Speaker 1: When we first released this episode on September eight, Anthony
Speaker 1: Sims had already spent twenty two years in prison and
Speaker 1: was hoping to bring some much needed attention to this
Speaker 1: horrendous injustice. At the time has passed to freedom or
Speaker 1: uncertain Since then, some monumental changes have occurred. For this
Speaker 1: updated episode, we spoke again with Anthony and his legal team.
Speaker 1: You'll hear this episode as it was originally released, but
Speaker 1: with brand new content to pick up where we left
Speaker 1: off on eight, a woman named Rachel claims to have
Speaker 1: seen her neighbors Julius Graves and Charlique Winbush talking. Charlie
Speaker 1: was telling her fiance Graves about how a man named
Speaker 1: Lee run Chen, who worked at the Chinese restaurant up
Speaker 1: the block. Mr Hays, had touched her inappropriately. Graves replied
Speaker 1: that he would scare him. Later that day, Julius Graves,
Speaker 1: his fiance's cousin, and another younger friend had a few
Speaker 1: drinks with Graves his friend Anthony Simms as they listened
Speaker 1: of music by Anthony's car. As the evening wrapped up,
Speaker 1: Graves asked Anthony to drive him down the block to
Speaker 1: Mr Hanks. Oblivious to any issue with Chen. Anthony agreed
Speaker 1: they went into the restaurant. When it is believed that
Speaker 1: Graves shot and killed Lee run Chen. In shock, Anthony
Speaker 1: fled alone while Graves and the two younger guys returned
Speaker 1: to Graves's apartment, wiped the gun clean, figured out where
Speaker 1: to stash it, and began to conjure up a story
Speaker 1: to deflect blame from Graves and onto Anthony Simms. With
Speaker 1: Graves and a number of his friends and families supporting
Speaker 1: this phony narrative, investigators set their sights on Anthony. Only
Speaker 1: one witness came forward independently who was neither coerced nor
Speaker 1: friends and family of Julius Graves Graves, his neighbor Rachel,
Speaker 1: who was on the phone outside of Mr Hanks during
Speaker 1: the shooting and saw Graves running from the restaurant with
Speaker 1: a sawed off shotgun in his hand. Yet her statement
Speaker 1: was ignored by investigators and hidden from the defense, and
Speaker 1: as a result, Anthony Simms continues to serve twenty five
Speaker 1: years to life. This is wrongful conviction with Jason Flomer.
Speaker 1: Welcome back to wrongful conviction with Jason Flom. That's me
Speaker 1: and today if you hear my voices, sounds sort of down.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is one of the most troubling wrongful
Speaker 1: conviction cases that I've ever seen in twenty eight years
Speaker 1: of doing this work, which is almost as long as
Speaker 1: Anthony Simms has been locked up for a crime he
Speaker 1: obviously didn't commit. First of all, I want to introduce
Speaker 1: the two attorneys who are so devoted to this case
Speaker 1: and to this man, Jonathan Hiles and Thomas Hoffman. Thank
Speaker 1: you both for being here. Thank you, Thank you for
Speaker 1: doing this Jason, and now of course saving the best
Speaker 1: for last. And I'm just so sorry that you're here
Speaker 1: under these circumstances, but I'm honestly honored that you're here
Speaker 1: with us today on the podcast. So Anthony Simms, Welcome
Speaker 1: to raval Conviction. Thank you. And Anthony, of course, is
Speaker 1: now forty five year old man, twenty four years into
Speaker 1: a life sentence for a murder he didn't commit. Now,
Speaker 1: this began back in but I want to go back
Speaker 1: even further than that. Um, Anthony, where did you grow
Speaker 1: up and what was your childhood like? Was it a
Speaker 1: happy childhood? Yes? I grew up in Brooklyn, York and
Speaker 1: a mother, father, and my two older brothers and we
Speaker 1: had was a very happy, loving family. We would do
Speaker 1: a lot of fun activity together, go on vacations. I
Speaker 1: remember every Sunday with family Day and leading up to
Speaker 1: when this awful crime occurred. You had kids, Beyonce, at
Speaker 1: that time. What was life like for you? I live
Speaker 1: what I thought was a normal line. I work for
Speaker 1: Bell Atlantic Telephone Company and I installed pull lines and
Speaker 1: provide a doubts on the customers. I live with my
Speaker 1: fiance Kisha and my two sons at the town. So
Speaker 1: this brings us to May, when you, Anthony, witnessed a
Speaker 1: terrible crime. There was a Chinese restaurant Mr. Hings, which
Speaker 1: was down the block from where your former friend Julius
Speaker 1: Grays lived, and around ten o'clock that night, a man
Speaker 1: named Lee run Shan, who worked at Mr. Hings was
Speaker 1: shot and killed. But earlier that day, before any of
Speaker 1: that happened, you thought you were just going to swing
Speaker 1: by Graves's apartment to show him this new car you
Speaker 1: bought your fiance Keisha. Julius Graves was at that time
Speaker 1: my best friend. I wanted to show him the cart
Speaker 1: and a boat. My wife this a process, so I
Speaker 1: drove took his house at that town. He asked me
Speaker 1: the job and to the liquor store. I went to
Speaker 1: the regular store on Boston. There we was talking. I
Speaker 1: was letting the music play from my car radio, and
Speaker 1: then his two friends came over, his fiance's cousin Derek,
Speaker 1: and then later on his friend Louis, and they was
Speaker 1: listening to music with us. And I want to say,
Speaker 1: like around ten o'clock, he was getting late, I wanted
Speaker 1: to go home. Showed my wife the cars, and I
Speaker 1: wanted to be home with my sons. So Dolis ask
Speaker 1: him to drop him to them and find the restaurants.
Speaker 1: So I thought this is a weird request because he
Speaker 1: lived down the Blood around a corner from the restaurant,
Speaker 1: and I thought he could have just walked. So I said,
Speaker 1: I listened, I was drinking a couple of days. Let
Speaker 1: me go to the thought about some restmans, because I
Speaker 1: don't like driving around like that. I remember Julius saying, listen,
Speaker 1: and I'm going to the house. I'm gonna go check
Speaker 1: with Charlik, which is his girlfriend at the time, to
Speaker 1: see if she wanted anything from the store as well.
