Speaker 1: Since our previous release of Vincent simmons story, an amazing
Speaker 1: series of events has occurred. In addition to the work
Speaker 1: of his investigator as well as his attorney, Justin Bonus,
Speaker 1: CBS Morning's lead correspondent, David beg Now did his own investigation,
Speaker 1: and as part of that, he did an interview that
Speaker 1: aired in February twenty twenty two in which he spoke
Speaker 1: with the alleged victims in this case, Karen and Sharon Sanders,
Speaker 1: who made some explosive revelations. And this re release, we
Speaker 1: will not only fill you in on the incredible developments
Speaker 1: in this case, but also you'll hear once again from
Speaker 1: the man himself, Vincent Simmons. In May of nineteen seventy seven,
Speaker 1: fourteen year old white twin sisters Karen and Sharon Sanders
Speaker 1: allegedly went to help their eighteen year old cousin, Keith Laboard,
Speaker 1: clean his house in of Old Parish, Louisiana. Years later,
Speaker 1: Keith Laborde admitted to carrying on a sexual relationship with
Speaker 1: Karen Sanders, but back in May of seventy seven, when
Speaker 1: asked about a scratch on his neck, Keith began to
Speaker 1: spin a narrative supported by the twin girls that led
Speaker 1: in a well tread direction. According to Keith and the twins,
Speaker 1: they picked up a hitchhiking black man who allegedly pulled
Speaker 1: a gun and forced Keith and Karen into the trunk
Speaker 1: before raping Sharon, followed by Karen. Conflicting accounts and descriptions,
Speaker 1: as well as a rape kit that confirmed that Sharon
Speaker 1: was still a virgin, didn't stop the accusation of an
Speaker 1: alleged black assailant. While police officer Robert la Board was
Speaker 1: out searching for a potential culprit on the morning of
Speaker 1: May ninety seven, his partner Floyd Juno spotted Vincent Simmons,
Speaker 1: whom he knew from previous petty crimes. Despite not matching
Speaker 1: what we're already conflicting descriptions of this imaginary black man,
Speaker 1: they arrested Vincent for the alleged rapes. Both girls and
Speaker 1: Keith picked out the only handcuffed black man in the lineup,
Speaker 1: and when Vincent refused to confess, Officer Robert Laborde shot
Speaker 1: him in the chest. Miraculously, Vincent survived, but only to
Speaker 1: have all evidence, all of it exculpatory withheld from him
Speaker 1: at trial. Condemning him to serve one years and Angol
Speaker 1: of prison. Vincent's fight against the web of family connections
Speaker 1: lies and the worst in American racism continues to this
Speaker 1: very day. This is wrongful conviction. Welcome back to wrongful conviction.
Speaker 1: I'm Jason Flam. Today's case is so troubling that I
Speaker 1: don't know where to start. But I will tell you
Speaker 1: this before we even get into it, and I introduced
Speaker 1: to you the man himself, Vincent Simmons, who's still incarcerated
Speaker 1: in Angola Penitentiary for over forty four years now for
Speaker 1: a crime he had nothing to do with. I will
Speaker 1: tell you that this case has a toxic mixture of
Speaker 1: small town racism, false accusations, a total lack of evidence,
Speaker 1: a police officer who was closely related to what should
Speaker 1: have been the obvious suspect, who actually shot Mr. Simmons
Speaker 1: in the police station when he refused to confess in
Speaker 1: the chest by the way, narrowly missing his heart and
Speaker 1: killing him. Yes, you heard that correctly. And everybody involved
Speaker 1: basically is white except for Mr Simmonds is black. And
Speaker 1: now that's just the freaking beginning. So first of all, Vincent,
Speaker 1: I'm so honored that you're here today to talk to us.
Speaker 1: I'm so sorry that you are where you are, that
Speaker 1: we're talking to you from prison, and I'm hoping that
Speaker 1: soon we'll be having a totally different conversation from the
Speaker 1: free world. So welcome to Wrongful Conviction. Thank you. We're
Speaker 1: very happy to have you, and we apologize to our
Speaker 1: audience in advance for the audio quality on Vincent's phone.
Speaker 1: It sounds like he's calling us from a time capsule,
Speaker 1: and in many ways he really is. As Angola Penitentiary
Speaker 1: was built on a literal plant Asian, which couldn't put
Speaker 1: a finer point on what this case is all about.
