Speaker 1: On February eleventh, twenty ten, a baby girl was born
Speaker 1: to unwed parents, Lourie Johnson and Ronnie Miller in Rockford, Illinois,
Speaker 1: but her parents' relationship gradually became contentious, which only worsened
Speaker 1: during the custody battle. During a heated exchange on July twelfth,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen, Ronnie threatened to sue for full custody. A
Speaker 1: few days later, he was accused of sexually assaulting their
Speaker 1: daughter in a video statement made with Child Protective Services.
Speaker 1: The daughter appeared to have been coached into making the
Speaker 1: accusation on the record, an accusation that she repeatedly recanted
Speaker 1: and never again affirmed. Yet the state was able to
Speaker 1: find a nurse who claimed that the daughter's medical history
Speaker 1: was suspicious for sexual abuse, and that was enough for
Speaker 1: a jury to send Ronnie away for twenty long years.
Speaker 1: This is wrongful conviction. Welcome back to ronful conviction, where
Speaker 1: we have a case where it appears that false accusations
Speaker 1: were used to weaponize our courts and child Protective services
Speaker 1: to settle a custody battle and ultimately victimized the child
Speaker 1: whom they purported to protect, as it seems that she
Speaker 1: was used against her own will to incarcerate her father,
Speaker 1: Ronnie Miller, who's now calling in from an Illinois correctional facility. Ronnie,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry you're here, but I'm really happy to be
Speaker 1: able to share your story and I appreciate you being here.
Speaker 2: Welcome, Thank you very much.
Speaker 1: And joining him his post conviction attorney, Leonard Goodman.
Speaker 2: Yes, thank you.
Speaker 1: And later we'll hear from Ronnie's sister, Deborah, But first
Speaker 1: let's hear about what Ronnie's life was like before all
Speaker 1: of this.
Speaker 3: I grew up in Rockford, Illinois. Not a good place
Speaker 3: growing up, but it became a teenager.
Speaker 1: Who moved out.
Speaker 3: I dropped out of school, I got my ended up
Speaker 3: getting my dad, and then kind of just fell into
Speaker 3: factory work. Up until this, I actually had a pretty
Speaker 3: decent pharmaceutical packaging company. I worked in the warehouse, you know,
Speaker 3: I'd been there four years. All the other factories that
Speaker 3: I worked in Rockford were pretty much shitholes, horrid conditions
Speaker 3: and a little bit of money. So this company that
Speaker 3: I actually made it into that the work was clean.
Speaker 3: You're in a pharmaceutical company, The people were friendly, nice,
Speaker 3: you had room for success. It was a pretty good
Speaker 3: place to work at on my way to becoming management.
Speaker 3: This was from two thousand eleven until twenty fifteen.
Speaker 1: During which time Ronnie was trying to copat his daughter
Speaker 1: with a woman named Laurie Johnson.
Speaker 3: I had known Laurie off and on. We had our
Speaker 3: daughter in twenty tens, but in the beginning of the
Speaker 3: relationship it wasn't nothing serious. It was just having fun
Speaker 3: until she wanted me to move into her place, which
Speaker 3: I did. We had been doing good for i'd say
Speaker 3: about a whole year before she found out she was pregnant,
Speaker 3: and at that time she already had a child before,
Speaker 3: so I would say she was questionable about having another.
Speaker 3: For me, this would have been my first child, which, yeah,
Speaker 3: I was stoked that I was going to be a dad.
Speaker 3: I made every doctor's appointment that it was scheduled. I
Speaker 3: remember at one time I found out that my daughter
Speaker 3: she could hear me, so I started reading books and
Speaker 3: talking and playing music and everything, but a lot of reading.
Speaker 3: So you know, during the birth, she came out screaming.
Speaker 3: She screamed, and the nurses got her in her hands
Speaker 3: and everything, and I remember saying to her, it's okay,
Speaker 3: baby girl. Here's daddy, and she immediately knew my voice.
Speaker 3: Even the nurse commented was like, oh she knows you.
Speaker 3: You know something I'll never forget.
Speaker 1: So while fatherhood seemed to suit Ronnie, he and Laurie
Speaker 1: weren't a natural fit.
Speaker 3: We made it like the first when I found out
Speaker 3: she was cheating on me with a another man, and
Speaker 3: we pretty much broke things off. I was out of
Speaker 3: the house, but it was a very toxic relationship to
Speaker 3: where I would move out and she would convince me
Speaker 3: to come back and all this, oh, let's do it
Speaker 3: for the babies. I'd fall for it every time I
Speaker 3: wanted my daughter to see us together. My parents were
Speaker 3: divorced and I didn't want that for her, So yeah,
Speaker 3: of course I kept coming back, even though the way
Speaker 3: she treated me was like shit. But when I wasn't
Speaker 3: with her, she would hold the child from me. No
Speaker 3: you can't see her, No you can't talk to her,
Speaker 3: this type of stuff, to where she would use the
Speaker 3: kid as leverage.
Speaker 4: My understanding is that if he was not allowed to
Speaker 4: see her, he would get a court order so that
Speaker 4: the mom's obstruction of his visitation would be put to
Speaker 4: a stop by the judge.
Speaker 1: And it appeared that this was a pattern for miss
Speaker 1: Johnson that had been playing out with the father of
Speaker 1: her fifteen year old son, Tristan oh Man.