Speaker 1: So I said, all right. So I can only assume
Speaker 1: that's the time that he got the weapon, and when
Speaker 1: I got back from my car, Julius was sitting in
Speaker 1: my passengers seat and his two little friends was sit
Speaker 1: in the back. They know that I didn't expect him
Speaker 1: to be in a car because they looked at me
Speaker 1: with this look like, all right, well, we're just gonna
Speaker 1: go to this restaurant with you. So I didn't think
Speaker 1: nothing now very I got in the car and I
Speaker 1: drove him to them and find the restaurants. When I
Speaker 1: got it out of the restaurant, I started looking around
Speaker 1: for the menus and stuff to see what I was
Speaker 1: going to purchase from my wife. The next thing I know,
Speaker 1: I saw Julius come in the store with like a
Speaker 1: weird expression on his face, and almost immediately he re
Speaker 1: sent his fans and pulled out a port of Saga,
Speaker 1: and I remember thinking like, what the hell was going on?
Speaker 1: And where? Didn't even get the gun from act? I said,
Speaker 1: what the hell are you doing to you? Praising Julius,
Speaker 1: Sexty said no, approached the count of pointed the gun
Speaker 1: of one of the workers and pulled the trigger, and
Speaker 1: I couldn't believe it. I felt the blood us from
Speaker 1: my body, and well, I remember at that time, just
Speaker 1: running out the store, getting in my car. Julius jumped
Speaker 1: in in too, and I said get out and kicked everybody.
Speaker 1: I said, everybody get out of my car and I drove.
Speaker 1: Pharman told keis what I happened. That was the worst
Speaker 1: night of my life. Yeah, it would be the worst
Speaker 1: night of almost anyone's life to witness something like that.
Speaker 1: I got home, I got on the phone. In that
Speaker 1: call though, and that's what the hell is wrong with you?
Speaker 1: Probably cursed about says some other things. So I'm gonna
Speaker 1: basically want to know why did he put me in
Speaker 1: a situation? And why do you Why did he allow
Speaker 1: me to walk into that? Why didn't come me? What
Speaker 1: was going on? Maybe he could, I would talk ab
Speaker 1: out of it. I don't know, but he just kept apologize.
Speaker 1: And that's when he told me that you know the
Speaker 1: person that he found out. I can't believe it. And
Speaker 1: I said, dude, I don't ever call me again. I
Speaker 1: don't want to hear from you no more. I just
Speaker 1: wanted to try to separate my cell phone. So it
Speaker 1: turns out that Julius Graves had a motive, and that
Speaker 1: is that Graves was upset that Mr. Chen, who worked
Speaker 1: at the Chinese restaurant, had reportedly touched the hand of
Speaker 1: Graves Is Fyonce Charlie earlier in the day of the
Speaker 1: murder that he had touched her hand inappropriately. She was
Speaker 1: upset about this, she told Graves, and Graves said that
Speaker 1: he would go to the restaurant and scare the victor.
Speaker 1: We know he did a lot more than that, but
Speaker 1: that appears to have been the motive that we didn't
Speaker 1: find out until many years later. Now, what was known
Speaker 1: at the time is that after the murder, after Anthony
Speaker 1: got Graves and his two friends, Derek Dollup and Louis
Speaker 1: Cologne to leave the car, it is undisputed that Graves
Speaker 1: took the shotgun used in the murder, went back to
Speaker 1: the apartment where he was staying, feverishly wiped off the
Speaker 1: shotgun to get his fingerprints off of it, and then
Speaker 1: gave the gun to his friend Louis Cologne to hide
Speaker 1: from police. And Louis, by the way, was only fourteen
Speaker 1: years old at the time. Graves Is excuse for doing
Speaker 1: this is that he wasn't thinking. That was his only justification. Now. Furthermore,
Speaker 1: this murder weapon that sawt off shotgun had previously been
Speaker 1: kept in a lockbox in the apartment where Graves was staying,
Speaker 1: and Graves and his friend Derek Dollup, who was also
Speaker 1: his fiance's cousin, admitted even that they knew the shotgun
Speaker 1: was kept there and had seen it there before. So
Speaker 1: all the evidence suggested that the shotgun belonged to Graves,
Speaker 1: and it is undisputed he had handled it right after
Speaker 1: the murder occurred, right and the physical evidence from the
Speaker 1: scene later proved that this sought off shotgun from Graves's
Speaker 1: apartment was used in the murder. So this is where
Speaker 1: we start seeing a narrative being formed from the Graves
Speaker 1: camp to try to deflect responsibility for this murder away
Speaker 1: from Graves and towards Anthony. And initially it will seem
Speaker 1: like a lot of witnesses came forward to support what
Speaker 1: was really just coming straight from Graves's imagination and what
Speaker 1: later became the prosecution's narrative. But it will become clear
Speaker 1: as we move along here that none of these witnesses
Speaker 1: were to be believed they should have believed for two reasons. One,
Speaker 1: it's discovered later that these eyewitness accounts are initially riddled
Speaker 1: with glaring inconsistencies and contradictions that were then changed to
Speaker 1: bit a cohesive narrative in time for trial, which is
Speaker 1: just not typical what a group of people are telling
Speaker 1: the truth obviously, right, and to most of the witnesses
Speaker 1: are friends and family of Graves. There are only two
Speaker 1: witnesses to who are not Graves as friends or family,
Speaker 1: one of whom was coerced by police into an ambiguous
Speaker 1: statement that nonetheless helped the prosecution's case at the time
Speaker 1: of trial, and the other is the only independent witness
Speaker 1: who bravely came forward to tell the truth about Graves's
Speaker 1: motive and having seen him running from the restaurant with
Speaker 1: the gun. However, none of this info about these two
Speaker 1: witnesses was known to the defense at trial, but we'll
Speaker 1: get to that later. Now. Right now, let's focus on
Speaker 1: the dubious narrative coming from the Graves camp. So, the
Speaker 1: day after the murder, Charlie's brother, William Robertson told police
Speaker 1: a second hand story from Charlie that Charlie had said
Speaker 1: that Anthony had come by earlier the day of the
Speaker 1: murder and taken the shotgun out of the apartment. Then
Speaker 1: comes the narrative from Graves about the night of the murder. Okay, ready, so,
Speaker 1: According to Graves, Anthony dropped by the apartment around six
Speaker 1: pm and they had a few drinks. Anthony allegedly showed
Speaker 1: Graves a shotgun that he had in his trunk, a
Speaker 1: shotgun that Graves should have recognized as the one from
Speaker 1: his apartment. Now, at some point, Anthony and Graves are
Speaker 1: joined by Charlique's cousin, Derek Dallup and another younger friend,
Speaker 1: Louise Cologne. According to Graves, Anthony had a previous altercation
Speaker 1: with the victim, Lee run Chen, who worked at the
Speaker 1: Chinese restaurant down the block, Mr Hans. The reason behind
Speaker 1: this disagreement and the timing changed between initial interviews and trial.