Speaker 1: And joining us today as a man who you may
Speaker 1: be familiar with from our coverage of Nelson Cruz in
Speaker 1: Brooklyn and Marcus Wiggins in Chicago. Now today he's fighting
Speaker 1: for Vincent's case pro bono, flying back and forth from
Speaker 1: New York to Louisiana. So justin bonus, thanks for coming
Speaker 1: back to Wrongful Conviction. Not a problem. Jason is great
Speaker 1: to be on here again as well. So this insane
Speaker 1: saga goes all the way back to ninety seven. So Vincent,
Speaker 1: before this happened and your life got turned upside down
Speaker 1: and inside out? What was your life like before this insanity? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I was bone in a ball par a place called Manilla,
Speaker 1: Louis yea when I would live it in man Still,
Speaker 1: I had had some involvement with sha I would involved
Speaker 1: with compared to crime. I moved to Houston and I
Speaker 1: got a job and I learned that my father and
Speaker 1: I come back to do it. Yeah, I was backful
Speaker 1: about a month. I would live with my sister. I'll
Speaker 1: leave you and I was all my way to work
Speaker 1: and I was picked up of all terrish bodye. So
Speaker 1: you were a known entity to a bols Parish police
Speaker 1: before heading to Houston for work and returning when your
Speaker 1: father passed away, which made you available to be picked
Speaker 1: up for what allegedly happened to these twin girls on
Speaker 1: May night, think seventy seven and the date. I mean,
Speaker 1: we're not even sure of that because the girls were
Speaker 1: never really clear on a date and time. But the
Speaker 1: narrative that comes out is a sadly familiar American tale,
Speaker 1: a false accusation of a black man by an alleged
Speaker 1: white victim or victims in this case, and the alleged
Speaker 1: crime that took place The narrative that set this horrible
Speaker 1: and justice against Vincent in motion is this. On May nine,
Speaker 1: twin sisters Sharon and Karen Sanders allegedly went over to
Speaker 1: the house of their eighteen year old cousin, Keith la
Speaker 1: Board remember that last name, to help him clean, and
Speaker 1: while driving the sister's home that night, the three allegedly
Speaker 1: stopped for gas when Vincent Simmons allegedly approached and asked
Speaker 1: la Board for a ride home, to which la Board
Speaker 1: supposedly agreed. And then the claim is that six miles
Speaker 1: outside of Marksville, on a deserted stretch of Little California Road,
Speaker 1: Vincent allegedly took out a gun, forced Keith la Board
Speaker 1: and Karen into the trunk while he allegedly raped Sharon,
Speaker 1: and then he allegedly put Sharon in the trunk, drove
Speaker 1: on for a bit before retrieving Karen to do the
Speaker 1: same to her. Now afterwards, Vincent allegedly threatened them all
Speaker 1: before dropping him self off to catch a bus. So
Speaker 1: about two weeks after this alleged incident, May is when
Speaker 1: this narrative is first reported to the Sheriff's office and
Speaker 1: the investigation. If you can even call it that begins
Speaker 1: justin take us through this nightmare. So there was Karen Sanders,
Speaker 1: Sharon Sanders and then Keith la Board that were allegedly
Speaker 1: basically kidnapped, thrown in a trunk. The two sisters were raped.
Speaker 1: That's their story. So on May John la Board, Keith's
Speaker 1: father calls the sheriff because Keith's father is the parish assessor.
Speaker 1: What you have to understand about the la Boards is
Speaker 1: there's like ten thousand of them in a vols parish.
Speaker 1: This is a very strong family. He calls the chief
Speaker 1: of police and he says that my twin nieces have
Speaker 1: been raped by a black man. That's how this begins.
Speaker 1: And then the girls are brought in. The girls don't
Speaker 1: know what date it happens. The police give them a date, okay.
Speaker 1: The girls provide their initial statements, which weren't turned over
Speaker 1: at trial. Uh, they weren't turned over. They give completely
Speaker 1: inconsistent statements. Sharon Sanders actually calls the suspect the N
Speaker 1: word over and over again, says all blacks look alike, okay,
Speaker 1: and that's why she wouldn't be able to identify him.
Speaker 1: They don't talk to the boy. Keith Laboard until after
Speaker 1: Vincent has already arrested. Neither of these girls give a
Speaker 1: description that matches Vincent. They say short and fat, well,
Speaker 1: Vincent is five nine. Again, their descriptions conflict. You know,
Speaker 1: it's just one thing after another. And specifically with regard
Speaker 1: to Karen Sanders, she talks about being raped anally orally vaginally.
Speaker 1: When the doctor looks at her after she talks to police,
Speaker 1: there is no injuries. Sharon talks about a thirty minute
Speaker 1: rape vaginally to the point where she bled. She said
Speaker 1: that she gave her panties to her grandmother and they
Speaker 1: were washed, of course. And what's interesting about Sharon is
Speaker 1: that her hyman was intact when she was examined by
Speaker 1: the doctor in this case, So okay, inconsistent statements, conflicting descriptions,
Speaker 1: and outright lies unsupported by physical reality. And the next
Speaker 1: day at am on Vincent was just walking to work
Speaker 1: when he was picked up off the street, arrested and
Speaker 1: brought to the station. He was arrested on May twenty three,
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy seven, on view for this crime. And what
Speaker 1: on view means is they didn't have a named Vincent Simmons,
Speaker 1: They had no probable cause to arrest him. They saw
Speaker 1: him on the side of the street. When I say they,
Speaker 1: you had mentioned a family member of one of the
Speaker 1: alleged victims, and that was Robert la Board. And I
Speaker 1: don't know his direct relation to Keith la Board, but
Speaker 1: I believe it could be a cousin. So really, what
Speaker 1: you have to understand with Vincent is he had a
Speaker 1: history with the Marksville Police Department and the Vols Parish
Speaker 1: Sheriff's office. And Floyd Juneau was driving with Robert Labourd
Speaker 1: on the Dave Vincent got arrested on MA and he
Speaker 1: knew Vincent, he knew who he was before, and he
Speaker 1: knew he was a troublemaker. And he's the glue to this.
