WEBVTT - Time is Ticking: Alabama Death Row Inmate Either Gets New Trial Or Gets Out

0:00:02.200 --> 0:00:06.280
<v Speaker 1>Hey there, folks. He has been on death row for

0:00:06.440 --> 0:00:10.960
<v Speaker 1>thirty six years. But in the next week, one of

0:00:11.080 --> 0:00:13.480
<v Speaker 1>two things is going to happen. He's either going to

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:16.080
<v Speaker 1>get a new trial or he is going to walk

0:00:16.440 --> 0:00:19.520
<v Speaker 1>out of prison. And with that, welcome to this episode

0:00:19.640 --> 0:00:23.480
<v Speaker 1>of Amy and TJ Presents. We don't get these everyday rogue.

0:00:23.480 --> 0:00:25.000
<v Speaker 1>So we're talking about a guy who's been on death

0:00:25.040 --> 0:00:28.240
<v Speaker 1>row for a long time and the clock is ticking,

0:00:28.320 --> 0:00:29.160
<v Speaker 1>something's going to happen.

0:00:29.240 --> 0:00:33.040
<v Speaker 2>That's right. This is one of Alabama's longest serving death

0:00:33.120 --> 0:00:37.040
<v Speaker 2>row inmates, sixty three year old Michael Sockwell. Yes, he's

0:00:37.040 --> 0:00:39.919
<v Speaker 2>been on death row for thirty six years. He's been

0:00:39.920 --> 0:00:43.159
<v Speaker 2>on death row since nineteen ninety after he was convicted

0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:46.919
<v Speaker 2>of killing a sheriff's deputy. His name was Isaiah Harris.

0:00:47.640 --> 0:00:52.600
<v Speaker 2>But this is now a situation in which prosecutors, yes,

0:00:52.800 --> 0:00:55.960
<v Speaker 2>have days to make a decision whether or not to

0:00:56.280 --> 0:01:02.160
<v Speaker 2>retry Michael Sockwell. And this has serious implications in terms

0:01:02.200 --> 0:01:06.959
<v Speaker 2>of the prosecutorial conduct and how they seeded the jury

0:01:07.319 --> 0:01:08.480
<v Speaker 2>in Michael Sockwell's case.

0:01:08.560 --> 0:01:10.160
<v Speaker 1>Let's be clear here, folks. We have seen a bunch

0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:12.240
<v Speaker 1>of cases where the guilt or innocence of someone on

0:01:12.319 --> 0:01:14.760
<v Speaker 1>death row is questioned. We've seen cases where they say

0:01:14.800 --> 0:01:17.240
<v Speaker 1>circumstances are a little different and maybe the sentence need

0:01:17.280 --> 0:01:20.240
<v Speaker 1>to be changed. That is not the conversation we're having here.

0:01:20.560 --> 0:01:22.920
<v Speaker 1>No one's beating a drama and saying this man is

0:01:23.000 --> 0:01:24.920
<v Speaker 1>innocent and we have evidence he needs to be off

0:01:24.959 --> 0:01:27.319
<v Speaker 1>death row. What they're saying here, robe is he never

0:01:27.319 --> 0:01:28.839
<v Speaker 1>got a fair trial in the first place.

0:01:28.880 --> 0:01:31.800
<v Speaker 2>Correct, And we should point out Sockwell does maintain his innocence.

0:01:31.840 --> 0:01:34.120
<v Speaker 2>He says he did not commit this crime. He actually

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:38.080
<v Speaker 2>has the finger pointed at someone specifically who he says,

0:01:38.120 --> 0:01:41.000
<v Speaker 2>in fact, did the killing. But you are correct. This

0:01:41.040 --> 0:01:43.280
<v Speaker 2>is not an issue of guilter innocence. This is an

0:01:43.280 --> 0:01:47.520
<v Speaker 2>issue of who was seated on the jury and why

0:01:47.920 --> 0:01:52.520
<v Speaker 2>and a DA who apparently had a quote significant history

0:01:53.160 --> 0:01:58.639
<v Speaker 2>of refusing to seat black jurors on the jury.

0:02:00.120 --> 0:02:02.280
<v Speaker 1>Big no, No, We've seen a lot of movies and

0:02:02.360 --> 0:02:05.600
<v Speaker 1>actually we've seen a lot of actual trials. Lawyers get

0:02:05.640 --> 0:02:08.000
<v Speaker 1>a lot of leeway and saying I don't want that

0:02:08.080 --> 0:02:10.160
<v Speaker 1>juror for whatever reason. Sometimes you just get a strike.

