Speaker 1: Hey guys, it's Laura. I'm here with some breaking news.
Speaker 1: In the season two of Wrongful Conviction and False Confessions,
Speaker 1: Steve and I brought you the story of a Virginia
Speaker 1: fisherman named Emerson Stevens. Emerson spent more than thirty years
Speaker 1: behind bars for a murder he didn't commit. Remember this
Speaker 1: is that crazy case where prosecutors tried to get an
Speaker 1: expert to say that the victim's way down body floated
Speaker 1: up the river against the current for miles before we're
Speaker 1: landing near emerson stock. The expert ended up telling the
Speaker 1: prosecutors their case was eyewash. That's Virginia slang for bullshit.
Speaker 1: But Emerson was wrongly convicted anyway. We told his story
Speaker 1: and we asked you to tell the governor of Virginia
Speaker 1: that he should grant Emerson's request for a pardon. So
Speaker 1: here's the breaking news. After more than three decades of waiting,
Speaker 1: Emerson finally got justice. On August sixteen, Virginia Governor Ralph
Speaker 1: Northam granted Emerson a pardon based on actual innocence. That
Speaker 1: means that Emerson is now eligible for compensation from the state,
Speaker 1: and it means his innocence has been publicly recognized once
Speaker 1: and for all. Thank you to all our listeners who
Speaker 1: supported Emerson. Congratulations to Emerson's longtime lawyers at the University
Speaker 1: of Virginia Law Innocence Project and Emerson. This news is
Speaker 1: the best hope you celebrate in style. We're re releasing
Speaker 1: your episode in honor of you. Welcome to Wrongful Conviction,
Speaker 1: False Confessions. I'm Laura and I writer and I'm Steve Drison.
Speaker 1: Today we'll tell you the story of Emerson Stevens, a
Speaker 1: fisherman from Virginia's Chesapeake Bay. When a young mother was
Speaker 1: found murdered, it seemed all the evidence pointed to Emerson
Speaker 1: until the case fell apart. Emerson survived thirty one years
Speaker 1: in prison with the help of an ally from across
Speaker 1: the bay. Now, oh, you can help him finally clear
Speaker 1: his name. Today's episode is based on interviews with Emerson
Speaker 1: Stevens and his lawyers, along with legal filings and court opinions. So, Steve, today,
Speaker 1: we're going to break them old. We're going to break
Speaker 1: them all. This is not a case that involves a
Speaker 1: false confession. This is a case that involves a false
Speaker 1: inculpatory statement. Sometimes detectives can't get a confession, but they'll
Speaker 1: settle for a false inculpatory statement. Right. That's lawyer talk
Speaker 1: for something you say that makes you look really bad.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right, and it's false. So it's a lie.
Speaker 1: And the same tactics that are used to get false
Speaker 1: confessions are often used to get these false inculpatory statements,
Speaker 1: and they can have the same devastating consequences. So when
Speaker 1: I think about this case, I think about it in
Speaker 1: terms of a puzzle. You know, and my family goes
Speaker 1: on vacation, we often buy a puzzle and we spend
Speaker 1: a lot of time putting that puzzle together. And anyone
Speaker 1: who puts puzzles together knows that there are a lot
Speaker 1: of times where the piece that you think will finish
Speaker 1: a part of the puzzle doesn't quite fit. It looks
Speaker 1: like it should fit, but just a little bit off.
Speaker 1: And that's what happened with a lot of the evidence
Speaker 1: in Emerson Stevens case. They manipulated the evidence to make
Speaker 1: it seem like it fit the police theory. That's what
Speaker 1: happens in runful conviction cases. Right tunnel vision makes police
Speaker 1: officers force these puzzle pieces together when in reality they
Speaker 1: might not fit at all. It was only after the
Speaker 1: fact that you could see that the pieces never really
Speaker 1: fit in the first place. Today's story takes place in
Speaker 1: Lancaster County, Virginia, a rural community instled between the Chesapeake
Speaker 1: Bay and the Rappahannock River. It's a place that'smells like
Speaker 1: ocean salt, an honest sweat. Generations there have made a
Speaker 1: living with their hands, hauling fish out of the bay
Speaker 1: and crabs and oysters out of the river. In this
Speaker 1: county was home to Mary Harding, who was Lancaster through
Speaker 1: and through. Petite and blue eyed, Mary was homecoming queen
Speaker 1: at Lancaster High before she and her high school sweetheart
Speaker 1: tied the knot. By age twenty four, Mary was working
Speaker 1: as a bookkeeper at the local bank while her husband
Speaker 1: was a fisherman. They had two young kids and a
Speaker 1: modest ranch home located just across the street from the cemetery.
