1
00:00:00,520 --> 00:00:04,680
Speaker 1: Washington, DC. A muggy summer day finally starts to cool

2
00:00:04,720 --> 00:00:10,320
Speaker 1: as night falls, street lights turn on, Crickets chirp, there's

3
00:00:10,360 --> 00:00:12,680
Speaker 1: the soft jingle of the tags on a dog collar.

4
00:00:13,640 --> 00:00:17,320
Speaker 1: A black poodle walks up someone's porch steps, sniffs around.

5
00:00:18,040 --> 00:00:20,400
Speaker 1: The dog leaps back down the stairs when its owner

6
00:00:20,440 --> 00:00:24,200
Speaker 1: calls its name. A few hours later, on those same

7
00:00:24,280 --> 00:00:27,520
Speaker 1: porch steps, the man who lives there slowly walks up,

8
00:00:27,920 --> 00:00:32,640
Speaker 1: and a masked figure walks up behind him. There's a gunshot.

9
00:00:33,080 --> 00:00:36,920
Speaker 1: Someone screams. The shooter makes a run for it, ripping

10
00:00:36,920 --> 00:00:39,960
Speaker 1: a stocking mask from his face. It lands on a

11
00:00:40,000 --> 00:00:43,320
Speaker 1: porch step as he disappears down the street into the night.

12
00:00:46,680 --> 00:00:49,120
Speaker 1: You live down the street from where the gunshot went off.

13
00:00:50,120 --> 00:00:52,839
Speaker 1: Three days later, you're hanging out with your girlfriend and

14
00:00:52,880 --> 00:00:57,480
Speaker 1: your mom's basement, sitting on the couch watching TV. Your

15
00:00:57,480 --> 00:01:01,880
Speaker 1: mom is upstairs cleaning up after dinner, and then there's

16
00:01:01,920 --> 00:01:06,160
Speaker 1: a knock at the door. You hear someone introduce themselves

17
00:01:06,160 --> 00:01:10,280
Speaker 1: as an officer, officer something or other, and damn it,

18
00:01:10,360 --> 00:01:13,800
Speaker 1: you think, and your teenage mind you figure he must

19
00:01:13,800 --> 00:01:15,679
Speaker 1: be there about the parking ticket you got a few

20
00:01:15,720 --> 00:01:18,880
Speaker 1: weeks ago and didn't pay yet. Your mom's going to

21
00:01:18,959 --> 00:01:24,240
Speaker 1: be pissed. You head upstairs, but they cuff you and

22
00:01:24,400 --> 00:01:28,240
Speaker 1: take you away. You're brought down to the station and

23
00:01:28,319 --> 00:01:30,840
Speaker 1: put in a cell, and they tell you that you'll

24
00:01:30,840 --> 00:01:35,000
Speaker 1: be tried for the murder of your neighbor. The next

25
00:01:35,080 --> 00:01:38,080
Speaker 1: day you're transferred to the county jail, and you're beginning

26
00:01:38,120 --> 00:01:41,280
Speaker 1: to absorb the shock of it all. The one thing

27
00:01:41,319 --> 00:01:43,679
Speaker 1: that you can't get past is the filth. It's just

28
00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:47,440
Speaker 1: terrible in there, everything from the bugs to the food,

29
00:01:47,640 --> 00:01:52,520
Speaker 1: to the living conditions, and the noise. The noise is unbearable.

30
00:01:52,960 --> 00:01:56,920
Speaker 1: You can hardly sleep. You begin to miss out on things.

31
00:01:57,320 --> 00:02:01,680
Speaker 1: Your family summer vacation comes and goes. Six months pass.

32
00:02:02,480 --> 00:02:06,040
Speaker 1: You would have had your ged by now. A year

33
00:02:06,080 --> 00:02:08,680
Speaker 1: slips by, and then a year turns into a year

34
00:02:08,680 --> 00:02:12,240
Speaker 1: and a half. Your nieces and nephews, the ones that

35
00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 1: you helped raise or growing up. You've spoken to them

36
00:02:15,600 --> 00:02:18,440
Speaker 1: a few times, but they haven't come to visit. Are

37
00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:22,120
Speaker 1: they thinking that their uncle may have done this? You

38
00:02:22,240 --> 00:02:24,200
Speaker 1: miss out on the final years of being a care

39
00:02:24,280 --> 00:02:30,320
Speaker 1: free teen. It seems as though everything's moving on without you. Finally,

40
00:02:30,960 --> 00:02:36,160
Speaker 1: after two agonizing years, your case goes to trial. You

41
00:02:36,240 --> 00:02:39,480
Speaker 1: want to get your life back. You didn't kill anyone.

42
00:02:40,200 --> 00:02:43,760
Speaker 1: You were in that same basement all night when someone

43
00:02:43,840 --> 00:02:46,640
Speaker 1: else climbed your neighbors steps and ended his life with

44
00:02:46,720 --> 00:02:53,120
Speaker 1: a single gunshot blast of the head. A few weeks ago,

45
00:02:53,160 --> 00:02:55,560
Speaker 1: an officer came to your cell and cut some of

46
00:02:55,600 --> 00:02:58,560
Speaker 1: your hair. Of course, you willingly let them take it

47
00:02:58,840 --> 00:03:03,200
Speaker 1: because you were sure help prove your innocence. As you

48
00:03:03,200 --> 00:03:06,160
Speaker 1: sit in the courtroom at your trial, the prosecutor says

49
00:03:06,200 --> 00:03:08,680
Speaker 1: that there was a nylon stocking mass found at the

50
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:11,960
Speaker 1: scene of the crime. An FBI agent takes the stand

51
00:03:12,000 --> 00:03:15,640
Speaker 1: for the prosecution and tells the jury, I compare the

52
00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:19,520
Speaker 1: defendant's hair to the thirteen hairs found on the mask.

53
00:03:20,120 --> 00:03:23,000
Speaker 1: This agent tells the jury that the defendant's hair is

54
00:03:23,080 --> 00:03:28,840
Speaker 1: indistinguishable from one of those thirteen hairs. The prosecutor says,

55
00:03:29,480 --> 00:03:33,919
Speaker 1: there's one chance, perhaps for all we know in ten million,

56
00:03:34,320 --> 00:03:38,080
Speaker 1: that it could be someone else's hair. This single hair

57
00:03:38,160 --> 00:03:43,160
Speaker 1: proves critical because it's the only physical evidence that ties

58
00:03:43,240 --> 00:03:48,400
Speaker 1: you to the homicide. You're told the jury's reached a verdict.

59
00:03:48,760 --> 00:03:51,160
Speaker 1: That shuffle back into the courtroom, and none of them

60
00:03:51,160 --> 00:03:54,800
Speaker 1: will look at you when you hear the word guilty.

61
00:03:55,080 --> 00:04:00,480
Speaker 1: There's the sudden eruption of uncontrolled sobbing, the turning on

62
00:04:00,560 --> 00:04:04,720
Speaker 1: of a spigot. There's the unraveling of your mother in Wales.

63
00:04:04,960 --> 00:04:08,720
Speaker 1: Not my baby, my baby didn't do it. Your aunts

64
00:04:08,720 --> 00:04:12,080
Speaker 1: are crying, your relatives are trying to console each other.