0:02:10.200 --> 0:02:12.800
<v Speaker 1>You just say nope, nope, nope, like yourself out. Sometimes

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:16.240
<v Speaker 1>you have to give a reason. You can't give a

0:02:16.280 --> 0:02:19.760
<v Speaker 1>reason of they black, they gotta go right, that's not allowed.

0:02:19.919 --> 0:02:23.119
<v Speaker 2>Yes, and specifically, this DA we're talking about. Her name

0:02:23.600 --> 0:02:27.320
<v Speaker 2>is Ellen Brooks, but she in this case in particular,

0:02:27.400 --> 0:02:30.360
<v Speaker 2>and there are other cases that the courts have cited,

0:02:30.760 --> 0:02:37.120
<v Speaker 2>she struck eighty percent of qualified black prospective jurors, and

0:02:37.280 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 2>qualified being the key. There was no other reason to

0:02:40.320 --> 0:02:43.760
<v Speaker 2>disqualify them. They had preconceived notions, they were against the

0:02:43.760 --> 0:02:45.880
<v Speaker 2>death penalty, they knew too much about the case. They

0:02:45.919 --> 0:02:48.520
<v Speaker 2>didn't think they could be unbiased. No, none of that.

0:02:48.600 --> 0:02:50.680
<v Speaker 2>Those are the reasons why you can strike a juror.

0:02:50.840 --> 0:02:55.799
<v Speaker 2>You cannot strike a juror because they look like your defendant.

0:02:56.160 --> 0:02:58.520
<v Speaker 2>And that's essentially what she put in her notes, that

0:02:58.560 --> 0:03:01.400
<v Speaker 2>she struck a jurors specifically because he had the same

0:03:01.520 --> 0:03:04.160
<v Speaker 2>he was the same race, the same sex, and the

0:03:04.200 --> 0:03:05.600
<v Speaker 2>same age as the defendant.

0:03:05.760 --> 0:03:08.000
<v Speaker 1>That'd be the exact guy what went on my jury, right,

0:03:08.120 --> 0:03:12.280
<v Speaker 1>and that is the exact person this prosecutor did not want. Again,

0:03:12.360 --> 0:03:16.839
<v Speaker 1>you can not do that. So roads they have been

0:03:17.160 --> 0:03:19.440
<v Speaker 1>fighting and fighting and fighting for this guy for years.

0:03:19.480 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 1>His attorney's happened. Finally in appeals court last year last

0:03:22.480 --> 0:03:24.880
<v Speaker 1>summer stepped in voted. I think the vote was two

0:03:24.919 --> 0:03:30.120
<v Speaker 1>to one, but saying yeah, his rights were violated, this

0:03:30.200 --> 0:03:34.200
<v Speaker 1>guy should get a new trial, or you need to

0:03:34.240 --> 0:03:36.080
<v Speaker 1>let him out of prison. Now that was last summer

0:03:36.160 --> 0:03:39.680
<v Speaker 1>roadse But they gave a date and a deadline that

0:03:39.920 --> 0:03:42.760
<v Speaker 1>now is it's knocking on the door.

0:03:42.880 --> 0:03:48.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, March eighteen. That is next Wednesday. Depending. I don't

0:03:48.160 --> 0:03:50.480
<v Speaker 2>know when anyone's listening to this, but yes, they got

0:03:50.520 --> 0:03:53.640
<v Speaker 2>a couple of days left to actually pursue a new

0:03:53.680 --> 0:03:57.320
<v Speaker 2>trial or he's released from prison. And initially the DA's

0:03:57.360 --> 0:04:01.440
<v Speaker 2>office said yeah, we're definitely going to pursue knew charges

0:04:01.480 --> 0:04:04.560
<v Speaker 2>were going to retry this case. And yet silence, crickets.

0:04:04.240 --> 0:04:06.440
<v Speaker 1>Have corn, no quiet. Now are you going to go

0:04:06.480 --> 0:04:06.880
<v Speaker 1>through with it?

0:04:07.960 --> 0:04:11.120
<v Speaker 2>You know? I think they have to weigh the expense

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:15.000
<v Speaker 2>and look, multiple people were convicted for this crime, not

0:04:15.160 --> 0:04:20.280
<v Speaker 2>just Sockwell, including the victim's wife, who police say was

0:04:20.320 --> 0:04:22.760
<v Speaker 2>the mastermind of this killing.