Speaker 3: If you talk to Wayne Gilberto, he'll tell you the
Speaker 3: exact same thing. And she had me believing this man
Speaker 3: was a heroin addict, the just the worst person imaginable.
Speaker 3: She was selling to me, and of course I believed her,
Speaker 3: But later on I found out this dude was going
Speaker 3: to work wanting to see his kid, wanted to be
Speaker 3: in his kid's life, but because he wouldn't submit to her,
Speaker 3: she did the exact same thing with him, use the
Speaker 3: kid as leverage.
Speaker 4: If you look at the family court records, you'll see
Speaker 4: similar accusations made against that father or that other child.
Speaker 4: But that child had a history of some mental illness
Speaker 4: and was doing things that were frightening.
Speaker 3: He threatened to commit suicide, spent like two weeks in
Speaker 3: the side corps getting on this medication. She told me, okay,
Speaker 3: he was at one point accused by his father that
Speaker 3: he was touching his stepdaughter on like a weekend visit
Speaker 3: over there, and she kept it real hush with me,
Speaker 3: so I didn't know the exact detailed. I just knew
Speaker 3: that he wasn't allowed to go over there because of
Speaker 3: these allegations. Okay, and his dad called him a pervert,
Speaker 3: and then she went to DCFF trying to say that
Speaker 3: Wayne was abusing Driston by accusing him of these things
Speaker 3: that were not true.
Speaker 1: It appears that mister Gilberto was interested in protecting his stepdaughters,
Speaker 1: but miss Johnson took that as an opportunity to weaponize
Speaker 1: the Illinois Department of Child and Family Services, or DCFS
Speaker 1: to restrict his access to their son. Meanwhile, Ronnie and
Speaker 1: his sister Deborah began fearing for GM safety.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so I used to watch GM every day, So
Speaker 5: there was things that GM would say to me about
Speaker 5: things happening in the household with her brother. There was
Speaker 5: one instance where she told me she woke up with
Speaker 5: her brother standing over her and she was afraid. And
Speaker 5: I told her mom about that and she told me, no,
Speaker 5: she's just lying. She's making things up. And I become
Speaker 5: concerned and I start telling Ronnie, like some of the
Speaker 5: things that GM has been saying to me.
Speaker 3: That's why I was concerned about my daughter living over there.
Speaker 3: And I confronted Maurie about this. She said oh, no, Tristan,
Speaker 3: he wouldn't do that. I said, well, why wouldn't my
Speaker 3: daughter be lying about this? I said, I don't feel safe,
Speaker 3: especially him coming out of a psych ward, being doped
Speaker 3: up on all this medication, and then all of a sudden,
Speaker 3: couple weeks later, you take him off his medication and
Speaker 3: now he's acting all fucking weird and shit.
Speaker 5: Then later on we come to find out in court
Speaker 5: record Tristan has sexually abused his dad's girlfriend's daughters. But
Speaker 5: none of this was ever brought to court.
Speaker 1: Which seems like some really important context, almost as important
Speaker 1: as what happened next.
Speaker 3: So I told her I was going to take her
Speaker 3: back to court for full custody because I'm concerned about
Speaker 3: what's going on here, and I'm going to let the
Speaker 3: courts know about his psych ward visits, about all this
Speaker 3: stuff that you say he's not doing but obviously is.
Speaker 3: So yeah, yeah, I threatened to take her back to
Speaker 3: court for full custody. And then I believe that was
Speaker 3: on like a Sunday, and here it is Wednesday. Now
Speaker 3: I'm being accused of sexually molesting my daughter.
Speaker 1: So it appears that July twelve, twenty fifteen, was the
Speaker 1: Sunday of the argument, and then Ms Johnson called DCFS.
Speaker 4: We don't know because we weren't there, but maybe the
Speaker 4: mom said the daughter had some itchiness and she asked
Speaker 4: her about it and she said, oh, daddy's weird.
Speaker 2: He touches me.
Speaker 4: And that was the initial report that was made, and
Speaker 4: that report was enough to get in order of protection.
Speaker 3: The way I found out was through my sister, because
Speaker 3: my sister watched my daughter. They showed up at my
Speaker 3: sister's house on Friday.
Speaker 5: She came by to pay me for the week before
Speaker 5: because heard my brother split paying me, and she made
Speaker 5: GM wait outside like Laurie was telling me all these things.
Speaker 5: And GM was looking through the screen door and she's like, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 5: I got to tell you something. So I come outside
Speaker 5: and she runs to the back of my yard and
Speaker 5: I have like a trampoline and everything because I have kids,
Speaker 5: and she's like, yeah, I got to tell you something.
Speaker 5: Daddy touches me. And then she runs off and goes
Speaker 5: and jumps on the trampoline like it was nothing, no
Speaker 5: big deal. I go to my brother because obviously, if
Speaker 5: a child is being hurt, I want to protect that child.
Speaker 1: GM was examined by their pediatrician, doctor Rhodes, who found
Speaker 1: no cause for concern. Meanwhile, Aunt Debbie called the family together.
Speaker 5: I instantly called my mom, my brother, and I'm like, look,
Speaker 5: this is what's going on. So then Ronnie called Laurie
Speaker 5: and got Laurie to come over to my mom's house.
Speaker 5: And she's telling everybody it's too late. DCFS is involved.