Speaker 1: In this farcical version of events, Anthony allegedly had refused
Speaker 1: to pay for something that Mr Hings because it was
Speaker 1: either something he hadn't ordered, or some chicken was under cooked,
Speaker 1: or it didn't look right. You know, lying is tricky
Speaker 1: that way, right, It gets hard to keep track of
Speaker 1: your own bullshit. Anyway, At the time of this alleged
Speaker 1: problem and refusal of payment, Lee run Chen allegedly pulled
Speaker 1: a gun on Anthony, to which Anthony allegedly responded that
Speaker 1: he would get Chen for this. According to Graves that night,
Speaker 1: in the lead up to the murder, Anthony brought up
Speaker 1: this two to three weeks old and then later four
Speaker 1: to five month old beef several times and was getting
Speaker 1: heated up about it before they headed to Mr Hins,
Speaker 1: where Anthony was the one who allegedly shot Lee run Chen,
Speaker 1: not Graves, whose fiance had complained to him about Chen's
Speaker 1: inappropriate touching earlier that day. So this just super believable
Speaker 1: narrative is what became the prosecution's theory. It just feels
Speaker 1: liberated to here you retell that story because it sounded
Speaker 1: crazy to me, and from you saying how craze this
Speaker 1: ounds to you, that means a lot. Because I've always
Speaker 1: believed down the line that the truth was going to
Speaker 1: come out. I didn't know that I would be in
Speaker 1: prison twenty three years before the truth came out, and
Speaker 1: it's gonna be out there now finally for everyone to
Speaker 1: hear it. And Jonathan, there's even more to know about
Speaker 1: Graves's ridiculous narrative. The story against Anthony was not only ridiculous,
Speaker 1: but as he alluded to. It was so inconsistent. Graves
Speaker 1: first actually told police Anthony and Graves his other two
Speaker 1: friends had gone to the Chinese restaurant earlier on that
Speaker 1: evening and then come back and Anthony was heated about
Speaker 1: an argument with the victim. But Graves's two friends never
Speaker 1: said they went to the Chinese restaurant. It was just
Speaker 1: made up. So Graves had to change his story and
Speaker 1: say that he had witnessed an argument between Anthony and
Speaker 1: the victim months earlier over a food order, and that
Speaker 1: Anthony was still fuming about this months later, on the
Speaker 1: night of the murder. Again, Graves his friends right who
Speaker 1: were trying to back him up. They never said that
Speaker 1: Anthony had any beef with the victim or was fuming
Speaker 1: about it in the car that evening. So the story
Speaker 1: never really made sense. But what was important to police
Speaker 1: and prosecutors, unfortunately, was clear in the case. And once
Speaker 1: they had Graves and his two friends who were willing
Speaker 1: to point the finger at Anthony as a scapegoat, the
Speaker 1: train had left the station. Okay, so they've got their
Speaker 1: site set on you, Anthony, and initially they show up
Speaker 1: at your job, but you were out that day. This
Speaker 1: tipped you off though that they were at least looking
Speaker 1: to talk to you, and eventually you went involuntarily. I mean,
Speaker 1: you were an innocent man. So did you think, well,
Speaker 1: I'll just go in there, clear this up and head
Speaker 1: on home. I did, And a big key does me
Speaker 1: left out was there was a camera inside of that restaurant,
Speaker 1: So I thought regartless that somebody would at one point
Speaker 1: in time review to take and then I had nothing
Speaker 1: to worry about to take with cleary thing up for me.
Speaker 1: So yes, drove with myself to the precinct, and that's
Speaker 1: what sense knocked away. You never walked out of there again,
Speaker 1: never walked out. Now what happened with the videotape from
Speaker 1: the Chinese restaurant? They said that the tape wasn't recalling.
Speaker 1: Do you believe that? To be honest, I don't know
Speaker 1: what to believe anymore. I used to have a lot
Speaker 1: of faith in the judicial system, but from being a
Speaker 1: cross rate of mysell phone listening to some of the
Speaker 1: other horror stories from people in here with me, I
Speaker 1: don't know what to believe now. They had their man,
Speaker 1: and any other evidence that existed then were emerged later
Speaker 1: that suggested Anthony was innocent, where that Graves was guilty
Speaker 1: was just an inconvenience to the prosecution's case, and so
Speaker 1: it was not disclosed to the defense. And of course
Speaker 1: listeners to this show will know that when the authority's
Speaker 1: withhold exculpatory evidence, it's called the Brady violation. Brady violations
Speaker 1: are illegal, but as our listeners also know, Brady violations
Speaker 1: rarely seemed to be any actual ramifications for the people
Speaker 1: who commit them, so it just keeps fucking happening in
Speaker 1: case after case, and and in this case, I believe
Speaker 1: the worst Brady violation, the worst one amongst so many,
Speaker 1: is the sole independent witness who came forward in this
Speaker 1: case that I alluded to earlier, whose statement was hidden
Speaker 1: from the defense. Will refer to her only as Rachel.
