Speaker 1: I fell into the hands of a corrupt detective.
Speaker 2: I was naive enough to believe that I would be
Speaker 2: able to just present all of my proof of actual innocence,
Speaker 2: that they would investigate adequately, and so that I wouldn't
Speaker 2: be going to prison because I was a good person.
Speaker 2: I hadn't done anything wrong.
Speaker 1: In the back of your mind, you say, well, when
Speaker 1: we go to a hearing or we go to court,
Speaker 1: the truth will come out. The prosecution from day one
Speaker 1: knew I was innocent and let forced testimony go uncorrected
Speaker 1: from the lower courts all the way up to the
Speaker 1: United States Supreme Court.
Speaker 3: You have someone with a badge with ultimate and really,
Speaker 3: in that moment, unchecked authority.
Speaker 2: Don't presume that people are guilty when you see them
Speaker 2: on TV, because it may just be a dirty da
Speaker 2: that is trying to rise upward.
Speaker 4: This is wrongful conviction. Welcome back to Wrongful Conviction with
Speaker 4: Jason Flamm. Today, I have two very special guests, and
Speaker 4: you'll learn more about that surely, but first I'm going
Speaker 4: to introduce them. Vanessa Gathers is our star today.
Speaker 3: Just months after the Crown Heights riots back in nineteen
Speaker 3: ninety one, Gathers was called in for questioning for robbery
Speaker 3: and the beating of an elderly man inside of his
Speaker 3: Crown Heights apartment. The victim fell into a coma then died.
Speaker 3: The case was classified a homicide. That's when controversial former
Speaker 3: NYPD detective Lewis Scarcella took over the case. Five years later,
Speaker 3: Scarcella reinterviewed Gathers and says she made a full confession.
Speaker 3: Gathers was convicted on that confession alone. The former detective
Speaker 3: is in the middle of several cases where people went
Speaker 3: to prison for crimes they did not commit.
Speaker 5: D A.
Speaker 3: Thompson and his team have already exonerated seventeen men. Gathers
Speaker 3: is the eighteenth, the first woman. Right now, the DA's
Speaker 3: office is looking into at least one hundred other cases.
Speaker 3: Fifty eight year old Vanessa Gatherers, who will no longer
Speaker 3: be labeled a convicted felon after ten years in prison
Speaker 3: for manslaughter, Brooklyn District Attorney Ken Thompson is expected to
Speaker 3: vacate her conviction.
Speaker 6: We're going to take a step to not only vacate
Speaker 6: misgatherers conviction, but to give her her good name back.
Speaker 4: Vanessa, Welcome to the show. Thank you and her badass
Speaker 4: attorney is here as well, Lisa Cahill. Welcome to Ronful Conviction.
Speaker 5: Happy to be here.
Speaker 4: So, Vanessa, let's go back to when life was simpler, right,
Speaker 4: because before this crazy incident happened, you were living basically
Speaker 4: a normal life like anyone else. Right. Yes, were you
Speaker 4: in a lot of trouble with the law as reason
Speaker 4: that they would have ever suspected you of being involved
Speaker 4: in a cold blooded murder, a terrible beating death.
Speaker 7: Not at all?
Speaker 4: What were you doing? What was your life like? Where'd
Speaker 4: you grow up?
Speaker 6: I grew up in Jersey City, in North Carolina, and
Speaker 6: then I moved to New York in seventy nine and
Speaker 6: I started working. I was working in Manhattan doing what
Speaker 6: I worked for, Gristities. I worked for a lawyer when
Speaker 6: I first arrived to New York City, So.
Speaker 4: Just finding your way doing different jobs whatever.
Speaker 7: I stayed with Gristiitis for quite some time.
Speaker 6: The original job I had was working for a lawyer,
Speaker 6: a criminal lawyer, and I was just doing statements of
Speaker 6: fouling and typing up notes. Things got slow, so later
Speaker 6: on I found a job with Christiiti's. He let me
Speaker 6: stay until I found something better.
Speaker 4: So you came to New York, like most people do,
Speaker 4: I guess, to pursue your dreams and find your way.
Speaker 4: And you were finding your way, things were going okay.
Speaker 4: Do you have a family when this came down?
Speaker 7: Yes, my family was in Jersey. I had a daughter.
Speaker 4: This case stems out of a murder that happened in
Speaker 4: nineteen ninety one. And there's a lot of things that
Speaker 4: are unusual about your case. But there are also a
Speaker 4: lot of things that we see that are common in
Speaker 4: wrongful convictions, including a false confession, which I think everyone
Speaker 4: is fascinated by it and terrified of. I know, I am.
Speaker 4: But in your case, this was a murder of a
Speaker 4: guy named Michael Shaw, I think right, Yes, And he
Speaker 4: was a guy who was murdered in nineteen ninety one.
Speaker 4: He was beaten to death by three women. Again, pretty
Speaker 4: unusual circumstance. And the reason we know he was beaten
Speaker 4: to death by three women is because he lived long
Speaker 4: enough to tell the tale. He died in the hospital. Yes,
Speaker 4: so originally you were living in the area. Did you
Speaker 4: know about the crime?
Speaker 6: No, not at the time. No, I did not. I
Speaker 6: found out all that information later on.
Speaker 4: And how did you first become aware that this. Did
Speaker 4: you know the victim?
Speaker 7: I didn't know him, per se.
Speaker 6: I just knew that he was like a picture post
Speaker 6: man that stayed in the window. He set by the
Speaker 6: window all the time because I used to walk my
Speaker 6: dog around the block.
Speaker 7: But I didn't know his name. I didn't know him.
Speaker 6: From time to time he would actually to come over
Speaker 6: to the window and would I get him a pack
Speaker 6: of cigarettes, which I did because I walked around the
Speaker 6: block and I walked my dog back and I just
Speaker 6: passed it to him.
Speaker 7: Through the window.
Speaker 4: So he lived on the first floor, Yes, And so
Speaker 4: when he was murdered, the word must have gotten around
Speaker 4: the neighborhood. And you first heard about it from a detective,
Speaker 4: is that right? Yes? And how'd that come about? Because
Speaker 4: it's weird because you weren't arrested until many years later
Speaker 4: when the case was cold. And then you actually drew
Speaker 4: a terrible straw or bad break what every gonna call it,
Speaker 4: because you got in the crosshairs of a guy who
Speaker 4: we know now is one of the worst detectives in
Speaker 4: the history of this country in terms of the damage
Speaker 4: that he did to an entire burrow. Really, he wrecked
Speaker 4: havoc on so many people, in so many cases, and
Speaker 4: a whole system. So how did it come about that
Speaker 4: you first encountered detectives, Garcella.
