Speaker 1: I've never been to trouble of my life. I didn't
Speaker 1: even have a parking ticket, and you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: I was brought up like cops are the good guys.
Speaker 1: I didn't know what was going to happen, but I
Speaker 1: do know that everything was stacked against me. Everything like
Speaker 1: everything this isn't supposed to happen this way. I'm innocent.
Speaker 1: I know I'm innocent. I know I had nothing to
Speaker 1: do with this. How is this possible? I grew up
Speaker 1: trusting the systems. I grew up believing that every human
Speaker 1: thing should do the right thing. And that's why, even
Speaker 1: though I was dealing with corros people, I wasn't going
Speaker 1: to brave anyone to get me out of prison because
Speaker 1: I wouldn't live with the fact that I braved my
Speaker 1: way out of my wife's death. I'm not innocent to
Speaker 1: proven guilty. I'm guilty until I proved my innocence. And
Speaker 1: that's absolutely what happened to me. Our system. Since I've
Speaker 1: been out ten years, it's come a little ways, but
Speaker 1: it's still broken, a totally little trust in humanity after
Speaker 1: what happened to me. This is wrongful conviction. Welcome back
Speaker 1: to wrongful Conviction. Today we have a very special episode.
Speaker 1: I know they say that, I know I say that
Speaker 1: a lot, but this time it's really true. This week's
Speaker 1: episode is a call to action because we're here to
Speaker 1: talk about the non unanimous jury problem in Louisiana and
Speaker 1: constitutional amendment to which is on the ballot next month,
Speaker 1: November six, and it needs to be eliminated. Today we
Speaker 1: have one of my favorite human beings and a personal
Speaker 1: hero of mine, Doug Delosa. Uh, Doug, welcome back to
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction. Thank you, Jason, pleasure to be back. And
Speaker 1: we have a guy whose name I can't pronounce. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna try it anyway, m who is a glutton for
Speaker 1: punish and let's just say that Chris Poush Show is
Speaker 1: here for the first time. Welcome to wrong for Conviction, Chris,
Speaker 1: thank you for having me. Jason, and by way of introduction,
Speaker 1: both of these guys are Louisiana natives. And we're here
Speaker 1: for a very specific purpose today, which is to discuss
Speaker 1: the non unanimous jury verdict problem in Louisiana, which is
Speaker 1: a unique and really terrifying problem. But with any luck
Speaker 1: at all, it's about to get fixed. And Doug, you
Speaker 1: have a very personal take on this because you are
Speaker 1: someone who was sentenced to life in prison after a
Speaker 1: non unanimous jury declared you guilty, and so you I mean,
Speaker 1: I can't even imagine what this looks like through your eyes,
Speaker 1: But why don't you elaborate a little on that situation.
Speaker 1: I was tried and convicted of second degree murder back
Speaker 1: in seven and the jury verdict was eleven one was
Speaker 1: a non unanimous verdict, and from my understanding, UH, after
Speaker 1: quite a bit of deliberation, UH numerous votes. At one
Speaker 1: point in time, the most people they had for conviction
Speaker 1: was eight, with four people holding out saying that I
Speaker 1: was not guilty. Then the bailiff comes in and says,
Speaker 1: if y'all don't come in with a verdict in the
Speaker 1: next couple of minutes, we're gonna have to continue this
Speaker 1: in the morning, and lo and behold for three of
Speaker 1: the four people, UH decided to change their minds, like, well,
Speaker 1: you know, the majority of people feel you're guilty, We're
Speaker 1: just gonna vote guilty so we can get out of here.
Speaker 1: So I was sent to prison for life with no
Speaker 1: opportunity for parole, probation, suspension of sentence. UH, and the
Speaker 1: verdict even after that was non unanimous. Uh. And you know,
Speaker 1: I may be opinionated and a little bit bias, but
Speaker 1: with even one person saying that I'm not guilty, to me,
Speaker 1: that's reasonable doubt. I mean, yeah, reasonable as I mean,
Speaker 1: it's eight percent of the jury, basically, right, more than
Speaker 1: eight percent of jury, And it's insane. I mean in
Speaker 1: your case. First of all, let's just reflect for a
Speaker 1: second on the idea that those three jurors who slipped,
Speaker 1: you know, who flipped their boat at the last minute,
Speaker 1: apparently felt that their evening at home was more valuable
Speaker 1: than the rest of your life. Um, which is hard
Speaker 1: to process. I mean, I can't imagine what was going
Speaker 1: through their minds. But and I know the details of
Speaker 1: your case. Anyone who's listening to your episode on Wrongful
Speaker 1: Conviction knows that no reasonable person could have listened to
Speaker 1: the evidence that was presented. Even though they framed you egregiously,
Speaker 1: they still couldn't have possibly looked at that and said, yep,
Speaker 1: I'm absolutely sure this guy killed his wife. Because the
Speaker 1: circumstances of your case are as crazy as any I've heard,
Speaker 1: and I've heard hundreds of them. So and and Chris.
Speaker 1: Let's turn to you, because Chris is the deputy director
Speaker 1: of the Unanimous Jury Coalition, and you've had a lot
Speaker 1: of experience in trying to do what you can to
Speaker 1: UM bring some justice to the injustice system in Louisiana.