Speaker 5: I've taken her to the doctor. GM. She comes in
Speaker 5: the house and she wants to sit with her dad like.
Speaker 5: She actually cried because she wanted to stay with all
Speaker 5: of us. When Laurie told her it's time to go.
Speaker 5: You tell them what you have to tell them, and
Speaker 5: let's go. And she was sitting on Ronnie's lap crying
Speaker 5: and screaming as Laurie took her to leave. That's actually
Speaker 5: the last time Ronnie seen her when GM was sitting
Speaker 5: on my brother's lap. And I'm sitting there talking to
Speaker 5: her and I'm explaining to her like GM, I'm an adult.
Speaker 5: I'm here to protect you. If there's anything going on.
Speaker 5: You can share this with Aunt Debbie and I'll make
Speaker 5: sure you know I keep you safe. That's what adults
Speaker 5: are supposed to do. And then She looked at me
Speaker 5: and she goes, so, if that was happening to Abby,
Speaker 5: which is my daughter, they're only a few years apart.
Speaker 5: She's like, would you do the same thing? And I
Speaker 5: told her, I said, Jim, if any child is ever
Speaker 5: being hurt, I will always keep them safe. And I
Speaker 5: kept telling her, this is very important that you tell
Speaker 5: me the truth. And then she changed her whole story,
Speaker 5: saying it was a guy at her mom's house, which
Speaker 5: was confusing to us.
Speaker 1: MS Johnson had another boyfriend at the time, or perhaps
Speaker 1: GM meant her older half brother Tristan. Either way, two
Speaker 1: weeks later, on August fourth, twenty fifteen, MS Johnson made
Speaker 1: an appointment with DCFS to get the allegation on video.
Speaker 4: My understanding is that the child had recanted to the
Speaker 4: mom and was telling the mom it never happened, and
Speaker 4: that was part of what prompted her to put the
Speaker 4: child in front of the video camera to try to
Speaker 4: document these stories against Ronnie and put them on film. Literally,
Speaker 4: with the mom practically sitting next to her.
Speaker 3: In this video interview, she's not supposed to know where
Speaker 3: she's going.
Speaker 4: Know what was going to be asked, the child starts
Speaker 4: making accusations against her dad before she's even asked any
Speaker 4: question by the interviewer, suggesting that she had been coached.
Speaker 4: Many of the things that she said during the interview
Speaker 4: are conceded to be not true and fantastical. She said
Speaker 4: that the police came and arrested my dad, but he
Speaker 4: got away, who was conceded that no police had come.
Speaker 4: She said that her dad had a cast in her
Speaker 4: description of the abuse. He never had a cast on
Speaker 4: his arm during this period. She said that there was
Speaker 4: a dog involved. So all these things were conceded to
Speaker 4: be not true.
Speaker 3: Everything that video is total lies, except the one that
Speaker 3: they want to believe is that I sexually abused my child.
Speaker 4: So yes, she had recanted before she was put in
Speaker 4: front of the video camera and after to a therapist,
Speaker 4: to the mom, and to the trial prosecutors, saying it's
Speaker 4: not true. I was manipulated into saying that. The prosecution
Speaker 4: then went out and hired a nurse practitioner who had
Speaker 4: taken a course in sexual abuse and somebody that they
Speaker 4: had used in the past as a sexual abuse expert,
Speaker 4: and this woman examined the child, who was at this
Speaker 4: time was five years old, found nothing abnormal and the
Speaker 4: prosecution said, well, the child is now saying it never happened,
Speaker 4: so we can't go forward with this case unless the
Speaker 4: expert will say that there is physical evidence of abuse.
Speaker 1: So no charges were filed, but the order of protection
Speaker 1: remained in place.
Speaker 4: The mom went to extraordinary lengths to keep the daughter
Speaker 4: away not only from her father, but from his whole family.
Speaker 4: It was almost as if the mom was afraid that
Speaker 4: people that clearly posed no threat to the child if
Speaker 4: they were with her, that the story that the mom
Speaker 4: had fabricated would be exposed.
Speaker 1: And by October and November, Ronnie and his family began
Speaker 1: winning at family court, and it appeared that they would
Speaker 1: all be allowed supervised visitation at a DCFS facility called
Speaker 1: Safe Harbor.
Speaker 3: The judge said, hey, there's no evidence here. I gotta
Speaker 3: let them see the kid. Here's Laurie calling up DCFS
Speaker 3: and letting them know that I'm winning in family court
Speaker 3: that they need to do something about it.
Speaker 5: I have all those records where DCFS contacted Shannon. Krueger
Speaker 5: was like, and it's all in the notes, which is
Speaker 5: crazy to me. This is what we need you to say.
Speaker 5: Can you say this? And she said yes, I can
Speaker 5: say that. Then they told her to contact the prosecutor
Speaker 5: and let them know that she would state that in court.
Speaker 4: So the expert then examined the child's medical history and
Speaker 4: found that there were some urinary tract infections and some
Speaker 4: genital redness and said, yes, I can say conclusively that
Speaker 4: is highly suspicious for sexual abuse in a five year
Speaker 4: old girl. I think she was four at the time
Speaker 4: that she had this redness.