Speaker 6: I believe I was walking my dog at the time,
Speaker 6: and I mean the detective Scuss Selling his partner Shamil
Speaker 6: approached me and asked me about the incident, and I said,
Speaker 6: I didn't know. Actually I didn't even know the man's name.
Speaker 6: I didn't know who he was. I just know him
Speaker 6: by sight, you know, from sitting in the window. That's
Speaker 6: all I knew about this individual. But then later on
Speaker 6: after that incident, I didn't see the man anymore. After
Speaker 6: a while, you know, I would still walk my dog,
Speaker 6: but the man was not there in the window anymore.
Speaker 4: So they approached you on the street, yes, And were
Speaker 4: they friendly? Were they hostel? Did they put you in copsle?
Speaker 4: How did this whole?
Speaker 7: They were friendly. They just asked me some questions.
Speaker 6: They also asked me about the same thing that I
Speaker 6: know the man, and I told him I didn't know
Speaker 6: who they were talking about at first. And then when
Speaker 6: they was telling me that he lived there, and I said, oh, yeah,
Speaker 6: I remember seeing the man in the window, but I
Speaker 6: didn't know him per se.
Speaker 4: Did they tell you that he had been murdered.
Speaker 6: No, they didn't state that. They just said something happened.
Speaker 6: It was an incident with this guy. They was trying
Speaker 6: to find out what happened.
Speaker 4: And let's turn to you. So what was going on there?
Speaker 4: First of all, Vanessa was sort of a person that
Speaker 4: you would not really think would be involved in anything
Speaker 4: like this. I mean, and meeting her now, she's such
Speaker 4: a gentle soul. The idea that she would be involved
Speaker 4: in a beating death seems so far fetched.
Speaker 5: I certainly agree with that. But one of the big
Speaker 5: mysteries always in the case was this business about Scarcella
Speaker 5: stopping Vanessa because she was a woman walking a white dog.
Speaker 5: Let me back up, right after mister Shaw was assaulted,
Speaker 5: he didn't die till months later, so it didn't become
Speaker 5: a homicide investigation for about four months time. So immediately
Speaker 5: after the assault, it's basically a robbery investigation. But detectives
Speaker 5: are working the robbery and the beating they're investigating somewhat.
Speaker 5: And those detectives interviewed the super in mister Shaw's building
Speaker 5: twice and memorialized that interview, and the super never said
Speaker 5: anything about Vanessa Gathers. He never described Vanessa Gathers. He
Speaker 5: never said, oh, there's a woman with a white dog
Speaker 5: in the neighborhood who you should talk to. None of
Speaker 5: that is reflected in those interview notes. But Scarcella consistently
Speaker 5: testified that the reason he stopped Vanessa was because after
Speaker 5: mister Shaw died, it did become a homicide investigation, obviously,
Speaker 5: and Scarcella was assigned the case. He testified that one
Speaker 5: of the first things he did was go interview the super.
Speaker 5: He claimed that the Super said one of the women
Speaker 5: who used to talk to Shaw and was friendly with
Speaker 5: Shaw was a woman in the neighborhood with a white dog. Now, suspiciously,
Speaker 5: Scarcella never memorialized that interview with the super, as you're
Speaker 5: supposed to do, and as two prior detectives had done
Speaker 5: when they interviewed the super. We always thought it was
Speaker 5: suspicious that there was never any memorialization of that. Why
Speaker 5: he in fact stopped Vanessa. I really don't know. I mean,
Speaker 5: I suppose it's conceivable the super said that, but the
Speaker 5: Super was dead by the time of trial, so no
Speaker 5: one really knows.
Speaker 4: Well, we do know that the victim said that it
Speaker 4: was three women. So the one thing you had in
Speaker 4: common with the perpetrate it was that you were a woman, right,
Speaker 4: But there's a lot of women, so just and we
Speaker 4: know now that Scarcella didn't really care whether you were
Speaker 4: the perpetrator or not. He just cared about getting convictions.
Speaker 4: And he was very good at it actually, I mean
Speaker 4: in a very nefarious and terrible way. He was famous
Speaker 4: actually for solving cases, and that's probably what he was after.
Speaker 4: So he saw you, figured he would stop and talk
Speaker 4: to you, and maybe he was bored, had nothing else
Speaker 4: to do. But it came and went right, and then
Speaker 4: you went back to your life, and you know, eventually
Speaker 4: you found out that mister Shaw had died, I'm sure,
Speaker 4: and life went on.
Speaker 6: Well that's basically what happened. Well, it was ninety two
Speaker 6: actually when he came around, I think April or May
Speaker 6: or something of nineteen ninety two when he came the
Speaker 6: initial visit with him, and then the next time I
Speaker 6: saw him was nineteen ninety seven. He's knocking on my door.
Speaker 4: He came to your home. Yes, and what transpired next,
Speaker 4: I mean, you had no reason to think that you
Speaker 4: would ever be a suspect in anything like this. No,
Speaker 4: and probably the memory of the whole thing had faded
Speaker 4: to some extent, right because it was one coming.
Speaker 6: I had already forgotten about him and the questioning at
Speaker 6: that time.
Speaker 7: I mean, I'm stayed in the same building. I didn't move.
Speaker 6: If I had anything to hide, I think I would
Speaker 6: have left. I mean, a lot of people in the
Speaker 6: neighborhood moved out, but I was still there.
Speaker 7: So there was no reason for.
Speaker 6: Me to try and run, will do anything negative regard
Speaker 6: in this manner, because I know I had no involvement
Speaker 6: in it.
Speaker 5: One of our hypotheses was that Vanessa was literally the
Speaker 5: only one who had any connection to Shaw who was
Speaker 5: actually still available to Scarcella, still living in the same building.
Speaker 4: So by now it had turned into a homicide investigation.
Speaker 4: Scarcella had decided that he was going to solve a
Speaker 4: cold case, or maybe not, probably many of them. Right.
Speaker 4: So when he did come see you six years after
Speaker 4: the murder, what happened? What was his approach this time?
Speaker 4: Was he friendly? Was he hostile to put you in coffs?
Speaker 7: He was very friendly.
Speaker 6: I actually was never in Coffs at that time we spoke.
Speaker 6: He asked me, saying questions. He asked me, should I
Speaker 6: come to the precinct. You know, I oblige and I
Speaker 6: went there. He showed me some muck shots and stuff.
