Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:
------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHERS NOTE: (Two): In a previous post, 'Martinsville 7' Part One,' I focussed on a travesty of justice in Virginia in 1951, in which seven Black men were executed. on charges they had raped a white woman two years earlier. Francis DeSales Grayson, Frank Hairston Jr., Howard Hairston, James Luther Hairston, Joe Henry Hampton, Booker T. Millner, and John ClabonTaylor were interrogated by police without the appointment of legal counsel and, under threats that they would be released to a lynch mob, confessed to involvement in the rape. After a succession of perfunctory trials before all -white, all-male juries, each was convicted and sentenced to death. Their sentences were carried out in the largest mass execution for rape in the history of the United States. The story behind this abomination of justice is told on a podcast produced by The Death Penalty information Center, a phenomenal source of information relevant to this Blog. My initial reaction, on reading about the unthinkable police conduct which led the false confessions, was to think that such a case was the exception and far from the rule. However, within seconds I thought about another Virginia case involving outrageous police behaviour which which occurred almost half a century later (in 1997) - the case of The Norfolk Four, the subject of several previous posts on this Blog. The case of the Norfolk Four was described by Laura Morehouse, a graduate of the Georgetown University Law School, an article which appeared in the 'American Criminal Law Review' under the heading, 'Confess or die: Threatening a subject with the death penalty should render confessions involuntary.' (I find it pretty shocking that a Law Review article should be necessary to make this point in the U.S.A. HL):
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The Norfolk Four case reveals that the police sometimes obtain false confessions from innocent suspects during interrogations. In the case of the Norfolk Four, the police used a number of tactics to elicit the false confessions. Danial Williams explained that the lead detective “treated him like a criminal from the outset, poking him in the chest, yelling in his face, calling him a liar and telling him, falsely, that he’d failed a polygraph test and that a witness saw him go into the [victim’s] apartment." Eric Wilson said that the lead detective “hit him several times and showed him photos of the crime scene and the victim and gave him details about the crime to include in his confession.” The police employed one additional tactic. Because the crime at issue involved the rape and murder of a young woman, all four men faced the death penalty under Virginia law if convicted. The police used this to their advantage and threatened the men with the death penalty during the interrogations. The police told them that the only way to avoid the death penalty was to confess. Under the threat of the death penalty, the Norfolk Four falsely confessed to a crime they did not commit. When the police interrogated the true killer over one year later, they told him he could “escape the death penalty” if he implicated the Norfolk Four in his confession. The killer did so in exchange for two life sentences, rather than the death penalty.."
ARTICLE: "Confess or die: Why threatening a suspect with the death penalty should render confessions involuntary," by Laura Morehouse, published by the 'American Criminal Law Review' in 2019. Volume 56, Page 531; 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GIST: As this this is a rather lengthy article here is a taste! "In July 1997, the rape and murder of a Navy sailor’s wife shocked the town of Norfolk, Virginia. Even more shocking was the fact that four Navy sailors, Danial Williams, Joseph Dick, Derick Tice, and Eric Wilson, falsely confessed to the crime. These men became known as the “Norfolk Four.” A Norfolk detective, with a history of eliciting false confessions, interrogated the four sailors. Each confessed to the crime, “alter[ing] their confessions to accommodate details fed to them by the police.” Nearly twenty years later, a federal judge vacated two of the convictions. Less than a year later, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe pardoned the four men. The Norfolk Four case reveals that the police sometimes obtain false confessions from innocent suspects during interrogations. In the case of the Norfolk Four, the police used a number of tactics to elicit the false confessions. Danial Williams explained that the lead detective “treated him like a criminal from the outset, poking him in the chest, yelling in his face, calling him a liar and telling him, falsely, that he’d failed a polygraph test and that a witness saw him go into the [victim’s] apartment.” Eric Wilson said that the lead detective “hit him several times and showed him photos of the crime scene and the victim and gave him details about the crime to include in his confession.” The police employed one additional tactic. Because the crime at issue involved the rape and murder of a young woman, all four men faced the death penalty under Virginia law if convicted. The police used this to their advantage and threatened the men with the death penalty during the interrogations. The police told them that the only way to avoid the death penalty was to confess.9Under the threat of the death penalty, the Norfolk Four falsely confessed to a crime they did not commit. When the police interrogated the true killer over one year later, they told him he could “escape the death penalty” if he implicated the Norfolk Four in his confession.11 The killer did so in exchange for two life sentences, rather than the death penalty."
ANOTHER PASSAGE: "The Norfolk Four are hardly alone in being convicted after a false confession. Another oft-cited case where a false confession led to a wrongful conviction is that of Christopher Ochoa, who was convicted of the rape and murder of a young woman in Texas. (Convicted on 05/05 1989): In Mr. Ochoa’s case, the police told him that he would receive the death penalty unless he cooperated, going so far as to “show[] him photos of death row” and “point[] out the spot on his left arm where the needle would be inserted." Mr. Ochoa has since been exonerated and has sought to bring awareness to the problem posed by false confessions, stating that coerced and false confessions “happen[] a lot more often than people think[.]” While it is impossible to know exactly how often police elicit false confessions, the experiences of people like the Norfolk Four and Mr. Ochoa illustrate that false confessions do happen, and they can lead to innocent people being wrongfully convicted."
The entire article can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