0:04:23.200 --> 0:04:25.080
<v Speaker 1>We've got it. There's got to be a snapped episode

0:04:25.120 --> 0:04:27.440
<v Speaker 1>about this. The murder for hire is what they're saying was, Yes,

0:04:27.480 --> 0:04:29.640
<v Speaker 1>the woman, the wife was behind it. She had the

0:04:29.640 --> 0:04:32.280
<v Speaker 1>death penalty. Initially, I think was ended up that right

0:04:32.440 --> 0:04:34.560
<v Speaker 1>ended up coming back to life in prison. But yes,

0:04:34.960 --> 0:04:37.120
<v Speaker 1>she is serving for this crime. I think that is

0:04:37.160 --> 0:04:39.440
<v Speaker 1>going to be his challenge robed in why this will

0:04:39.440 --> 0:04:42.000
<v Speaker 1>get a new trial, because you're not just this isn't

0:04:42.040 --> 0:04:44.360
<v Speaker 1>just the death penalty phase of it. We're talking about

0:04:44.360 --> 0:04:45.080
<v Speaker 1>a whole new trial.

0:04:45.200 --> 0:04:45.479
<v Speaker 2>Correct.

0:04:45.520 --> 0:04:48.640
<v Speaker 1>So this is the guy you think is a cop killer,

0:04:48.720 --> 0:04:49.520
<v Speaker 1>you got to retry it.

0:04:49.720 --> 0:04:53.760
<v Speaker 2>Yes, So the crime, by the way, Sheriff Sipputy Isaiah Harris,

0:04:53.839 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 2>he was on his way to work and police say

0:04:57.320 --> 0:05:00.040
<v Speaker 2>that he was shot in the face. This happened in

0:05:00.200 --> 0:05:04.599
<v Speaker 2>nineteen eighty eight. That's how far back this goes. But

0:05:04.720 --> 0:05:06.760
<v Speaker 2>he was shot in the face in a murder for

0:05:06.920 --> 0:05:10.599
<v Speaker 2>higher plot that was arranged by his wife. And yes,

0:05:10.640 --> 0:05:15.400
<v Speaker 2>Harris's wife was convicted. She is now serving life in prison.

0:05:15.520 --> 0:05:18.080
<v Speaker 2>But she was having an affair. She claimed she was

0:05:18.120 --> 0:05:22.040
<v Speaker 2>being abused by her husband and she was having an affair. Now,

0:05:22.279 --> 0:05:27.080
<v Speaker 2>Sockwell says, wasn't me, It was her lover. It was

0:05:27.600 --> 0:05:31.159
<v Speaker 2>her the guy who she was having an affair with.

0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:33.359
<v Speaker 2>That's who killed her husband, not me.

0:05:33.839 --> 0:05:37.040
<v Speaker 1>And that is not what courts have been ruling on.

0:05:37.160 --> 0:05:39.760
<v Speaker 1>They are not listening to his guilt or isn't innocence?

0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:42.040
<v Speaker 1>They are listening to whether or not he got a

0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:46.320
<v Speaker 1>fair trial, and that's the only determination. So rose that. So, yes,

0:05:46.400 --> 0:05:49.160
<v Speaker 1>I think everybody on death row and cell block D

0:05:49.320 --> 0:05:52.440
<v Speaker 1>says they're innocent, right, But so they're not listening to that.

0:05:52.520 --> 0:05:56.440
<v Speaker 1>But the Supreme Court didn't necessarily take up the case.

0:05:56.920 --> 0:05:58.800
<v Speaker 1>So after the court down there ruled he should get

0:05:58.800 --> 0:06:01.400
<v Speaker 1>a new trial to get out of prison, Alabama appealed

0:06:01.440 --> 0:06:04.320
<v Speaker 1>to the Supreme Court. Supreme Court essentially saying, we ain't

0:06:04.320 --> 0:06:06.559
<v Speaker 1>trying to hear it. Yes, So they did not issue

0:06:06.560 --> 0:06:08.359
<v Speaker 1>a ruling, They did not take up the case, and

0:06:08.400 --> 0:06:11.360
<v Speaker 1>in doing so, the only decision that now stands is

0:06:11.400 --> 0:06:14.600
<v Speaker 1>the one that's from that lower court. So, now, prosecutors,

0:06:14.600 --> 0:06:16.880
<v Speaker 1>what you going to do? Yeah, we are literally he's waiting. Yeah,

0:06:16.920 --> 0:06:19.760
<v Speaker 1>he's seven, he's been on death row for thirty six years,

0:06:19.800 --> 0:06:22.320
<v Speaker 1>and he is days away from determining whether or not

0:06:22.320 --> 0:06:23.520
<v Speaker 1>he's going to walk out of that place.