Speaker 1: So Rachel was right outside the Chinese restaurant where the
Speaker 1: murder occurred, talking on a pay phone. This was an
Speaker 1: undisputed fact, and police spoke to her, and initially she
Speaker 1: said that she had heard the shot and seen people
Speaker 1: running from the Chinese restaurant, but she didn't have her
Speaker 1: contacts in and so she couldn't identify who those people were.
Speaker 1: That was what she said, Now, this was not a
Speaker 1: neighborhood where it was easy to report to police who
Speaker 1: you had seen involved in a murder, much less if
Speaker 1: that person was your neighbor. And actually Rachel, who was
Speaker 1: seventeen at the time, she was neighbors with Julius Graves. Now,
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks went by and Rachel had kept
Speaker 1: this information to herself, but her conscience was gnawing away
Speaker 1: at her. She learned that Anthony had been wrongfully arrested
Speaker 1: for the crime, and she actually received a call from
Speaker 1: Anthony's wife at the time, Keisha, who said to Rachel,
Speaker 1: I hear you were present at the scene and that
Speaker 1: you may have seen something. Please just talk to police,
Speaker 1: tell them what you saw, whatever you saw, Please just
Speaker 1: tell them the truth. Now. At around the same time,
Speaker 1: Rachel actually had an exchange with Graves and his fiance
Speaker 1: outside of their brown stone. During that exchange, Rachel said,
Speaker 1: I know what you did. I saw what you did.
Speaker 1: In truth, she had seen Julius Graves running from the
Speaker 1: Chinese restaurant with a shotgun right after the shot was fired,
Speaker 1: and she said, I know what you did, and you're
Speaker 1: trying to put it on somebody out us and Graves
Speaker 1: said you talked too much and if you keep talking,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna shut you up. And so she called police,
Speaker 1: spoke to a detective and she said, I saw Julius
Speaker 1: Graves running from the Chinese restaurant with a big, long gun.
Speaker 1: I know it was him. He's my neighbor. And the
Speaker 1: detective said, we already have another guy. It was the
Speaker 1: taller guy. Anthony is six three, Graves is five nine.
Speaker 1: Rachel said, no, I know, they look completely different. I
Speaker 1: know that it was Graves who was running with a shotgun.
Speaker 1: And the detective basically said, well, thank you for your
Speaker 1: time and hung up the phone. Shaw Lee had anticipated
Speaker 1: that Rachel good going to the police. So shaw Lee
Speaker 1: reports that as harassment. They had that report, but if
Speaker 1: I can complete that incredibly, even though Rachel lived next
Speaker 1: door to shaw Lee, they did not question Rachel at
Speaker 1: all about up that police report. They didn't have to
Speaker 1: go across the country to interview somebody or across the state, right,
Speaker 1: they go across the street, across the street. Somebody who
Speaker 1: who actually had begged to be interviewed, even though she
Speaker 1: had been threatened by a really dangerous guy, was like, no,
Speaker 1: I'm going to do the right thing, but instead she
Speaker 1: just got shut down by those who are supposed to
Speaker 1: protect us, which left Graves out on the streets to
Speaker 1: potentially commit more violent crimes while Anthony was stripped of
Speaker 1: his freedom and civil rights. So back to this investigation.
Speaker 1: If you want to call it that the grandmother of
Speaker 1: Graves's children, you know, Charlie's mom signs onto parents some
Speaker 1: of the narrative. This is Dorothy Bolding, whose story changed
Speaker 1: from her initial interview when she didn't mention Anthony Graves
Speaker 1: or even having been at Mr. Hings at all this interview.
Speaker 1: Critical information here was hidden from the defense, and by
Speaker 1: the time the grand jury and the trial roll around,
Speaker 1: she's changed her story, now claiming to be able to
Speaker 1: implicate Antony in the murder. But still the investigators needed
Speaker 1: to get someone outside of Graves's inner circle in order
Speaker 1: to strength in the case. And as I alluded to earlier,
Speaker 1: this is the only other witness besides Rachel who was
Speaker 1: not directly related to Graves. She was a single mom
Speaker 1: who certainly appears to have been coerced into giving an
Speaker 1: ambiguous statement that helped the prosecution's case a trial, and
Speaker 1: will refer to this witness as Salima now Shalima, as
Speaker 1: we have since learned, she initially told police that she,
Speaker 1: when visiting her friend's apartment across the street from the murder,
Speaker 1: had heard this loud bang, had looked out the window
Speaker 1: from a second floor on a dark night and had
Speaker 1: seen a couple of men ran out of the Chinese restaurant,
Speaker 1: but she couldn't describe them at all. She'd seemed that
Speaker 1: one of them appeared to be holding along done, but
Speaker 1: she couldn't make any sort of description, and they said, well,
Speaker 1: let's take you in and see if we can refresh
Speaker 1: your memory. They took her in, they separated her from
Speaker 1: her young child, and they interrogated her for hours and
Speaker 1: wouldn't tell her where her child was, which she kept asking,
Speaker 1: And then eventually they emerged with the report saying that
Speaker 1: she identified the taller man as being the one holding
Speaker 1: the gun, which was something that was clearly fed to
Speaker 1: her because she told police that she couldn't describe the
Speaker 1: men she had seen, including the person who was running
Speaker 1: with the gun. We first learned that in the past year.
Speaker 1: Shalima said, I don't know how I could have testified
Speaker 1: that I saw the taller man running with the shotgun.