Speaker 1: Previously, the child's preediatrician had attributed these issues to potty training,
Speaker 1: a new bath soap, or a new laundry detergent. Yet
Speaker 1: Krueger's opinion led to Ronnie's arrest in early December. He
Speaker 1: was bonded out his family. Court wins were rolled back,
Speaker 1: but at least his family was granted access to GM.
Speaker 3: Their first visit was right after the holidays for my
Speaker 3: whole family. I'm talking like eight adults and like twelve
Speaker 3: nieces and nephews. They wanted to give her all of
Speaker 3: her presents for Christmas and all that. So they have
Speaker 3: a thing over at my sister's house.
Speaker 5: All the girls in the family, my daughter and then
Speaker 5: my brother's two daughters and her. They're all pretty close
Speaker 5: in age, so just seeing them together, playing with their dolls,
Speaker 5: being able to sit with my mom, having all her
Speaker 5: grandkids together.
Speaker 3: Now, mind you, I can't be around at all. I'm
Speaker 3: at a whole nother house with another witness that says
Speaker 3: I was there the whole time, after they dropped her
Speaker 3: back off, after she got all of her presents, all
Speaker 3: this stuff. Now, this is Lorie. This ain't my daughter.
Speaker 3: This is Laurie calling the police saying that my daughter
Speaker 3: told her that I talked to her on the phone.
Speaker 3: A total fabrication.
Speaker 1: After checking the call logs and speaking with Ronnie's family,
Speaker 1: the police confirmed that the accusation was false, and then
Speaker 1: after the second visitation came another false accusation.
Speaker 4: The mom calls Protective Services again and said Ronnie's violating it.
Speaker 4: He's using these grandparent visitations to see his daughter and
Speaker 4: to sexually abuse her at school.
Speaker 5: The DCFS they pulled my daughter in question her for
Speaker 5: two hours. They were trying to see if she could
Speaker 5: verify if Ronnie was at the visit.
Speaker 2: That was later conceded to be false.
Speaker 4: Everyone agreed he never violated the order protection, but it
Speaker 4: was enough to end these grandparent visitations.
Speaker 1: Since these two new accusations were provably false. The state
Speaker 1: only moved forward with the first one with the support
Speaker 1: of Nurse Krueger.
Speaker 4: And Ronnie had a conversation with his lawyer prior to
Speaker 4: trial where he said, I've seen these reports that they're
Speaker 4: going to call an expert to say that my daughter
Speaker 4: was abused. Shouldn't we have our own expert, And his
Speaker 4: lawyer responded, no, we don't because there's no physical evidence.
Speaker 2: We don't need an expert.
Speaker 3: Jafer admits she never called or looked around for any
Speaker 3: expert testimony. If she had, she would have found out
Speaker 3: that the allegations that Kruger made were totally medically mumbo jumbo.
Speaker 1: Shannon Krueger's opinion was about to go unchallenged a trial,
Speaker 1: along with Miss Johnson's credit with her well documented history
Speaker 1: of weaponizing family court.
Speaker 4: This lawyer didn't pull the family court file, so she
Speaker 4: wouldn't have known about the past history, but she did
Speaker 4: know about the December January incident and the false accusation,
Speaker 4: and the lawyer just was unable to figure out how
Speaker 4: to get that in at trial.
Speaker 3: The judge in my case, Judge McGraw, he wouldn't even
Speaker 3: allow my witnesses to testify to the second allegation denied
Speaker 3: it on grounds of relevance.
Speaker 1: The recantation to the therapist was also denied on grounds
Speaker 1: of confidentiality, even though it was clearly exculpatory, as were
Speaker 1: the recantations to the trial prosecutors.
Speaker 3: They were trying to prefer for trial. That's when she
Speaker 3: told them that once twice, that my dad didn't do
Speaker 3: this to me. Also, they admit during those interviews with
Speaker 3: her that she seemed to cheer up when she heard
Speaker 3: my name, was excited to see me and was like,
Speaker 3: oh is my daddy here? Like is that somebody afraid
Speaker 3: to somebody? No witness recans to you twice, she recants
Speaker 3: to a therapist, She recants to her mother on thirty
Speaker 3: times that she says. So she's trying to tell these
Speaker 3: people this shit didn't happen, but none of them are
Speaker 3: believe in her.
Speaker 1: Or maybe they did, considering the affidavits they signed about
Speaker 1: the recantations, as well as the offer they made to
Speaker 1: Ronnie prior to trial.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they offered me probation, no jail time. What type
Speaker 3: of guilty man is not going to take a deal
Speaker 3: for no jail time? In probation. The only person that
Speaker 3: is not going to take that deal is the innocent
Speaker 3: person that believed in the justice system and has the
Speaker 3: truth behind their side. I turned that opportunity down.
Speaker 4: Even though he's facing twenty years. He said, no, I
Speaker 4: can't because it requires me to say that I harmed
Speaker 4: my daughter and I never would have harmed my daughter.
Speaker 1: Because he refused this deal, Ronnie was taken to trial
Speaker 1: in twenty seventeen, where curiously, first the state called GM's pediatrician,
Speaker 1: doctor Rhodes, to the stand and asked about the history
Speaker 1: of discomfort.
Speaker 3: Rhodes she admits, Hey, this could be something simple as
Speaker 3: hygiene or an allergic reaction to laundry soap or something
Speaker 3: like that, and they told the jury to totally disregard
Speaker 3: their witness.
Speaker 1: Then they revited Rhodes with nurse Krueger.