0:06:23.680 --> 0:06:29.800
<v Speaker 2>That's an insane situation. And you know, I actually listening

0:06:29.880 --> 0:06:32.800
<v Speaker 2>or reading the Federal Appeals Court ruling, I mean they

0:06:32.839 --> 0:06:36.800
<v Speaker 2>were very strong in their language talking about the misconduct

0:06:36.839 --> 0:06:39.599
<v Speaker 2>that took place in seeding this jury. They said Alabama

0:06:39.640 --> 0:06:46.200
<v Speaker 2>prosecutors repeatedly and purposefully rejected qualified black jurors. And this

0:06:46.400 --> 0:06:49.839
<v Speaker 2>was their their big statement that stood out. Equal justice

0:06:50.040 --> 0:06:55.120
<v Speaker 2>under law requires a criminal trial free of racial discrimination

0:06:55.320 --> 0:07:01.640
<v Speaker 2>in the jury selection process period, and that is why

0:07:01.720 --> 0:07:03.479
<v Speaker 2>we are where we are today.

0:07:03.600 --> 0:07:05.280
<v Speaker 1>This was Alabama in the late eighties.

0:07:06.320 --> 0:07:09.960
<v Speaker 2>Yes, yes, and when they talked about and this all

0:07:10.080 --> 0:07:14.280
<v Speaker 2>was detailed in this appellate court ruling. But the da

0:07:14.400 --> 0:07:16.640
<v Speaker 2>Ellen Brooks and we mentioned, they said she had a

0:07:16.680 --> 0:07:22.880
<v Speaker 2>significant history of striking jurors based on their racial basically

0:07:22.960 --> 0:07:24.880
<v Speaker 2>if they were black. Let's just put it, say it

0:07:24.920 --> 0:07:27.280
<v Speaker 2>like it is. And so they said that there were

0:07:27.480 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 2>several instances of Ellen Brooks striking black jurors. The quote

0:07:33.440 --> 0:07:38.560
<v Speaker 2>was Brooks purposefully struck black jurors in the cases she prosecuted.

0:07:38.600 --> 0:07:40.560
<v Speaker 2>So this was not the only case.

0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:44.000
<v Speaker 1>And it's not just and it's interesting. It was uh no,

0:07:44.160 --> 0:07:46.280
<v Speaker 1>that's the cow My god, Did I really just try

0:07:46.280 --> 0:07:50.840
<v Speaker 1>to recite precedent of Batson, bats and versus Kentucky. You

0:07:50.840 --> 0:07:54.160
<v Speaker 1>are correct that, yes, bats and versus Kentucky is the one.

0:07:54.560 --> 0:07:56.600
<v Speaker 1>It is the President sett in case to where you

0:07:56.640 --> 0:07:59.960
<v Speaker 1>cannot discriminate based on race when it comes to juris

0:08:00.080 --> 0:08:03.800
<v Speaker 1>because not only is it a violation of that defendants right,

0:08:03.880 --> 0:08:07.720
<v Speaker 1>it's actually discrimination against the jury, your discrimination against that

0:08:07.800 --> 0:08:13.000
<v Speaker 1>person for racial reasons. So this is well established and

0:08:13.040 --> 0:08:16.640
<v Speaker 1>this is a major no no. And so Robes it's

0:08:16.640 --> 0:08:18.840
<v Speaker 1>hard to argue with this to say, oh, he's a

0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:21.120
<v Speaker 1>cop killer, just throw away the key. I mean, this

0:08:21.200 --> 0:08:24.360
<v Speaker 1>is sometimes the beauty of our system. Robes that even yes,

0:08:24.440 --> 0:08:27.840
<v Speaker 1>the guy convicted of being a cop killer went on trial,

0:08:28.080 --> 0:08:31.640
<v Speaker 1>got the death penalty, we're determining thirty six years later,

0:08:31.680 --> 0:08:35.480
<v Speaker 1>he wasn't treated fairly in the process. That there's some

0:08:35.559 --> 0:08:36.959
<v Speaker 1>beauty in the system.

0:08:37.160 --> 0:08:40.440
<v Speaker 2>There somewhere Ropes that that could eventually happen for a

0:08:40.480 --> 0:08:41.559
<v Speaker 2>black man in Alabama.

0:08:41.840 --> 0:08:43.920
<v Speaker 1>Yes, the problem is that it happened in the first place.