Speaker 1: I couldn't have made a description, and that's what I
Speaker 1: told detectives. And their response was to take me in
Speaker 1: for basically a full day of interrogation, separated from my child,
Speaker 1: until they had pressured her to give them what they wanted. Right, So,
Speaker 1: now they finally had someone as shaky as this idea
Speaker 1: was to corroborate what the Graves camp was saying. So
Speaker 1: July second, they charged you, Anthony, with two counts and
Speaker 1: murder in the second degree intentional and depraved indifference, and
Speaker 1: one count of criminal possession of a weapon in the
Speaker 1: fourth degree, a weapon that you had never even held
Speaker 1: in your hand. And before a trial even began in April,
Speaker 1: Graves attempted to disappear. Graves didn't want to testify, He
Speaker 1: wanted to get himself off of the hook. But even
Speaker 1: he perhaps had some pangs of conscience about falsely implicating
Speaker 1: someone who had formerly been his friend, and so he
Speaker 1: went underground before the trial started. And he was on
Speaker 1: probation at the time, actually on a weapon's possession charge,
Speaker 1: and he hadn't been reporting to his probation officer for
Speaker 1: three years, and so the District Attorney's office actually initiated
Speaker 1: proceedings to revoke graves probation so he would be remanded
Speaker 1: to prison potentially. This one's really mystifying. I mean, do
Speaker 1: you have a guy who has a propensity to violence,
Speaker 1: who knows his way around with weapons, who was the
Speaker 1: possession of the gun, who had a previous weapons violation,
Speaker 1: and it's like, yeah, now we're just gonna ignore that.
Speaker 1: Julius was asked directly, have you reported to your probation
Speaker 1: officer often and regularly? He answered yes, when he hadn't
Speaker 1: reported for three years, and that's why was not corrected.
Speaker 1: And clearly the credibility of Graves was critical. We did
Speaker 1: not know that he had not reported till last year.
Speaker 1: So at trial, the state presented Salima, along with Graves's
Speaker 1: cadre of liars right Graves himself, of course, and his
Speaker 1: fiance's cousin Derek Dallap, his friend Louise Cologne, and the
Speaker 1: grandmother of Graves's two children, Dorothy Boulding. Now, bulding story
Speaker 1: changed twice. In her initial interview, she didn't mention seeing
Speaker 1: Graves Anthony or even having been at Mr Hins, and
Speaker 1: then at the grand jury she testified that while drinking
Speaker 1: outside of Mr Hains, she saw Anthony enter with a
Speaker 1: long gun and heard a shot fired before Graves entered
Speaker 1: the restaurant. Then at trial, I don't know, maybe she
Speaker 1: had some pangs of conscience Either way, though, she testified
Speaker 1: that she saw Anthony go in followed by Graves, then
Speaker 1: heard a gunshot but never saw a gun. Miss bolding
Speaker 1: for initial report would have really discredit her as a
Speaker 1: prosecution witness was not disclosed. Also not disclosed for bias
Speaker 1: given her relation to Julius Graves. Okay, so now there's Shelima.
Speaker 1: She also testified against you, Anthony. She said that on
Speaker 1: the night of the shooting, she was visiting a friend
Speaker 1: who lived on the second floor in an apartment across
Speaker 1: the street from Mr Hans. She said that she heard
Speaker 1: a gunshot and looked out the window to see two
Speaker 1: black men running from the restaurant, and that quote the
Speaker 1: tall the guy had a gun. This was helpful for
Speaker 1: the prosecution because Anthony was taller than Graves. Now, the
Speaker 1: prosecutor tried to get her to identify Anthony. You know,
Speaker 1: look around the courtroom. Is the person you saw running
Speaker 1: with the gun here? She said, I don't know. I
Speaker 1: can't say. And also she testified that of the two
Speaker 1: men she saw running, it was the person who was
Speaker 1: running second, who was behind, who was running with a shotgun.
Speaker 1: Graves testified that he was running second, that he was
Speaker 1: behind Anthony. So actually her testimony was very ambiguous, but
Speaker 1: it was really the only thing the prosecution had that
Speaker 1: came outside of Graves's inner circle, and as a result,
Speaker 1: the failure to disclose what Shlima had had told detectives
Speaker 1: from the beginning that she couldn't describe anything was a
Speaker 1: very damaging Brady violation for Anthony's defense. Was there any
Speaker 1: real defense mounted in your case, Anthony? No, we didn't
Speaker 1: even call any witnesses them of behalf, although I asked
Speaker 1: my lawyer, cannot testify and he said no, like he
Speaker 1: was really confident that there was no need for them
Speaker 1: because the case was a weak case and they eventually
Speaker 1: gave it to say, you know, Julias did or whatever,
Speaker 1: and that was that. So I didn't really have a defense. So,
Speaker 1: after hearing from Graves's network of liars and Salima's ambiguous testimony,
Speaker 1: and then importantly the absence of Rachel, did you still
Speaker 1: hold out any hope at all? That you'd be vindicated.
Speaker 1: I did only because it was It was a time
Speaker 1: during the deliberations what the jury came back into the
Speaker 1: courtroom and they passed to notice that they were deadlocked,
Speaker 1: and the just said, well, listen, I'm going to give
Speaker 1: you a brief out in charge. He was basically saying,
Speaker 1: I don't know what the problem is. It's not like
Speaker 1: he's facing the death. Unity, go give me a verdict.
Speaker 1: And they needed some reback, some courses and stuff. I
Speaker 1: was still hopeful, although hope was flipping away at that point,
Speaker 1: but they came back and found you guilty. What was
Speaker 1: that moment was that if you can just take us
Speaker 1: inside that core room and inside your mind and your soul.
Speaker 1: At that moment, uh, I was shocked, confused, I was hurt, devastated, nases.
Speaker 1: I mean I was angry. I remember trying to stand up,
Speaker 1: but I didn't have any feeling in my livings there
Speaker 1: just so weak. Ironically, what was going through my mind
Speaker 1: at that point was my son's because they were so young,
Speaker 1: and every night I would tell them crazy bedtime stories,
Speaker 1: either ones that I read from a book or I
Speaker 1: used to make up some stories, and they looked forward
Speaker 1: to going to sleep just about I could come in
Speaker 1: the room and telling them stories. And I said to myself,
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna be able to do that for a while.