Speaker 1: But first, let me ask you this question, because having
Speaker 1: been a public defender and everything else, and probably the
Speaker 1: toughest place in the country to be a public defender,
Speaker 1: are there any other states? I know the answer to
Speaker 1: this question, but are there any other states that have
Speaker 1: a non unanimous jury verdict? One? Which one? Aside from Louisiana,
Speaker 1: it's Oregon. I think they're working on fixing it too,
Speaker 1: because I met probably have that fixed in the spring, right,
Speaker 1: and I'm I'm yeah, I actually met with the governor
Speaker 1: and spoke to her about I know she'd like to
Speaker 1: see it fixed as well. But the UM But back
Speaker 1: to this this crazy question. Certainly Oregon is a much
Speaker 1: smaller problem because they have a tiny fraction of the
Speaker 1: number of cases that go through the They probably have
Speaker 1: less cases than New Orleans, I would guess as a state.
Speaker 1: But you can't prove that. Yeah, I can't prove that.
Speaker 1: I don't know, but that's a guess. But but how
Speaker 1: does this situation asian even exists? Why does it exist? Chris?
Speaker 1: I mean, what was the origin of this non unanimous
Speaker 1: jury verdict? Um A protocol? Let me just interject that
Speaker 1: while Oregon is the only other state in the United
Speaker 1: States where they have such a thing as a non
Speaker 1: unanimous jury verdict, Louisiana is the only state where a
Speaker 1: person can be sentenced to life imprisonment on less than
Speaker 1: a unanimous jury verdict. So in Oregon, while a person
Speaker 1: can be convicted with an eleven one or ten to two,
Speaker 1: they can't be sentenced to life in prison. And that's
Speaker 1: a tough cross to bear, I mean, and tough. It's
Speaker 1: obviously to to a light of a word for that,
Speaker 1: But I can't imagine for you or anyone else. And
Speaker 1: it's not You're not an isolated case, um. And we'll
Speaker 1: talk about that in a second. To be sitting there
Speaker 1: spending the rest of your life in prison knowing that
Speaker 1: a jury of your peers didn't actually vote to convict you.
Speaker 1: They they, they they It's called a hung jury for
Speaker 1: a reason, right, I mean, there, if anything, you should
Speaker 1: have been given a retrial um. And you know, if
Speaker 1: the jury couldn't decide, then we know what happens. They
Speaker 1: go home and you can start all over again sometime
Speaker 1: in the future. But that's obviously now what happened. How
Speaker 1: how common is it for people to be sentenced to
Speaker 1: prison or even life in prison in Louisiana by non
Speaker 1: unanimous jury. Well, it's a horror, uh, you know, to
Speaker 1: think that they are members of the jury who think
Speaker 1: you're innocent, sometimes as many as too voting not guilty.
Speaker 1: Yet you're found guilty and sent to prison for mandatory
Speaker 1: life sentence or practical life sentence, meaning that just because
Speaker 1: you're not sentenced to life, if you sentenced to three
Speaker 1: hundred years, no one's going to live to serve that. So, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, it's just haughtening at the very least, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, to think that you're facing a system that
Speaker 1: the chords are stacked against you. The d A is
Speaker 1: bringing marginal cases because they know they don't need a
Speaker 1: unanimous verdict, right, And that's a very important point that
Speaker 1: you brought up, right. So d A s are much
Speaker 1: more inclined to bring a case that they otherwise might
Speaker 1: drop because they know that they only have to convince,
Speaker 1: you know, basically ten out of twelve about heard me
Speaker 1: do the math. Um, you know, a majority of the
Speaker 1: of the jury. You know, um to convict. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's important also, dog to talk about the
Speaker 1: fact that, you know, for people who are listening, going, well,
Speaker 1: this can never happen to me. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: like it's not really gonna affect my life, right. Um,
Speaker 1: you would be somebody that would probably have a lot
Speaker 1: to say about that because you were the farthest thing
Speaker 1: from a career criminal. I mean when this happened, your
Speaker 1: life was basically a bowl at cherry's right. I don't
Speaker 1: know about a bowl of cherries, but maybe a bowl
Speaker 1: of peaches. Uh. Yeah, you're right, Jason. Uh. I don't
Speaker 1: think there's necessarily anything special about me. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, I don't think I'm the typical person who
Speaker 1: gets sentenced to life in prison in the state of
Speaker 1: Louisiana or anywhere. I've never been in trouble with the law.
Speaker 1: I guess prior to me being arrested, I had one
Speaker 1: traffic ticket twenty years earlier, and that's the extent of
Speaker 1: my exposure to the law. Uh. I came from an
Speaker 1: upper middle class family. Um, no one in my family
Speaker 1: would ever been in trouble with the law. I was
Speaker 1: happily married with two children, and we will live in
Speaker 1: the American dream as far as I'm concerned, until it
Speaker 1: turned into the literal worst night turned into the American nightmare. UM. So, Chris,
Speaker 1: I want to come back to you, what is the
Speaker 1: origin of this very bizarre It was really un american
Speaker 1: um protocol that that is sort of you leak, unique
Speaker 1: to Louisiana and and Oregon and hopefully going to be
Speaker 1: going away by the time the most people even hearing
Speaker 1: this podcast. So, the drafters of the state Constitution in
Speaker 1: Louisiana adopted in uh to quote to perpetuate the supremacy
Speaker 1: of the Anglo Saxon race in Louisiana. So in they
Speaker 1: drafted an amendment to the constitution. And it's hard to
Speaker 1: imagine that they were thinking other anything other than well,
Speaker 1: if we get some people who are of a color
Speaker 1: that's probably not the word they were using on a jury.