Speaker 1: He's the person that basically points the finger at Vincent first, right, right, right,
Speaker 1: And if you have the chance to watch one of
Speaker 1: the documentaries about Vincent's story, there's the Farm and Shadows
Speaker 1: of a Doubt. We'll have them linked in the bio,
Speaker 1: of course, but in Shadows of a Doubt, Floyd Juneau
Speaker 1: describes this arrest in much the same way that Justin has.
Speaker 1: So that same morning, the sheriff sent deputies for the
Speaker 1: twins who were picked up from school and brought to
Speaker 1: the station along with Keith Laboard who was brought from work,
Speaker 1: and told them that they were going to view a
Speaker 1: line up with the perpetrator in it. So officers picked
Speaker 1: out seven guys for the lineup, one of whom was white. Okay,
Speaker 1: a few others were well over sick feet tall. But
Speaker 1: remember the description was of this imaginary perpetrator was black,
Speaker 1: short and fat, right, And they placed Vincent in the center.
Speaker 1: And get this, Vincent is the only one who was
Speaker 1: handcuffed out of all of them. I mean, it wasn't
Speaker 1: like they were trying to be subtle here right as
Speaker 1: to who they wanted them to identify. So the twins
Speaker 1: and Keith lo and Behold all select Vincent as the perpetrator.
Speaker 1: They claimed that I would identify and from that point
Speaker 1: they took me into another room and that's when they
Speaker 1: told me that I had to give him a confession,
Speaker 1: and I refused to give a confession. I told him
Speaker 1: that before I confessed to a crime that I didn't do,
Speaker 1: I'll die for and that's when they hit me and
Speaker 1: they adopted to the plow and started kicking me. And
Speaker 1: then when I tried to get out, he kicked me again.
Speaker 1: And when I did, you to chat, I was sitting
Speaker 1: in to get up. Robert he see where he was
Speaker 1: writing confession and his WelCom and shot. He shot in
Speaker 1: the chat. This episode is underwritten by global law firm
Speaker 1: Greenberg Traric. Through its pro bono program, Greenberg Traric leverages
Speaker 1: it's more than lawyers across forty two offices to serve
Speaker 1: the greater good of our communities and provide equal access
Speaker 1: to justice for all. In the field of criminal justice,
Speaker 1: greenbrig Triary attorneys have exonerted and freedom and in Philadelphia
Speaker 1: represent numerous individuals previously sentenced to life for crimes committed
Speaker 1: as juveniles and resentencing hearings, and received the American part
Speaker 1: Association one Exceptional Service Award for Death Penalty Representation for
Speaker 1: their work on five death penalty cases. GT is reimagining
Speaker 1: what big law can be because a more just world
Speaker 1: only happens by design. I think something that I really
Speaker 1: want to bring to your attention here, Jason, is this
Speaker 1: is that technically Vincent really should have been charged with
Speaker 1: kidnapping Keith Labor. They didn't charge him with that. Why well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think we know why. The other thing
Speaker 1: is the police all said that Vincent attempted to grab
Speaker 1: the gun of one of the officers and the safety
Speaker 1: was on or something like that ridiculous story. They don't
Speaker 1: ever charge Vincent with attempted murder of a police officer either.
Speaker 1: And this is weird, right, because it's not like the
Speaker 1: state typically has any issue at all with piling on charges. Right,
Speaker 1: But there were no gun charges here either, as that
Speaker 1: was part of the alleged kidnapping in this case as well.
Speaker 1: So at the preliminary hearing on July seven, both twins testified,
Speaker 1: but neither the alleged kidnapping victim Keith Laboard, nor the
Speaker 1: alleged attempted murder victims the police officers participated. Yeah that's yeah, sure, Okay.
Speaker 1: So during her testimony, Sharon has asked three consecutive times
Speaker 1: to identify the man from the crime, and this is
Speaker 1: the twin who states that all black people look alike.
Speaker 1: She doesn't respond until the court steps in, and this
Speaker 1: was when, for the very first time ever, she says
Speaker 1: that the man said his name was Simmons. Now, Karen
Speaker 1: also parroted this statement that the culprit told Keith his
Speaker 1: name was Simmons, but then in the same preliminary hearing,
Speaker 1: when asked why it took two weeks to come forward
Speaker 1: with this story, Karen testified that, quote, we couldn't go
Speaker 1: to the cops because we didn't know his name, unquote,
Speaker 1: So which one is it? Karen, right, which is it?
Speaker 1: Because both of those things can't be true. Everyone overlooked that.
Speaker 1: That means that their testimony in the preliminary hearing that
Speaker 1: they knew the man's name, and their testimony at trial
Speaker 1: that they knew the man's name. It is false. That
Speaker 1: kind of just got glossed over. So let's get to
Speaker 1: the trial, and I'm gonna put trial in quotes here too.