Speaker 3: Krueger has asked the same questions that the Rhodes testify to,
Speaker 3: and she would not admit that could be caused by
Speaker 3: something simple as hygiene issues or allergic reaction from bubble
Speaker 3: bass or laundry detergent.
Speaker 1: And then GM was brought to the stand.
Speaker 4: This is a matter of Illinois law. They had to
Speaker 4: put her on the stand in order to put in
Speaker 4: the videotape of her prior statement, but the child was
Speaker 4: no longer accusing her father of a crime. They were
Speaker 4: very concerned, the prosecutors, because it had been more than
Speaker 4: two years since she had last seen her dad.
Speaker 3: Oh yes, I was very emotional and just see in
Speaker 3: her face. It was just like it was crazy. And
Speaker 3: as soon as my daughter walked in the you should
Speaker 3: stopped the trial. And basically told the judge was that, hey,
Speaker 3: we're afraid that she's going to run up and just
Speaker 3: give him a hug, and that's not going to look
Speaker 3: good in front of the jury.
Speaker 4: The judge's suggestion, and the prosecutors carried this out, is
Speaker 4: to create sort of a human shield so that when
Speaker 4: the child was brought to the stands, she would not
Speaker 4: be able to see her father and so she would
Speaker 4: not be tempted to go and run and hug him.
Speaker 1: So a human shield obstructed GM's view of her father.
Speaker 1: And GM did say that her father touched her cuckoo
Speaker 1: with his finger, but it was said in a vague
Speaker 1: and non sexual context, and GM didn't recall any details
Speaker 1: of a sexual nature. So the exchange went, quote, do
Speaker 1: you remember if he touched you on the inside or
Speaker 1: the outside of your cuckoo? She replied, uh huh, you
Speaker 1: don't remember, she said, no. Do you remember what it
Speaker 1: felt like? She says, well, it hurt it a little bit,
Speaker 1: but not too much, like getting your ears pierced. Did
Speaker 1: you ever see daddy's private she says, I don't remember.
Speaker 1: Did daddy ever touch you anywhere else on your body
Speaker 1: that he shouldn't have touched? She says no. Do you
Speaker 1: miss your daddy? She answered yes. Do you love your daddy?
Speaker 1: She said yes? And there they're back and forth ends
Speaker 1: right there. That's an end quote.
Speaker 3: The prosecution Hader preps and is very vague on whether
Speaker 3: you could consider this sexual abuse. Well, did your daddy
Speaker 3: touch me? Yeah, he touched which could be construed as anything.
Speaker 3: I was a responsible single parent. Yes, I bade my child. Yes,
Speaker 3: I brush my daughter's hair, I made her brush her teeth,
Speaker 3: I dressed her. Yes, I did all that. A responsible
Speaker 3: parent does all those things. To say that sexual abuse
Speaker 3: is just.
Speaker 1: Crazy, But that testimony came with the context of the
Speaker 1: video statement, and despite the absurdities and untrue details, it
Speaker 1: appears to have made a powerful impression on the jury,
Speaker 1: who subsequently were deprived of knowing about the false accusations
Speaker 1: and Miss Johnson's history with family court, despite Debra's best efforts.
Speaker 5: When we testified the only thing when we tried to
Speaker 5: bring up that date, they obviously kept it out of
Speaker 5: the court. They would seal everything, They would go up
Speaker 5: there and talk to the judge. Then the judge would decide,
Speaker 5: this can't be discussed because it has nothing to do
Speaker 5: with it. And we kept trying to say, yes it does.
Speaker 5: It's a pattern of these lies that are continuing. It
Speaker 5: like it totally had something to do with the case,
Speaker 5: and they kept all of that out of the court documents.
Speaker 2: This to me was incredibly troubling.
Speaker 1: Almost as troubling as the prosecution, the court, and her
Speaker 1: mother repeatedly ignoring GM's recantations. And when Miss Johnson was
Speaker 1: asked about the July twelfth, twenty fifteen, argument with Ronnie,
Speaker 1: she said it wasn't about suing for full custody or Tristan,
Speaker 1: but rather about where GM would go to school. But
Speaker 1: that testimony went unchallenged, and with that jury deliberation predictably
Speaker 1: went very quickly.
Speaker 3: They delivered rated two hours and they came back in
Speaker 3: and said guilty, and it was over. I went from
Speaker 3: not spending one day in jail in my whole life
Speaker 3: to being cuffed up and brought away into a prison
Speaker 3: system for twenty years, and I've been here ever since.
Speaker 3: Prison is tough, man. Every day I wake up and
Speaker 3: it's a nightmare. Man. Prison is designed to break you
Speaker 3: down every single day, and I refuse to let them
Speaker 3: do that. Now. This is what counts me every day,
Speaker 3: is that my daughter has been left in her refuser's
Speaker 3: hands and continue to be used by the state and Laurie,
Speaker 3: And I'm fearful every day for her safety. And she's
Speaker 3: the most important thing to me. If she could know
Speaker 3: the truth and I knew that she was safe, I'd
Speaker 3: have no problem doing whatever they needed. If they needed
Speaker 3: me here for the rest of my life, I could
Speaker 3: hear lists or my life's already ruined. I want her
Speaker 3: to be safe, and I want her to know the truth,
Speaker 3: and that's the bottom line of it. And I will
Speaker 3: always maintain my innocence no matter how this goes, and
Speaker 3: I'll never give up fighting. I'll fight this to the
Speaker 3: day I die.