Speaker 1: We want to make sure that they don't get to
Speaker 1: screw up our you know, our our ability to lock
Speaker 1: people up whatever we want to more or less. Um.
Speaker 1: And since the overwhelming majority of the people be unlocked
Speaker 1: up back then, and now we're people of color. Um,
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's really hard to imagine that they
Speaker 1: had anything other than the worst intentions when they set
Speaker 1: this up. And when I say the worst, I mean
Speaker 1: purely racist intentions. Is that fair? That's fair, very fair?
Speaker 1: And the intent was clear. If the federal constitution required
Speaker 1: that African Americans be allowed to serve on juries, the
Speaker 1: state constitution would make sure that minority votes could be discounted. Now,
Speaker 1: let me ask you this. You have many years of
Speaker 1: experience working in really in the trenches of the criminal
Speaker 1: justice system in in New Orleans, right, not too many,
Speaker 1: but yes, I was a client advocate at the Public
Speaker 1: Defenders Office, so you've seen a lot. And we know
Speaker 1: sixty minutes did that amazing disturbing peace on the Public
Speaker 1: Defenders Office in Louisiana a couple of years ago, where
Speaker 1: the head of the association whatever it's called, the Public
Speaker 1: Defenders in Louisiana, or it was a Nuance, it was
Speaker 1: New Orleans, right, So the head of the Public Defenders
Speaker 1: actually took a stand and said he was going to
Speaker 1: refuse to allow his attorneys, his Public Defenders, to handle
Speaker 1: any felony cases, violent felony cases, because as he said,
Speaker 1: we've got fifty two public defenders who are processing twenty
Speaker 1: cases a year. So the math is simple. Right, they
Speaker 1: were doing about four cases per person. And when you
Speaker 1: do then when you get deeper in the weeds on
Speaker 1: the numbers, and you know the courts aren't open on
Speaker 1: the weekends, that means they were doing about a case
Speaker 1: and a half a day average. Right. So yeah, and
Speaker 1: just to be clear on that, um, what happened at
Speaker 1: the public Defender's office at that point there was because
Speaker 1: of staff turnover and the way things were shaking out,
Speaker 1: the public defender in New Orleans began refusing cases on
Speaker 1: all like major crimes like life without parole cases that
Speaker 1: the public defenders take would would take um at the time,
Speaker 1: public defenders would not take in that office. We're not
Speaker 1: taking death penalty cases. That's what was going on when
Speaker 1: the sixty minutes piece came out, right, And there's a
Speaker 1: simple reason for that, which is that and the the
Speaker 1: gentleman I forgot his name, but he um, he spoke
Speaker 1: re eloquently, and he talked about how he wasn't going
Speaker 1: to continue to just process people into prison because you know,
Speaker 1: when you when you break it down, if you're handling
Speaker 1: that many cases, plus trying to have any kind of
Speaker 1: a life, which as a public defender and making you know,
Speaker 1: barely above minimum wage and with deaths from college or
Speaker 1: law school and everything else. I mean, there's an amazing movie,
Speaker 1: Gideon's Promise, that really takes you inside the you know,
Speaker 1: the struggles that these people, many of whom are really
Speaker 1: uh doing, you know, doing the Lord's work so to speak. Um,
Speaker 1: it's it's impossible for them to mount any sort of
Speaker 1: an effective defense without having any time to prepare. Many
Speaker 1: of them meet their clients on the day of the
Speaker 1: trial for the first time, and then you're up there.
Speaker 1: I mean, I can't imagine that, you know what's going
Speaker 1: through somebody's mind when they're like, wait, you're my attorney,
Speaker 1: and and basically a lot of them just go come
Speaker 1: up and say, hey, yuh, my advice is plead guilty
Speaker 1: because I can't you know, I don't I don't know
Speaker 1: what to do. And that's why we have this felony.
Speaker 1: There's guilty plea problem in in America, where of felony
Speaker 1: convictions are a result of guilty pleae. It's probably even
Speaker 1: higher down there. If I had to guess, Doug, what's
Speaker 1: what's your take on this whole situation? And when what
Speaker 1: do you what? I mean, what what can be done?
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously people have to get out and right
Speaker 1: because his references on the ballot, and that's what we're
Speaker 1: here to talk about now, to be about to get
Speaker 1: out and vote and get rid of this thing before
Speaker 1: it gets rid of you. You're right, Jason, the education
Speaker 1: of the voters in Louisiana is probably the most important thing.
Speaker 1: You know, I myself haven't gone through everything that I have.
Speaker 1: It only dawned on me a couple of years ago
Speaker 1: that a person could be convicted in Louisiana by less
Speaker 1: than a unanimous verdict, and that we were the only
Speaker 1: place in the United States where I would have received
Speaker 1: a life sentence based on in the leven one vote.