Speaker 1: So there's no physical evidence that these rapes ever actually happened.
Speaker 1: Start with that. No forensic tests were done on the twins, clothing,
Speaker 1: or the car in which the alleged rapes occurred, and
Speaker 1: police reports did not include a single lead appointed to Vincent.
Speaker 1: Doctors didn't find any sign of injury on either of
Speaker 1: the alleged victims, including Sharon's intact him, and she was
Speaker 1: a virgin who was, according to her statement, the victim
Speaker 1: of a bloody rape, which of course is physically impossible.
Speaker 1: So if you're listening to this now and going, well,
Speaker 1: then there's all this evidence, right, How the hell could anyone,
Speaker 1: even a black man in the Deep South in the seventies,
Speaker 1: how could anyone get convicted on the basis of this. Well,
Speaker 1: it later comes out with Vincent and his attorney received
Speaker 1: exactly none of this. They received no discovery in this case,
Speaker 1: but not, I mean zero. What I'm saying is all
Speaker 1: of that critical exculpatory evidence that you just heard wasn't
Speaker 1: revealed to him for another sixteen years. His lawyers never
Speaker 1: even knew about the shady lineup with the handcuffs, you know,
Speaker 1: which was obviously done for one reason, so that these
Speaker 1: alleged victims would know who to pick in this imaginary crime.
Speaker 1: There were pictures of that, the inconsistencies and conflicts in
Speaker 1: initial accounts and assailant descriptions and initial statements. They said
Speaker 1: they didn't know his name, but later testified that he
Speaker 1: had told Keith his name was Simmons. How Karen gave
Speaker 1: a clue to that discrepancy in her preliminary hearing testimony,
Speaker 1: all of it. So the fix was in so justin,
Speaker 1: can you take us through what happened at this sham trial?
Speaker 1: So they take him to trial and the girls get
Speaker 1: on the witness stand and they say they know his name.
Speaker 1: They say a rape happened, and the defense attorneys don't
Speaker 1: do a great job of poking holes in there because
Speaker 1: they don't have anything to poke holes in. They don't
Speaker 1: have any cross examination material. Okay, they have three witnesses
Speaker 1: that were allegedly with this man for three hours. That's
Speaker 1: a long time to be with somebody. Mistaken identification is
Speaker 1: not really something you can argue when you're around somebody
Speaker 1: for three hours unless you saw the initial statements, right,
Speaker 1: can't really do it. I mean, the trial's a joke.
Speaker 1: Eddie Nole, who was the prosecutor, and the district attorney
Speaker 1: and his wife are the ones that tried the case,
Speaker 1: and this was a flim flam show. They actually, on
Speaker 1: occasion during direct examination they would interchange when they thought
Speaker 1: the other one didn't ask enough questions, or on cross examine.
Speaker 1: I've never seen that, and they probably could have done
Speaker 1: anything they wanted because without discovery, they had nothing with
Speaker 1: which to hold the prosecution or any of the witnesses accountable.
Speaker 1: Then you have these racially charged elements, two white twin
Speaker 1: sisters underage, by the way, fourteen years old, a black
Speaker 1: guy in Louisiana in nine seven. So they could have
Speaker 1: said that he took them in a spaceship, hit them
Speaker 1: on the head with a toaster of it, and then
Speaker 1: they went and visited, you know, talking penguins on Mars.
Speaker 1: I mean, they could have said anything, and I could
Speaker 1: actually picture in my mind the jury just sort of
Speaker 1: sitting there, you know, horrified with their mouths open, hearing
Speaker 1: about how the two young girls were brutalizing. You know,
Speaker 1: these these poor little girls. It's hard to turn away
Speaker 1: from that kind of testimony. But there were some very
Speaker 1: significant things that still should have sowed serious doubts in
Speaker 1: the minds of these jurors. Now, I think the biggest
Speaker 1: thing here that we started to uncover as we investigated
Speaker 1: is that the area that Vincent allegedly sees these three
Speaker 1: at a gas station in the middle of Marksville, but
Speaker 1: then he takes them allegedly or tells them to go
Speaker 1: to a part of a Vols parish that's like Clan country.
Speaker 1: So where these alleged rapes happen is in the middle
Speaker 1: of Clan Country. It's not where the black community is.
Speaker 1: That's what to me should have raised alarm bells for everybody,
Speaker 1: including the white jury. This is not believable. What was
Speaker 1: alleged to be a three hour long encounter with two
Speaker 1: twin underage white girls being raped by a black man
Speaker 1: in the middle of Clan country. I would have sooner
Speaker 1: bought into the story. Worry about Mars and Vincent was
Speaker 1: able to present something in his defense right. His attorney
Speaker 1: called him to the stand where he said that he
Speaker 1: was at a bar on May night and presented three
Speaker 1: alibi witnesses who all dated that he was at the
Speaker 1: bar with them. His alibi witnesses, they tried to discredit
Speaker 1: these people with traffic tickets and like petty crimes because
Speaker 1: they wanted to make the alibis look like they were
Speaker 1: not law abiding citizens, even though they basically were. I mean,
Speaker 1: one of the witnesses that testified for Vincent was a
Speaker 1: business owner, and they attacked them using like speeding tickets
Speaker 1: and parking tickets that he received. It was a joke.