Speaker 1: Ronnie's direct appeal was handled by another lawyer soon after
Speaker 1: his conviction. But unfortunately you can't bring in new evidence
Speaker 1: like the defense expert that should have been hired, or
Speaker 1: evidence of false allegations, et cetera. Of course, just don't
Speaker 1: allow it.
Speaker 4: But the lawyer made a fairly strong argument that the
Speaker 4: evidence was insufficient. As a matter of law and due
Speaker 4: process says, the prosecution must present evidence to prove guilt,
Speaker 4: otherwise the or should set you free. But what the
Speaker 4: appellate court said is well, even though the child never
Speaker 4: made any accusation at trial, there was an expert to
Speaker 4: corroborate what was said on videotape. The court went on
Speaker 4: to say, the defense put on no evidence to rebut
Speaker 4: this so we have to sort of accept that it
Speaker 4: was true.
Speaker 1: Now, I'd like you to remember that the court noted
Speaker 1: the absence of what would have been helpful evidence at trial,
Speaker 1: as the next part of the fight would be to
Speaker 1: prove that Ronnie had been deprived of his right to
Speaker 1: effective counsel.
Speaker 4: Part of the problem is the lawyer that represented Ronnie
Speaker 4: is now a judge in Winnebago County. She was appointed
Speaker 4: to a vacancy in the court by the judge that
Speaker 4: presided over Ronnie's trial.
Speaker 3: Another thing weird too, is after Schaeffer loses the trial,
Speaker 3: Judge mcgrall teach congratulates her, Like, what kind of person
Speaker 3: is like, Oh, you did such a good job, but
Speaker 3: you lost the case. I found that very weird. And
Speaker 3: then Judge mcral puts Schaeffer up for the judge ship. Right,
Speaker 3: there's a lot of suspicion with that. Right after my case.
Speaker 1: In a case where raising ineffective assists of counsel also
Speaker 1: calls the trial judges judgment into question, this doesn't bode well.
Speaker 1: It stinks, but those are the cards that they were dealt.
Speaker 1: So Leonard raised the issue that his attorney had failed
Speaker 1: to get Miss Johnson's history in family court as well
Speaker 1: as her having made false allegations. She wasn't able to
Speaker 1: get any of this admitted into the proceedings, in addition
Speaker 1: the failure to hire a defense expert to rebut the
Speaker 1: testimony of the States expert.
Speaker 4: I had a conversation with this lawyer when I came
Speaker 4: into the case, and she confirmed to me that she
Speaker 4: made no attempt to contact any experts for the defense. Now,
Speaker 4: it took me probably less than a couple hours to
Speaker 4: make some phone calls and find somebody, a well respected,
Speaker 4: board certified guynecologist that had experience with prepubescent teens and
Speaker 4: was able to tell me very quickly what their expert
Speaker 4: told the jury was complete nonsense. That this is very
Speaker 4: common in prepubescent girls to have episodes of urinary tract
Speaker 4: infections and general redness and itchiness, especially when they're learning
Speaker 4: toilet skills and all of that.
Speaker 1: Doctor Jack McCubbin said, quote, there is no medical evidence
Speaker 1: of sexual abuse, and it is imperative that the jury
Speaker 1: not be left with that perception end quote.
Speaker 4: The post conviction was filed with I think something like
Speaker 4: seventy exhibits, including doctor mccubbin's report, the family law documents,
Speaker 4: DCFS records, which showed that the girl had recanted to
Speaker 4: her therapist. It was conceded at trial that she recanted
Speaker 4: to the trial prosecutors. There was also a report from
Speaker 4: a child psychologist, because the defense really should have called
Speaker 4: a child psychologist, because the prosecution told the jury I'm paraphrasing,
Speaker 4: but inclosing argument that kids don't make these sort of
Speaker 4: things up. When kids tell stories, it's about dinosaurs, ghosts,
Speaker 4: and monsters. It's not about daddy touching me. What a
Speaker 4: child's psychologist would have done is explain the situations when
Speaker 4: there's a negative influence from the mother when children do fabricate.
Speaker 2: The other thing that the.
Speaker 4: Prosecution said is it because the person that was asking
Speaker 4: the questions on the videotape was a forensically trained interviewer
Speaker 4: that guaranteed the accuracy of what the child was saying,
Speaker 4: and this child psychologist would have explained to the jura
Speaker 4: is that, in fact, that forensically trained interviewer was not
Speaker 4: using very good practices, including the mother bringing the child
Speaker 4: into the room and placing her in front of the camera,
Speaker 4: and the fact that the child started making accusations without
Speaker 4: even being asked a question by the interviewer, which is
Speaker 4: highly suspicious that the.
Speaker 2: Child had been coached.
Speaker 4: The other thing that we had asked for is we
Speaker 4: wanted the child's counseling records because we had direct evidence
Speaker 4: that the child had told her therapist that this never happened.
Speaker 4: Counseling records are private, but if you can show a
Speaker 4: compelling reason that we need this information to free an
Speaker 4: innocent person, the judge should order it. And the judge
Speaker 4: did not, so that was part of the post conviction petition.
Speaker 4: As I said, there were dozens and dozens of exhibits
Speaker 4: that was presented.