Speaker 6: He asked me about some of the women in the neighborhood.
Speaker 6: Did I know in them? It's a couple that I
Speaker 6: did see that had I guess criminal records.
Speaker 7: And that was basically it.
Speaker 6: He never stated to me that I was a suspect
Speaker 6: or anything. I had no knowledge of that up until
Speaker 6: the time that we did. After the polygraph and all
Speaker 6: of that other information that were transpire. He had my history.
Speaker 6: I told him where I was working. You know, he
Speaker 6: knew where I lived.
Speaker 7: I didn't have anything to hide from this spoof. I
Speaker 7: cooperated the best that I could.
Speaker 6: I was working at the Brooklyn Family Court and he
Speaker 6: picked me up that morning. He came to my job
Speaker 6: and said he wanted me to come take a polygrab chest.
Speaker 6: I went with him and everything. I had nothing to die.
Speaker 6: So after that, we stayed at the Priests and all
Speaker 6: of these other things transpired, and he kept stating to
Speaker 6: me that he was going to take me home. It
Speaker 6: got late into the evening before I left the Priests,
Speaker 6: and it was night. It was night when I did
Speaker 6: leave there, and he kept saying that my companion that
Speaker 6: he would contact him.
Speaker 7: He never did. He just continued to lie, Lie, Lie.
Speaker 7: He was frightening.
Speaker 6: He took his jacket off, he had his gun exposed,
Speaker 6: and he kept on threatening me, saying I was dere
Speaker 6: I was there. I kept telling him no, I wasn't.
Speaker 6: And it just went back and forth like that for
Speaker 6: quite some time.
Speaker 4: So he went sort of progressively from friendly to you'd
Speaker 4: pick you up and you probably were like most people.
Speaker 4: I mean, you were law abiding citizen. It wasn't like
Speaker 4: you had a long rap sheet, right.
Speaker 6: I didn't have no knowledge of the law, so he
Speaker 6: and I think he really knew that. So he knew
Speaker 6: because I don't remember him randomizing me or anything.
Speaker 7: I don't remember all of that.
Speaker 6: As far as getting a lawyer, I didn't know I
Speaker 6: needed one because I didn't know I was. I was
Speaker 6: the person that was chlose Toh had committed this crime.
Speaker 4: Right and Lisa, That's something that always bothers me is
Speaker 4: that people like Vanessa who are innocent are very likely
Speaker 4: to waive their Miranda rights and speak freely and not
Speaker 4: request a lawyer. And if you're listening to the show. Now,
Speaker 4: I'm going to encourage you. If you do get picked up,
Speaker 4: don't assume anything, right, just request a lawyer, and other
Speaker 4: than that, don't say anything other than your name, your address,
Speaker 4: and that's basically it, right, And once you ask for
Speaker 4: a lawyer, they're not allowed to ask you more questions.
Speaker 7: That's right, That's right.
Speaker 4: I mean, they may do it anyway, but they'll be
Speaker 4: breaking the law. Yeah, I mean, it is a tragic
Speaker 4: and cruel irony that people like Vanessa who go in
Speaker 4: wanting to help right and wanting to be cooperative and
Speaker 4: good citizens and help the police, end up often really
Speaker 4: on the terribly wrong end of the stick because of
Speaker 4: the fact that they just don't know and they get
Speaker 4: taken advantage of, which is exactly what happened here.
Speaker 7: That's right.
Speaker 5: And one of the issues that we identified with the polygraph,
Speaker 5: which was basically how Scarcela kicked off that morning. With
Speaker 5: the polygraph, a polygrapher is supposed to sit down alone
Speaker 5: with this subject and basically explain to the subject why
Speaker 5: they're there this morning, and for example, to say, do
Speaker 5: you know why you're here? You were here because you're
Speaker 5: suspected of involvement in this incident, and that's what I
Speaker 5: want to talk to you about today. And in fact,
Speaker 5: this particular polygraph never went through that exercise with Vanessa,
Speaker 5: and she didn't know any better. Someone would say, well,
Speaker 5: what do you think when someone's polygraphing you? But Vanessa
Speaker 5: had had no prior experience with us. She was just
Speaker 5: trying to do what they asked her to do.
Speaker 4: And again, if you don't have anything to hide, and
Speaker 4: if you are telling the truth, you'd think, well, why
Speaker 4: shouldn't I take a polygraph? But not such a great idea. Well,
Speaker 4: then we get to the part that gives me a
Speaker 4: stomach ache. Is this whole process that takes place in
Speaker 4: the interrogation room when someone in this case Garcela, but
Speaker 4: it happens all over the country when a detective is
Speaker 4: determined to get a confession, and they're not necessarily determined
Speaker 4: to get the truth. In your case, they had no
Speaker 4: reason to believe that you had any involvement, and yet
Speaker 4: they approached you and interrogated you as if they basically
Speaker 4: had everything in the world, every reason in the world
Speaker 4: to suspect that you were the actual killer. Ultimately, you
Speaker 4: confess to this crime. You didn't commit. And that's the
Speaker 4: number one thing, Vanessa. When I talked to people who
Speaker 4: aren't familiar with these issues, everybody says, I would never confess.
Speaker 4: They couldn't get me to do it. That's crazy. I'm
Speaker 4: too strong, I'm tough. I would never confit, that's you know.
Speaker 4: And I'm like, well, let me tell you something. So
Speaker 4: how did they get you? I mean, you're an intelligent woman,
Speaker 4: you're a law abiding person. You would know enough to
Speaker 4: know that that's a disaster, right, But you did it?
Speaker 7: Yes, I did.
Speaker 6: You are in a tiny room with these two police
Speaker 6: detectives and you don't even know your rights.
Speaker 7: I didn't know. I was terrified.
Speaker 6: And then the badgering started and the jagger came off,
Speaker 6: like I said, expose it, and he started threatening me
Speaker 6: and leaning over her and you know, making all of
Speaker 6: these accusations and stuff. And I continually told him that
Speaker 6: I did not commit this crime.
Speaker 7: I was not there. And when he wrote.
Speaker 6: The statement, I told him we were going back and
Speaker 6: for as he's trying to tell me to state this.
Speaker 4: And state that this must have been confusing.
Speaker 6: It was because I'm like, I'm not understanding what is
Speaker 6: going on as far as what he's writing on paper.
Speaker 6: He tried to get me to write that statement and
Speaker 6: I said, I'm not writing anything because I don't know
Speaker 6: what happened.