0:08:44.000 --> 0:08:47.080
<v Speaker 2>Correct. And here there's another interesting twist to this in

0:08:47.120 --> 0:08:51.880
<v Speaker 2>that the jury that convicted him, they voted seven to

0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:56.000
<v Speaker 2>five for life imprisonment, so they voted against the death penalty,

0:08:56.360 --> 0:09:01.880
<v Speaker 2>but the judge overrode the jury's recommendation and handed down

0:09:01.920 --> 0:09:05.160
<v Speaker 2>the death sentence. Anyway, by the way, that is illegal now,

0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:09.120
<v Speaker 2>but it was legal up until twenty seventeen. Alabama was

0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:13.880
<v Speaker 2>the last state in this country to stop that practice

0:09:13.920 --> 0:09:18.079
<v Speaker 2>of a judge being able to overturn a jury's recommendation

0:09:18.280 --> 0:09:21.640
<v Speaker 2>for punishment. And so that happened to him. That couldn't

0:09:21.679 --> 0:09:25.320
<v Speaker 2>happen today. If he were sentenced today, he would have

0:09:25.360 --> 0:09:27.439
<v Speaker 2>gotten the life. He would have gotten life in prison,

0:09:27.640 --> 0:09:28.400
<v Speaker 2>not the death compy.

0:09:28.559 --> 0:09:31.400
<v Speaker 1>It's so it's wild that that was permitted at all.

0:09:31.480 --> 0:09:34.240
<v Speaker 1>The jury decides what it wants to happen, and you're saying, nope,

0:09:34.360 --> 0:09:38.800
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna do something else. That's just bizarre. And one

0:09:38.800 --> 0:09:40.160
<v Speaker 1>are the others that we've covered a lot of these,

0:09:40.559 --> 0:09:43.280
<v Speaker 1>a lot of death penalty cases Forbes, the other I

0:09:43.280 --> 0:09:45.120
<v Speaker 1>can't remember the states, but some of them even have

0:09:45.240 --> 0:09:47.760
<v Speaker 1>where it doesn't have to be unanimous to get the

0:09:47.760 --> 0:09:48.440
<v Speaker 1>death penalty.

0:09:48.559 --> 0:09:53.479
<v Speaker 2>Correct, you're that it seems like when it's something that significant,

0:09:53.559 --> 0:09:56.400
<v Speaker 2>it should be unanimous, just like the jury's verdict needs

0:09:56.400 --> 0:10:00.439
<v Speaker 2>to be unanimous about guilt or innocence. It seems though,

0:10:00.760 --> 0:10:05.160
<v Speaker 2>that same that same standard should be applied to whether

0:10:05.280 --> 0:10:06.200
<v Speaker 2>or not you live or die.

0:10:06.320 --> 0:10:09.360
<v Speaker 1>Can you imagine you found guilty and the vote was

0:10:10.559 --> 0:10:13.480
<v Speaker 1>seven to.

0:10:12.240 --> 0:10:14.000
<v Speaker 2>Five or something, Yeah, yeah.

0:10:13.800 --> 0:10:15.800
<v Speaker 1>That's you're mad. I did put you on the spot.

0:10:15.800 --> 0:10:18.160
<v Speaker 2>I don't know. I couldn't remember how many jurors are seated.

0:10:18.200 --> 0:10:19.480
<v Speaker 1>I can see you have the look on your face.

0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:20.520
<v Speaker 1>Is it terrified?

0:10:20.760 --> 0:10:22.080
<v Speaker 2>Is it fourteen?

0:10:22.120 --> 0:10:24.880
<v Speaker 1>I can't remember the idea there. It just that seems

0:10:24.920 --> 0:10:26.960
<v Speaker 1>wild as well. So, yes, that a judge could override

0:10:26.960 --> 0:10:28.680
<v Speaker 1>when a jury said what they wanted to have into

0:10:28.679 --> 0:10:31.000
<v Speaker 1>the man. We should start there even with this case.

0:10:31.040 --> 0:10:33.000
<v Speaker 2>All right, when we come back, we're going to tell

0:10:33.000 --> 0:10:37.040
<v Speaker 2>you what the reaction was from the Sockwell camp to

0:10:37.120 --> 0:10:50.640
<v Speaker 2>the Supreme Court's decision, and what may happen next. Welcome

0:10:50.640 --> 0:10:54.000
<v Speaker 2>back everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ Presents.

0:10:54.120 --> 0:10:57.960
<v Speaker 2>We are following a court case that is thirty six

0:10:58.040 --> 0:10:59.960
<v Speaker 2>years in the making and only has a few days

0:11:00.160 --> 0:11:03.040
<v Speaker 2>left for us to know what is going to happen next.