Speaker 1: The trial was a joke. Yeah, it was a joke,
Speaker 1: but not not a funny one though, because eleven white
Speaker 1: people and one black woman on the jury. I remember
Speaker 1: at that time in Louisiana and all the way up
Speaker 1: till two thousand eighteen, they didn't need a unanimous verdict
Speaker 1: to convict. It was one of the ways that they
Speaker 1: disenfranchised black folks. You only needed ten of the twelve
Speaker 1: members on the jury to vote guilty. So black woman
Speaker 1: or not, let's just call it like it is. There
Speaker 1: was no hope in hell for Vincent. And so there
Speaker 1: you are, still trying to heal from a gunshot wound
Speaker 1: to the chest at close range and watching this ridiculous trial.
Speaker 1: Did you still have any hope that they would see
Speaker 1: the discrepancies in this crazy narrative and see that you
Speaker 1: were innocent? Oh? Yeah, there was no hope because the
Speaker 1: way that was focused. Oh what the victims were saying,
Speaker 1: there was no hope of the receiving a sad trial.
Speaker 1: And even though I was shot, they that was there
Speaker 1: was no questions answer what happened. So Vincent, at that moment,
Speaker 1: a lot had happened to you already. But I have
Speaker 1: to think this would be the worst moment of anybody's
Speaker 1: life to be wrongfully convicted of a crime they didn't commit.
Speaker 1: Do you remember that moment when they declared you guilty
Speaker 1: and sentenced you to a hundred years in prison. Yes,
Speaker 1: I did when I heard all those lives sold and
Speaker 1: the jury come back and condicted me. Even with my
Speaker 1: alibi Richards telling the truth, the jury still believed their lies.
Speaker 1: And it was amazing for me to believe that those
Speaker 1: people would, Yeah, that kind of lied to the juror,
Speaker 1: and the jury believed there. When I got the golden
Speaker 1: and they claimed the doose hind me, it was like
Speaker 1: a shot to me. And from that moment then I
Speaker 1: would experience a nightmares at night when I went to sleep.
Speaker 1: I tried to go to sleep, and I would have
Speaker 1: a nightmare as a being shot and beating over and
Speaker 1: over again. When I got there, even the guys in
Speaker 1: the town, they already knew what my charge was and
Speaker 1: I went to mulate experiences they so I bought all
Speaker 1: you ship human ways, you know you taught um. I've
Speaker 1: been called several times, you know all the skin come
Speaker 1: over my father, but I wouldn't report it because they
Speaker 1: would call your retire at several night nights, balls that
Speaker 1: were from of all past. They would make it possible
Speaker 1: for they didn't make out a home you the gods
Speaker 1: heard um of all, Harry, they would intentively, well, I
Speaker 1: can repote where how would be the repetrator of the night.
Speaker 1: So from one lockdown to another, that's what caused me
Speaker 1: to be locked down. And it's solidaires confirmed. And all
Speaker 1: these years because I was being attacked and being transferred
Speaker 1: to another lotdown, I said, twenty seven years and solid confined.
Speaker 1: And I just got out in uh two thousand nineteen,
Speaker 1: and that's when I got the call from Deston said,
Speaker 1: as you would take my case. Forty four years wrongfully convicted,
Speaker 1: and twenty seven of those were in solitary confronement because
Speaker 1: of constant assaults from other prisners who also found ways
Speaker 1: to believe the childish nonsensicalized that these three backwoods, redneck
Speaker 1: low lifes told to cover up their dirty, disgusting little
Speaker 1: incests secret. And I don't even know what to say
Speaker 1: except that I'm absolutely amazed at your courage and your
Speaker 1: strength to persevere and just even be here at all,
Speaker 1: after all you've gone through, Vincent, you are a living miracle.
Speaker 1: So justin we know that the post conviction litigation started
Speaker 1: almost immediately back in eight and it went about as
Speaker 1: well as the trial did. But Vincent finally got a
Speaker 1: break of swords in can you talk us through that?
Speaker 1: Vincent files a man Damis, and somebody in the d
Speaker 1: a's office copies the whole file. That's how Vincent gets
Speaker 1: his file. That's when he first gets the discovery. And
Speaker 1: then Vincent got a letter from his lawyer in ninety
Speaker 1: eight saying that we've never seen these documents before. You know,
Speaker 1: and by the way, that lawyer ninety eight, I think
Speaker 1: he was a judge by that point. I mean, these
Speaker 1: are credible people that came forward and said that they
Speaker 1: had never seen these documents before. Right, this is the
Speaker 1: discovery with the details that we mentioned earlier that if
Speaker 1: Vincent's trial attorney would have had this at the trial
Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy seven, and of course it was totally
Speaker 1: illegal for them not to share it, but if they
Speaker 1: had had this discovery, it's very possible that even that
Speaker 1: jury could have come to the right conclusion. So, in
Speaker 1: addition to that, more exculpatory evidence has developed over time. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Vincent is denied parole again and again and again and again.
