affecting. How has it
Speaker 1: changed your life?
Speaker 2: Well, man, mago, I feel right today that my time
Speaker 2: got is spending their role. All the suffering and pain,
Speaker 2: it was not for nothing. He's a purpose for it.
Speaker 2: And I still got this trench to go around and
Speaker 2: speak against it their penalty. And the reason I do
Speaker 2: it is because what happened to me, I don't want
Speaker 2: it to happen to nobody else. We don't need a
Speaker 2: law like that. We know better, we can do better.
Speaker 2: We don't need it.
Speaker 1: Can you just talk about like where listeners can go
Speaker 1: who care about wrongful conviction, who care about the death
Speaker 1: penalty to support these kind of causes. There any places
Speaker 1: that you recommend.
Speaker 2: Oran inzations like winness do in and saying any anything
Speaker 2: type of little organization they need help. That's good to help,
Speaker 2: But the main thing is to talk to lays. Later,
Speaker 2: teach people to talk to the lay's ladel the law
Speaker 2: make us. They're the one that can change these things.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll have witness to Innocent linked in the bio.
Speaker 1: And now we've come to the portion of the show
Speaker 1: called closing arguments, where I first thank you both for
Speaker 1: joining us today, and now I'm just going to ask
Speaker 1: you for your final thoughts. So let's start with you, Linda,
Speaker 1: and we'll close it out with Wan today.
Speaker 3: Well, I would just say that I think that generally
Speaker 3: people should understand that there can be things that happen
Speaker 3: in the criminal justice system that need to be fixed
Speaker 3: or repaired. Those things do happen, and we have to
Speaker 3: take steps to fix them and not feel so sort
Speaker 3: of entrenched in the injustice that we can't say that
Speaker 3: that was wrong or this mistake was made, because I
Speaker 3: do think that unfortunately, as an example in Wan's case,
Speaker 3: that may have been part of the reason why no
Speaker 3: one wanted to say that there was a problem here.
Speaker 3: So I would just ask people to keep that perspective
Speaker 3: that mistakes do happen, and you have to be open
Speaker 3: minded enough and we have to have the law be
Speaker 3: flexible enough to fix those mistakes.
Speaker 2: First of all, I want to thank all of you
Speaker 2: for doing this, and one thing for inviting Linda to
Speaker 2: do it. I go around and speaking about against it
Speaker 2: the penity, because like I said before, I want this
Speaker 2: who happen to nobody. I also want people to understand
Speaker 2: that when they execute someone, then executing the same person
Speaker 2: that committed the crime the secuting somebody else. I learned
Speaker 2: this when I was in their role, because I've been
Speaker 2: with them and I saw how they change, and believe
Speaker 2: me me, amigo, people do change. I've seen it. It
Speaker 2: changed for the good. They got some people in there
Speaker 2: that I'm not going to say, let them out. It's
Speaker 2: some people there that could meit some crime that you
Speaker 2: cannot forget the victims, the family, but you don't have
Speaker 2: to kill them. The same people that I'm talking about
Speaker 2: that the community's crime can also become mentors because they
Speaker 2: can teach others not to become like there was. They
Speaker 2: can teach the ones that we know we got to
Speaker 2: let them go to become a better man in the outside.
Speaker 2: The penalty, like they say in Puerto Rico, it's just
Speaker 2: a waste. Don't bring nothing. There's more pain, more parable
Speaker 2: damage all over. One of the worst things for me
Speaker 2: when when I was in their row, is when they
Speaker 2: secus someone I'm in the sale next to me. It's
Speaker 2: another person that I know for ten or fifteen years.
Speaker 2: He cries in my shoulder, I cries in his. His
Speaker 2: share with me and him was intimatus. I share mine
Speaker 2: with him. And one day they snatch him over there
Speaker 2: and I know exactly what's going to happen. And my
Speaker 2: time was the electric chair. They kill forty two before
Speaker 2: I left. They got to generate the share with electricity
Speaker 2: because it's two ten bulls. They got to go to
Speaker 2: the body in order to getting killed. So we can
Speaker 2: hear the nosy sound and we know precisely the time
Speaker 2: when they kill him because the light bulbs they go
Speaker 2: off and off. It's no movie. They do go off
Speaker 2: and off because all that power got to go and
Speaker 2: that share. And now I'm telling you me a nego
Speaker 2: when that happened, nobody saying nothing. It's just like a
Speaker 2: side like going to it that you're going to buy
Speaker 2: yourself in the cemetery. That's the only time is requiet
Speaker 2: there when that happened. They they're penalty is racist, It
Speaker 2: don't deter crime. It's quel and unnecessary. It costs too much.
Speaker 2: But the most important thing that people need to learn
Speaker 2: is this. Any state that have any contrue that have
Speaker 2: it always will be a risk to execute an innocent one.
Speaker 2: We always can release an innocent man from prison, but
Speaker 2: you cannot, and I repeat, you can never release an
Speaker 2: innocent man from their grade.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I'm your guest host,
Speaker 1: Gilbert King. I'd like to thank executive producers Jason Flohm
Speaker 1: and Kevin Wurders for inviting me to be here. I'd
Speaker 1: also like to thank our production team Connor Hall, Annie Chelsea,
Speaker 1: Lyla Robinson, and Jeff Cliburn. The music in this production
Speaker 1: comes from 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 Po, and on Twitter at wrong Conviction,
Speaker 1: as well as Lava for Good. On all three platforms,
Speaker 1: you can find me on Twitter at Gilbert Underscore King,
Speaker 1: and you can listen to my podcast Bone Valley from
Speaker 1: Lava for Good wherever you listen to podcasts. Wrongful Conviction
Speaker 1: is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts in association
Speaker 1: with Signal Company Number one