0:11:03.360 --> 0:11:06.720
<v Speaker 2>We are talking about a case out of Montgomery County, Alabama,

0:11:07.120 --> 0:11:10.840
<v Speaker 2>where sixty three year old Michael Sockwell has been on

0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:14.720
<v Speaker 2>death row since nineteen ninety. He was convicted for a

0:11:14.840 --> 0:11:18.199
<v Speaker 2>nineteen eighty eight killing of a sheriff's deputy. It was

0:11:18.240 --> 0:11:21.880
<v Speaker 2>a murder for hire. The sheriff deputy's wife is behind bars.

0:11:21.920 --> 0:11:25.800
<v Speaker 2>She was convicted initially to the death penalty, but I

0:11:25.880 --> 0:11:28.720
<v Speaker 2>ended up getting life in prison, and now we have

0:11:29.000 --> 0:11:32.440
<v Speaker 2>a The Supreme Court decided not to listen to the

0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:36.320
<v Speaker 2>State of Alabama's appeal to a lower court's ruling that said,

0:11:37.080 --> 0:11:41.600
<v Speaker 2>guess what, the DA acted improperly when seeding this jury.

0:11:41.640 --> 0:11:45.839
<v Speaker 2>And this DA has a history of acting improperly. When

0:11:45.840 --> 0:11:48.760
<v Speaker 2>I say improperly, she has a significant history of striking

0:11:48.840 --> 0:11:52.400
<v Speaker 2>black jurors for black defendants. That's a big no no.

0:11:53.720 --> 0:12:00.040
<v Speaker 1>We've seen attorneys question potential jurors before this process. I

0:12:00.200 --> 0:12:04.600
<v Speaker 1>only imagine this one. She doesn't have to ask questions. Nope, nope, nope,

0:12:04.760 --> 0:12:07.959
<v Speaker 1>black black, black, bye bye bye. Like that seems they

0:12:07.960 --> 0:12:11.800
<v Speaker 1>are actually saying, that's all she was doing. You don't

0:12:11.960 --> 0:12:16.520
<v Speaker 1>have to I'm saying, not literally, but quite frankly, don't

0:12:16.520 --> 0:12:18.440
<v Speaker 1>need to ask them questions about their background. I don't need

0:12:18.440 --> 0:12:21.000
<v Speaker 1>to look at the questionnaire. That's a black person. There's

0:12:21.000 --> 0:12:22.800
<v Speaker 1>a black person. There's a black person. Don't want you

0:12:22.840 --> 0:12:23.320
<v Speaker 1>on my jerry.

0:12:23.559 --> 0:12:26.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. And in her notes she said it, there was

0:12:26.679 --> 0:12:29.440
<v Speaker 2>no denying it, that there was no other reason to

0:12:29.600 --> 0:12:32.720
<v Speaker 2>not seat them, and so they were all qualified to

0:12:32.720 --> 0:12:35.160
<v Speaker 2>sit on that jury based on the questions they were asked.

0:12:35.200 --> 0:12:38.160
<v Speaker 2>And that's the point, and she struck. There were ten

0:12:38.200 --> 0:12:41.480
<v Speaker 2>potential black durers left to be seated. She struck eight

0:12:41.520 --> 0:12:44.679
<v Speaker 2>of them for no reason other than the fact that

0:12:44.720 --> 0:12:47.760
<v Speaker 2>they were black. You can't do that. And so yes,

0:12:48.200 --> 0:12:51.720
<v Speaker 2>the court finally, thirty six years later, I guess this

0:12:51.840 --> 0:12:54.560
<v Speaker 2>all this decision initially happened last summer in June of

0:12:54.720 --> 0:12:58.440
<v Speaker 2>twenty twenty five. But they said, hey, okay, prosecution, you

0:12:58.559 --> 0:13:03.480
<v Speaker 2>now have a timeline by March eighteenth. Either you start,

0:13:03.600 --> 0:13:06.160
<v Speaker 2>or you retry this man, or you let him go.

0:13:06.480 --> 0:13:09.640
<v Speaker 2>So Michael Sockwell either gets a new trial as of

0:13:09.679 --> 0:13:13.199
<v Speaker 2>March eighteenth or he gets out of jail.

0:13:13.800 --> 0:13:16.320
<v Speaker 1>They have to they have to try him. That you

0:13:16.400 --> 0:13:19.320
<v Speaker 1>have to. They have to ropes. This is a guy

0:13:19.360 --> 0:13:23.000
<v Speaker 1>that Nope, they're not saying is possibly innocent. Are you

0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:25.080
<v Speaker 1>really going to say, okay, that was enough years. You

0:13:25.120 --> 0:13:28.199
<v Speaker 1>serve thirty six and that was enough for killing a.