65
00:04:12,400 --> 00:04:16,640
Speaker 1: There's just a medley of weeping and misery. You feel

66
00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:19,120
Speaker 1: like you're going to pass out. The room is sideways,

67
00:04:19,160 --> 00:04:22,320
Speaker 1: and then it's upside down, and then you're all white.

68
00:04:23,200 --> 00:04:27,839
Speaker 1: All you can hear, all you can see. Everything turns white,

69
00:04:28,040 --> 00:04:32,599
Speaker 1: and you go numb. You're sentenced to twenty years to

70
00:04:32,680 --> 00:04:37,599
Speaker 1: life and stay prison, and then there is nothing. Everything

71
00:04:38,160 --> 00:04:45,240
Speaker 1: goes blank. You do everything you can to prove your innocence.

72
00:04:46,000 --> 00:04:49,880
Speaker 1: You write letters, study the law. Your father comes to

73
00:04:49,960 --> 00:04:53,320
Speaker 1: visit you just about every single Saturday. But he dies

74
00:04:53,440 --> 00:04:57,120
Speaker 1: four years after your arrest. Your mom dies two years

75
00:04:57,120 --> 00:05:00,120
Speaker 1: after that, and you can't go to either of their funerals.

76
00:05:00,839 --> 00:05:04,039
Speaker 1: You can't help but to think, did this kill them?

77
00:05:04,440 --> 00:05:09,479
Speaker 1: My wrongful conviction. You sit in your cell, numb most days,

78
00:05:09,839 --> 00:05:12,520
Speaker 1: and you try to recall little things that will bring

79
00:05:12,600 --> 00:05:18,600
Speaker 1: some comfort. To smell your mother's cooking, sitting around playing cards,

80
00:05:18,600 --> 00:05:22,520
Speaker 1: with your friends, holding hands with your girlfriend, and your

81
00:05:22,520 --> 00:05:27,600
Speaker 1: mother's basement watching TV. You live a lifetime in that prison,

82
00:05:28,560 --> 00:05:33,080
Speaker 1: thirty three long years. It takes all of that time

83
00:05:33,320 --> 00:05:36,440
Speaker 1: for the district attorney to finally agree to test the

84
00:05:36,560 --> 00:05:39,920
Speaker 1: DNA contained in the hair that was found on that

85
00:05:40,040 --> 00:05:42,920
Speaker 1: stocking mask that dropped to the steps of that porch.

86
00:05:43,920 --> 00:05:46,800
Speaker 1: It turns out the way you knew it would. Your

87
00:05:46,880 --> 00:05:51,080
Speaker 1: DNA does not match any of those thirteen hairs. But

88
00:05:51,160 --> 00:05:53,960
Speaker 1: they do figure out who one of the hairs belongs to,

89
00:05:54,360 --> 00:05:58,440
Speaker 1: and it's not a person. Turns out that one of

90
00:05:58,440 --> 00:06:01,559
Speaker 1: the hairs they found on that stock mask and argued

91
00:06:01,640 --> 00:06:04,919
Speaker 1: that the jury was a human hair belonged to that poodle.

92
00:06:06,320 --> 00:06:09,040
Speaker 1: When you re enter the world, they say you're free,

93
00:06:09,279 --> 00:06:12,240
Speaker 1: but are you really. You went in as an eighteen

94
00:06:12,320 --> 00:06:15,240
Speaker 1: year old boy and came out a fifty one year

95
00:06:15,240 --> 00:06:19,799
Speaker 1: old man, and you've aged beyond your years. You're fighting

96
00:06:19,800 --> 00:06:22,720
Speaker 1: an illness caused by the burden of carrying around your

97
00:06:22,720 --> 00:06:27,039
Speaker 1: innocence for your entire adult life. You die at the

98
00:06:27,040 --> 00:06:30,359
Speaker 1: age of fifty nine, enjoying only eight free years with

99
00:06:30,440 --> 00:06:34,599
Speaker 1: what's left of your family. But your death, your suffering

100
00:06:34,920 --> 00:06:39,400
Speaker 1: is not in vain. After you were found to be innocent,

101
00:06:39,800 --> 00:06:43,919
Speaker 1: the FBI starts to re examine over three thousand cases

102
00:06:43,960 --> 00:06:48,200
Speaker 1: where similar evidence was used. They're looking for other people, who,

103
00:06:48,360 --> 00:06:52,159
Speaker 1: like you, were wrongfully convicted of crimes they didn't commit,

104
00:06:52,920 --> 00:06:56,560
Speaker 1: people whose lives were destroyed by the junk science of

105
00:06:56,720 --> 00:07:05,120
Speaker 1: hair comparison analysis. The story you just heard is based

106
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:09,479
Speaker 1: on true events of Sante Trebble's life. He was wrongfully

107
00:07:09,520 --> 00:07:13,840
Speaker 1: convicted in nineteen seventy eight and exonerated in twenty twelve.

108
00:07:14,520 --> 00:07:19,640
Speaker 1: He passed away in July of twenty twenty. This episode

109
00:07:19,960 --> 00:07:28,040
Speaker 1: is dedicated to him. I'm Josh duban civil rights and

110
00:07:28,080 --> 00:07:32,000
Speaker 1: criminal defense attorney and Innocent ambassador to the Innocence Project

111
00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:35,920
Speaker 1: in New York. Even when examined under a microscope, the

112
00:07:36,040 --> 00:07:39,600
Speaker 1: similarities that can be observed between two hairs are open

113
00:07:39,680 --> 00:07:43,120
Speaker 1: to a wide interpretation. In other words, there are no

114
00:07:43,320 --> 00:07:48,080
Speaker 1: definitive traits that can prove with any scientific certainty that

115
00:07:48,160 --> 00:07:51,920
Speaker 1: a suspect's hair matches a hair found at a crime scene.

116
00:07:52,600 --> 00:07:56,200
Speaker 1: Yet hair comparison analysis was still being used to falsely

117
00:07:56,280 --> 00:08:00,120
Speaker 1: identify and convict innocent people up until the year two

118
00:08:00,120 --> 00:08:04,720
Speaker 1: thousand and Today, there are still people who are incarcerated

119
00:08:04,760 --> 00:08:09,120
Speaker 1: that were convicted based on this false evidence. So how

120
00:08:09,160 --> 00:08:12,320
Speaker 1: did this evidence get admitted into courts in the first place.