Speaker 1: So if I didn't realize this, I would say that
Speaker 1: the vast majority of voters in Louisiana have no idea
Speaker 1: what the law is, right. I mean, you were a
Speaker 1: very educated guy, and um, you know, you would have
Speaker 1: had every reason if anyone would know about it, you
Speaker 1: would have been person about it. But it's sort of
Speaker 1: obscure um aspect of the of the criminal justice or
Speaker 1: a criminal injustice system down there. And we know that
Speaker 1: up until very recently, Louisiana incarcerated more Americans per capita
Speaker 1: than any state in the country. Um. Now Oklahoma has
Speaker 1: taken that dubious distinction, and of course New Orleans uh
Speaker 1: incarceraates more Louisiana's per capita than anywhere else in Louisiana.
Speaker 1: So you were actually right in the epicenter of the problem,
Speaker 1: and you were processed Uh. I mean yeah, really processed
Speaker 1: through because it was good for certain people's careers to
Speaker 1: get a conviction in your case, I mean your your
Speaker 1: case was for people who aren't familiar with the Doug
Speaker 1: Delosa case. I mean, your case was a high profile
Speaker 1: case and they needed to get a conviction and they
Speaker 1: couldn't figure it out, and you made a convenient scapegoat.
Speaker 1: Is that about right? That's pretty much it. Uh. The
Speaker 1: careers of the two assistant district attorneys and the detectives
Speaker 1: who arrested me rested on getting a conviction, and I
Speaker 1: think they did it just to prove that they could
Speaker 1: frame a person and get away with it. Well, one
Speaker 1: of the most terrifying aspects of your case is the
Speaker 1: fact that they actually told you they were framing you. Well,
Speaker 1: one of the arresting officers told you they were framing
Speaker 1: you while they were framing you, right, which is something
Speaker 1: that I think if you put that. You know, I'm
Speaker 1: friends with John Grisham. I think I don't have to
Speaker 1: call him and see if he even I don't think
Speaker 1: he would even dare to put that in a book.
Speaker 1: If someone would go actual ridiculous, no one's gonna believe that, right. Yeah.
Speaker 1: The arresting detective stood face to face with me and
Speaker 1: when I asked him why he was arresting me when
Speaker 1: he knew I didn't do it. I won't go into
Speaker 1: all the profanity that he used. You can. This is
Speaker 1: a it's a family show, but you can go ahead.
Speaker 1: You know. He he looked me in the face and
Speaker 1: almost spitting with his words and said, fuck you, fuck
Speaker 1: your children, fuck your dead wife. And they set stupid
Speaker 1: bitch to die in my parish, my jurisdiction. And I
Speaker 1: know you didn't do it, but you wanted someone arrested.
Speaker 1: So guess what. I couldn't find the person that actually
Speaker 1: did it, but I can frame you so you're rit right,
Speaker 1: So you had them, you had the nerve to actually
Speaker 1: speak out to try to encourage the authorities to find
Speaker 1: the person that murdered your wife, the mother of your children,
Speaker 1: and that's really what your crime was. And and then
Speaker 1: that that was that was enough to say, Okay, well,
Speaker 1: I mean that wasn't the only reason, right. The other
Speaker 1: thing was a few months had gone by, Uh, they
Speaker 1: didn't have an arrest. We know that in these cases
Speaker 1: when there's a media spotlight, a high profile case, nice neighborhood, um,
Speaker 1: brutal crime, people are scared. There's a lot of pressure. Um,
Speaker 1: there's that much more of a chance that uh, an
Speaker 1: innocent person is going to get um, not just wrongly convicted,
Speaker 1: but framed as you were because of all those factors.
Speaker 1: And and this was this was I mean this when
Speaker 1: it hit all those buttons. Yeah, absolutely, I mean I
Speaker 1: was told by quite a few people, including the attorney
Speaker 1: that represented me a trial, if I had just kept
Speaker 1: my mouth shut, I would have never been arrested. They
Speaker 1: would have left the crime going solved. But because I'd
Speaker 1: cause trouble for the local police department, they were going
Speaker 1: to make trouble for me. Wow, that's Um, I gotta
Speaker 1: just process that for a minute. Um. And I know
Speaker 1: your story. I mean, I've told your story so many times,
Speaker 1: and I find them sometimes when I'm actually telling your story,
Speaker 1: I'm listening to myself tell it and going, no, that
Speaker 1: can't be true. But I know that it is because
Speaker 1: I know you now for how many years? It's like,
Speaker 1: yeah and so and we've been you know, we've told
Speaker 1: your story in great detail on this show. I believe
Speaker 1: you know, one of the most powerful and disturbing episodes
Speaker 1: that we've ever done, uh is the episode we did
Speaker 1: with you and um. Yeah. So I hope people will
Speaker 1: take the time to go back, uh and listen to
Speaker 1: the Doug Delosa episode because it is really there's a
Speaker 1: lot to be learned from what you went through, and
Speaker 1: it speaks to the problem exactly the problem that we
Speaker 1: are facing now in Louisiana, and that we're hoping that
Speaker 1: people who are listening will get out and vote, understanding
Speaker 1: that again, you can be convicted by a jury of
Speaker 1: your peers even though two of them don't think you're guilty.