0:13:28.120 --> 0:13:33.120
<v Speaker 2>Copy I agree from just from so many different points

0:13:33.160 --> 0:13:35.840
<v Speaker 2>of view, they have to retry this case.

0:13:35.880 --> 0:13:37.040
<v Speaker 1>Now, remind me where's this happening?

0:13:37.160 --> 0:13:44.760
<v Speaker 2>Montgomery County, Alabama. And they said when, Yes, when, when

0:13:44.800 --> 0:13:47.640
<v Speaker 2>this decision came down by the lower court, It was

0:13:47.640 --> 0:13:51.800
<v Speaker 2>a federal court in June. The Montgomery County Prosecute the

0:13:51.840 --> 0:13:54.000
<v Speaker 2>DA's and they said, Okay, we are absolutely going to

0:13:54.040 --> 0:13:57.840
<v Speaker 2>retry this case. But they have not officially commented since

0:13:57.880 --> 0:14:01.440
<v Speaker 2>the Supreme Court refused to hear the state's appeal, so

0:14:01.559 --> 0:14:06.160
<v Speaker 2>we don't know. They haven't made another announcement since June

0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:09.120
<v Speaker 2>of twenty twenty five as to what they're going to do.

0:14:09.200 --> 0:14:11.200
<v Speaker 2>Maybe they were banking on the fact that the Supreme

0:14:11.200 --> 0:14:13.800
<v Speaker 2>Court was going to back them up and throw out

0:14:13.840 --> 0:14:16.280
<v Speaker 2>the Appellate Court's decision, but that did not happen, and

0:14:16.320 --> 0:14:19.600
<v Speaker 2>so now the ball is literally in their court. And

0:14:19.640 --> 0:14:22.360
<v Speaker 2>Michael Sockwell's defense lawyers had this to say when the

0:14:22.360 --> 0:14:26.160
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court decided not to rule or not to look

0:14:26.280 --> 0:14:29.480
<v Speaker 2>into the Appellate Court's decision, they said, we appreciate the

0:14:29.520 --> 0:14:33.440
<v Speaker 2>Supreme Court's decision. Michael has been denied his right to

0:14:33.480 --> 0:14:36.920
<v Speaker 2>a fair trial for more than thirty five years, will

0:14:36.960 --> 0:14:39.440
<v Speaker 2>continue to fight for his freedom.

0:14:40.200 --> 0:14:43.360
<v Speaker 1>I haven't seen we've been looking at and covering the story.

0:14:43.640 --> 0:14:46.400
<v Speaker 1>I haven't seen much of a drumbeat of anybody saying

0:14:46.440 --> 0:14:49.000
<v Speaker 1>he's innocent to saying he's going to get a chance

0:14:49.040 --> 0:14:52.400
<v Speaker 1>to present some new evidence that something is going to change.

0:14:52.640 --> 0:14:54.560
<v Speaker 1>That's not that drum beat, correct.

0:14:54.680 --> 0:14:57.480
<v Speaker 2>Well from Michael Sockwell, there is. He's claiming it was

0:14:57.640 --> 0:15:02.280
<v Speaker 2>the wife's lover who actually killed the sheriff's deputy, not him.

0:15:02.440 --> 0:15:04.560
<v Speaker 1>So the guy on trial is blaming somebody else. That's

0:15:04.560 --> 0:15:09.120
<v Speaker 1>a new one. I'm saying, this is not that when

0:15:09.640 --> 0:15:11.760
<v Speaker 1>it's not that thing. There have been plenty where there

0:15:11.800 --> 0:15:15.080
<v Speaker 1>are questions. Even Hell, we've seen some of the families

0:15:15.120 --> 0:15:18.640
<v Speaker 1>of the victims come forward and defend the defendant to

0:15:18.680 --> 0:15:23.280
<v Speaker 1>a certain this is nothing along those lines. But he

0:15:23.360 --> 0:15:26.760
<v Speaker 1>has denied a fair trial. Thirty six later, years later,

0:15:26.760 --> 0:15:29.280
<v Speaker 1>we're trying to right or wrong. The wrong shouldn't have

0:15:29.320 --> 0:15:32.040
<v Speaker 1>happened in the first place. Sure, but I mean you

0:15:32.120 --> 0:15:34.080
<v Speaker 1>have to look at our system and go, Okay, this

0:15:34.240 --> 0:15:36.280
<v Speaker 1>is how it's supposed to work exactly.

0:15:36.320 --> 0:15:39.480
<v Speaker 2>And look, Michael Sockwell, as you point out, might still

0:15:39.600 --> 0:15:42.880
<v Speaker 2>be convicted for this crime, and almost certainly will be.