Speaker 1: The sisters showed up at the parole hearings and said
Speaker 1: all sorts of awful racist things. I remember seeing this
Speaker 1: on the video and hearing about it in one occasion
Speaker 1: where one of the three members of the pro board
Speaker 1: was a black gentleman, and one of the sisters actually
Speaker 1: said in the parole hearing that she wouldn't feel safe
Speaker 1: alone in the room with him. And I'm talking about
Speaker 1: the guy who was on the parole board, the black
Speaker 1: guy and the parole board. Am I actually right about that?
Speaker 1: You are? You cannot make this up. So now we're
Speaker 1: all the way at October and justin you've now joined
Speaker 1: Vincent's team, and Vincent has applied for post conviction relief
Speaker 1: based on several to process violations and newly discovered evidence
Speaker 1: which shows that the alleged rape was a total fabrication,
Speaker 1: and that part of the new evidence that was presented
Speaker 1: is from a family member of the alleged victims themselves, right,
Speaker 1: So can you tell us about that? Essentially, we have
Speaker 1: a family member of the law boards coming forward with
Speaker 1: a detailed statement about an admission that Keith gave her.
Speaker 1: I think it was in two thousand and eleven, two
Speaker 1: thousand twelve, and actually what happened forty four years ago was.
Speaker 1: She was there when Keith came into her mother's house
Speaker 1: and he had a scratch on his neck. And it
Speaker 1: appears is that Keith is the first one that drops
Speaker 1: the story that gets and thrown in prison, which is
Speaker 1: that you know, he gave a black man a ride
Speaker 1: home with the girls and the black man scratched his neck,
Speaker 1: threw him in the trunk, and raped the two girls.
Speaker 1: See the problem with that, though, if you talk to
Speaker 1: this witness, she knows Keith Laboard. He's a total psycho.
Speaker 1: Keith also, I believe I said two thousand eleven, two
Speaker 1: thousand and twelve, he admitted that there was no black man.
Speaker 1: We actually have Facebook messages between Keith Laborde's first cousin
Speaker 1: and Karen where Karen admitted that Keith Laboard raped her.
Speaker 1: Now you have to understand this same cousin, Keith Labord
Speaker 1: actually admitted that he had what he termed to be
Speaker 1: consensual sex with Karen and through Sharon in the trunk.
Speaker 1: So that's why Sharon's hyman is attack because Key threw
Speaker 1: her in the trunk because she didn't want to have
Speaker 1: sex with him. But he definitely had sex with Karen. Now,
Speaker 1: Karen says that it was a rape. He says it
Speaker 1: was consensual sex. But at the time of the alleged
Speaker 1: sexual act, Keith was an adult, Karen was a minor.
Speaker 1: You know. Then we have an investigative report from our
Speaker 1: investigator who spoke to Karen where Karen said she might
Speaker 1: have made a mistake, that she doesn't want to testify
Speaker 1: again in this case. Yeah, I think I need a shower.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is even worse than I originally thought,
Speaker 1: which I didn't think was possible. So where are we now?
Speaker 1: What in the world is it going to take to
Speaker 1: bring Vincent home? Where are we right now? We filed
Speaker 1: the motion to vacate the conviction of post conviction relief
Speaker 1: motion in October of I mean, there's Affidavid's newly discovered evidence,
Speaker 1: there's scientific reports and here identification experts, doctors, obviously the
Speaker 1: previous discovery that wasn't turned over when the motion was
Speaker 1: initially filed. Kerry Sproul was the judge that was overseeing
Speaker 1: the motion and Charles Riddle was the district attorney And
Speaker 1: essentially what happened is in more arch of one, I
Speaker 1: got my hands on a document where carry Sprul admitted
Speaker 1: that he represented keith La Board's daughter in a previous
Speaker 1: I don't know if it was a custody case or
Speaker 1: a family court case. And so we had a hearing
Speaker 1: to recuse Carry Sproul, and in that hearing to recuse
Speaker 1: Carry Sproul, Carry Sprul not only admitted that he had
Speaker 1: represented keith La Board's daughter, but also that he had
Speaker 1: a close relationship with keith La Board since I guess
Speaker 1: almost childhood, and actually hired keith La Board to work
Speaker 1: on construction projects in his house. So he had a
Speaker 1: longstanding relationship with keith La Board and his family. And
Speaker 1: then after that is when we had the motion to
Speaker 1: recuse the District Attorney's office where we took testimony from
Speaker 1: Vincent's trial attorney, Mike Kelly, where Mike Kelly testified at
Speaker 1: the hearing that the defense received no discovery, not a
Speaker 1: ingle document. They didn't know there was a lineup, they
Speaker 1: didn't know that there was original statements made, they didn't
Speaker 1: know anything. We took testimony from a civil rights activist,
Speaker 1: Alan Holmes, who heard Charles Riddle admit that Mike Kelly
Speaker 1: didn't receive discovery, and then we took testimony from Charles
Speaker 1: Riddle himself, and Charles Riddle admitted that he believed Mike
Speaker 1: Kelly when Mike Kelly testified that they didn't have any
Speaker 1: of the discovery in this case. That caused Judge Bennett