121
00:08:13,080 --> 00:08:17,520
Speaker 1: Turns out, hair my Crosscoby was born in the eighteen hundreds,

122
00:08:17,840 --> 00:08:20,880
Speaker 1: and the methods used to analyze and compare human hairs

123
00:08:21,280 --> 00:08:33,800
Speaker 1: haven't changed much since. In eighteen sixty nine, a man

124
00:08:33,880 --> 00:08:36,920
Speaker 1: named John Dorsey was accused of killing his wife by

125
00:08:36,960 --> 00:08:38,760
Speaker 1: beating her over the head with a club in his

126
00:08:38,800 --> 00:08:44,080
Speaker 1: own yard in Massachusetts. During the trial, two men claimed

127
00:08:44,080 --> 00:08:47,000
Speaker 1: that they had seen hairs attached to the alleged murder weapon,

128
00:08:47,520 --> 00:08:50,920
Speaker 1: and that the hair appeared to be brunette human hair

129
00:08:51,720 --> 00:08:55,640
Speaker 1: that was the color of mister Dorsey's wife's hair. Mister

130
00:08:55,760 --> 00:08:59,280
Speaker 1: Dorsey was shocked his wife was brunette, but so were

131
00:08:59,320 --> 00:09:03,200
Speaker 1: as horses. According to mister Dorsey, the club wasn't a

132
00:09:03,280 --> 00:09:06,040
Speaker 1: murder weapon, it was just one of many pieces of

133
00:09:06,080 --> 00:09:09,400
Speaker 1: wood that was set out by the horse stables. The

134
00:09:09,480 --> 00:09:12,360
Speaker 1: hair and the clubs didn't belong to his wife, but

135
00:09:12,520 --> 00:09:15,000
Speaker 1: was a hair that had fallen from his horse's tail.

136
00:09:16,200 --> 00:09:18,880
Speaker 1: But the court ruled that mister Dorsey couldn't present this

137
00:09:18,960 --> 00:09:23,480
Speaker 1: account about the horse hair. Meanwhile, the testimony from the

138
00:09:23,520 --> 00:09:27,640
Speaker 1: men claiming that the hair was mister Dorsey's wife's was permitted.

139
00:09:29,000 --> 00:09:33,320
Speaker 1: Mister Dorsey was eventually convicted of killing his wife. This

140
00:09:33,480 --> 00:09:36,760
Speaker 1: was the first time a coord admitted hair comparison analysis

141
00:09:36,760 --> 00:09:40,439
Speaker 1: as evidence in our legal system, and it definitely wouldn't

142
00:09:40,440 --> 00:09:44,480
Speaker 1: be the last. Over a century later, animal hair and

143
00:09:44,559 --> 00:09:47,800
Speaker 1: human hair would again be an issue in the Sante

144
00:09:47,880 --> 00:09:48,600
Speaker 1: triple case.

145
00:09:53,600 --> 00:09:57,800
Speaker 2: That case was just an example of the overconfidence in

146
00:09:57,960 --> 00:10:02,200
Speaker 2: overreaching and what it could do to different individuals. The

147
00:10:02,320 --> 00:10:05,840
Speaker 2: idea that not only could they be wrong about linking

148
00:10:05,880 --> 00:10:08,600
Speaker 2: a hare to a person, which they can because you

149
00:10:08,640 --> 00:10:11,120
Speaker 2: can't do that at all, but that they can't even

150
00:10:11,200 --> 00:10:15,000
Speaker 2: identify what is human here and what isn't. Not only

151
00:10:15,040 --> 00:10:18,760
Speaker 2: did it occur in that case, but it continued to

152
00:10:18,880 --> 00:10:26,000
Speaker 2: occur unchecked. That was just outrageous, all right.

153
00:10:26,040 --> 00:10:29,319
Speaker 1: So joining us today is Vanessa Antone and Vanessa is

154
00:10:29,320 --> 00:10:33,120
Speaker 1: a member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

155
00:10:33,120 --> 00:10:35,440
Speaker 1: I think will refer to them as the NACDL, And

156
00:10:35,480 --> 00:10:39,120
Speaker 1: this is just a wonderful, wonderful group. I'm a member

157
00:10:39,160 --> 00:10:45,439
Speaker 1: of the NACDL, and it is a policy and advocacy

158
00:10:45,559 --> 00:10:50,679
Speaker 1: organization that really is on the ground working for reforms

159
00:10:50,679 --> 00:10:53,480
Speaker 1: and improvements in the criminal justice system. You're going to

160
00:10:53,600 --> 00:10:58,120
Speaker 1: learn about a really remarkable project that they have been

161
00:10:58,160 --> 00:11:01,720
Speaker 1: involved in with the FBI, and Vanessa is a key

162
00:11:01,840 --> 00:11:05,480
Speaker 1: member of this project. And what they are doing is

163
00:11:05,559 --> 00:11:10,559
Speaker 1: reading hundreds of transcripts from old cases and cases where

164
00:11:11,120 --> 00:11:16,080
Speaker 1: defendants and the accused were convicted and in many cases

165
00:11:16,120 --> 00:11:21,360
Speaker 1: wrongfully convicted based on hair comparison analysis. So to start, Vanessa,

166
00:11:21,480 --> 00:11:26,400
Speaker 1: hair comparison analysis is also called hair microscopy, and we'll

167
00:11:26,520 --> 00:11:29,840
Speaker 1: use these terms interchangeably, but tell us a little bit

168
00:11:29,880 --> 00:11:34,600
Speaker 1: about what hair microscopy or hair comparison analysis is exactly.

169
00:11:35,720 --> 00:11:39,880
Speaker 2: It's looking at hair under a microscope, as you would

170
00:11:39,920 --> 00:11:44,920
Speaker 2: think from the title. But what a well trained hair

171
00:11:45,240 --> 00:11:49,079
Speaker 2: examiner was supposed to be able to do is look

172
00:11:49,120 --> 00:11:53,720
Speaker 2: at different characteristics and hair and try to make an

173
00:11:53,760 --> 00:11:58,120
Speaker 2: association from those characteristics. They look at characteristics like the

174
00:11:58,160 --> 00:12:02,520
Speaker 2: color and the thickness, whether it looks wavy, if it

175
00:12:02,600 --> 00:12:05,640
Speaker 2: has what they call scales on the cuticle, whether it's

176
00:12:05,679 --> 00:12:09,080
Speaker 2: smooth or ragged. They also look at the part of

177
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:12,520
Speaker 2: the hair that's the medula, which is the middle of

178
00:12:12,600 --> 00:12:16,360
Speaker 2: the hair, and they look at the shape of that,

179
00:12:16,840 --> 00:12:21,000
Speaker 2: the thickness, the color. They also look at the cortex,

180
00:12:21,240 --> 00:12:23,840
Speaker 2: which is the main part of the hair, and that

181
00:12:24,040 --> 00:12:27,400
Speaker 2: gives the hair characteristics like the pigment. And when they

182
00:12:27,440 --> 00:12:31,320
Speaker 2: do the examination, they make note of all these characteristics

183
00:12:31,520 --> 00:12:34,079
Speaker 2: in like a known sample of hair, and then they

184
00:12:34,080 --> 00:12:36,560
Speaker 2: seek to compare that to the evidentiary hair.

185
00:12:37,040 --> 00:12:40,640
Speaker 1: So it sounds scientific, I guess in a way. The

186
00:12:40,720 --> 00:12:46,040
Speaker 1: examiner takes some hair from the suspect's head and they

187
00:12:46,080 --> 00:12:49,240
Speaker 1: know where that's coming from because it's the person that's

188
00:12:49,240 --> 00:12:51,560
Speaker 1: accused of the crime right in front of them, sitting

189
00:12:51,600 --> 00:12:54,480
Speaker 1: in a jail cell. So they take that hair and

190
00:12:54,760 --> 00:12:57,560
Speaker 1: put it in a little bag and label it, and

191
00:12:58,040 --> 00:13:01,400
Speaker 1: they take that hair sample compare it to what you

192
00:13:01,520 --> 00:13:04,760
Speaker 1: refer to as the evidentiary hair or the unknown sample

193
00:13:04,840 --> 00:13:07,640
Speaker 1: that was found at the scene of a crime. And

194
00:13:08,160 --> 00:13:11,200
Speaker 1: so they're looking at characteristics of the hair found at

195
00:13:11,200 --> 00:13:14,520
Speaker 1: the crime scene and then seeing if the person that

196
00:13:14,559 --> 00:13:19,280
Speaker 1: they claim committed this crime has hair that matches these characteristics.