Speaker 4: This is part of the process, right, And it's the
Speaker 4: crazy thing in this country that police are allowed to lie.
Speaker 4: They can say they have a satellite image of you
Speaker 4: committing the crime. They can say that they found your fingerprints,
Speaker 4: they can say that they have witnesses. They can say
Speaker 4: almost anything they want. What they can't say is they
Speaker 4: can't threaten you with say you're going to get the
Speaker 4: death penalty if you're not. There's certain things they can't
Speaker 4: do like that. But as far as the facts surrounding
Speaker 4: the case, they can lie all they want, which I
Speaker 4: think is crazy and't It's not that way in most
Speaker 4: other Western European countries are well, Jason.
Speaker 5: The reason they do that is to put the subject
Speaker 5: in a helpless feeling situation so then they can get
Speaker 5: them to turn and do what they want to do.
Speaker 5: They make you feel helpless and then they extend and
Speaker 5: olive branch. Just sign this and I'll take you home.
Speaker 5: Just help me out here, I'll get you out of here.
Speaker 5: But the first thing is making the subject feel helpless,
Speaker 5: and they do that with these false sevenence ploys.
Speaker 4: So which lies did they tell you?
Speaker 6: Well, he told me that he had fingerprints, Yeah, eyewitnesses.
Speaker 6: He has proof that I was in the house. And
Speaker 6: I kept telling him, no, that's not true. And to me,
Speaker 6: it's like now getting confused because I'm saying, there's no
Speaker 6: way possible that this could be. But you know, he
Speaker 6: continued to tell me different stories and different things that well,
Speaker 6: at that point he said, you might be going to jail.
Speaker 7: These are the things that would happen to you once
Speaker 7: you get there.
Speaker 6: You need to sign this paper that he wrote, and
Speaker 6: he said, I'll take you home. So I'm constantly like,
Speaker 6: I don't know what to do. Now I'm here by
Speaker 6: myself in his little room and I'm crying, I'm set,
Speaker 6: I'm hysterical. And he kept stated to me, I'm going
Speaker 6: to let you call home. I said, I want to
Speaker 6: call home. I felt that if I called my friend
Speaker 6: maybe he would give me some information.
Speaker 7: What should I do?
Speaker 6: He denied my phone calls because I constantly told him
Speaker 6: I would like to call home. He said, well, when
Speaker 6: we finished, you could call home. I'll call I'll have
Speaker 6: his partner call and let him know where I'm at,
Speaker 6: I'm saying, because at this point of the day, I
Speaker 6: should be home.
Speaker 7: Which I wasn't.
Speaker 6: So now my companion had no idea where I was
Speaker 6: or what happened to me at all.
Speaker 4: Yeah, so all of this just adds to the stress
Speaker 4: and confusion and terror. It's really terror, right that you're
Speaker 4: experiencing at this point because you don't know what these
Speaker 4: guys are capable of, and you know there's nobody but you,
Speaker 4: and you're overmatched. You are really helpless. I mean, they
Speaker 4: won't let you in many cases, they won't give you
Speaker 4: any food, any water. You're just going to sit there
Speaker 4: and they go in and they go out, and they
Speaker 4: have this all. It's a whole protocol is designed to
Speaker 4: do exactly what it did, which is to get you
Speaker 4: to be willing to do basically anything and confess to anything. Right.
Speaker 4: What's crazy on top of all the rest of this
Speaker 4: is that they were not only committing an act of evil, right,
Speaker 4: which is knowingly extracted a confession from a person that
Speaker 4: they had every indication was innocent of the crime, but
Speaker 4: also they were sloppy. And why I say that is
Speaker 4: because the confession that you signed didn't make any sense
Speaker 4: because the facts that were on that piece of paper
Speaker 4: didn't match the evidence from the case. Right. They got
Speaker 4: you to say that he was in a wheelchair, which
Speaker 4: he wasn't, that it was a robbery of sixty dollars,
Speaker 4: which would find out later that the guy probably didn't
Speaker 4: have sixty dollars. There was a number of other facts
Speaker 4: in there that were just wrong. And that's so weird
Speaker 4: because I don't know. At least it seems to me,
Speaker 4: if you were doing this, you would at least try
Speaker 4: to get someone to sign a confess that's accurate to
Speaker 4: the facts of the case. But they didn't even bother
Speaker 4: to do that.
Speaker 5: That's right, And one of the interesting things here was
Speaker 5: that there were really two confession statements. One was the
Speaker 5: handwritten statement which Scarcella himself wrote out and Vanessa merely signed,
Speaker 5: and this was consistent with protocol at the time. There
Speaker 5: was a video restatement of the confession and that is
Speaker 5: led by an assistant district attorney with Scarcella in the room.
Speaker 5: Now Scarcella could not control the questioning by the assistant
Speaker 5: district attorney. Vanessa testified that they basically rehearsed and Scarcella
Speaker 5: told her what to say in the video, but he
Speaker 5: could not control some of the questions and the ADA,
Speaker 5: for example, asked, was the old man standing?
Speaker 7: Was he sitting?
Speaker 5: And Vanessa said he was sitting, and he said, so
Speaker 5: what was he sitting in? And Scarcella had not researched
Speaker 5: was there ever a wheelchair in the apartment, because Vanessa
Speaker 5: then guessed she said he was sitting in a wheelchair.
Speaker 4: Because he was old. So that might have made sense, right,
Speaker 4: but it's.
Speaker 5: Not true, and so there was a gotcha for us
Speaker 5: as the defense team. That was a great mistake in
Speaker 5: the confession, which we could use to prove it was coerced.
Speaker 5: And the caine. The ADA asked what kind of cain
Speaker 5: was used to hit mister Shaw, and Vanessa again guessed
Speaker 5: because she had no idea. She guessed that it was
Speaker 5: a wooden cane. In fact, it was a metal cane.
Speaker 5: So that's how some of these mistakes came in, is
Speaker 5: that Scarcella could not control the ADA and his questioning.
Speaker 5: Thank god, because otherwise we might not have caught these mistakes.
Speaker 4: So ultimately you end up going to trial, but before
Speaker 4: you get to trial, they held you in Rykers Island
Speaker 4: for thirteen months. Yes, how terrifying.
Speaker 7: Is that very very terrifying.
Speaker 6: But prior to me getting there, after all of the
Speaker 6: confession and everything, they still never told me I was
Speaker 6: being arrested for the crime. They bypassed my house. They
Speaker 6: still stated to me that they were taking me home.