Speaker 1: On Friday, August, that modest home became the scene of
Speaker 1: a terrible discovery. On weekdays, Mary had a routine before work,
Speaker 1: she'd drop off her one year old at the home
Speaker 1: of her husband's grandmother, Virginia Walker. But that Friday morning,
Speaker 1: Mary didn't show up. Virginia was worried, so she drove
Speaker 1: over to Mary's house. Virginia was greeted at the door
Speaker 1: by Mary's four year old son, who told here that
Speaker 1: he couldn't find his mom. The TV and lights were
Speaker 1: on throughout the house. Some unrinsed comet was left in
Speaker 1: the bathroom sink, and the little boy's chicken dinner from
Speaker 1: the night before was still sitting on the table. Don't worry,
Speaker 1: the four year old assured his great grandma. In his
Speaker 1: mother's absence, he was taking care of the baby. Virginia
Speaker 1: knew there's no way Mary would abandon her children. There's
Speaker 1: only one explanation for her disappearance. Mary must have been taken.
Speaker 1: Virginia calls the police, and soon a state police detective
Speaker 1: by the name of David Riley arrives at the house.
Speaker 1: He finds cat litter scattered on the ground outside the
Speaker 1: back door, along with one of Mary's white sandals, but
Speaker 1: there's no sign of Mary. Pretty soon, word spreads and
Speaker 1: the whole community starts searching through the woods and along
Speaker 1: the shore, but they find nothing. Nothing that is until
Speaker 1: four days later. That's when a woman's body is found
Speaker 1: in the shallows of the Rappahannock River. The body is unclothed,
Speaker 1: badly decomposed, and hard to identify, but it's clear something
Speaker 1: horrific has happened. The woman's back is covered with deep,
Speaker 1: evenly spaced slashes. There's a rope tied around her neck
Speaker 1: with a huge cinder block attached to the other end.
Speaker 1: A heavy chain is wrapped around the woman's right leg.
Speaker 1: Soon enough, the medical examiner confirms this is Mary Harding.
Speaker 1: She's been strangled to death. Now here's the thing. The
Speaker 1: rope and chain were the same kind that you can
Speaker 1: find on most fisherman's boats in Lancaster. So suddenly this
Speaker 1: close knit community was being torn apart by suspicion. Everyone
Speaker 1: was wondering who would have done this to the homecoming queen.
Speaker 1: Before long, the authorities settled on a suspect, thirty two
Speaker 1: year old Emerson Stevens. Like so many other Lancaster men,
Speaker 1: Emerson had worked on the water since he was a teenager.
Speaker 1: Emerson was a crabber and an oysterman who hauled his
Speaker 1: catch in on a boat named after his wife. He'd
Speaker 1: spent his life by the shore, the kind of guy
Speaker 1: who has salt water in his veins. It was Mary's
Speaker 1: husband who pointed police to Emerson Steven's. Emerson had gone
Speaker 1: to Mary's funeral, and Mary's husband thought Emerson seemed nervous there.
Speaker 1: Mary's husband also remembered that he had once heard Emerson
Speaker 1: make a crude joke about female anatomy. This wasn't much
Speaker 1: to go on, but days later, a couple of people
Speaker 1: told police they had seen a light colored pickup truck
Speaker 1: outside Mary's home on the night she disappeared. Now, Emerson
Speaker 1: Steven's happened to drive a white Dodge pickup, so he
Speaker 1: quickly became the police's number one suspect. Detective Riley asks
Speaker 1: Emerson to meet him at Mary Harding's house and the
Speaker 1: two men sit down on the front porch. According to Emerson,
Speaker 1: Riley gestures to the street and asks, why were you
Speaker 1: parked in front of this house the night Mary vanished.