Speaker 2: To the trial judge who was now asked.
Speaker 4: To find that lawyer that he had appointed to the
Speaker 4: bench had been ineffective in this case.
Speaker 1: And as expected, the motion was denied.
Speaker 3: She's part of the club, she's a judge. Now got
Speaker 3: one person covering the other person's ass all the way up.
Speaker 3: Just look at his explanation of denying my post conviction.
Speaker 3: He didn't even give an explanation. Mister Goodman had to
Speaker 3: file the motion for reasoning and he was pissed about
Speaker 3: that that we would even question why he denied it. Well,
Speaker 3: you didn't give us an explanation why.
Speaker 1: So that decision was appealed to the very same court
Speaker 1: that denied the direct appeal, considering that they had noted
Speaker 1: two years prior that the defense had not rebutted the
Speaker 1: state's expert. Their ruling was.
Speaker 4: The same court is looking at the appeal of the
Speaker 4: post conviction case, in which evidence has been presented in
Speaker 4: the form of a report from a gynecologist with forty
Speaker 4: years of experience saying that what the state's expert said
Speaker 4: at trial was complete nonsense. And I would just point
Speaker 4: out that the state never disputed that they basically conceded. Yeah,
Speaker 4: that's true, but you should still affirm this conviction. The
Speaker 4: state sort of came up with this excuse, Well, it's cumulative,
Speaker 4: there's other evidence that the girl had told some lies
Speaker 4: that there's other evidence that the girl had trouble wiping herself. Therefore,
Speaker 4: we don't need to hear from doctor mccobbn. It would
Speaker 4: have been cumulative to call doctor McCubbin.
Speaker 2: Again.
Speaker 4: This is complete nonsense. But the appellate court twisted itself
Speaker 4: in knots in order to uphold this conviction and keep
Speaker 4: this innocent person in jail and avoid making a finding
Speaker 4: of ineffective assistance against this colleague on the bench.
Speaker 1: So it appears that Nurse Krueger's testimony the only thing
Speaker 1: that kept them from ruling for insufficient evidence on direct appeal,
Speaker 1: where the expert would have been key. Now, with some
Speaker 1: mental gymnastics, that court decided that the presentation of such
Speaker 1: an expert was now cumulative to what had been presented.
Speaker 1: Make it make sense, I can't so. Additionally, the Illinois
Speaker 1: Supreme Court chose not to hear the case. So Leonard
Speaker 1: and Ronnie moved on to federal habeas.
Speaker 4: The case is pending in front of a federal district
Speaker 4: judge in Rockford, Ian Johnson, a judge with a very
Speaker 4: good reputation. We've asked for a hearing in front of him,
Speaker 4: and we'll see what happens. The case is fully briefed.
Speaker 4: The state filed their response, We filed a reply. Those
Speaker 4: are all sitting on the judge's desk waiting for him
Speaker 4: to make a ruling.
Speaker 1: Well, we hope Ronnie is granted a hearing where the
Speaker 1: judge can recognize both his innocence and the violations of
Speaker 1: his rights. In the meantime, there's a young girl still
Speaker 1: out there without her dad.
Speaker 5: Even why Ronnie's been locked up all these years. We
Speaker 5: continued in family court, fighting and fighting, and where my
Speaker 5: mom was finally approved to just have visits with GM
Speaker 5: with Lourie present, and it'd always be like they go
Speaker 5: out to eat, or they'd take her shopping or something.
Speaker 5: We did get a guardian at lightam involved. My daughter
Speaker 5: was allowed to go to the visits with my mom.
Speaker 5: But then when I finally got allowed my first very
Speaker 5: first visit with my daughter, my mom, GM, Laurie and
Speaker 5: Laurie's mother. We were at McDonald's. She went back and
Speaker 5: told the court that I was questioning GM about everything
Speaker 5: again because you know, obviously you're not allowed to talk
Speaker 5: about any of it, and then all visits were stopped again.
Speaker 5: I even asked the guardian at Lightham to come to
Speaker 5: the visit, like none of this happened. And they're still
Speaker 5: using the court to say now you guys can't see her.
Speaker 5: And I know why they're keeping us away from her
Speaker 5: because the truth will come out. It will come out
Speaker 5: one day when she's old enough and she can say
Speaker 5: what happened. It's all going to come out.
Speaker 4: The one other aspect of this case, it's so tragic.
Speaker 4: This is secondhand information, but it is something that would
Speaker 4: not be hard to understand, is that she was basically
Speaker 4: used by the prosecution to put her father in prison
Speaker 4: for a crime that he didn't commit. And the fact
Speaker 4: that the child is telling you and telling everyone that
Speaker 4: will listen to her, this never happened. I think as
Speaker 4: she has gained some awareness of what her role was,
Speaker 4: it's been very difficult for her and apparently there was
Speaker 4: some suicidal ideation in the child.
Speaker 5: To this day, she's still having lots of issues between
Speaker 5: her mom and her brother, and there's no help for her.
Speaker 5: I recently found out Tristan was arrested. Laurie stated she
Speaker 5: came home from work. He was drunk under the influence
Speaker 5: and had destroyed and broke everything in the house. They
Speaker 5: did arrest him, and they actually put him in the
Speaker 5: hospital that night. They said they had to strap him
Speaker 5: to a bed for over six hours and they couldn't
Speaker 5: release them because of Laurie's safety. And in the police
Speaker 5: report Laurie puts she's afraid of him and this has
Speaker 5: happened on another occasion. But if they couldn't release them
Speaker 5: for Lorie's safety, what about GM safety?