Speaker 1: And that's crazy. And you know, imagine if that if
Speaker 1: that was the situation across this country. The rate of
Speaker 1: convictions would be astronomical and the I mean, we already
Speaker 1: have the worst mass incarceration problem in the history of
Speaker 1: the of the civilized world, and it would be absolutely untenable.
Speaker 1: And the number of innocent people in prison, which is
Speaker 1: clearly estimated to be six across this country, right, which
Speaker 1: six Well, what if you're one of them? That's six percent.
Speaker 1: By the ways, I'm out a hundred thousand people. That's
Speaker 1: a hundred thousand Doug Delosos that are out there. I
Speaker 1: know because I get letters from them, you know, um,
Speaker 1: and uh, it's you know, it would be again, the
Speaker 1: numbers would go up dramatically, uh, maybe even exponentially if
Speaker 1: that were allowed to be the case. It's also true
Speaker 1: and why I think this is so important that we
Speaker 1: have to have a unanimous jury very everywhere, is because
Speaker 1: it's a mismatch in the courts, right the you know,
Speaker 1: the fact is we talked about the public defenders and
Speaker 1: how overmatch they are. But even if you have a
Speaker 1: private attorney, the government has literally almost unlimited resources and
Speaker 1: they can, uh, they can do an awful lot that
Speaker 1: the defense can't do by way of convincing a jury.
Speaker 1: I mean, the juries. We know that my friend Josh
Speaker 1: Dubin conducted a study and found that your average person
Speaker 1: has an inherent bias that if someone is on the stand,
Speaker 1: or if someone is in the um you know is
Speaker 1: shown to them in a lineup or anything else, that
Speaker 1: the numbers are almost around eighty percent of how many
Speaker 1: people think that they must be guilty or they wouldn't
Speaker 1: be there in the first place. So start with that,
Speaker 1: and the burden is really high to try to convince
Speaker 1: jurors that you didn't do it if you ever find
Speaker 1: yourself in that situation. Um, Chris, what what else can
Speaker 1: you share with us about this situation and the effects
Speaker 1: that it has on the justice system in Louisiana. And
Speaker 1: let's not forget, by the way, that every time a
Speaker 1: Doug Glosa or someone else is convicted, that's innocent, and
Speaker 1: we know that that happens much more frequently when you
Speaker 1: have a non unanimous jury UM verdict. The guilty guys
Speaker 1: allowed to remain free and prey on other innocent victims.
Speaker 1: I mean, it makes us less safe, right, UM, when
Speaker 1: we're not sure, when there is when there is doubt,
Speaker 1: and we're essentially UM prosecutors essentially able to weaponize the
Speaker 1: non unanimistury in in their power because they can basically
Speaker 1: use for they can use somebody's passed against them, and
Speaker 1: they can basically use that as a way to get
Speaker 1: people to plea out because they're staring at, you know,
Speaker 1: a major charge that carries a certain amount of weight
Speaker 1: and you know, depending on the facts of the case,
Speaker 1: if you're if you're a guy who's looking at twenty
Speaker 1: years if you lose this case, right, and the prosecutors
Speaker 1: can can use the fact that they don't need, you know,
Speaker 1: a unanimatescurity to to put you in jail. That's unpacked
Speaker 1: that for a second. So basically what you're looking at
Speaker 1: is particularly in the minority community, where you know, we
Speaker 1: know that a lot of people have rightly or wrongly,
Speaker 1: and in many cases wrongly, they have a prior arrest
Speaker 1: um and that means that they can stack the charges
Speaker 1: and they can you know, hang that over your head,
Speaker 1: the idea that you're gonna end up with an enhanced sentence.
Speaker 1: Enhanced as a weird word, but because that that actually
Speaker 1: sounds like a positive word, but so that you can
Speaker 1: have a much longer sentence based on the fact that
Speaker 1: you have priors and now you go into the career
Speaker 1: you know whatever you want to call that um category.
Speaker 1: So uh, then and then you add to that that
Speaker 1: on top of that hammer that they already holding over
Speaker 1: your head. Now they can say, well, we know they
Speaker 1: don't have to say it out loud, but they know
Speaker 1: that their chances of getting conviction are greater than any
Speaker 1: other place in the country because of the fact that
Speaker 1: they don't need to get a full jury to convict you.
Speaker 1: So now you as a defendant, if you are made
Speaker 1: aware of this, and you're sitting there going wait a minute,
Speaker 1: So not only am I looking at potentially spending twenty
Speaker 1: or basically all the best years of my life in prison,
Speaker 1: but I know that the odds are not only stacked
Speaker 1: against me because I'm dealing with a public defender who's
Speaker 1: overworked and underpaid, and then and and and and no
Speaker 1: not proper investigators that could help me, and and a
Speaker 1: system that's really just sort of you know, collapsing down
Speaker 1: on me and my chances of proving my innocence. And
Speaker 1: in the case of unanimous jury, you know, situation would
Speaker 1: be tough enough. But now, yeah, I mean, anybody would go,
Speaker 1: well hell with it. I don't care if I did
Speaker 1: the crime or not. I'm gonna take the five or
Speaker 1: six or seven years whatever I can get so I
Speaker 1: can at least go home and and see seeing my kids,
Speaker 1: you know, graduate from high school or god knows what. Right,
Speaker 1: if you're looking at five years and you might be
Speaker 1: a year into in your arrest and you're just waiting
Speaker 1: for trial, you're looking at getting out in a handful
Speaker 1: of years, you know, and you may not even have
Speaker 1: to do that full five depending on the type of
Speaker 1: plea you take. So it becomes a processing said suation
Speaker 1: pretty much. And I gonna go back to how coming,
Speaker 1: because I'm sure some people are listening to So this
Speaker 1: can't happen all that often, right, I mean, like, you know,
Speaker 1: is this really something I need to be concerned with?