Speaker 1: If you question somebody on the porch, you're creating a
Speaker 1: context that is different from your standard police interrogation. You
Speaker 1: can tap into all of the emotions of This is
Speaker 1: where this woman lived, this is where she had her children,
Speaker 1: this is where she was last seen. This is not
Speaker 1: a police interrogation room. It feels like the kind of
Speaker 1: place where you'd have a heart to heart conversation. And
Speaker 1: there's another thing that makes this porch interrogation even more emotional. Yeah,
Speaker 1: not only was this the front porch at Mary's house,
Speaker 1: it was right across the street from the burial ground
Speaker 1: where her headstone was. As the two men look out
Speaker 1: at the cemetery, Riley presses Emerson for information, but Emerson
Speaker 1: is stunned he hadn't been at Mary's house. He says
Speaker 1: he'd been at home. Then he'd taken his kids over
Speaker 1: to the neighbors to watch TV and eat crab. They'd
Speaker 1: returned home together at about nine pm, and Emerson's wife
Speaker 1: had gotten home from work shortly after. He tells Riley
Speaker 1: to talk to his neighbor and confirm the alibi, but
Speaker 1: Riley doesn't buy Emerson's story. Instead, he orders a search
Speaker 1: of Erson's pickup truck. After digging through the truck for hours,
Speaker 1: police discover a single strand of hair. They send the
Speaker 1: hair off to the state crime lab for forensic analysis.
Speaker 1: The next week, Riley asks Emerson to come to a
Speaker 1: nearby Virginia police station for a polygraph as soon as
Speaker 1: the polygraphs completed, Riley tells Emerson he failed. According to Emerson,
Speaker 1: Riley says he must either have killed Mary Harding or
Speaker 1: done something else related to her murder. Those are two
Speaker 1: pretty bad options, and Emerson is terrified. But then Riley
Speaker 1: offers Emerson a third choice that seems a lot better.
Speaker 1: Maybe you were at Mary's house that night doing something innocent.
Speaker 1: Maybe you were driving by and you stopped on the
Speaker 1: side of the road to take a leak. The fisherman
Speaker 1: takes the bait. He's desperate to please Riley and changes
Speaker 1: his story to exactly what Riley suggested. If detectives can't
Speaker 1: get a full confession, they'll settle for a false inculpatory statement.
Speaker 1: All the detective can get from Emerson is a statement
Speaker 1: that he pulled over on the side of the road
Speaker 1: a short distance away from Mary's house to relieve himself
Speaker 1: at the approximate time of death. That's the admission I
Speaker 1: was in the vicinity of her home near the time
Speaker 1: where the medical examiner believed she was killed. That was
Speaker 1: all Emerson said. He did not confess, but he'd said
Speaker 1: enough to get himself in real trouble. He just placed
Speaker 1: himself at the crime scene. Detective Riley was on high alert,
Speaker 1: but the case against Emerson was pretty damn thin until
Speaker 1: test results came back from the State crime Lab on
Speaker 1: that hair from Emerson's truck. The lab had put the
Speaker 1: hair under a microscope and compared it to Mary Harding's hair,
Speaker 1: and the lab said it was an exact match. The
Speaker 1: police's thin case suddenly seemed rock solid, and in late October,
Speaker 1: Emerson Stevens was a rested for the abduction and murder
Speaker 1: of Mary Harding. The trial of Emerson Stevens was one
Speaker 1: of the most dramatic events Lancaster County had ever seen.
Speaker 1: To a packed courtroom, prosecutors described how they thought the
Speaker 1: crime unfolded. Emerson kidnapped Mary, they said, then strangled her
Speaker 1: and threw her body into the river. They even suggested
Speaker 1: that Emerson slashed Mary's back with his fishing knife in
Speaker 1: order to attract crabs so there wouldn't be anything left
Speaker 1: of her body. The worst imaginable kind of cry. It's
Speaker 1: like throwing chum over the side of a boat to
Speaker 1: entice sharks. But there were problems with the prosecution's theory.
Speaker 1: They claimed that Emerson had thrown Mary's body into the
Speaker 1: river off the end of his own dock, but her
Speaker 1: body was actually found a full ten miles upstream. How
Speaker 1: does a body that is waged down with a cinder
Speaker 1: block travel ten miles upstream upstreams against the current. That's
Speaker 1: the thing. I mean. To swim those ten miles upstream
Speaker 1: would have been crazy, let alone somehow to float a
Speaker 1: weighted down body that distance. It makes no sense at all.