Speaker 1: As you can imagine, for the first couple of years,
Speaker 1: I was very better. I was I was I was mad,
Speaker 1: I was angry, and I was almost like a walking
Speaker 1: Tommy so to speak. I mean, I was always trying
Speaker 1: to do programs and stuff and trying to help myself
Speaker 1: and help other people as well, but inside I was
Speaker 1: really messed up. And I remember going on a visit
Speaker 1: one day and my son, little Anthony Junior, which I
Speaker 1: loved to dollop both of mysels, he was crying. He
Speaker 1: just broke out one day crying on a visit and
Speaker 1: he said, Daddy, don't worry, I'm gonna I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: Julius to doing this to you, because he had known
Speaker 1: at that point julia Is as his uncle because we
Speaker 1: were so close. And I looked at him and I said, no, Anthony,
Speaker 1: don't ever say that again. I said, I don't ever
Speaker 1: say that. No, And I was very you let them
Speaker 1: know that the law will mentally prevailing there to work
Speaker 1: herself out, And in the same time he looked at
Speaker 1: me and he says, Lord and Daddy, you gotta promise
Speaker 1: me that you would never do anything to him. And
Speaker 1: I said, I won't. I promise you that. And it
Speaker 1: was that point with that I forgave to is and
Speaker 1: I continue to live my life as a life give them,
Speaker 1: but also trying to help any and everybody out because
Speaker 1: of his helping me as well. And that's that was
Speaker 1: my turnal point. That's when I forgave him. Forgot what
Speaker 1: it did. Well. It sounds like you you did a
Speaker 1: hell of a job even in the brief time you
Speaker 1: had with your son's raising them and teaching them right. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: prison has a way to divine families, as you can
Speaker 1: only imagine. So my son's mother, which is my wife
Speaker 1: of the town, her name is also Kisa. This prison
Speaker 1: bay became too much for us and it felt like
Speaker 1: I was holding back from living high life. So we
Speaker 1: both came to the agreement that we should just divorce
Speaker 1: semper Race so that she can live for life of
Speaker 1: this week. And God always has a way of making
Speaker 1: things happen. But my wife today which is Olfen named Kisa,
Speaker 1: it's my junior high school girlfriend. She was my Chilidher
Speaker 1: when I was a captain of the basketball team. So
Speaker 1: Jesus started to write me, and one thing turned into another.
Speaker 1: All of the old filings came back and we decided
Speaker 1: to try one more time to get married. And that
Speaker 1: was probably the best decision of my life. My name
Speaker 1: is Keisha Sins and I am Anthony sins wife, and
Speaker 1: it is it's the best decision that we've ever made
Speaker 1: that I've ever made. Anthony and I were, you know,
Speaker 1: junior high school sweethearts. You know, people in the situation
Speaker 1: always think that the people in prison, you know, they
Speaker 1: should be grateful that someone makes a hyper commitment to
Speaker 1: them under these circumstances. But for me, Anthony has brought
Speaker 1: just so much to my life. He hasn't reached my
Speaker 1: life so much. I'm grown so much as a person
Speaker 1: because of him. This situation in particular has made me stronger,
Speaker 1: and so I'm just grateful that he chose me to
Speaker 1: go on this journey with him and to fight for
Speaker 1: his innocence. One day, I was reading the newspaper from
Speaker 1: a friend of mine name Kevin Jenkins. He asked me
Speaker 1: to read this article because the articles involved the person
Speaker 1: that we both know rehave the Manu Cooper. Kevin suggested
Speaker 1: that I try to get in touch with Tom hoff
Speaker 1: and the lawyer that got this guy out. So I
Speaker 1: talked to my wife and she said that night it
Speaker 1: was awful her to sleep because she worked around a
Speaker 1: lot of lawyers. You can do that. She only had
Speaker 1: one shot at this and she was making little bullet point.
Speaker 1: She was rehearsing what she would say because you knew
Speaker 1: that it was really important to obtain Thomas Hoffer. She said.
Speaker 1: The first thing Tom wanted to know was was he
Speaker 1: any because he would not represent anybody who was not innocent.
Speaker 1: And Casa told, yes, he is, but I'm going to
Speaker 1: save you some information so that you can see it
Speaker 1: for yourself. At that point, I had all of Anthony's
Speaker 1: legal work because his son had kept all of his documentation,
Speaker 1: and he said, well, send me everything that you have.
Speaker 1: So I'm working from home. All I have is an
Speaker 1: Adobe scan app on my phone, which can only scan
Speaker 1: one page at a time. One of Anthony's transcripts is
Speaker 1: four hundred and some our pages. That's just only one transcript.