Speaker 1: But that's not accurate either, right, I mean, this is
Speaker 1: how often does this actually come into play? I think
Speaker 1: it comes into play all too often, Jason, just in Louisiana,
Speaker 1: in the past ten years, we've had more than thirty
Speaker 1: exonerations to my knowledge, and they've been over the same
Speaker 1: period of time, probably well over a thousand exonerations nationwide
Speaker 1: in the past ten years, And I think we've got
Speaker 1: a total of almost two thousand exonerations, uh since the
Speaker 1: inception of the Innocence project or accurate record keeping. So
Speaker 1: it's not like it's a once in a blue moon occurrence.
Speaker 1: But in in Louisiana specifically, how often are people convicted
Speaker 1: by a nine unanimous jury? Is that a frequent currents? Uh?
Speaker 1: From the statistics that I've seen, roughly of all jury
Speaker 1: verdicts or non unanimous verdicts, So four out of ten
Speaker 1: people who go to trial, maybe even a little bit
Speaker 1: more than four out of ten or convicted by less
Speaker 1: than a unanimous verdict. That's a crazy number. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's and I know from I got from working in
Speaker 1: this field for twenty five years. There have been way
Speaker 1: too many cases that I've seen, even death penalty cases
Speaker 1: where it ended up and attended to or eleven O
Speaker 1: one and of course that ended up in a retrial
Speaker 1: and and ultimately an acquittal, and in the cases where
Speaker 1: somebody was adequately represented by counsel, and some of these
Speaker 1: cases would when you read them, Um, and I'm reading
Speaker 1: this incredible book, Quest for Justice, Defending the Damn by
Speaker 1: Richard Jaffee, it will blow your mind. But uh, in it,
Speaker 1: you see cases that are I think even even you, Doug,
Speaker 1: even with your experience, it would turn the rest of
Speaker 1: your hair gray because some of these cases you just
Speaker 1: sit there and go you can't understand how anyone could
Speaker 1: vote to convict, or how they could have even been
Speaker 1: taking a trial in the first place, and yet they
Speaker 1: end up in these tended to or eleven and one
Speaker 1: uh situations. But at least you have those holdouts. And
Speaker 1: let's you know, and let's talk to for a second
Speaker 1: about the importance of serving on a jury, because I
Speaker 1: talked about this a lot. For your average person, it's
Speaker 1: sort of one of those things in life that you dread, right.
Speaker 1: You get that envelope in the mail, and you know
Speaker 1: what it is before you open it up, and it's
Speaker 1: a it's from the courts, and it says show up
Speaker 1: at such and such time nine in the morning. And
Speaker 1: then your thoughts go to, oh my god, I'm so
Speaker 1: busy right now. I got work, I got things with
Speaker 1: my family, I got obligations. I gotta how important is
Speaker 1: it for people that are listening to show up and
Speaker 1: when they're and and Doug, from your experience, you're a
Speaker 1: terrible experience. What what should people be aware of when
Speaker 1: they do go to serve ut a jury and they
Speaker 1: end up in a criminal trial and they hold somebody
Speaker 1: somebody's life in their hands. I think that the average
Speaker 1: juror are all jurors, when they show up for jury
Speaker 1: duty and they're selected to sit on that jury, they
Speaker 1: need to realize that their vote counts and that they
Speaker 1: shouldn't compromise their beliefs just to go home early or
Speaker 1: just because they're being pressured by other members of the jury.
Speaker 1: That there's a reason why they're on that jury, and
Speaker 1: it's not to just acquiesce to someone who's a bully
Speaker 1: trying to tell you or vote guilty so we can
Speaker 1: go home, or vote innocent, even you know, it's up
Speaker 1: to the each individual on that jury to vote clearly
Speaker 1: what they're conscious tells them to vote, because the end
Speaker 1: result is you stand a chance to either ruin a
Speaker 1: person's life, ruin the life of their family and loved
Speaker 1: ones by a vote other than what you sincerely believe,
Speaker 1: or you have the opportunity if you bring back a
Speaker 1: not guilty verdict, you have the opportunity to give that
Speaker 1: person a chance to go on with their life and
Speaker 1: be a productive number of society. But they can't do
Speaker 1: that if they don't vote sincerely. Right, So you have
Speaker 1: to be made aware and anyone who listens to this
Speaker 1: show knows that there are you know there Listen, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of very decent and honorable people in law enforcement.