Speaker 6: And we got to the precint I said, why didn't
Speaker 6: you pass my house or we have to make one
Speaker 6: more stop. This is still lives And we got to
Speaker 6: the precinct and at that point then he said he
Speaker 6: had to handcuff me. I was never cuffed. I was
Speaker 6: never told I was arrested and they had to cuff
Speaker 6: me to take me into that building, which was Central Booking.
Speaker 6: I didn't even know that. And then I was put
Speaker 6: in the cage and I just stayed there until they
Speaker 6: said I was supposed to see a judge or whatever
Speaker 6: I had to It was all a blur because I
Speaker 6: don't recall all of that that happened at that time.
Speaker 6: And the next day I guessed that I was on
Speaker 6: the bus going to Rikers Island and up on my rival.
Speaker 6: You know, they do the strips serge your neckad you're
Speaker 6: walking around in the sheet in the cage with a
Speaker 6: whole bunch of people, other women, and you know, and
Speaker 6: then you put into a cell. And at that time
Speaker 6: when they put me to a housing unit, I was
Speaker 6: able to call home finally and tell him where I was.
Speaker 4: At and what was that phone called?
Speaker 8: Like it was.
Speaker 7: He was very upset. I was upset.
Speaker 6: I was hysterical, and I still couldn't think of how
Speaker 6: I landed here, you know, in Riker's Island. It was
Speaker 6: just it was ter and you have no clothes. You
Speaker 6: have the rents out what you have on. You took
Speaker 6: a shower, your rents out what you have on and
Speaker 6: hang it in your cell, hopefully it be dry by morning,
Speaker 6: cause that's all you have.
Speaker 7: And that was it til the next morning.
Speaker 6: Then you're taking out and you go to the mess
Speaker 6: hall as they call it, and and you're just there
Speaker 6: in that space until they put you for two weeks.
Speaker 6: I guess it's two weeks before they put you in
Speaker 6: population and then you they assign you another where I.
Speaker 7: Was living in the dormitory.
Speaker 6: In the dorm where it's a whole bunch of beds
Speaker 6: and women half toilets. There was no privacy at all.
Speaker 6: You take showers where the whole bunch of other women
Speaker 6: in one big circle thing, and you just got spickers
Speaker 6: coming out the wall, and it was a lot of
Speaker 6: different things that happen. It's it's terrible just being in
Speaker 6: that place. A lot of different things go on, women
Speaker 6: and women. I started working the night shift. I did
Speaker 6: whatever I had to do so I wouldn't be on
Speaker 6: the dorm at night. I just didn't. It was just
Speaker 6: disgusting for me. I couldn't deal with that part of it.
Speaker 4: So ultimately, thirteen months later, you end up finally getting
Speaker 4: your day in court, and you had a lawyer who
Speaker 4: didn't seems like he did the minimum amount of work
Speaker 4: that he could do. Now you know, I don't know.
Speaker 4: He may have been working on four hundred other cases.
Speaker 4: There are certainly lawyers of public defenders in New York
Speaker 4: who are so overburdened. But that doesn't matter when it's
Speaker 4: your life on the line, right And we don't know
Speaker 4: the personal circumstances that this individual was in, but one
Speaker 4: way or another, he was not prepared and did not
Speaker 4: represent you adequately, and you really didn't have a chance.
Speaker 7: That's true.
Speaker 6: Well, I like the attorney I made. My companion kept
Speaker 6: asking him and court. When we went to court, could
Speaker 6: he speak with him? He always said yes, but he
Speaker 6: left the courtroom. He adjourned my case on numerous occasions,
Speaker 6: so there was nothing that he did.
Speaker 7: There was no.
Speaker 6: Investigation because as far as I'm concerned, when this incident happened,
Speaker 6: I don't see where there's a police investigation done in anything.
Speaker 6: By the time that they decided the man had passed away,
Speaker 6: there was dust that family had came in and cleaned
Speaker 6: the house, did a lot of things, so therefore there
Speaker 6: was no fingerprints. There was nothing. The house was cleaned
Speaker 6: because the family members. This is all the information I
Speaker 6: found out later on after I was incarcerated.
Speaker 4: Another terrible aspect of pre trial detention is that I'm
Speaker 4: guessing your lawyer didn't visit you.
Speaker 7: No, he did not, right, And.
Speaker 4: There's the reason behind that too, which is that for
Speaker 4: a lawyer to go to Rikers Island and visit you,
Speaker 4: basically that's going to take their whole day. They don't
Speaker 4: make it easy. It's a whole process you have to
Speaker 4: go through. They have to travel to the jail. So
Speaker 4: people who are not in the system right, people who
Speaker 4: are out on bail or on their own recognisance, have
Speaker 4: a much better chance because they can meet more freely
Speaker 4: with their lawyers and get better representation, which is another
Speaker 4: thing that I think it's important for people to understand.
Speaker 4: It's one of the reasons why our bail system is
Speaker 4: so unfair and ill conceived. So you were in that
Speaker 4: exact situation where you're facing a murder wrap. Your lawyer's
Speaker 4: not visiting you, he's not really doing any work every
Speaker 4: time he comes in, and a journeys the case, you
Speaker 4: go right back to Rikers Island, and so there's just
Speaker 4: nothing that's fair or equitable about that. And ultimately, though
Speaker 4: thirteen months later, you did get your day in court.
Speaker 4: By this point, I mean, you've been through so much,
Speaker 4: and you'd been lied to by the people who are
Speaker 4: supposed to protect you, and you'd been let down by
Speaker 4: the other person was supposed to protect you as your lawyer.
Speaker 4: The whole system is failing you. But when you went
Speaker 4: to court, did you believe that justice would finally be
Speaker 4: done and people would see that you were an innocent person.
Speaker 7: Yes?
Speaker 4: I did.
Speaker 6: That's the reason why I test on my own behalf,
Speaker 6: because I didn't have anyone.
Speaker 7: To testify for me. And I mean Scott Selly.
Speaker 6: He went out of his way to make sure that
Speaker 6: family members were there, and a lot of them had
Speaker 6: moved away because of the time lapse. They were in
Speaker 6: another state, but he brought a lot of them there
Speaker 6: so that the jury could see that there was a
Speaker 6: large family, and it just made things move a little
Speaker 6: smoother for him to get the conviction.
Speaker 7: But I did speak to the family. I spoke to
Speaker 7: the judge.
Speaker 6: I even wrote a letter to the judge stating that
Speaker 6: I did not commit this crime.