Speaker 1: to recuse Charles Riddle because Charles Riddle refused to consent
Speaker 1: to give Vincent Simmons a new trial. Essentially that Riddle
Speaker 1: was basically condoning a constitutional violation. Right he knew that
Speaker 1: there was a violation and refused to remedy it. And
Speaker 1: a prosecutor has a duty to act fair and impartial,
Speaker 1: and his duties are based upon the Constitution. He has
Speaker 1: to be fair to the accused, and when there's a
Speaker 1: due process violation like there is in this case, the
Speaker 1: only way he can remedy that is by giving Vincent
Speaker 1: another trial, and he refused to do it. We now
Speaker 1: have an Attorney General's Office that's taken over there trying
Speaker 1: to vacate the recusal of Charles Riddle. They're basically trying
Speaker 1: to delay this as best as they can. No one
Speaker 1: wants to give Vincent any relief here, and that's where
Speaker 1: we are right now. We're in front of the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court battling it out over the motion to recuse the
Speaker 1: district attorney, and I'm in the process of filing something
Speaker 1: to try to compel the court to do the right
Speaker 1: thing here. After our release, Justin went to work on
Speaker 1: just that, and back in January twenty two, I got
Speaker 1: a call from Angola. It was Vincent thanking me and
Speaker 1: everyone here at the Wrungful Conviction podcast, and I didn't
Speaker 1: know what he was thanking us for. It turns out
Speaker 1: that at some point between the original release in November
Speaker 1: one and that January, Justin had won him a hearing
Speaker 1: set for February two, in which his motion for some
Speaker 1: re judgment was to be decided. Either the judge would
Speaker 1: rule against him or he'd be granted a new trial,
Speaker 1: at which point the prosecutor would have to decide whether
Speaker 1: or not to go forward with this case. Knowing what
Speaker 1: we know now, and Vincent had faith that this would
Speaker 1: finally set him free. Now I'm ecstatic to report that
Speaker 1: he was correct. Vincent, Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction. Thank
Speaker 1: you man, you are so welcome. You know words will
Speaker 1: never do justice to this mixture of joy and anger
Speaker 1: that I feel about your case. But right now I'd
Speaker 1: like to focus on that magical moment when you were
Speaker 1: set free. You know, I saw a footage of it.
Speaker 1: I wanted to be there in person, but I couldn't.
Speaker 1: And I know that you knew it was coming, but
Speaker 1: there was a look of shock and surprise on your face. Yes,
Speaker 1: even though I had this vision when did manifesting, man,
Speaker 1: I was a shock free So you know, I knew
Speaker 1: that based on the evidence that they had den and
Speaker 1: look at the evidence that they have now, they had nothing,
Speaker 1: did nothing but the lines and then Boom thought it.
Speaker 1: Four year later the family come forward and Boom revealed
Speaker 1: new evidence or what they had died all these years. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean not only that cousin who had come forward
Speaker 1: talking about Keith Laboard, all of those damning messages that
Speaker 1: we had already discussed on the podcast. Not to mention
Speaker 1: that there was no discovery at all in this case.
Speaker 1: Let me say it again, there was no discovery at all.
Speaker 1: Nothing was turned over to the defense and all of
Speaker 1: the things that could have been turned over and should
Speaker 1: have been turned over in discovery or exculpatory. Then the
Speaker 1: two alleged victims accusers in your case, Sharon and Karen Sanders,
Speaker 1: went on CBS and had no good answers to explain
Speaker 1: the wild inconsistencies and their statements, among others, to explain
Speaker 1: the inconsistency about when they knew your name and that
Speaker 1: they had actually known it all along. They had said
Speaker 1: that they had made a pack to not say your name,
Speaker 1: which is total horseshit. After they had identified you in
Speaker 1: the lineup, they still didn't know your name in those
Speaker 1: statements either, which totally contradicted themselves. Again, they also admitted
Speaker 1: to the racist comments that one of the sisters had said,
Speaker 1: quote unquote, all n words look alike. And how could
Speaker 1: they even have identified you anyway if that was the case, right,
Speaker 1: I mean, there's another direct contradiction there, and let alone
Speaker 1: that you didn't even fit their bogus description that they
Speaker 1: had made up out of thin air. This case is madness.
Speaker 1: And in addition, Karen Sanders also admitted to a sexual
Speaker 1: relationship with Keith la Board starting as early as nine
Speaker 1: years old. Man, I mean I was watching that My
Speaker 1: my job. I hit the floor. You were simply dragged
Speaker 1: into their web of sadness and lies, with neither probable
Speaker 1: cause nor having fit any description other than just being
Speaker 1: a black man. Your case is about as disgusting as
Speaker 1: any we've ever heard. So with all of this floating
Speaker 1: in the zeitgeist, along with the mountain of Brady material,
Speaker 1: the judge finally set you free after over forty four
Speaker 1: years in prison, and you were reunited with your family.