Speaker 1: It's by no means an easy job. And uh, I'm
Speaker 1: you know, I believe in a system of laws, and
Speaker 1: I think we need to have uh, you know, I
Speaker 1: I know what I call nine one one. I want
Speaker 1: to know that somebody's gonna come if I'm in trouble. Right,
Speaker 1: there was that, There was that U It's funny. Back
Speaker 1: in the seventies. Anyone who's a enough remember there was
Speaker 1: a a T shirt or a sticker that said, don't
Speaker 1: like don't like cops. Next time you're in trouble, try
Speaker 1: calling a hippie, right um. And so I'm not one
Speaker 1: of those people that wants to call it hippie. But
Speaker 1: at the same time, we it's important for everyone to
Speaker 1: stay woke and realize that in any profession you have
Speaker 1: bad apples, and it's certainly true in law enforcement, where
Speaker 1: there are reverse incentives in many cases like they were
Speaker 1: in your case to get things solved. And sometimes, you know,
Speaker 1: even sometimes even for you know, a decent, honest person,
Speaker 1: they can get tunnel vision and they can go ahead
Speaker 1: down a road and and then start to ignore the
Speaker 1: signs that someone's really innocent because it's kind of gained
Speaker 1: momentum on its own. And uh, we've seen all different
Speaker 1: kinds of causes of wrongful convictions. So yes, if you
Speaker 1: get called to be on a jury, go your life
Speaker 1: is gonna be okay. You know, you're you're you're. It
Speaker 1: seems like a big inconvenience at the time, but not
Speaker 1: that bad. Go serve realize that you're there, uh, protecting
Speaker 1: or you know, or you're there. You're there as a
Speaker 1: as a citizen of a society that needs you, and
Speaker 1: you're there passing judgment on your fellow citizen, so and
Speaker 1: protecting your community, as you said, Because again, when when
Speaker 1: you were convicted, Doug, when anyone in your situation is
Speaker 1: convicted wrongly, the actual killer or violent criminal, whoever they
Speaker 1: might be, remains free and goes and praise on other
Speaker 1: innocent people. Um, Chris, before we before we wrap up,
Speaker 1: it's it's gonna be by the time this airs and
Speaker 1: people are listening Um, it's gonna be almost time to
Speaker 1: get out there and and vote or not in Louisiana.
Speaker 1: So with your um experience of having worked in various
Speaker 1: different aspects of uh, you know, the criminal justice system
Speaker 1: in and around New Orleans, how important is it for
Speaker 1: people to vote on this referendum? And what do they
Speaker 1: need to know going to the ballot box? Is there
Speaker 1: a particular is there a number to this? Okay, let's
Speaker 1: let's give people all the information that they need so
Speaker 1: they can make the best decision that they can. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So it is constitutional amendment to UM on the ballot box.
Speaker 1: The language is written very well, UM, so it's very
Speaker 1: easy to understand. The actual amendment says, do you support
Speaker 1: an amendment to require a unanimisterury verdict in all non
Speaker 1: capital felony cases for offenses that are committed on or
Speaker 1: after January one, nineteen. So that is the the exact
Speaker 1: language of it. You just vote yes. So UM. Early
Speaker 1: voting starts on October three, and it lasts a week
Speaker 1: and then the actual vote will be on November six.
Speaker 1: So early voting starts October. The vote itself is on
Speaker 1: November six. Um. I think there's there's you know if
Speaker 1: you're if you're having trouble figure ot how to get
Speaker 1: to the polls. I think Uber and Left actually offering
Speaker 1: free rides to the polls are if you don't have
Speaker 1: the Uber or the lift app, get it on your smartphone,
Speaker 1: they'll give you a free ride to the polls. Uh.
Speaker 1: Constitutional amendment to vote yes because the ass you saved
Speaker 1: could be your own, um, or it could be someone
Speaker 1: you love. I mean, it's you know, it's it's really
Speaker 1: as straightforward as that. Um. You could find yourself in
Speaker 1: a situation UM where you're facing a jury of your peers,
Speaker 1: and you're gonna want to know, even if it's just
Speaker 1: for purely your own interest, that that a unanimous jury
Speaker 1: is what's going to be required to convict you. UM.
Speaker 1: And and again, I mean we're sitting here now with
Speaker 1: Doug Delosa, who was sent to life in prison by
Speaker 1: a non unanimous jury for a crime that he has proven, um,
Speaker 1: that he didn't commit. I mean, they should have known
Speaker 1: all along they didn't commit it because it was obvious.
Speaker 1: But now he's here, after serving fourteen years in maximum
Speaker 1: security prison to talk about this. I mean, Doug, I
Speaker 1: want to turn it back to you just for any
Speaker 1: other thoughts that you have, because there's really almost no
Speaker 1: one more qualified to speak on this subject than you.
Speaker 1: So I appreciate you showing up here, coming all the
Speaker 1: way up to New York to record this with us,
Speaker 1: and uh, you know, and and helped to educate and
Speaker 1: motivate your fellow Louisiana AND's I see the importance that
Speaker 1: the critical nature of this vote, which I'm you know,
Speaker 1: I'm I'm optimistic and and and really hopeful that it's
Speaker 1: going to pack. I think the one final thing I'd
Speaker 1: like to note, as Chris mentioned earlier a hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty years ago in eight, racism played a large role
Speaker 1: in the Constitution being written the way it was so
Speaker 1: that there wasn't the need for a unanimous uh verdict
Speaker 1: to convict someone. But that racism in a hundred and
Speaker 1: twenty years hasn't disappeared in Louisiana one bit, uh even today?