Speaker 1: And I did that for days, you know, trying to
Speaker 1: get all the information to him and he saw all
Speaker 1: of the discrepancies, you know, and all the violations and
Speaker 1: things that we had always seen. Tom knew that Anthony
Speaker 1: was innocent and it was just astounding evidence to support
Speaker 1: that at that Tom and kind of house doing my
Speaker 1: kids pro bono. It's an amazing story, I mean, a
Speaker 1: tale of two kishas and which eventually resulted in these
Speaker 1: two attorneys, which of course brings us to the post
Speaker 1: conviction that a gaistion. And it looks like before you
Speaker 1: both got involved, there were some filing surrounding an inappropriate
Speaker 1: remarked by the prosecutor, in effective assistant claims, trial court errors,
Speaker 1: discriminatory jury challenges, all of which were serious points but
Speaker 1: ultimately failed. There was some new evidence, a recantation of
Speaker 1: trial testimony from Graves. We know he was feeling remorseful
Speaker 1: for throwing Anthony under the bus, but he didn't want
Speaker 1: to come clean. So this affid David really is reflective
Speaker 1: of that, meaning he doesn't tell the whole truths. He
Speaker 1: basically says that Anthony went inside Mr Hans and he,
Speaker 1: Julius Graves, did not. He continued that he didn't see
Speaker 1: who shot Chen and was coerced to testify that he
Speaker 1: had seen Anthony do it, so it takes the onus
Speaker 1: off of Anthony, but it's definitely not the exonerating evidence
Speaker 1: that one would hope for as or the other filings
Speaker 1: in this case. Everything that sort of happened in those
Speaker 1: initial post trial proceedings was sort of skirmishes around secondary issues,
Speaker 1: which unfortunately is often the best you can do for
Speaker 1: a convicted person until you get it Tom Hoffman to
Speaker 1: fully reinvestigate the case like a detective. Right Without Tom,
Speaker 1: we wouldn't know the context around Shalima's testimony, which is
Speaker 1: what passed for a corroborating witness for Graves and his
Speaker 1: whole network of liars, and then the major Brady violation
Speaker 1: in hiding Rachel for all of these years. Remember, she
Speaker 1: witnessed Charlik and Graves talking about the inappropriate touching, which
Speaker 1: established the motive. She saw Graves running from Mr Hins
Speaker 1: with the gun. Then when she confronted Charlie and Graves,
Speaker 1: she was threatened, you talked too much. You keep talking,
Speaker 1: I'm going to shut you up. Was the quote. Not
Speaker 1: to even mention all of the previously unknown or ignored
Speaker 1: holes and shifts and Graves as narrative and finally, we
Speaker 1: haven't even talked about this yet, but there was a
Speaker 1: cook at Mr Hins who had a view of the
Speaker 1: shooter and described his complexion as quote not black. This
Speaker 1: is consistent with Graves is light brown skin, while Anthony
Speaker 1: importantly has a dark complexion. So, Tom, what is being
Speaker 1: done with all of the exculpatory evidence that you've compiled.
Speaker 1: The four forty was initially filed in December, and we
Speaker 1: attached Rachel's Affidavid Slima's statement. We also found this documentation
Speaker 1: that Graves had lied about reporting to his probation officer
Speaker 1: often and regularly. We also found additional Grady violation, and
Speaker 1: as the case was proceeding, we then get even more
Speaker 1: documents from Foil, including that Graves on the day of
Speaker 1: his testimony, received money, received housing together with his girlfriend,
Speaker 1: his girlfriend's brother, and the brother's girlfriend, and then he
Speaker 1: eventually gets twenty five thousand dollars in benefits. All this
Speaker 1: comes out, so we then amend our Titian. We also
Speaker 1: found out that Cologne had told one of his friends
Speaker 1: that it was his friend who committed to shoot it. Well,
Speaker 1: his friend was Julius Graves. That was only recently ascertained
Speaker 1: as with others, and I should say, look the current
Speaker 1: four forty a d s. In their response, they did
Speaker 1: not address any of our allegations. Did Julius Graves lie
Speaker 1: or did he not lie? Not addressed? They said you
Speaker 1: could have a hearing. Well, the hearing is gonna take
Speaker 1: quite a while, and Anthony should be home now. The
Speaker 1: evidence is overwhelming. The resistance on undoing a wrongful conviction
Speaker 1: is huge. Yeah, absolutely, it is even under normal circumstances.
Speaker 1: But here in Brooklyn there's been an even more obstinate
Speaker 1: than usual obstacle in this case. Anthony brought his case
Speaker 1: to the Brooklyn Conviction Review Unit in two thousand seventeen,
Speaker 1: and one would think that the good folks would take
Speaker 1: one look at Graves's bullshit and do something about it.
Speaker 1: But the man tasked with running the cru in Brooklyn
Speaker 1: since two thousand fourteen was Mark Hale, who just so
Speaker 1: happens to be the man who prosecuted Anthony's case. Huhm.
Speaker 1: But and this is a big butt. Mark Hale just
Speaker 1: retired at the beginning of July. So while this is
Speaker 1: good news for Anthony, there's still plenty of ways that
Speaker 1: this might not work. Out. Even when Mark Hale out
Speaker 1: of the way, Brooklyn, d a Erik and z Alice
Speaker 1: continued to oppose throwing out his wrongful conviction, knowing that
Speaker 1: Anthony only had two other options, his four or forty
Speaker 1: emotion in front of Judge Danny Chun, who had never
Speaker 1: granted a single four forty emotion in his lengthy career,
Speaker 1: or going in front of the Pearl board. Both were
Speaker 1: dubious avenues. So they went in front of this judge,
Speaker 1: and Julius Graves not only admitted to perjuring himself at trial,
Speaker 1: but also continued to say things that contradicted what he
Speaker 1: had previously said under oath. Meanwhile, Mark Hale also took
Speaker 1: the stand and claimed over and over again to have
Speaker 1: no memory of this case, Julius Graves or the egregious
Speaker 1: Brady violations. The motion is still pending. I mean, in
Speaker 1: the summer, Anthony was eligible for parole and the board
Speaker 1: was much more reasonable releasing him on his first try.
Speaker 1: So Anthony, welcome back. Thank you for having me again. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm sure your family, Kisha and everyone is just ecstatic
Speaker 1: to have you home. So tell me about your first
Speaker 1: moments on the outside with them. It was surreal. I
Speaker 1: can't believe it. December first, I was released. I walked
Speaker 1: through the doors. I put my different clothes on that
Speaker 1: my wife sent me, and I stood outside and I
Speaker 1: was met by Hood with his big hug and smiles
Speaker 1: of joy. And although I was outside, it didn't seem real.
Speaker 1: Nothing at that moment seemed to real. And we drove
Speaker 1: to a nearby dinah, and she just wanted to make
Speaker 1: sure that I had something good to eat for a change.
Speaker 1: I had sunny side up eggs has frown fried, and
Speaker 1: I had some toast, and we ate and we talked.
Speaker 1: He held my hand, I held us and I just
Speaker 1: tried to take it all in. I got to imagine
Speaker 1: that all of this has been amazing, but bitter sweet.
Speaker 1: I mean, you're finally free, but only after all of
Speaker 1: those years. Years you can't get back, and there must
Speaker 1: be a lot of mixed emotions, and it's got to
Speaker 1: just be a burning desire to just clear your name.