Speaker 2: This girl is now, what is she twelve? Thirteen years old?
Speaker 5: She is fourteen.
Speaker 4: So I'm hoping that someday we will be able to
Speaker 4: have some contact with her and maybe the truth can
Speaker 4: come out to not only set Ronnie free, but at
Speaker 4: least an attempt to right the wrong that was done
Speaker 4: to them.
Speaker 1: And hopefully Judge Johnston can give Ronnie the relief that
Speaker 1: he so richly deserves and needs. And with that, we're
Speaker 1: going to go to closing arguments, first Leonard, then Debrah
Speaker 1: and Finally, Ronnie, thank you all for being here. I'm
Speaker 1: going to switch off my mic, kick back in my
Speaker 1: chair with my headphones on and just listen to anything
Speaker 1: else you have to say.
Speaker 4: I always had the feeling that deep down people want
Speaker 4: to do the right thing. And one of the things
Speaker 4: that they don't teach you in law school is that
Speaker 4: you can be right on the facts and the law
Speaker 4: and still lose if you have judges that have a
Speaker 4: different agenda. And that's a very painful lesson for lawyers,
Speaker 4: especially lawyers that do criminal defense work and really believe
Speaker 4: in some of their co clients. And I think what
Speaker 4: you're doing is probably the most important. As they say,
Speaker 4: sunlight is the best disinfect and people know that a
Speaker 4: wrong was done, and I think if they think that
Speaker 4: it can be done in darkness, then there is little
Speaker 4: incentive for people to want to come forward and right
Speaker 4: or wrong, because it is hard for prosecutors to admit
Speaker 4: that they made mistakes. It is hard for judges to
Speaker 4: admit that they made mistakes. It is hard for lawyers.
Speaker 4: But let's make this right.
Speaker 5: I've been there since day one. I've gone to every
Speaker 5: court thing. I have all the documents and me having
Speaker 5: my own daughter, I couldn't imagine your kids mean everything
Speaker 5: to you and then for somebody to use your kid
Speaker 5: against you for their own personal gain. That's what's really
Speaker 5: hard for me to understand. I just want them to
Speaker 5: see how the justice system is wrong and how it
Speaker 5: incarcerates completely innocent people and rips lifes apart. Not only
Speaker 5: for my brother, not only was he wronged, GM was
Speaker 5: wronged by the system too. I used to tell Ronnie
Speaker 5: that one day we be standing somewhere talking about how
Speaker 5: the truth would come out and people would really see
Speaker 5: what a person around he really is instead of what's
Speaker 5: been cast upon him. It will happen just one day.
Speaker 3: Our justice system is broken from the foundation to the top.
Speaker 3: All the checks and balances that are supposed to protect
Speaker 3: an innocent man like myself fails. It failed because it
Speaker 3: is run by corrupt people who only see people like
Speaker 3: myself as money and a conviction rate, and they care
Speaker 3: nothing about true justice or the truth. I think everyone
Speaker 3: who has heard and knows my story and say that
Speaker 3: I was not given a fair trial, I was deliberately
Speaker 3: denied a fair trial. When it comes to sex abuse allegations,
Speaker 3: I have learned that no evidence is needed for a conviction.
Speaker 3: All the players in our justice system know how sensitive
Speaker 3: the public is towards sex abuse, and they exploit this
Speaker 3: fear to convict innocent people like myself, all for money,
Speaker 3: all for power, not for real justice or public safety.
Speaker 3: This is bigger than me. This can easily happen to anyone.
Speaker 3: It could happen to you, to someone in your family.
Speaker 3: This must stop. The system has failed me and my daughter.
Speaker 3: To the people listening, I need your help. These corrupt
Speaker 3: individuals work in the shadows. They don't want cases like
Speaker 3: mine to be in the public eye. So I need
Speaker 3: all those who are listening to be my voice to
Speaker 3: expose what happened to me. The whole people that listen
Speaker 3: to this, the bigger and brighter that light becomes, and
Speaker 3: then these corrupt individuals won't be able to hide in
Speaker 3: those shadows no more, and the truth, God willing will prevail.
Speaker 3: I am pleading with all those listening to talk to
Speaker 3: everyone they know and encourage them to listen to this podcast.
Speaker 3: Thank you for your time and God bless you.
Speaker 1: Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
Speaker 1: to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
Speaker 1: week early and ad free by subscribing to Lava for
Speaker 1: Good plus on Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our
Speaker 1: production team, Connor Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as
Speaker 1: my fellow executive producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff Kliber.
Speaker 1: The music in this production was supplied by three time
Speaker 1: OSCAR nominated composer Jay Rowse. Be sure to follow us
Speaker 1: across all social media platforms at Lava for Good and
Speaker 1: at Wrongful Conviction. You can also follow me on Instagram
Speaker 1: at It's Jason Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is a production of
Speaker 1: Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number One.
Speaker 2: We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported
Speaker 2: in this show are accurate. The views and opinions expressed
Speaker 2: by the individuals featured in this show are their own
Speaker 2: and do not necessarily reflect those of Lava for Good.