Speaker 1: Will it my jury? Uh in the state used every
Speaker 1: strike that they had to strike blacks from my jury,
Speaker 1: even though on Caucasian. And the reason they did that.
Speaker 1: I could overhear the two assistant district attorneys talking at
Speaker 1: the bench next to is, and they said the last
Speaker 1: thing we want is any f and blacks. Of course
Speaker 1: they use the N word, not blacks on that jury
Speaker 1: because uh, blacks will understand that he's telling the truth.
Speaker 1: Where white people can be convinced that's what happened to
Speaker 1: Doug Dalosa doesn't happen. And even to this day, I
Speaker 1: think statistics will prove that, especially in Jefferson Parish where
Speaker 1: majority of the jury pool is white or something other
Speaker 1: than black, they still use way too many strikes against
Speaker 1: black jurors. And that's unconstitutional. The Supreme Court decided many
Speaker 1: years ago that you cannot exclude people based on their race,
Speaker 1: but it still happens, and it's another reason why it's
Speaker 1: non unanimous jury. Uh A practice is so dangerous and
Speaker 1: so nefarious. It's part of the reason why, um, you know,
Speaker 1: gentrification is becoming such an issue and it's something that
Speaker 1: nobody thinks about, um, especially like in the New Orleans area.
Speaker 1: Like part of this is now you have somebody, these
Speaker 1: residents who don't necessarily understand the culture, and they may
Speaker 1: not understand, you know, everything about the city. And these
Speaker 1: are individuals who are being selected to go on juries
Speaker 1: and they don't they don't really get everything right. They
Speaker 1: don't get the system. They don't get what what what's
Speaker 1: going on and how that affects. UM can affect somebody's life,
Speaker 1: you know, they just want to be on a jury
Speaker 1: or they don't want to be on a jury. UM.
Speaker 1: And so it's something that it's just a byproduct of
Speaker 1: this of of gentrification in New Orleans where we have
Speaker 1: it just a different type of juror and it's not
Speaker 1: always the best thing for uh, for folks who are
Speaker 1: from the city, from the area, and UM, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: it's fascinating. So so Chris, besides the obvious, which is
Speaker 1: for people to get up, get out vote early starting
Speaker 1: in October or on November six, of course, go to
Speaker 1: the polls, UM, do whatever you need to do to
Speaker 1: get there. Remember that Uber and left are offering free rides.
Speaker 1: So if you don't have those apps, get the apps
Speaker 1: so you can get there and you can take advantage
Speaker 1: that free It's totally free if you're going to vote.
Speaker 1: UM can be people donate If they're hearing this and
Speaker 1: they're saying, this is outrageous. I didn't know about this.
Speaker 1: I want to do something. Can people donate money to
Speaker 1: help with this effort to get the vote out and
Speaker 1: to and to fix this terrible problem. Absolutely. Um. People
Speaker 1: can go to www Dot Unanimous jury dot org. That's
Speaker 1: www Dot unanimous jury dot org. Um, there is a
Speaker 1: donate button UM on the page. It goes to our
Speaker 1: Act Blue UM, which we use too for our fundraising. Right,
Speaker 1: So there's a donate button on the page and it
Speaker 1: goes right to Act Blue and it's used specifically for
Speaker 1: fundraising for this very very critical issue. And UM, yeah,
Speaker 1: so go their vote, donate, get involved, let's fix this
Speaker 1: problem and then we can move on to the next
Speaker 1: one because there are plenty of other ones for us
Speaker 1: to deal with as we do on wrongful conviction. And Doug,
Speaker 1: you know, since you've been on the show before and
Speaker 1: you've heard it and you're very very familiar with our work,
Speaker 1: I do the thing that's hardest for me to do,
Speaker 1: which is that I stopped talking and turn the mic
Speaker 1: your phone over to you for any final thoughts. Yes,
Speaker 1: on November six, we need everyone in Louisiana to go
Speaker 1: vote yes on constitutional Amendment to Let's vote yes onto
Speaker 1: UM and if you want any more information, if anyone
Speaker 1: wants to volunteer, if anyone wants to donate, you go
Speaker 1: to www dot Unanimus Jerry dot org. Once again, Chris Pusho,
Speaker 1: Doug Galosa, thank you for being with us today on
Speaker 1: this very special episode of Wrongful Conviction. Thank you for
Speaker 1: having it. Jason, don't forget to give us a fantastic review.
Speaker 1: Wherever you get your podcasts, it really helps. And I'm
Speaker 1: a proud donor to the Innisis Project and I really
Speaker 1: hope you'll join me in supporting this very important cause
Speaker 1: and helping to prevent future or wrong forul convictions. Go
Speaker 1: to Innocence Project dot org to learn how to donate
Speaker 1: and get involved. I'd like to thank our production team,
Speaker 1: Connor Hall and Kevin Wardis. The music in the show
Speaker 1: is by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be
Speaker 1: sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction and
Speaker 1: on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast. Wrongful Conviction with Jason
Speaker 1: Flam is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts and
Speaker 1: association with Signal Company Number one