197
00:13:19,320 --> 00:13:23,320
Speaker 1: But the problem seems to be that there are so

198
00:13:23,440 --> 00:13:28,760
Speaker 1: many different characteristics and variables and hair that matching one

199
00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:33,480
Speaker 1: hair to another, and you know, doing that to try

200
00:13:33,480 --> 00:13:35,800
Speaker 1: to find out whether it came from the same person

201
00:13:35,920 --> 00:13:38,359
Speaker 1: isn't as easy as some might think.

202
00:13:39,280 --> 00:13:43,679
Speaker 2: And reading all of these transcripts from hair examiners, you know,

203
00:13:43,880 --> 00:13:48,720
Speaker 2: throughout decades until two thousand, they would tell you that

204
00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:52,040
Speaker 2: there's a range, even in a person's own head of hair.

205
00:13:52,559 --> 00:13:54,400
Speaker 3: They don't all look identical.

206
00:13:54,840 --> 00:13:56,920
Speaker 1: So where does hair my cross could be really run

207
00:13:56,960 --> 00:13:59,280
Speaker 1: into trouble? Why isn't it reliable?

208
00:14:00,360 --> 00:14:07,080
Speaker 2: Microscopic hair comparison doesn't rely on a chemical analysis or

209
00:14:07,200 --> 00:14:12,520
Speaker 2: a set of concrete standards to associate or to make

210
00:14:12,559 --> 00:14:15,559
Speaker 2: a comparison. It's what is known as a pattern and

211
00:14:15,640 --> 00:14:21,160
Speaker 2: matching discipline. So it's basically eyeballing it. It's a subjective

212
00:14:21,400 --> 00:14:24,520
Speaker 2: forensic discipline. In fact, in the words of one of

213
00:14:24,560 --> 00:14:28,480
Speaker 2: the FBI hair examiners, it's the most subjective of the

214
00:14:28,520 --> 00:14:34,760
Speaker 2: forensic disciplines. As another microscopic hair examiner said, you just

215
00:14:35,120 --> 00:14:38,040
Speaker 2: you know, sometimes you get a feeling about a hair

216
00:14:38,120 --> 00:14:40,240
Speaker 2: and you know, it just bowls you over and you

217
00:14:40,320 --> 00:14:42,840
Speaker 2: just look at it. And so that's why there won't

218
00:14:42,880 --> 00:14:45,280
Speaker 2: be a database. You can't make a database of that

219
00:14:45,400 --> 00:14:47,560
Speaker 2: type of subjective feeling about hair.

220
00:14:47,920 --> 00:14:49,600
Speaker 1: Yeah, I get it. I mean you could make a

221
00:14:49,680 --> 00:14:54,000
Speaker 1: database of people's subjective feelings about hair, but it's not

222
00:14:54,080 --> 00:14:57,040
Speaker 1: going to tell you very much, But it really begs

223
00:14:57,040 --> 00:15:01,200
Speaker 1: the question why were prosecutors using this to try to

224
00:15:01,240 --> 00:15:06,600
Speaker 1: get convictions. If it's so subjective and so speculative, why

225
00:15:06,640 --> 00:15:08,840
Speaker 1: were they using it at all.

226
00:15:08,880 --> 00:15:13,280
Speaker 2: Generally, they would start out operating on the transfer principle

227
00:15:13,640 --> 00:15:16,880
Speaker 2: that if your hair falls out and you are in

228
00:15:16,960 --> 00:15:20,640
Speaker 2: a location or you're near someone, hair can transfer to

229
00:15:20,760 --> 00:15:24,040
Speaker 2: another person or to the place that you're in close

230
00:15:24,080 --> 00:15:29,440
Speaker 2: proximity to, So it could give evidence of someone's presence

231
00:15:29,440 --> 00:15:32,560
Speaker 2: in a certain location or with a certain person. When

232
00:15:32,560 --> 00:15:35,480
Speaker 2: that is one of the few pieces of evidence you have,

233
00:15:35,600 --> 00:15:40,560
Speaker 2: obviously you want to pursue that. And a lot of

234
00:15:40,640 --> 00:15:43,360
Speaker 2: these cases, not all, but a lot of them were

235
00:15:43,400 --> 00:15:48,720
Speaker 2: in pre DNA times, so this would be very powerful

236
00:15:48,760 --> 00:15:51,640
Speaker 2: evidence when you can't just DNA test something.

237
00:15:51,960 --> 00:15:53,480
Speaker 3: So what you had is the hair.

238
00:15:53,960 --> 00:15:58,000
Speaker 1: But DNA testing could come out in the nineties, So

239
00:15:58,120 --> 00:16:02,160
Speaker 1: why wasn't it being used on hair evidence? Why were

240
00:16:02,680 --> 00:16:06,800
Speaker 1: prosecutors still an FBI examiners for that matter, still using

241
00:16:06,840 --> 00:16:08,560
Speaker 1: this hair comparison analysis.

242
00:16:09,480 --> 00:16:13,920
Speaker 2: When we think of DNA testing, that's nuclear DNA testing.

243
00:16:14,120 --> 00:16:17,880
Speaker 2: And the problem with hair and why this happened was

244
00:16:17,960 --> 00:16:21,400
Speaker 2: because unless there was tissue at the root of the hair,

245
00:16:21,800 --> 00:16:23,800
Speaker 2: Like if you yank your hair out and it may

246
00:16:23,920 --> 00:16:26,520
Speaker 2: or may not have some tissue at the root. Unless

247
00:16:26,520 --> 00:16:30,200
Speaker 2: there was tissue there that could be tested with nuclear DNA,

248
00:16:30,560 --> 00:16:33,160
Speaker 2: you couldn't do a DNA test on hair. All you

249
00:16:33,200 --> 00:16:38,560
Speaker 2: could do is eyeball it under a microscope until mitochondrial DNA,

250
00:16:38,880 --> 00:16:42,600
Speaker 2: you know, different type of DNA testing allowed testing of

251
00:16:42,680 --> 00:16:46,200
Speaker 2: the hair shaft to give a result. So in all

252
00:16:46,280 --> 00:16:51,960
Speaker 2: those decades that was not there, that technology wasn't being used,

253
00:16:52,000 --> 00:16:55,960
Speaker 2: and it wasn't until around two thousand that even you know,

254
00:16:56,120 --> 00:16:59,880
Speaker 2: the FBI lab started using that in all the cases,

255
00:17:00,080 --> 00:17:03,240
Speaker 2: and that is when they could actually look at the

256
00:17:03,320 --> 00:17:08,680
Speaker 2: hair and say conclusively, no, it wasn't from this individual.