Speaker 4: So these are what happened.
Speaker 5: Well, Finessa testified that the confession was coerced and that
Speaker 5: she was not there.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 5: The jury deliberated for I think over thirteen hours. It
Speaker 5: was a lengthy deliberation, relatively speaking, and they acquitted her
Speaker 5: on the top count, which was murder. But there must
Speaker 5: have been some kind of compromise because they did convict
Speaker 5: her on the manslaughter and the only evidence against her
Speaker 5: was the confession. But you have to remember this was
Speaker 5: back in ninety seven and juries were not sensitized to
Speaker 5: the issues we all know today about how innocent people
Speaker 5: can confess. The science was not there then, and it
Speaker 5: would take a lot for a jury to reject a
Speaker 5: confession that someone seemed to have voluntarily made, and there
Speaker 5: was no false confession expert who testified on her behalf
Speaker 5: a trial, just Vanessa's word against Scarcella's word. And obviously
Speaker 5: Scarcela at that time was a senior detective who nobody
Speaker 5: had reason to question. There had been no allegations yet
Speaker 5: that he had engaged in any corrupt eye activity, So
Speaker 5: it was reasonable for a jury to buy Scarcello's account
Speaker 5: instead of Finesses. And I think that's what happened. If
Speaker 5: the same case we're tried today, I think a jury
Speaker 5: would be much more attuned to coercion issues and that
Speaker 5: false confessions can happen. I think it would be a
Speaker 5: different outcome today.
Speaker 4: Frankly, Yeah, And I want to make sure that people
Speaker 4: who are listening really take that in because now we
Speaker 4: know there's so much research on false confessions. It is
Speaker 4: a wonderful show on Netflix called The Confession Tapes. So
Speaker 4: many people have seen the Confessions and other programs like
Speaker 4: Making a Murderer that are so obviously false. We know
Speaker 4: that in DNA exonerations over twenty percent of the cases
Speaker 4: involve false confessions. It's a scary phenomenon, but it's very real.
Speaker 4: And so Vanessa, at that moment when you were convicted,
Speaker 4: because the jury did come back in and declare you
Speaker 4: guilty of second degree manslaughter, what was that like?
Speaker 7: I think I just went numb on it and believe it.
Speaker 6: I didn't think I would get that kind of time
Speaker 6: anyway for this he even if they didn't believe me.
Speaker 6: I really didn't even realize how much time I had
Speaker 6: to do. I just didn't believe it, so that nobody
Speaker 6: believed me, you know what I was stating to them.
Speaker 6: I mean, I know he had some issues in the past,
Speaker 6: and he just came back forward trying to just get
Speaker 6: a conviction, because he did have some problems in the department.
Speaker 7: But he just came gun home at me.
Speaker 6: And I'm not realizing that he was set me up
Speaker 6: the whole time just to take the four for this crime.
Speaker 4: But he did. And he probably got some pats on
Speaker 4: the back and some you know, sort of accolades for
Speaker 4: solving another cold case. And you were, you know, just
Speaker 4: a little detailed to him. That's all. I probably never
Speaker 4: Probably I'm guessing he went home that night, had a
Speaker 4: nice dinner, you know, watch some TV, and went to sleep.
Speaker 4: So you end up serving ten years in prison where
Speaker 4: you had a perfect disciplinary record, and the whole time
Speaker 4: you maintained your innocence, even though there were times when
Speaker 4: you came before a parole board and it would have
Speaker 4: been better for you in some ways to say that
Speaker 4: you were guilty, because they would have probably sent you home.
Speaker 6: Yes, that's true. But the first couple of times I went,
Speaker 6: I did not. I kept I stated that I did
Speaker 6: not do the crime.
Speaker 4: But they don't want to hear that. They want to
Speaker 4: hear that you're remorseful, that you feel bad that the victim.
Speaker 6: I can't feel remorse when I didn't do something you
Speaker 6: don't understand.
Speaker 7: How do you feel?
Speaker 6: You don't know the person, you didn't do the crime,
Speaker 6: so how can you feel remorse. I mean, I feel
Speaker 6: remorse when someone is getting beaten or something like that,
Speaker 6: actually seen it happen. But as far as me doing
Speaker 6: something like that, never.
Speaker 5: Never Finessa's right. In the first two parole hearings, she
Speaker 5: said I did not do what they said I did.
Speaker 5: But eight years in with a perfect disciplinary record and
Speaker 5: seeing how little asserting her evidence got her with the
Speaker 5: parole board previously, in her third parole hearing, she appeared
Speaker 5: to admit guilt, and we retained a fabulous expert who
Speaker 5: was able to explain the conundrum that someone like Vanessa
Speaker 5: is facing. And Vanessa testified in her deposition that everyone
Speaker 5: on the inside was telling her you're an idiot. You've
Speaker 5: got to tell them what they want to hear. Just
Speaker 5: tell them you did it. And so Vanessa in the
Speaker 5: third parole hearing appeared to admit guilt when in fact
Speaker 5: obviously she was not guilty, but it was the only
Speaker 5: way she could see to get out early.
Speaker 6: At that point, it didn't matter they it didn't matter.
Speaker 6: Even in the third hearing, date hit me again with
Speaker 6: another two years, which is pissed my cr date, my
Speaker 6: condition to release. If it was up to them, I
Speaker 6: would have still been in there until two thousand and eight.
Speaker 4: Now we're going to get to the good part of
Speaker 4: the story, right, because there is a happy ending, or
Speaker 4: you wouldn't be sitting here now and you wouldn't be
Speaker 4: enjoying the nice, big, extended family that you now have.
Speaker 4: And so the good guys come to the rescue. Right.
Speaker 4: You have Lisa and her team at Hughes, Hubbard and Red,
Speaker 4: and you have the legal aid Society, and then at
Speaker 4: just about the right time in Brooklyn, the Conviction Review
Speaker 4: Unit was established, and that unit has done phenomenal work
Speaker 4: in reversing many wrongful convictions, including last time I looked
Speaker 4: at was seven or eight that Scarcela was directly responsible for,
Speaker 4: including yours. So let's talk about that, because the happy
Speaker 4: ending part of this story is really really important because
Speaker 4: it requires people like Lisa and other dedicated professionals to
Speaker 4: go and reverse one of these things. It's hard. I mean,
Speaker 4: they don't make it easy at all. So how did
Speaker 4: it come about Lisa? How did she end up getting justice?
Speaker 4: After all?