Speaker 1: It's absurd, But prosecutors found a witness to bolster this
Speaker 1: theory insane though it seemed. A marine scientist testified that
Speaker 1: it was possible for Mary's body to float against the
Speaker 1: current cinder block and all for ten miles from Emerson's
Speaker 1: dock to where it was found, and there were other
Speaker 1: witnesses to Detective Riley told the jury that Emerson claimed
Speaker 1: to have been near Mary's house on the night she disappeared,
Speaker 1: and the prosecution called two people to corroborate Emerson's statement,
Speaker 1: Clyde Dunaway and and Dick. They both claimed they had
Speaker 1: seen a pickup truck resembling Emerson's near the victim's house
Speaker 1: that night, and finally, the prosecution called a witness from
Speaker 1: the crime lab to testify that the hair and emer'sons
Speaker 1: truck seemed to match Mary's. So it seemed at this
Speaker 1: point as though all the puzzle pieces fit together, and
Speaker 1: they painted a compelling portrait of Emerson's guilt. But this
Speaker 1: is not the end of the story, not by a
Speaker 1: long shot. When the defense's turn came, Emerson's lawyers put
Speaker 1: on a strong case of their own, no fewer than
Speaker 1: four alibi witnesses. In the end, the jury hung unable
Speaker 1: to reach a verdict. The prosecution was quick to retry Emerson,
Speaker 1: and on July the second trial began. This time, the
Speaker 1: prosecution's case seemed, if anything, weaker. The marine scientist was
Speaker 1: a no show, so the prosecutor read the jury his
Speaker 1: testimony from the previous trial. Only one witness, Clyde Dunaway,
Speaker 1: testified about seeing Emerson's pickup near Mary's house, but the
Speaker 1: crime lab technician repeated his previous testimony about the hair
Speaker 1: in the truck, and Detective Riley testified again about Emerson's
Speaker 1: statements to ring the second trial, Emerson's lawyer put on
Speaker 1: his alibi witnesses again, and Emerson himself took the stand.
Speaker 1: He tried to explain that he was innocent, that he
Speaker 1: hadn't actually pulled over near Mary's house that night. He'd
Speaker 1: only said that to satisfy his interrogator. Prosecutors pounced, you
Speaker 1: admit to us You lied, They asked, yes, I told that,
Speaker 1: Emerson answered. Later he quietly added, I'm not a smart person.
Speaker 1: The case wasn't any stronger than at the first trial,
Speaker 1: but this time the jury reached a verdict guilty, and
Speaker 1: Emerson Stevens was sentenced to a prison term of one
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty four years. Fast forward to two thousand two.
Speaker 1: During those sixteen years behind bars, Emerson earned his g
Speaker 1: e d. He worked in the dusty prison wood shop,
Speaker 1: building furniture for state institutions. He wrote letters constantly to
Speaker 1: his family and to lawyers, begging for help with his case.
Speaker 1: When he wasn't working or writing, Emerson would dream about
Speaker 1: the smell of the shore. He wondered if he'd ever
Speaker 1: be on the water again. In April two thousand two,
Speaker 1: Emerson's attention was caught by a news story about a
Speaker 1: genteel of Virginia lady named Beverly Monroe. Beverly was a
Speaker 1: professional chemist whose upper middle class background seemed worlds away
Speaker 1: from Emerson. At least at first you see. Ten years earlier,
Speaker 1: fifty five year old Beverly had been dating a wealthy
Speaker 1: real estate mogul named Roger de la Byrd. Roger lived
Speaker 1: on a massive estate in Virginia Horse Country. He claimed
Speaker 1: to be an art dealer who was descended from European nobility.
Speaker 1: But when Roger turned up dead one morning from a
Speaker 1: gunshot wound, police suspected Beverly of murder, even though she'd
Speaker 1: never had so much as a traffic ticket. The case
Speaker 1: against Beverly was absurd from day one. Beverly had a
Speaker 1: grocery store received proving she hadn't been at Roger's estate
Speaker 1: at the time he died, and Roger's death had been
Speaker 1: ruled a suicide. Turns out his life was falling apart.
