PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination – and because of the growing body of scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects are to widely used interrogation methods such as the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’ As all too many of this Blog's post have shown, I also recognize that pressure for false confessions can take many forms, up to and including physical violence, even physical and mental torture.
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:
———————————————————
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The key piece of evidence remaining at the retrial was Wright’s confession. His lawyers argued that it was coerced. The detectives denied it. Lawyer Sam Silver, representing Wright, asked Devlin to write down the nine-page confession in real time, as he said he had done “word for word” in 1991. The once-famed detective — who helped nab a New Jersey rabbi in his wife’s murder-for-hire — jotted down only six words before giving up. Wright told jurors that police had made him sign the confession without reading it. They deliberated just a few minutes before acquitting him, and Wright, who spent 25 years in prison, later received a nearly $10 million settlement from the city. Then in 2021, a grand jury indicted Devlin, Santiago and Jastrzembski. Santiago and Devlin were accused of lying about the confession."
---------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Ex-Philly detectives accused of lying in retrial of wrongfully convicted man," by reporters Claudia Vargas, Maryclaire Dale and David Chang, published by ABC, on March 18, 2025.
SUB-HEADING: "Former detectives Martin Devlin, Manuel Santiago and Frank Jastrzembski, all now in their 70s, are accused of lying under oath during the 2016 retrial of Anthony Wright, who was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder."
SUB-HEADING: :Three former police detectives from Philadelphia are on trial for perjury and Tuesday both sides started making their case. NBC10 investigative reporter Claudia Vargas has the latest."
What to Know
- Tuesday marked the first day of testimony in the trial of three former Philadelphia police detectives who are accused of lying under oath during the 2016 retrial of a man who was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder.
- Experts in innocence cases say it's unusual for police or prosecutors to face criminal charges over misconduct that leads to wrongful convictions.
- Former detectives Martin Devlin, Manuel Santiago and Frank Jastrzembski, now in their 70s, hoped to have a judge dismiss the perjury case over mistakes made in the grand jury process. But Judge Lucretia Clemons denied the motion last year.
GIST: "Tuesday marked the first day of testimony in the trial of three former Philadelphia police detectives who are accused of lying under oath during the 2016 retrial of a man who was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder.
In 1991, 20-year-old Anthony Wright was arrested and charged with raping and murdering an elderly widow. Wright was convicted of the crime two years later in 1993 and spent two decades in prison.
Wright’s conviction was overturned in 2014 however, after DNA evidence pointed to another suspect. Despite the DNA exclusion, Seth Williams – Philadelphia’s District Attorney at the time – chose to retry Wright in 2016, calling former Philadelphia police detectives Martin Devlin, Manuel Santiago and Frank Jastrzembski out of retirement to testify.
The key piece of evidence remaining at the retrial was Wright’s confession. His lawyers argued that it was coerced. The detectives denied it.
Lawyer Sam Silver, representing Wright, asked Devlin to write down the nine-page confession in real time, as he said he had done “word for word” in 1991. The once-famed detective — who helped nab a New Jersey rabbi in his wife’s murder-for-hire — jotted down only six words before giving up.
Wright told jurors that police had made him sign the confession without reading it. They deliberated just a few minutes before acquitting him, and Wright, who spent 25 years in prison, later received a nearly $10 million settlement from the city.
Then in 2021, a grand jury indicted Devlin, Santiago and Jastrzembski. Santiago and Devlin were accused of lying about the confession. Santiago and Jastrzembski were accused of lying when they testified that they didn’t know about the DNA problem. Jastrzembski was accused of lying about finding the victim’s clothes in Wright’s bedroom.
All three retired detectives – now in their 70s – have been named in federal civil rights lawsuits, including Wright’s. The lawsuits accuse them of police misconduct and in some cases, coercing false confessions. The city of Philadelphia settled those lawsuits for a total of nearly $30 million but did not admit fault.
The perjury trial for the three former detectives was set to begin more than a year ago. Lawyers for the defense have been trying to get the case tossed, however, arguing that inadmissible evidence was used during the grand jury proceedings that led to their indictment. Just last week, the lawyers petitioned the Pennsylvania supreme court for extraordinary relief.
All three have maintained their innocence and pleaded not guilty. The Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office had previously said it was doing a review of the former detectives’ prior cases that ended in convictions. A spokesperson for the office told NBC10 on Monday that it was unclear if the review is complete. NBC10 reached out to the defense attorneys. We have not yet heard back from them.
Assistant District Attorney Brain Collins began the trail on Tuesday with his opening statement explaining to the jury that the perjury trail they will decide is an unusual one.
The first witness to testify was Ernest Ransom, the current head of the homicide unit staff inspector. He was questioned for two hours about the 1991 statements and department protocols at the time.
Wright's time on the stand was spent answering the prosecutors' questions about what he said and did not say to police in 1991.
Wright is expected to take the stand again on Wednesday for cross-examination. NBC10 reached out, but Wright, along with the three detectives and their lawyers, declined to comment."
The entire story can be read at:
https://authory.com/HaroldLevy
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
—————————————————————————————————————
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