Speaker 5: Credit initially unquestionably goes to the Legal Aid Society. This
Speaker 5: is what happened. Charles Hines was in the political fight
Speaker 5: of his career and there had been an initial Scarcella
Speaker 5: related exoneration in the David Ranta case, and the New
Speaker 5: York Times and Ken Thompson are breathing down Charles Hines's back,
Speaker 5: and he says, it's okay, everybody, I'm telling you right now,
Speaker 5: I am going to reinvestigate every trial conviction that detective
Speaker 5: Scarcella touched, and Hines prepared a list which has never
Speaker 5: been publicly available. I don't know anyone that's ever seen it.
Speaker 5: Initially it had at least fifty names of defendants on it.
Speaker 5: And what the DA's office did was they contacted the
Speaker 5: last lawyer of record in each of those fifty cases. Well,
Speaker 5: the Legal Aid Society was the last lawyer of record
Speaker 5: in a good half of those, about twenty five. And
Speaker 5: so Legal Aid went to firms around town looking for
Speaker 5: partners which is how Hughes Hubbard got involved with the case,
Speaker 5: and we proceeded on a three year partnership with Legal Aid.
Speaker 5: We reinvestigated the crime and marshaled our arguments, retained experts,
Speaker 5: and were able to make a persuasive pitch to the
Speaker 5: then District Attorney, Ken Thompson, who had beaten Charles Hines
Speaker 5: in that election. And that is the short story of
Speaker 5: how we were able to get to the exoneration day.
Speaker 4: And Ken Thompson sadly died last year at the young
Speaker 4: age of fifty. He was a good man and a
Speaker 4: decent man. He was a friend of mine, but he
Speaker 4: was so proud. You know, he used to walk around
Speaker 4: with a picture of you. I don't know, do you
Speaker 4: know that?
Speaker 6: No, I know it's in his office but I didn't
Speaker 6: know he had the picture with it.
Speaker 4: He at his birthday party. He has this cardboard thing.
Speaker 4: I'm holding my arms out wide to show how big
Speaker 4: it was, and then it was about a couple of
Speaker 4: feet three feet high, and on it it had a
Speaker 4: picture of you and the other exoneries that he his
Speaker 4: office had helped to exonerate. And so he was very
Speaker 4: proud of you and of the work that he and
Speaker 4: his team had done to help in your case. I
Speaker 4: remember him mentioning you specifically, So you should feel good
Speaker 4: about that. So when finally the light shone on you
Speaker 4: and on your case and justice was done, and it
Speaker 4: was proven by all these good people that this had happened,
Speaker 4: and that you were telling the truth all along, except
Speaker 4: when you were lying, because it was them telling you
Speaker 4: what to say, right, I mean, but in fact, as
Speaker 4: you had been saying you were innocent for so many years,
Speaker 4: what did that feel like when finally you got your
Speaker 4: life back?
Speaker 6: It felt great, and I was like, I'm saying, I'm
Speaker 6: able to finally put this behind me. You don't know
Speaker 6: what you're feeling at that time, because it's like it's
Speaker 6: clear now that I didn't do it. I mean, you
Speaker 6: don't know what people think of you, whether you did
Speaker 6: this crime or not, because it's on record stating that
Speaker 6: you did. But I felt great, I mean I felt
Speaker 6: reallyd Now live my life without having that on my record,
Speaker 6: it's very difficult to try and find a job, to
Speaker 6: move on in life because you have this hanging over
Speaker 6: your head. Now my record is clean, I could state
Speaker 6: that I have no record, which makes life a lot
Speaker 6: easier for me because people look to a background check.
Speaker 7: Is nothing there.
Speaker 4: It's nothing there because you never had anything there, because
Speaker 4: you were always there, always were a law abiding citizen.
Speaker 6: Yes, but as far as the law and the criminal
Speaker 6: justice system said, yes you have a record, it's on there.
Speaker 4: Not anymore.
Speaker 7: Not anymore, it's been taken away.
Speaker 4: And now you know, there's another aspect of this, which
Speaker 4: is something that's so troubling. You know, when we live
Speaker 4: in a country where we have approximately four point four
Speaker 4: percent of the world's population, but we have thirty three
Speaker 4: percent of the world's female prison population, which is just
Speaker 4: so outrageous. I mean, it's a national disgrace the way
Speaker 4: we treat women in this country. And when somebody like
Speaker 4: you is locked up, you're missing out on your children's lives,
Speaker 4: right and your children, grandchildren and that dynamic. I mean,
Speaker 4: that must have been an extra punishment.
Speaker 7: It was.
Speaker 6: My granddaughter was like only a year or when I
Speaker 6: went in, and it caused a lot of chaos between
Speaker 6: me and my daughter because I wasn't there for her.
Speaker 6: You understand, when she needed her mother to help her,
Speaker 6: when she had questions about raising her daughter.
Speaker 7: I wasn't there.
Speaker 4: She couldn't even call you.
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 4: And not only were there, but you were far away,
Speaker 4: right That That's another thing.
Speaker 6: I was in bedfoot for a while, and then I
Speaker 6: finally moved to They moved me to Bayview, which is
Speaker 6: in Manhattan, which was made closer because I didn't get
Speaker 6: a lot of visits. I didn't get visits because my
Speaker 6: family couldn't come to the facility because we were poor.
Speaker 6: We didn't have money like that. I mean, even like
Speaker 6: my father was living at the time. He wanted to
Speaker 6: put up his farm. I wouldn't allow him to do
Speaker 6: that because they gave me a quarter million dollar bill.
Speaker 6: I'm saying, where do you think I'm gonna get that
Speaker 6: kind of money from. It was difficult for everyone. I
Speaker 6: lost a lot of family members. I lost a brother,
Speaker 6: or sister, my uncle, my aunt, I lost my mother,
Speaker 6: my father's brother. It was it was a lot of
Speaker 6: family member once that passed away. During my first year incarcerated,
Speaker 6: I couldn't attend anything because if you're in New York
Speaker 6: or if your family's out of state, you can't go
Speaker 6: to the services.
Speaker 7: So that was hard for me to deal with too.
Speaker 6: It was a lot of things that that I missed
Speaker 6: out on because of my incarceration.