Speaker 1: The FBI was investigating him for art fraud, and his
Speaker 1: claims of nobility were also being exposed as phony. But
Speaker 1: Beverly ended up being wrongly convicted of Roger's murder anyway.
Speaker 1: Why because in part of Detective David Riley, the same
Speaker 1: officer who had built the case against Emerson Stevens. When
Speaker 1: Detective Riley interrogated Beverly, she refused to admit to something
Speaker 1: she didn't do, but Riley administered a polygraph and told
Speaker 1: Beverly she failed it, and then he suggested that she
Speaker 1: must have been present when Roger shot himself. Detective Riley
Speaker 1: seems to have manipulated Beverly into placing herself at the
Speaker 1: scene of the crime, just like he seems to have
Speaker 1: done with Emerson. The similarities are unmistakable. Beverly Monroe was
Speaker 1: wrongfully convicted based on inculpatory statements that placed her at
Speaker 1: the crime scene, and Riley then built his case around
Speaker 1: that statement to make it look like this wasn't a
Speaker 1: suicide at all, that this was a murder. It's amazing,
Speaker 1: just like Emerson, Beverly never confessed to anything. Same detective
Speaker 1: using the same modus operandi in order to get not
Speaker 1: a false confession, but a false inculpatory statement that was
Speaker 1: used to convict them and send them away for crimes
Speaker 1: they did not commit. A federal judge later called Riley's
Speaker 1: interrogation of Beverly Monroe deceitful and manipulative. Even so, Beverly
Speaker 1: ended up serving ten years in prison before her conviction
Speaker 1: was thrown out and she was released in April two
Speaker 1: thousand two. That news story Emerson saw on TV from
Speaker 1: behind Bars was about Beverly's first moments of freedom. Emerson
Speaker 1: didn't waste a minute. He immediately wrote to Beverly's lawyer,
Speaker 1: who agreed to take his case. And when Beverly herself
Speaker 1: heard about Emerson, she got involved too. She went to
Speaker 1: the lawyers that had just exonerated her her and said,
Speaker 1: now you need to do it again for this other guy,
Speaker 1: which you know, to their credit, they did. They tried
Speaker 1: to reinvestigate as much as they could, and then when
Speaker 1: it became clear that they were sort of losing steam,
Speaker 1: Beverly turned her sides to me. That's dear to end Right,
Speaker 1: the director of the University of Virginia's Innocence Project Clinic.
Speaker 1: She's one of the lawyers Beverly enlisted to join Emerson's
Speaker 1: legal team. Emerson, you know, he had been trying for years,
Speaker 1: writing to people about his case and begging for help.
Speaker 1: And if you ever meet or speak to Beverly, you
Speaker 1: will learn that you will do anything that Beverly says
Speaker 1: to do, because she's absolutely charming but also absolutely compelling.
Speaker 1: Beverly made it something of a mission to help other
Speaker 1: people who were convicted by the evidence collected by the
Speaker 1: same detective. With Beverly's help, Emerson now had a top
Speaker 1: notch legal team, and while the lawyers got to work,
Speaker 1: Beverly and Emerson began corresponding. Beverly is not only college
Speaker 1: educ but she's a chemist, and she lived a very
Speaker 1: extravagant life with her partner before this all happened. And
Speaker 1: Emerson is this waterman who grew up, you know, with
Speaker 1: his nine siblings in Lancaster. I mean, this is the
Speaker 1: classic thing that happens in these wrongful conviction cases, is
Speaker 1: that people who would never in a lifetime be near
Speaker 1: each other or connect do. Beverly and Emerson became friends.
Speaker 1: Beverly sensed how much this fisherman longed for the water,
Speaker 1: and started sending him photographs of the place he missed most,
Speaker 1: the Chesapeake Bay. She was hyper aware of taking care
Speaker 1: of him while he was incarcerated so he didn't feel abandoned,
Speaker 1: writing and calling and making sure he had money in
Speaker 1: his commissary and holidays and birthdays. And I remember thinking,
Speaker 1: she knows what he's feeling better than any of us.