257
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,160
Speaker 1: I want to talk about three cases that all occurred

258
00:17:21,160 --> 00:17:25,280
Speaker 1: around the Washington, DC area. One was Sante Tribble, who

259
00:17:25,320 --> 00:17:28,320
Speaker 1: we mentioned earlier, where a dog hare was mistaken for

260
00:17:28,359 --> 00:17:31,840
Speaker 1: a human air. Now, another case was the case of

261
00:17:31,920 --> 00:17:36,119
Speaker 1: Donald Eugene Gates, and Donald Gates was accused of raping

262
00:17:36,160 --> 00:17:39,680
Speaker 1: and killing a girl in a park. Now, during his trial,

263
00:17:39,960 --> 00:17:45,000
Speaker 1: an FBI special agent testified that Donald's hair was quote

264
00:17:45,280 --> 00:17:51,000
Speaker 1: microscopically indistinguishable end quote from hairs found on the victim's body,

265
00:17:52,000 --> 00:17:55,399
Speaker 1: and based on that that the hair from the crime

266
00:17:55,440 --> 00:17:59,600
Speaker 1: scene probably belonged to Donald Gates. And so Donald was

267
00:17:59,640 --> 00:18:03,000
Speaker 1: convicted and sentenced to twenty years to life in prison.

268
00:18:04,040 --> 00:18:07,600
Speaker 1: And then there's yet a third case, and that is

269
00:18:07,640 --> 00:18:10,159
Speaker 1: the case of an eighteen year old named kirk Odom.

270
00:18:10,280 --> 00:18:14,400
Speaker 1: Now this one was, you know, another sort of mind

271
00:18:14,440 --> 00:18:19,320
Speaker 1: bending example of this junk science being applied, because here

272
00:18:19,400 --> 00:18:22,320
Speaker 1: you have mister Odom just walking down the street one day.

273
00:18:23,040 --> 00:18:25,760
Speaker 1: He's on his way to go see his infant daughter

274
00:18:25,880 --> 00:18:28,680
Speaker 1: at his house, and a cop stops him on the

275
00:18:28,720 --> 00:18:30,680
Speaker 1: street and says, you know, you look like the guy

276
00:18:30,800 --> 00:18:33,679
Speaker 1: in this picture. And the picture was a sketch that

277
00:18:33,800 --> 00:18:37,119
Speaker 1: had been drawn based on a description given by a

278
00:18:37,160 --> 00:18:41,560
Speaker 1: woman that had been attacked, blindfolded and raped by a

279
00:18:41,600 --> 00:18:44,960
Speaker 1: stranger with a gun. And the victim only got a

280
00:18:44,960 --> 00:18:48,600
Speaker 1: brief look at her attacker, but the officers drew the

281
00:18:48,680 --> 00:18:52,560
Speaker 1: sketch based on what she described, which was basically a

282
00:18:52,560 --> 00:18:57,800
Speaker 1: young black man. Based on that, the officer arrests kirk Odem.

283
00:18:58,359 --> 00:19:02,639
Speaker 1: And you have another example of an FBI agent testifying

284
00:19:03,080 --> 00:19:06,000
Speaker 1: at a trial. And here the agent gets on the

285
00:19:06,040 --> 00:19:11,879
Speaker 1: stand and says, kirk Odom's hair matches essentially hair found

286
00:19:11,880 --> 00:19:14,760
Speaker 1: on the victim's nightgown, and they use the same sort

287
00:19:14,800 --> 00:19:19,080
Speaker 1: of language that is indistinguishable from Kirk's hair. Kirk spent

288
00:19:19,200 --> 00:19:23,399
Speaker 1: over twenty two years in prison. So what happens next

289
00:19:23,440 --> 00:19:28,280
Speaker 1: is mitochondrial DNA testing finally becomes available, right, that's the

290
00:19:28,359 --> 00:19:32,919
Speaker 1: DNA testing of hair. And all three of these men's

291
00:19:33,040 --> 00:19:37,040
Speaker 1: hair was tested, and what do you know, none of

292
00:19:37,080 --> 00:19:40,000
Speaker 1: their DNA matched any of the hairs that were found

293
00:19:40,040 --> 00:19:42,800
Speaker 1: at the scenes of these crimes. And at this point,

294
00:19:42,800 --> 00:19:46,719
Speaker 1: the FBI couldn't hide behind this anymore. So tell us, Vanessa,

295
00:19:46,800 --> 00:19:47,679
Speaker 1: what happens next.

296
00:19:48,760 --> 00:19:52,240
Speaker 2: Well, I was lucky enough to be working with ANACDL

297
00:19:52,520 --> 00:19:59,800
Speaker 2: when NACDL joined in work in a partnership with the FBI,

298
00:20:00,080 --> 00:20:03,920
Speaker 2: the Department of Justice, and the Innocence Project to conduct

299
00:20:03,960 --> 00:20:07,800
Speaker 2: a review of the FBI Hair Examiner's cases from you know,

300
00:20:07,960 --> 00:20:10,840
Speaker 2: whenever they started, when the earliest we could find up

301
00:20:10,880 --> 00:20:15,119
Speaker 2: to about two thousand and that came about for a

302
00:20:15,200 --> 00:20:19,199
Speaker 2: couple reasons, one of which was the National Academy of

303
00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:23,800
Speaker 2: Sciences Report on Strengthening Forensic Science, which looked at patterned

304
00:20:23,800 --> 00:20:28,600
Speaker 2: and matching disciplines, including specifically hair comparison and said, you know,

305
00:20:28,640 --> 00:20:31,760
Speaker 2: it just doesn't have a sufficient foundation to be used

306
00:20:32,040 --> 00:20:33,920
Speaker 2: for identifying people.

307
00:20:34,560 --> 00:20:37,720
Speaker 1: So the NACDL is working with the FBI, and you

308
00:20:37,880 --> 00:20:41,119
Speaker 1: start going through all of these old cases. You're reading

309
00:20:41,160 --> 00:20:44,199
Speaker 1: the transcripts, and these are trials where hair evidence was

310
00:20:44,359 --> 00:20:47,800
Speaker 1: used to get a conviction. So what did you find.

311
00:20:48,800 --> 00:20:53,080
Speaker 2: Part of the frustration that the lawyers had and that

312
00:20:53,560 --> 00:20:56,679
Speaker 2: we all had reading these transcripts back to back was

313
00:20:56,720 --> 00:21:01,440
Speaker 2: the continued nature of the same states that were unscientific,

314
00:21:01,920 --> 00:21:05,000
Speaker 2: and so we called them error type one, two, and three.