Speaker 1: That's the main thing. Because although I'm free, I'm still
Speaker 1: technically awarded the state. I'm on parole right now. I
Speaker 1: have to report a parole officer, so whenever I need
Speaker 1: to go somewhere, I have to call and get permission
Speaker 1: to go. I thank god that the parole officer that
Speaker 1: I was as handed to me is a cool parole officer.
Speaker 1: He's decent. You know, he does his job, but he's
Speaker 1: not one of those sticklers for just trying to mess
Speaker 1: with people, so he's fair. But yeah, I'm still I'm
Speaker 1: still awarded the state. So any thing that could happen,
Speaker 1: golf a bit, I get pulled over, somebody has a
Speaker 1: rough day because just don't be right back in it.
Speaker 1: So what are the plans going forward? Right now? It's
Speaker 1: a waiting game. It's not the more. We could do.
Speaker 1: Everything now rest in the hand of the judge. Any
Speaker 1: tongue which is optimistic and hopeful that you know he'll
Speaker 1: he'll do the right thing and exonerate me. If he
Speaker 1: does an Exonaret as did, then of course we're gonna
Speaker 1: put an appeal in. Well, you have all of our
Speaker 1: support in your quest to lay claim to your actual innocence,
Speaker 1: and with that we're going to go to closing arguments, where,
Speaker 1: first of all, I'm gonna thank you again, I mean
Speaker 1: just for being you, because you inspire the funk out
Speaker 1: of me. Honestly, I know you don't curse, but I do. Um.
Speaker 1: You inspire me to want to work harder and smarter
Speaker 1: and longer hours to help the other countless. A number
Speaker 1: of Anthony Sims is out there. And now I'm going
Speaker 1: to sit back in my chair, turn my mic off,
Speaker 1: and just listen to any closing thoughts that you may
Speaker 1: want to share. I'm I'm really excited that you're here.
Speaker 1: I'm really excited that you're free. So Jonathan and Thomas
Speaker 1: will go and then we're going to save you for last.
Speaker 1: I think it's important to look at the broader picture
Speaker 1: and how this injustice occurred, and it's because the system
Speaker 1: did not value the life of Anthony Simms, and it
Speaker 1: also did not value the life of the run chunt.
Speaker 1: What we're fighting to do is to make sure that
Speaker 1: justice is served for Anthony and also for the victim,
Speaker 1: for the truth to emerge, and every ounce of help
Speaker 1: we can get to ensure that happens is deeply appreciated,
Speaker 1: because the truth has been clear from the start that
Speaker 1: Julius Graves was the perpetrator of this awful crime, not
Speaker 1: Anthony Simms. So thank you again, Jason, thank you again
Speaker 1: for doing this. I believe you have had a hundred
Speaker 1: forty five podcasts of people who are wontfully convicted. I
Speaker 1: have listened to many. While the facts vary, the stories
Speaker 1: are all the same. A horrific crime is committed, drawing
Speaker 1: wide media and public attention. Perpetrators need to be taken
Speaker 1: off the street and held to account. However, the concern
Speaker 1: of the police and the prosecutors is not to find
Speaker 1: the actual perpetrator, but to give the public the perception
Speaker 1: that the case was solved. It did not matter whether
Speaker 1: the right person was brought to justice, as long as
Speaker 1: the conviction was secured and the public fear allayed. As
Speaker 1: Jonathan said, neither the victim nor the defendant's life is
Speaker 1: value as long as the case is worked. So to
Speaker 1: the public is not valued, as the police did not
Speaker 1: care whether the actual perpetrator remained loose and posed the
Speaker 1: danger to the public. Also common in order to win
Speaker 1: these cases, favorable evidence pointing away from defendants guilt is
Speaker 1: disregarded and, in contravention of the prosecutors constitutional duty, is
Speaker 1: hidden from the defender. Meanwhile, husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers,
Speaker 1: and sons and daughters are destroyed, all in the interests
Speaker 1: of winning at all courts. People ask me why do
Speaker 1: I do this? I now I'm giving it away. And
Speaker 1: my Holocaust survivor I was born in nineteen basically my family,
Speaker 1: extensive family was wiped out, and that Holocaust was caused
Speaker 1: by people remaining silent. Undo this horrific injustice, Anthony. I
Speaker 1: just want to say thank you again for all the supporters.
Speaker 1: Definitely to you for taking the time out to actually
Speaker 1: here our stories, to give us a platform and give
Speaker 1: me a platform to talk about these raw for convictions.
Speaker 1: Since I've been out, I've been doing a lot of
Speaker 1: things to try to bring awareness criminals justice. I've been
Speaker 1: very supportive and different venues to speaking engagements, and I
Speaker 1: will always try to lend a voice to the people
Speaker 1: who can't be heard. I just pray and hope that
Speaker 1: you know this nightmare is over with soon. I pray
Speaker 1: and hope that Danny Tune just does the right thing
Speaker 1: and go over the material and review everything and then
Speaker 1: exonerate me so that I could live my life. I
Speaker 1: know I'll never be able to get those years back.
Speaker 1: I know that I never be able to get the
Speaker 1: skall off me of prison. You know what I'm saying,
Speaker 1: but I just want to fresh start and I just
Speaker 1: pray for that opportunity. And again I thank you all
Speaker 1: for the support and everything, and of course I thank
Speaker 1: my beautiful wife because she's the truth, that's my better
Speaker 1: half right there. So thanks again, thank you for listening
Speaker 1: to Roble Conviction. I'd like to thank our production team
Speaker 1: Connor Hall, Jeff Clyburn and Kevin Artists, with research by
Speaker 1: Lyla Robinson. The music in this production was supplied by
Speaker 1: three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to
Speaker 1: follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction, on Facebook at
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction podcast, and on Twitter at wrong Conviction, as
Speaker 1: well as at Lava for Good. On all three platforms,
Speaker 1: you can also follow me on both TikTok and Instagram
Speaker 1: at It's Jason flam Ralevul Conviction is the production of
Speaker 1: Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number
Speaker 1: one