Speaker 1: I think that Emerson, once he had Beverly, he knew
Speaker 1: that there was another person out there who was advocating
Speaker 1: for him ferociously. I mean, most people who are incarcerated
Speaker 1: don't have that person. And because she was so smart
Speaker 1: and because she had been through it, she wasn't going
Speaker 1: to hear that it couldn't be done. While Beverly was
Speaker 1: keeping Emerson's hope alive, his legal team was systematically unwinding
Speaker 1: the case against him, and, as it turned out, one
Speaker 1: piece of faulty evidence after another seemed to lead back
Speaker 1: to Detective Riley. First up was the claim that witnesses
Speaker 1: had seen a white pickup truck like Emerson's near Mary's house.
Speaker 1: A woman named and Dick had testified to that effect
Speaker 1: at the first trial, but her story had changed by
Speaker 1: the time of the second trial. There she swore that
Speaker 1: the person she saw driving the truck was not Emerson.
Speaker 1: Stevens when asked why she didn't say that to the
Speaker 1: first jury, and answered because Detective Riley told me not to.
Speaker 1: The other pickup truck witness, Clyde Dunaway Well turns out
Speaker 1: he came forward only after police offered a twenty thousand
Speaker 1: dollar reward for information. He asked Detective Riley about the
Speaker 1: money during their very first conversation, but at Emerson's second trial,
Speaker 1: Dunaway swore he never asked anyone about the reward. Now,
Speaker 1: Detective Riley was sitting in the courtroom listening to this,
Speaker 1: He must have known Dunaway was lying, but the detective
Speaker 1: never said a word. Eventually, Dunaway paid a price for
Speaker 1: his false testimony in Emerson Steven's case. He ended up
Speaker 1: pleading guilty to obstruction of justice. Once you dangle reward money,
Speaker 1: especially in a place like Lancaster where there's a lot
Speaker 1: of people living very much on a margin, the fact
Speaker 1: that Clyde Dunaway bit on that is hardly surprising. He
Speaker 1: repeatedly inquired about when am I going to get that money,
Speaker 1: and the detective would say, only after you testify. The
Speaker 1: upshot of the investigation is that Clyde Dunaway got in trouble,
Speaker 1: and our dirty detective, who sat on that information during
Speaker 1: both trials, walked away unscathed. The little guy got it
Speaker 1: as usual. Next up was the bizarre claim that Mary's body,
Speaker 1: cinder block and all floated up stream ten miles that
Speaker 1: marine scientists who testified at the first trial, remember he
Speaker 1: was m i A. At the second trial, prosecutors had
Speaker 1: to read the jury a transcript of his previous testimony.
Speaker 1: Why didn't he show up the second time? Well, Emerson's
Speaker 1: lawyers found a letter from the scientist to the prosecutor
Speaker 1: that provided a pretty clear explanation. After the first trial,
Speaker 1: the scientist wrote, Lieutenant Riley applied what maybe the correct
Speaker 1: term to my testimony in this case. He called it
Speaker 1: I wash. I wash is Virginia slang for bullshit. Oh god,
Speaker 1: the marine scientists. It's clear that the science that he
Speaker 1: put forth at this trial wasn't real. Even Detective Riley
Speaker 1: called this theory eye wash. Why a marine biologist went
Speaker 1: along with that the first time I have no idea,
Speaker 1: But by the second time he clearly did not want
Speaker 1: to do it and thought it was dirty. Right. That's
Speaker 1: what his letters suggested, is you're asking me to do
Speaker 1: something that's nonsensical. Suddenly there was reason to believe that
Speaker 1: Detective Riley had jinned up some of the evidence against Emerson,
Speaker 1: and it seems that Riley tried to take it even further.
Speaker 1: The owner of a Lancaster convenience store gave Emerson's lawyers
Speaker 1: a sworn statement that reads as follows. Detective Riley tried
Speaker 1: to get me to say that Emerson Stevens woke me
Speaker 1: up in the middle of the night, that Mary Harding
Speaker 1: disappeared so that he could buy five gallons of gas.
Speaker 1: Detective Riley was extremely aggressive and pushy, insisting that I
Speaker 1: agree with his story even though it was not true.