315
00:21:05,840 --> 00:21:11,120
Speaker 2: And in Layman's terms, air type one is basically where

316
00:21:11,119 --> 00:21:15,040
Speaker 2: they're making a one to one association between a person

317
00:21:15,200 --> 00:21:18,760
Speaker 2: and a hair, which can never be done with microscopic

318
00:21:18,800 --> 00:21:23,040
Speaker 2: hare comparison. So that's when an examiner either states or

319
00:21:23,119 --> 00:21:27,520
Speaker 2: implies that the evidentiary hair can be associated to a

320
00:21:27,600 --> 00:21:31,159
Speaker 2: specific individual to the exclusion of all others. And that

321
00:21:31,200 --> 00:21:36,359
Speaker 2: would include statements indicating that hair is unique. Sometimes an

322
00:21:36,400 --> 00:21:39,840
Speaker 2: analogy of a fingerprint was used in testimony. Well, it's

323
00:21:39,840 --> 00:21:42,600
Speaker 2: not exactly like a fingerprint, but it kind of is,

324
00:21:42,840 --> 00:21:46,080
Speaker 2: and that's why we can say that this hair came

325
00:21:46,080 --> 00:21:49,320
Speaker 2: from this person. So that's that one to one association,

326
00:21:49,680 --> 00:21:54,040
Speaker 2: and that is absolutely incorrect. You can't say hair is

327
00:21:54,200 --> 00:21:57,000
Speaker 2: unique and use it to associate people. You know, you

328
00:21:57,000 --> 00:21:59,280
Speaker 2: shouldn't have to say it's like this or it's like that.

329
00:21:59,480 --> 00:22:02,200
Speaker 2: You should just what it is, and if what it

330
00:22:02,320 --> 00:22:06,320
Speaker 2: is isn't enough, then it shouldn't be used to connect

331
00:22:06,320 --> 00:22:10,520
Speaker 2: the hair to a person. That wasn't really the most

332
00:22:10,920 --> 00:22:16,560
Speaker 2: common type of error or scientifically invalid statement we saw.

333
00:22:17,080 --> 00:22:20,680
Speaker 2: It was usually what we call air two and what

334
00:22:20,800 --> 00:22:24,440
Speaker 2: I'm talking about. There are statements like, well, it would

335
00:22:24,480 --> 00:22:28,600
Speaker 2: be rare if two hairs that looked this similar came

336
00:22:28,880 --> 00:22:32,479
Speaker 2: from two different individuals, and those were the things we

337
00:22:32,480 --> 00:22:37,320
Speaker 2: were looking for in the review, and unfortunately found that

338
00:22:37,440 --> 00:22:41,119
Speaker 2: in the majority, the vast majority, over ninety percent of

339
00:22:41,240 --> 00:22:47,720
Speaker 2: cases where FBI examiners gave testimony, the conclusions were exaggerated

340
00:22:47,760 --> 00:22:51,240
Speaker 2: and there were scientifically unsupported statements in the testimony.

341
00:22:51,760 --> 00:22:55,320
Speaker 1: Look, I always knew this was bad, but ninety percent

342
00:22:55,480 --> 00:22:58,480
Speaker 1: of the cases, I mean, that's just an insane statistic.

343
00:22:59,119 --> 00:23:01,800
Speaker 1: And you know, our listeners really need to remember that

344
00:23:01,840 --> 00:23:06,200
Speaker 1: these weren't just any experts coming in to give testimony.

345
00:23:06,280 --> 00:23:09,959
Speaker 1: This is the FBI. This is an organization that has

346
00:23:10,000 --> 00:23:14,800
Speaker 1: a reputation for having attained higher knowledge, you know, knowing

347
00:23:14,840 --> 00:23:16,439
Speaker 1: more than just everyday people.

348
00:23:17,520 --> 00:23:22,760
Speaker 2: When an FBI examiner comes in, especially in a state case,

349
00:23:23,400 --> 00:23:26,800
Speaker 2: great weight is given to what they say. It is

350
00:23:27,440 --> 00:23:31,360
Speaker 2: very impressive to have the FBI show up and explain

351
00:23:32,080 --> 00:23:36,160
Speaker 2: a discipline and tell you what something means in their experience.

352
00:23:36,720 --> 00:23:38,080
Speaker 3: And that's what happened.

353
00:23:38,920 --> 00:23:42,240
Speaker 2: In some cases, an FBI was asked to do hair

354
00:23:42,359 --> 00:23:46,680
Speaker 2: examination when the local examiners couldn't make an association, which

355
00:23:46,720 --> 00:23:50,400
Speaker 2: makes the whole thing even more questionable because the inquiry

356
00:23:50,440 --> 00:23:52,960
Speaker 2: should end there. You shouldn't be able to try to

357
00:23:53,000 --> 00:23:56,600
Speaker 2: find someone else who will give you the answer that

358
00:23:56,680 --> 00:24:01,560
Speaker 2: you want. Also, they found that the FBI hair examiners

359
00:24:01,800 --> 00:24:05,639
Speaker 2: kept their identity as law enforcement agents first and foremost.

360
00:24:06,359 --> 00:24:10,320
Speaker 2: And they found that instead of acting like impartial scientists,

361
00:24:11,200 --> 00:24:14,919
Speaker 2: the FBI lab culture at the time embraced the agent

362
00:24:15,040 --> 00:24:19,960
Speaker 2: examiners acting like more like detectives, and that that approach

363
00:24:20,160 --> 00:24:23,840
Speaker 2: should have been pulled back. And remember, no, you're independent.

364
00:24:24,320 --> 00:24:27,520
Speaker 2: This is scientific. You're not part of the law enforcement

365
00:24:27,600 --> 00:24:29,720
Speaker 2: investigative team. You're a scientist.

366
00:24:30,400 --> 00:24:33,640
Speaker 1: So, Vanessa, you read transcripts from a ton of cases,

367
00:24:33,760 --> 00:24:37,359
Speaker 1: A lot of testimony were there any that really stood

368
00:24:37,400 --> 00:24:39,320
Speaker 1: out to you where you sat back and said, Wow,

369
00:24:39,400 --> 00:24:40,800
Speaker 1: this is really bad.

370
00:24:41,960 --> 00:24:44,159
Speaker 2: A couple of things where I thought I could not believe.

371
00:24:44,160 --> 00:24:47,159
Speaker 2: This was the case where the examiner said that he

372
00:24:47,320 --> 00:24:53,360
Speaker 2: had significant experience, you know, examining pubic cares from people

373
00:24:53,800 --> 00:24:58,800
Speaker 2: from Mexico, and therefore he could exclude people from Mexico

374
00:24:59,160 --> 00:25:02,200
Speaker 2: from having we did the pubic care in the case

375
00:25:02,240 --> 00:25:07,400
Speaker 2: at hand. Obviously that was because the alternate suspects other

376
00:25:07,480 --> 00:25:09,080
Speaker 2: than the defendant were from Mexico.

377
00:25:09,400 --> 00:25:10,920
Speaker 3: So that was entirely made up.

378
00:25:11,040 --> 00:25:14,359
Speaker 2: I mean, I can't even there's no point trying to

379
00:25:14,359 --> 00:25:17,440
Speaker 2: be nice about it. That's not a thing anybody can

380
00:25:17,480 --> 00:25:21,000
Speaker 2: ever say, and it was just made up. You can't

381
00:25:21,359 --> 00:25:24,880
Speaker 2: say that a hair came from an individual of a

382
00:25:25,000 --> 00:25:27,679
Speaker 2: particular racial group. They can look at the hair and

383
00:25:27,720 --> 00:25:30,879
Speaker 2: talk about some of the ancestral origins and some of

384
00:25:30,920 --> 00:25:35,639
Speaker 2: the classifications into groups at a huge broad level, which

385
00:25:35,800 --> 00:25:40,080
Speaker 2: really wouldn't have value and you know, crime investigation, but

386
00:25:40,200 --> 00:25:43,640
Speaker 2: they absolutely can't say that it did or did not

387
00:25:43,800 --> 00:25:48,680
Speaker 2: come from a person from a certain country. So that's

388
00:25:48,880 --> 00:25:53,720
Speaker 2: you know, that's pretty ridiculous.