Speaker 4: So you had to endure the death of numerous family
Speaker 4: members while you were behind bars for something you didn't do,
Speaker 4: and you weren't even allowed to go to the funeral. No. Right, So,
Speaker 4: I mean, it's so amazing to me that you're here now,
Speaker 4: standing up straight, proud, like, able to put a sentence together, right,
Speaker 4: able to just have a life when you've been through
Speaker 4: such an incredibly terrible ordeal that you never deserved. I mean,
Speaker 4: it's crazy. So now the good news is you have
Speaker 4: gotten your life back, right. I mean, this thing actually
Speaker 4: happened almost twenty years ago. Must be crazy to think
Speaker 4: about that. And now you've been out for some time,
Speaker 4: and what's the situation now? You settled your lawsuits, right,
Speaker 4: which is great? Yes, And It's worth noting that Scarcela
Speaker 4: not only ruined so many people's lives and left so
Speaker 4: many crimes unsolved, leading to many more crimes happening, because obviously,
Speaker 4: when he arrested and was able to get convictions on
Speaker 4: the wrong people, the right people were out there committing
Speaker 4: more crimes. Right, So he's got that. And then also
Speaker 4: there's been tens of millions of dollars paid out to
Speaker 4: so many victims of his by the city, which is
Speaker 4: taxpayer money. So there's nothing cute or funny about what
Speaker 4: this guy was doing. When these guys behave in this way,
Speaker 4: who are supposed to be protecting us and keeping us safe,
Speaker 4: it has so many terrible consequences across the board. So
Speaker 4: now where are you living, how's your life? What's your
Speaker 4: family situation? I want to hear, well, I'm living.
Speaker 6: In Jersey's City now, although I was living in Manhattan
Speaker 6: until twenty fourteen and working. I was working from the
Speaker 6: day that I got out of prison because I met
Speaker 6: a couple. They gave me a job and I work
Speaker 6: with them for almost eight years until they retired. And
Speaker 6: then now living in Jersey City. My mother has Alzheimer's.
Speaker 6: That's one of the reasons I moved back to Jersey City.
Speaker 7: Which she is.
Speaker 6: I recently purchased a home or it's eleventh graduations. I
Speaker 6: have the first one, and my daughter has a second.
Speaker 6: It's a two family house and she's upstairs with a
Speaker 6: daughter and her granddaughter, my granddaughter, my great granddaughter and
Speaker 6: my daughter, so we all live in together.
Speaker 4: Right, have any boys in your family?
Speaker 7: We do have boys.
Speaker 6: I have brothers, But as far as me, it's four
Speaker 6: generations of females. Well five, you put my mother in there,
Speaker 6: but it's just females.
Speaker 4: You got four generations living under one roof in Jersey City.
Speaker 4: It sounds incredible and isn't that nice though, that now
Speaker 4: you're able to make up for the time that you
Speaker 4: lost with your family. Now you have your whole like
Speaker 4: so many of you all there together. I mean, it
Speaker 4: must be just a joy for you.
Speaker 7: It is. It is wonderful.
Speaker 6: I can see my granddaughter, my great granddaughter at any
Speaker 6: time if I need to go somewhere in My granddaughter
Speaker 6: does have a car. She's working, so she could take
Speaker 6: me and then I get this babysit my granddaughter.
Speaker 4: So that's amazing. Well, listen, I'm happy that things finally
Speaker 4: worked out. I want to apologize to you for what
Speaker 4: the city and the state did to you. There's no
Speaker 4: excuse for it, but I'm glad you're here now. One
Speaker 4: of my favorite parts of the show often is to
Speaker 4: turn the microphone over to our featured guest and see,
Speaker 4: is there anything else you want to share with the audience.
Speaker 6: Well, no, I'm just saying that. Well, during the time
Speaker 6: that I was in there, I mean, I wasn't going
Speaker 6: to let the time do me.
Speaker 7: I was going to do the time.
Speaker 6: So I got myself involved with a lot of different
Speaker 6: activities throughout the prison. I worked hard to stay in
Speaker 6: touch with my family. I would read my granddaughter books
Speaker 6: on you know, on video and send the books. There's
Speaker 6: a lot of programs in there. There's a lot of
Speaker 6: things you could do even though you're fighting your case.
Speaker 6: But do something positive, you know, don't let the negativity
Speaker 6: rule you.
Speaker 4: And Lisa any final thoughts, I would.
Speaker 5: Just say, having known Vanessa now for five or six years,
Speaker 5: she is an exceptional person and the only way I
Speaker 5: think she was able to get through this ordeal was
Speaker 5: her strength of character. She got into prison, and I
Speaker 5: think this woman just put her head down and said,
Speaker 5: I'm going to get through this. And she just was
Speaker 5: forward thinking. She never obsessed about how did this happen?
Speaker 5: How did I get here? It was just one day
Speaker 5: at a time. I've got to get out of here.
Speaker 5: And she mentioned the couple that hired her right after prison.
Speaker 5: I just want to speak to that because I think
Speaker 5: it's so telling about Vanessa. Literally, a wealthy couple was
Speaker 5: volunteering at Bayview, husband and wife. Vanessa was running the
Speaker 5: GED program. She was running this thing, that thing, and
Speaker 5: they elbowed each other and said, why is she here?
Speaker 7: We don't get it.
Speaker 5: She's not like anyone else in here. And they befriended Vanessa,
Speaker 5: and literally one week after she was released, she was
Speaker 5: in a full time job working for them, and she
Speaker 5: was the chief administrator of their very successful company and
Speaker 5: worked for these people for seven years. They trusted her,
Speaker 5: they loved her. They could see what she was capable of.
Speaker 5: And you know, my client is just an extraordinary woman,
Speaker 5: and it's a testament to her character that she was
Speaker 5: able to get through this.
Speaker 4: Well, both of you are extraordinary women. So Vanessa, Lisa,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for coming in and appearing on
Speaker 4: the show. You've been listening to a very special episode
Speaker 4: of Wrongful Conviction with our guests Vanessa Others and Lisa Kaya.
Speaker 8: Thank you for having me, don't forget to give us
Speaker 8: a fantastic review.
Speaker 4: Wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps. And I'm
Speaker 4: a proud donor to the Ennisnce Project and I really
Speaker 4: hope you'll join me in supporting this very important cause
Speaker 4: and helping to prevent future wrongful convictions. Go to innisonceproject
Speaker 4: dot org to learn how to donate and get involved.
Speaker 4: I'd like to thank our production team, Connor Hall and
Speaker 4: Kevin Wartis. The music in the show is by three
Speaker 4: time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to.
Speaker 8: Follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and on Facebook at.
Speaker 4: Wrongful Conviction Podcast. Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flamm is a
Speaker 4: production of Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company.
Speaker 8: Number One
Speaker 4: In the Morning, The Boy