Speaker 1: I was never woken up in the middle of the
Speaker 1: night by Emerson Stevens. Ever, for any reason, none of
Speaker 1: these pieces of the puzzle actually fit together. They were
Speaker 1: all manipulated by this detective so that they fit his
Speaker 1: theory that Emerson was guilty of this crime. Now that's
Speaker 1: the eye wash. The rest of the case crumbled to
Speaker 1: remember the theory that Emerson used his knife to slash
Speaker 1: Mary's back. A new assess s meant by the medical
Speaker 1: examiner showed that those evenly spaced gashes were probably made
Speaker 1: by a boat propeller, not by a human with a knife.
Speaker 1: And finally, what about the hair from Emerson's truck Back
Speaker 1: in the crime lab had put that hair under a
Speaker 1: microscope and claimed that it was an exact match to marry.
Speaker 1: This technique, known as hair microscopy, has since been debunked.
Speaker 1: There's no way you can match hairs with that level
Speaker 1: of certainty just by looking through a microscope. In fact,
Speaker 1: more than seventy people have been exonerated after bogus hair
Speaker 1: evidence was used to convict them. There's just nothing to
Speaker 1: the science that you can microscopically compare hairs and identify anybody.
Speaker 1: We've had cases where people say that this is a
Speaker 1: human hair belonging to this victim, and it belongs to
Speaker 1: a dog. Even according to the FBI, hair microscopy is
Speaker 1: junk science. Decades later, Emerson's lawyers sought DNA testing, but
Speaker 1: it turned out the hair was too old to test.
Speaker 1: In other words, there's no way to know who it
Speaker 1: belonged to. It could have been Mary's or Emerson's, or
Speaker 1: Emerson's wife's, it could have been anybody's. Armed with this
Speaker 1: new information, Emerson's lawyers filed a post conviction petition in
Speaker 1: asking for his conviction to be thrown out, but it
Speaker 1: hasn't been yet. This is where Emerson's legal case has stalled.
Speaker 1: Despite skilled lawyers and compelling evidence of innocence, the courts
Speaker 1: have denied his petitions at every turn. But there has
Speaker 1: been one important victory. On May nineteenth, two thousand seventeen,
Speaker 1: Emerson Stevens was paroled from prison. He'd spent thirty one
Speaker 1: years behind bars. His family filled the lobby of the
Speaker 1: correctional center, which is almost always absolutely empty, and then
Speaker 1: we came with students and people who have been working
Speaker 1: on this case for years. We all hopped into cars
Speaker 1: and we asked Emerson where he would like to have
Speaker 1: his first free meal. So what was the fisherman craving
Speaker 1: after more than three decades of prison food. Emerson very
Speaker 1: quickly told us that he wanted to go to Cracker
Speaker 1: Barrel and he wanted the seafood platter at Cracker Barrel.
Speaker 1: And I don't argue with anyone who wants that like
Speaker 1: a tide that might never come back in Emerson. Stephen's
Speaker 1: life ebbed for thirty one years as he sat behind bars.
Speaker 1: Now his life is flowing again. You know, he's done
Speaker 1: such a great job of getting out and just sort
Speaker 1: of sliding back into his life, moving back in, seeing family,
Speaker 1: going back to work immediately being a great worker. So
Speaker 1: in that part of his life, he's done a really
Speaker 1: wonderful job. But on the other hand, he's still a
Speaker 1: convicted murderer, and that burden weighs on him every day.
Speaker 1: I think he feels that until he is cleared and
Speaker 1: other people are exposed, his life is on hold until
Speaker 1: that happens. At least Emerson gets to see his kids
Speaker 1: and his grandkids. He's back out on the water and
Speaker 1: his small aluminum boat, feeling the breeze on his face.
Speaker 1: I just said to him, the only thing you owe
Speaker 1: me is a trip to go Oystering, and he will
Speaker 1: be good for that. I know it. I've been to
Speaker 1: a Steven's cookout, and you know what they do is
Speaker 1: go crab and fish and come back and cook it
Speaker 1: all up in the yard and have huge tables of
Speaker 1: food and it's delicious. The case against Emerson Stevens has
Speaker 1: taken years to unwind. Sometimes fighting cases this thin can
Speaker 1: be strangely hard, almost like your shadow boxing a ghost.