Speaker 1: Can you take us back to that night? Where'd you go?
Speaker 1: What did you do? Well? I was taken all by
Speaker 1: my family and Mr Bonus to a restaurant, you know,
Speaker 1: a real expensive restaurant, and I'm looking about wow, you know,
Speaker 1: and you asked me what I wanted to eat. I
Speaker 1: say everything, everything, that's great, I will eat everything. So
Speaker 1: you know, we had lovely billo. We talked, we laugh
Speaker 1: we joked. That moment is very special. It's very special.
Speaker 1: You know, that chills, you know, travel to your body,
Speaker 1: all of love and arts and kisses and all that.
Speaker 1: It brought a warmth to me, that something special that
Speaker 1: was missing when you're coming out of somewhere where you've
Speaker 1: been kidnapped and held against your will for further for
Speaker 1: a year. I value that, you know. You know, it's
Speaker 1: hard because I got to relearn everything, you know, but
Speaker 1: it doesn't it doesn't stop us from thinking, you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't stop us from living and it doesn't stop
Speaker 1: me from doing the right things too, to freedom minds,
Speaker 1: you know, to show them that, you know, we we
Speaker 1: have to value ourselves, you know you have. You can't
Speaker 1: love somebody if you don't value who you are, if
Speaker 1: you don't love yourself, you know, and you come first,
Speaker 1: and then you know you show compassionate love to others.
Speaker 1: You know, this is what our join us are, you know,
Speaker 1: our do this for being here on it, you know,
Speaker 1: is to get people to understand God law. Hey man,
Speaker 1: get them laws in your man. You know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: Whatever God, you believe that. You know, everyone have a
Speaker 1: duty to each other as humanity, you know, but yet
Speaker 1: refighting each other. Why I'm here to deliver that message.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna fight it. I'm gonna fight it. I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna go alone. You know, I'm not gonna be all.
Speaker 1: I'm not gonna turn a blind eye to the truth.
Speaker 1: And that's what I'm fighting for. I have a big
Speaker 1: family that I live beyond black and white. I'm fighting
Speaker 1: for us. What we do? What are we here for justice?
Speaker 1: You know, we're here to correct That's what Joe Jabby
Speaker 1: is your report? What's going on? You know to the public,
Speaker 1: to the people. I love you man. We love you too, Vincent.
Speaker 1: And you know, all I can do is to continue
Speaker 1: to shine a light on these injustices and helped to
Speaker 1: be part of the team that works to correct them
Speaker 1: wherever and whenever I have the power to do so.
Speaker 1: And without you sharing your story, well we wouldn't be
Speaker 1: able to do that here. So I'd like to just
Speaker 1: thank you for on behalf of everyone that works on
Speaker 1: a team, for joining us and sharing your story. And
Speaker 1: then I'm gonna turn to the closing of our show
Speaker 1: where I turned my microphone off, leave my headphones on,
Speaker 1: kick back in my chair, and just listen to any
Speaker 1: final passages that you have. You know, I'm I'm I'm
Speaker 1: gonna give it to the people. How I learned it.
Speaker 1: I learned it hardly. You know, I'm gonna give it
Speaker 1: to anybody. Roa Yah is the only week I'm fighting
Speaker 1: for the people. We're trying to fix a system that
Speaker 1: is broken based on racism. Don't say that racism because
Speaker 1: it do and everybody don't want to deal with it.
Speaker 1: Why not? You know they judge is in prosecutor using
Speaker 1: the sheeld of the state to do criminal activity. Is
Speaker 1: you make all kind of laws saying that you know,
Speaker 1: we're against this and we're against that, but you ain't
Speaker 1: passion them. They don't have a law by the constitution
Speaker 1: that say that the prosecutor. I can leave my employers
Speaker 1: to intimidate other people to say what I want them
Speaker 1: just saying, and if they don't say it, then I'm
Speaker 1: gonna send them in the prison. I'm apprenticed them. No,
Speaker 1: who are you? You're human luck, I am you representative
Speaker 1: people and when you miss you your authorities, you're supposed
Speaker 1: to be pitialized by the people that goes for judges, lawyers, das,
Speaker 1: whoever you may be. You're a human and you supporter
Speaker 1: a humanly use your powers wisely. Thank you for listening
Speaker 1: to Wrongful Conviction. I'd like to thank our production team
Speaker 1: Connor Hall, Justin Golden, Jeff Claverne, and Kevin Wardis. With
Speaker 1: research by Lila Robinson. The music in this production was
Speaker 1: supplied by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be
Speaker 1: sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction, on
Speaker 1: Facebook at Wrongful Conviction podcast, and on Twitter at wrong Conviction,
Speaker 1: as 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 flom Raleful Conviction is the production of
Speaker 1: Lava for Good podcasts and association with Signal Company Number
Speaker 1: one