0:15:43.320 --> 0:15:46.080
<v Speaker 2>But will he get the death penalty? And that's the

0:15:46.120 --> 0:15:49.000
<v Speaker 2>other big question because again, the jury that was initially seated,

0:15:49.000 --> 0:15:52.680
<v Speaker 2>the jury that they say now was unfairly placed. The

0:15:52.760 --> 0:15:56.800
<v Speaker 2>racial makeup, I believe was ten white jurors two black

0:15:56.880 --> 0:16:01.200
<v Speaker 2>jurors that they voted against the death penal. They voted

0:16:01.360 --> 0:16:04.720
<v Speaker 2>for life imprisonment, and it was the judge who gave

0:16:04.800 --> 0:16:07.760
<v Speaker 2>him that death send. So at the very least, this

0:16:07.800 --> 0:16:11.000
<v Speaker 2>new trial would actually be the difference between life or death.

0:16:11.040 --> 0:16:14.400
<v Speaker 2>It might not be the difference between freedom and incarceration.

0:16:15.120 --> 0:16:18.400
<v Speaker 2>But certainly he has a shot at he's sixty five

0:16:18.440 --> 0:16:23.280
<v Speaker 2>years old, at growing old behind bars and potentially getting out.

0:16:23.400 --> 0:16:25.040
<v Speaker 2>That's still on the table, on.

0:16:25.000 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 1>The table, he has three options. But yeah, you're probably

0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:32.560
<v Speaker 1>right that continue to have he'll get off death row, right,

0:16:32.600 --> 0:16:35.440
<v Speaker 1>he will get I will imagine death row jury already

0:16:35.440 --> 0:16:37.320
<v Speaker 1>didn't want him on death row, so here we are

0:16:37.360 --> 0:16:40.720
<v Speaker 1>these years later. So yes, to that point, it's significant.

0:16:40.840 --> 0:16:44.560
<v Speaker 1>It's significant this, this decision or lack of one by

0:16:44.560 --> 0:16:46.680
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court might have just saved this man's life.

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:49.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that is a very good way to put it.

0:16:49.480 --> 0:16:52.880
<v Speaker 2>And we will of course continue to follow this story

0:16:52.960 --> 0:16:55.520
<v Speaker 2>because yes, we are days away from getting an answer

0:16:55.600 --> 0:17:01.320
<v Speaker 2>from Alabama's prosecution or Montgomery County curatorial team to see

0:17:01.360 --> 0:17:04.639
<v Speaker 2>whether or not they will. I don't know how do

0:17:04.680 --> 0:17:07.000
<v Speaker 2>you get a new trial. You just say we're now

0:17:07.040 --> 0:17:10.080
<v Speaker 2>officially recharging or we're going to give him a new trial.

0:17:10.200 --> 0:17:12.000
<v Speaker 2>I don't know what the announcement.

0:17:11.520 --> 0:17:14.000
<v Speaker 1>Is, all right. The amount of paperwork, oh my goodness,

0:17:14.240 --> 0:17:16.320
<v Speaker 1>assume and things that have to be filed to get

0:17:16.320 --> 0:17:18.200
<v Speaker 1>this done and a judge has to sign off on it.

0:17:18.359 --> 0:17:20.239
<v Speaker 1>But they'll get it done. But this is we are

0:17:20.320 --> 0:17:22.440
<v Speaker 1>days away. We are going to find out, and wrote

0:17:22.480 --> 0:17:25.159
<v Speaker 1>we are not used to in cases like this. The

0:17:25.200 --> 0:17:28.879
<v Speaker 1>clock is usually ticking on the execution, correct, the clock

0:17:28.960 --> 0:17:31.200
<v Speaker 1>is ticking on is the governor going to step into

0:17:31.200 --> 0:17:33.560
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court going to step all those things? Now,

0:17:34.680 --> 0:17:36.880
<v Speaker 1>it's rare that the clock is ticking because we're waiting

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.200
<v Speaker 1>on the prosecution to do something. Yeah, in a death

0:17:39.280 --> 0:17:39.800
<v Speaker 1>row case?

0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:42.680
<v Speaker 2>Right, But we wait, all right, we wait and we

0:17:42.720 --> 0:17:45.280
<v Speaker 2>will watch and we will keep you all updated. Thank

0:17:45.320 --> 0:17:47.680
<v Speaker 2>you though for listening to us. As always, I made

0:17:47.680 --> 0:17:50.800
<v Speaker 2>Wroteboch alongside TJ. Holmes. We will talk to you soon.