Speaker 1: Emerson should be pardoned, and Emerson's innocence needs to be
Speaker 1: recognized by the governor of the State of Virginia. In
Speaker 1: cases like this, it's just never the slam dunk that
Speaker 1: it should be. We immediately applied for an absolute pardon,
Speaker 1: which would exonerate him totally, and he pretty quickly got
Speaker 1: a letter that said thanks for your petition. We probably
Speaker 1: won't be able to get to this for two years,
Speaker 1: and don't bother us in the meantime. For Emerson to
Speaker 1: be pardoned would mean that he gets an absolute clean slate,
Speaker 1: and it's a gateway to maybe proving what people did
Speaker 1: to get him convicted. For people like him, you need that,
Speaker 1: You need the real story to be told. For her part,
Speaker 1: Beverly Monroe, now in her eighties, still supports Emerson, still
Speaker 1: talks to him regularly by phone, still is waiting for
Speaker 1: the day he'll be exonerated. We're waiting to Emerson, and
Speaker 1: we stand with you all the way. Hey is this Emerson? Yes, yes,
Speaker 1: Hey Emerson, It's Laura night Rider and Steve Drison. How
Speaker 1: are you? I'm doing good? So tell me, Emerson, what
Speaker 1: have you been doing these days? How have you been
Speaker 1: keeping yourself busy? Ah? Well, my oldest brother he asked
Speaker 1: me if I would take his boat and get all
Speaker 1: this crap pipes up. So I did that, you know,
Speaker 1: Oh it felt great. It felt great being backward on
Speaker 1: the water again. And then he wants me to build
Speaker 1: orsting with him, you know, So I'm thinking about it.
Speaker 1: I want to buy purchase a boat of my own,
Speaker 1: you know, like my brother's got and be able to
Speaker 1: work on the water again. You know, what would you
Speaker 1: name you about, Emerson? Well, these type of boats, you
Speaker 1: don't really put names on them. But I don't know,
Speaker 1: misfit or something. I don't know. There's times that are
Speaker 1: enjoyable and wonderful. You're with your family, you're back out
Speaker 1: on the water. And there's times that are heard too,
Speaker 1: I'm sure. Oh yeah, yeah. I lost my oldest daughter
Speaker 1: when I was in prison. She died at the age
Speaker 1: of forty and that broke my heart. And it's not
Speaker 1: a day that don't go by that I don't think
Speaker 1: about them, you know, I'm really sorry, Emerson. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: she's looking down from some I hope, and rooting for you,
Speaker 1: just like the rest of us. Are. Are you still
Speaker 1: in touch with Beverly? Oh, Beverly, she's been not my
Speaker 1: number one fan, you know, She's always believed in me,
Speaker 1: and she's great. She's a great person. Every now and
Speaker 1: then I text Shaw call and talk to him, but
Speaker 1: she loves to talk now, loves to talk to support
Speaker 1: Emerson Stevens. You can write the Governor of Virginia and
Speaker 1: ask him to grant Emerson an Absolute pardon. You can
Speaker 1: find the address on my Instagram page at Laura and
Speaker 1: I Writer. And that's the story of Emerson Stevens. Join
Speaker 1: us next week when we tell you about a Philadelphia
Speaker 1: man named Walter oh Grod. Walter spent decades on death
Speaker 1: row until a new generation of prosecutors came to Philadelphia.
Speaker 1: They brought reform to the city and hope to Walter.
Speaker 1: Wrongful Conviction, False Confessions is a production of Lava for
Speaker 1: Good Podcasts in association with Signal Company Number one Special
Speaker 1: thanks to our executive producers Jason Slom and Kevin Wardis.
Speaker 1: Our production team is headed by Senior producer and Pope,
Speaker 1: along with producers Josh Hammer and Jess Shane. Our show
Speaker 1: is mixed by Jeanie Montalvo. John Colbert is our intrepid intern.
Speaker 1: Our music was composed by j Ralph. You can follow
Speaker 1: me on Instagram or Twitter at Laura NI Writer, and
Speaker 1: you can follow me on Twitter at s driven. For
Speaker 1: more information on the show, visit Wrongful Conviction podcast dot com.
Speaker 1: Be sure to follow the show on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction,
Speaker 1: on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast, and on Twitter at
Speaker 1: wrong Conviction