389
00:26:01,119 --> 00:26:04,479
Speaker 1: So after you review the transcripts from a case and

390
00:26:04,600 --> 00:26:08,600
Speaker 1: Let's say you determine that you know, an expert or

391
00:26:08,640 --> 00:26:11,800
Speaker 1: a so called expert came in and gave testimony and

392
00:26:11,920 --> 00:26:14,880
Speaker 1: said things that were just outside the bounds of science,

393
00:26:15,880 --> 00:26:19,240
Speaker 1: and there was a conviction. What happened next? What were

394
00:26:19,240 --> 00:26:20,560
Speaker 1: the next steps of the review?

395
00:26:21,840 --> 00:26:27,560
Speaker 2: I seek to assist folks in finding counsel and hooking

396
00:26:27,600 --> 00:26:30,439
Speaker 2: them up with lawyers who could assist them to pursue

397
00:26:30,440 --> 00:26:33,480
Speaker 2: any claims they might have. If that type of evidence

398
00:26:33,560 --> 00:26:36,719
Speaker 2: was used in their case, they would do the DNA

399
00:26:36,840 --> 00:26:40,159
Speaker 2: testing on the hair, or if no hair could be

400
00:26:40,240 --> 00:26:43,160
Speaker 2: found after all these years, because these are old cases,

401
00:26:43,560 --> 00:26:47,080
Speaker 2: they would do testing on other biological evidence as long

402
00:26:47,200 --> 00:26:49,719
Speaker 2: as a chain of custody could get established.

403
00:26:50,320 --> 00:26:53,399
Speaker 1: So look, I just have to say, and if this

404
00:26:53,520 --> 00:26:56,320
Speaker 1: is a shameless plug, so be it. The NACDL was

405
00:26:56,400 --> 00:27:01,440
Speaker 1: just it's a remarkable organization because you're not only exposing problems,

406
00:27:01,960 --> 00:27:05,159
Speaker 1: which you certainly did here, but it goes that extra

407
00:27:05,280 --> 00:27:09,159
Speaker 1: step to helping people that you know have been the

408
00:27:09,240 --> 00:27:13,000
Speaker 1: victim of a wrongful conviction or the victim of you know,

409
00:27:13,440 --> 00:27:16,879
Speaker 1: testimony that goes outside the bounds of science, and getting

410
00:27:16,880 --> 00:27:20,359
Speaker 1: them help and hooking them up with lawyers. So you

411
00:27:20,480 --> 00:27:25,200
Speaker 1: must Vanessa have had an interesting experience from all these cases.

412
00:27:25,280 --> 00:27:27,800
Speaker 1: What is your biggest takeaway from this work?

413
00:27:28,880 --> 00:27:32,159
Speaker 2: No matter how much you want a conviction or how

414
00:27:32,240 --> 00:27:35,320
Speaker 2: much other evidence you think you have of guilt, it's

415
00:27:35,400 --> 00:27:40,880
Speaker 2: never appropriate to admit unsupported science and the idea that

416
00:27:41,600 --> 00:27:47,440
Speaker 2: using certain techniques are needed as tools to quote unquote

417
00:27:47,520 --> 00:27:51,480
Speaker 2: catch the bad guys, which is still a conversation that's

418
00:27:51,520 --> 00:27:56,239
Speaker 2: going on with forensic science today. That's the fear that

419
00:27:56,840 --> 00:28:00,920
Speaker 2: law enforcement won't have the tools they need to catch

420
00:28:01,280 --> 00:28:06,880
Speaker 2: people or to convict people. And the appropriate response should be, well,

421
00:28:06,960 --> 00:28:11,480
Speaker 2: those tools have to be scientifically valid and they have

422
00:28:11,560 --> 00:28:13,280
Speaker 2: to be scientifically sound.

423
00:28:13,880 --> 00:28:17,120
Speaker 1: So can't this model that the NACDL and the FBI

424
00:28:17,400 --> 00:28:22,720
Speaker 1: employed here, which is rear reviewing cases and exposing problems

425
00:28:22,800 --> 00:28:26,640
Speaker 1: and helping right these wrongs. Can't this model be applied

426
00:28:27,200 --> 00:28:31,000
Speaker 1: to other disciplines of junk science. It just seems so effective.

427
00:28:31,080 --> 00:28:32,840
Speaker 1: Then you're able to help so many people.

428
00:28:33,960 --> 00:28:38,440
Speaker 2: As a result of the FBI hair Review and other

429
00:28:39,000 --> 00:28:43,440
Speaker 2: movements to make sure forensic science was more reliable for

430
00:28:43,520 --> 00:28:47,120
Speaker 2: the courtroom, there were plans in the Department of Justice

431
00:28:47,240 --> 00:28:52,200
Speaker 2: in the last administration to do similar reviews of other

432
00:28:52,320 --> 00:28:55,840
Speaker 2: pattern and matching disciplines, to take a historical look back

433
00:28:56,280 --> 00:28:59,920
Speaker 2: and see if in some other disciplines in the FBI

434
00:29:00,120 --> 00:29:04,600
Speaker 2: lab that were susceptible to similar errors, if similar errors

435
00:29:04,600 --> 00:29:07,280
Speaker 2: had occurred, and like the hair of you to find

436
00:29:07,320 --> 00:29:12,920
Speaker 2: those and identify them and provide notification and give a

437
00:29:13,000 --> 00:29:18,400
Speaker 2: means for folks to address those potential scientific overstatements.

438
00:29:18,920 --> 00:29:21,680
Speaker 1: All right, So the way you say that evans when

439
00:29:21,680 --> 00:29:24,239
Speaker 1: you say there are were plans in the Department of

440
00:29:24,440 --> 00:29:29,680
Speaker 1: Justice to do this historical look back, makes me have

441
00:29:29,720 --> 00:29:32,240
Speaker 1: the sinking suspicion that maybe it didn't pan out.

442
00:29:32,360 --> 00:29:38,000
Speaker 2: What happened that, along with several other plans, was rolled

443
00:29:38,040 --> 00:29:43,240
Speaker 2: back by then Attorney General Sessions. Under the new administration,

444
00:29:44,080 --> 00:29:46,520
Speaker 2: it has become a little harder. We have to be

445
00:29:46,760 --> 00:29:51,640
Speaker 2: extra vigilant when you're dealing with the situation where plans

446
00:29:51,720 --> 00:29:58,280
Speaker 2: for progress were abandoned. So while a lot of progress

447
00:29:58,400 --> 00:30:00,920
Speaker 2: has been made, there's a lot to be done. You know,

448
00:30:01,040 --> 00:30:07,120
Speaker 2: cases are still litigation, cases still need to be litigated. So, yeah,

449
00:30:07,800 --> 00:30:09,800
Speaker 2: the struggle continues.

450
00:30:13,880 --> 00:30:16,640
Speaker 1: You might be listening to this wondering what you can

451
00:30:16,680 --> 00:30:19,520
Speaker 1: do to help. Thanks to the work that Vanessa is

452
00:30:19,560 --> 00:30:24,360
Speaker 1: doing with the NACDL, many individuals have been exonerated, but

453
00:30:24,520 --> 00:30:27,960
Speaker 1: being exonerated means moving from a life of injustice and

454
00:30:28,040 --> 00:30:32,080
Speaker 1: hardship in prison to another kind of very difficult life

455
00:30:32,120 --> 00:30:36,959
Speaker 1: outside of prison. Take for example, Drew Whitley. In nineteen

456
00:30:37,000 --> 00:30:40,480
Speaker 1: eighty nine, the manager of McDonald's was murdered in Pennsylvania.

457
00:30:41,160 --> 00:30:44,720
Speaker 1: Another McDonald's employee was there when the crime occurred. The

458
00:30:44,800 --> 00:30:47,720
Speaker 1: witness could not see the face of the perpetrator because

459
00:30:47,720 --> 00:30:50,840
Speaker 1: he was wearing a ski mask, but he claimed nonetheless

460
00:30:51,240 --> 00:30:54,040
Speaker 1: that the person that committed the crime had been Drew Whitley,

461
00:30:54,200 --> 00:30:58,080
Speaker 1: his neighbor. Investigators found a hair on a ski mask

462
00:30:58,440 --> 00:31:01,520
Speaker 1: which was found near the crime scene. They compared it

463
00:31:01,560 --> 00:31:04,840
Speaker 1: to Drew's hair and claimed that it matched Drew. Whitley

464
00:31:04,920 --> 00:31:09,200
Speaker 1: was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. After fighting

465
00:31:09,240 --> 00:31:11,840
Speaker 1: for years, Drew was finally able to get the hairs

466
00:31:11,840 --> 00:31:15,800
Speaker 1: from the crime scene tested for mitochondrial DNA. The hairs

467
00:31:15,800 --> 00:31:18,920
Speaker 1: did not belong to him, and he was exonerated in

468
00:31:19,000 --> 00:31:23,800
Speaker 1: two thousand and six. The trauma from his wrongful conviction remains.

469
00:31:24,440 --> 00:31:27,520
Speaker 1: He's always looking over his shoulder with the constant and

470
00:31:27,720 --> 00:31:31,600
Speaker 1: perhaps justified worry that a police officer will bring him

471
00:31:31,600 --> 00:31:35,560
Speaker 1: back to prison for no good reason at all. Something

472
00:31:35,560 --> 00:31:37,640
Speaker 1: that strikes me about a lot of these men who

473
00:31:37,640 --> 00:31:41,120
Speaker 1: have been convicted based on hair comparison evidence, like Drew

474
00:31:41,160 --> 00:31:45,120
Speaker 1: Whitley and Kirk Odom, is that many of them have

475
00:31:45,240 --> 00:31:48,720
Speaker 1: shaved their heads after their release. I can't help but

476
00:31:48,800 --> 00:31:51,800
Speaker 1: to wonder if it's because of this fear that someone

477
00:31:51,840 --> 00:31:54,240
Speaker 1: will find their hair where it shouldn't be and the

478
00:31:54,320 --> 00:31:59,680
Speaker 1: nightmare will begin all over again. After serving seventeen years

479
00:31:59,680 --> 00:32:03,680
Speaker 1: for he didn't commit dru was finally released, but he

480
00:32:03,720 --> 00:32:08,080
Speaker 1: didn't receive any compensation from the state. So here's someone

481
00:32:08,120 --> 00:32:12,120
Speaker 1: that lives a literal nightmare, struggling behind bars to prove

482
00:32:12,160 --> 00:32:15,240
Speaker 1: his innocence, and now he has to struggle to survive

483
00:32:15,320 --> 00:32:20,000
Speaker 1: on the outside. Right now, fifteen states in this country

484
00:32:20,040 --> 00:32:24,680
Speaker 1: don't offer any compensation to exonaies. The thirty five states

485
00:32:24,720 --> 00:32:27,920
Speaker 1: that do differ widely in the amounts that they offer,

486
00:32:28,240 --> 00:32:31,160
Speaker 1: and it's often difficult to satisfy all of the procedural

487
00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:35,080
Speaker 1: requirements to qualify for the money. As you can imagine,

488
00:32:35,120 --> 00:32:39,360
Speaker 1: there are always loopholes, and the states often exploit them.

489
00:32:39,640 --> 00:32:42,040
Speaker 1: Money can't give back the years of someone's life that

490
00:32:42,080 --> 00:32:46,720
Speaker 1: they were robbed of, but compensation does help. It eases

491
00:32:46,720 --> 00:32:49,840
Speaker 1: an ex houneries path forward and healing and living a

492
00:32:49,840 --> 00:32:53,520
Speaker 1: more comfortable life. The Innocence Project is fighting to hold

493
00:32:53,640 --> 00:32:59,120
Speaker 1: states accountable for compensating wrongfully convicted individuals. Until all states

494
00:32:59,200 --> 00:33:05,160
Speaker 1: enact legislation to compensate the wrongly convicted, that fight will continue.

495
00:33:05,240 --> 00:33:08,520
Speaker 1: The Innocence Project has set up a fund to support exonrees.

496
00:33:09,160 --> 00:33:12,400
Speaker 1: The fund is currently expanding to cover those exoneries who

497
00:33:12,400 --> 00:33:16,200
Speaker 1: are facing job loss or economic hardships due to COVID nineteen.

498
00:33:16,920 --> 00:33:20,160
Speaker 1: You can donate to this fund by going to Innocenceproject

499
00:33:20,200 --> 00:33:27,000
Speaker 1: dot org slash Exonery dash Fund DASH twenty twenty. You

500
00:33:27,040 --> 00:33:30,360
Speaker 1: can also support the amazing work that the NACDL is

501
00:33:30,400 --> 00:33:34,520
Speaker 1: doing by donating to the NACDL Foundation for Criminal Justice.

502
00:33:34,960 --> 00:33:39,240
Speaker 1: You can find out more about that at NACDL dot org.

503
00:33:48,400 --> 00:33:51,440
Speaker 1: Next week, we'll explore the junk science of shoe print

504
00:33:51,520 --> 00:33:56,880
Speaker 1: and tire track evidence Wrongful conviction. Junk Science is a

505
00:33:56,880 --> 00:34:00,320
Speaker 1: production of Lava for Good Podcasts in association with Signal

506
00:34:00,400 --> 00:34:04,120
Speaker 1: Company Number One. Thanks to our executive producer Jason Flamm

507
00:34:04,320 --> 00:34:07,719
Speaker 1: and the team at Signal Company Number one, Executive producer

508
00:34:07,800 --> 00:34:11,800
Speaker 1: Kevin Wartis and senior producers Kara Kornhaber and Britz Spangler.

509
00:34:12,560 --> 00:34:15,760
Speaker 1: Our music was composed by Jay Ralph. You can follow

510
00:34:15,840 --> 00:34:19,760
Speaker 1: me on Instagram at dubin Josh. Follow the Wrongful Conviction

511
00:34:19,920 --> 00:34:24,040
Speaker 1: podcast on Facebook and on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and

512
00:34:24,120 --> 00:34:25,840
Speaker 1: on Twitter at wrong Conviction