They Executed Him. 20 Years Later, DNA Proved He Didn't Do It.

0:00This is Hota Kotby from Joy 101 with Hota Kotby, whether you're calling the wise women in your life, video calling your girlfriends across the country, or checking in on someone who always knows how to make you smile, staying connected matters. Those small conversations shared laughs and quick halos are what keep relationships strong even when life gets busy. Some of the most life changing conversations start with just a phone call. That's why AT&T guarantees a network you can rely on so you can focus on the moments and people that matter most. That's the AT&T guarantee. AT&T, connecting changes everything. Terms and conditions apply. Visit AT&T.com slash guarantee for details. Download text now because it cuts out cloutery. You can literally activate it from your couch. Nationwide 5G with the same towers the other companies use. Pay what you want or not at all.

1:03You're in control. Show these ridiculous carriers we ain't paying for stupid because we're way too smart to pay them. Reapp base talk and text me the text now app requires Wifi or data connection data plan so separately 5G where available. PNC Bank brings you call of the wild money moves. Hear that? That's an internet troll telling you to put all your money into a single investment. He wants you to liquidate your emergency fund. And by a digital rice horse night, Silicon Steve. Stavigilant he's very persistent. Guard against wild money moves with PNC Bank brilliantly boring since 1865. Imagine if you will sitting in this cold concrete cell the air is you know it's stale, smelling of rust and floor cleaner. Yeah that distinct institutional smell. Right and down the hallway you hear this heavy metallic clank of a door slamming shut it just echoes. Oh that would be terrifying.

2:05It is you're counting down the hours or like maybe even the minutes to your own execution. The sheer suffocating terror of that scenario is just unimaginable on its own. It really is. But there's this added layer to this nightmare you know with absolute unshakeable certainty that you are entirely innocent. That's the part that just it breaks you. Exactly. And the most honking part of it all you know the real perpetrator is out there. They're out there walking free, living their life while yours is about to be extinguished by the very system designed to protect you. It's a literal waking nightmare. But for the people in the historical case files we're exploring today this wasn't some dark thought experiment it was a very terrifying reality. It truly is the darkest corner of the human experience. I mean the absolute loss of agency knowing this massive machinery of the state is just grinding towards you. And you can't stop it. Right there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop it. Well welcome to Thrilling Threads just a quick reminder before we get into it. The conversation you're about to hear is for informational and entertainment

3:08purposes only. Please always consult with the qualified professional before making any decisions particularly regarding legal matters or interacting with the justice system. Our exploration today involves historical and legal case files and we're examining them purely for informational and educational insight. Yeah absolutely essential to keep that in mind as we you know navigate all this heavy history. Definitely. So today we're taking a deep dive into the source material. This incredible curated compilation of true crime and historical justice case files. We really want to unpack the reality of wrongful executions. And is it grim reality but an important one? Yeah our mission is to look at these recurring systemic flaws right from so-called infallible science to the really dark psychology of police interrogations all the things that lead the justice system to make the ultimate irreversible mistake. Because we need to understand how a system that's built on this bedrock concept of like beyond reasonable doubt. Right the golden rule of justice. Exactly how that

4:14system can sometimes operate with this blind fatal certainty. What's fascinating here is that the justice system for all its marble columns and grand architecture and complex legal doctrines it's ultimately just a machine built by humans built operated and maintained entirely by humans and humans by our very evolutionary nature we are inherently fowlable. Yeah we mess up a lot. We do we hold unconscious biases we miss interpret data our memories constantly fail us and we succumb to pressure. But the stakes here are so much higher than just a normal mistake. Right because when you take that inherently flawed human machine and combine it with the absolute finality of the death penalty. The margin for error just completely disappears you you're applying a permanent irreversible punishment using a fundamentally imperfect mechanism. Which is exactly why we're asking you the listener to keep a really open mind today we want you to put yourself in the shoes of the accused as we trace these historical threads. Yeah it's so easy to distance yourself. It is when we talk about the state or the system it can sound so abstract you know like this faceless bureaucracy

5:19but these were real people they had families and futures and they were caught in a machinery that simply refused to hit the brakes. We absolutely have to humanize the data these case files in our sources they aren't just statistics or morbid trivia they are crucial cautionary tales about the limits of human judgment. Okay let's start with a concept that I think we all inherently trust forensics. Oh boy yeah. Right I mean if you watch literally any police procedural on television science is presented as this cold hard and fallible truth. A glowing blue light flashes on a screen a computer beeps and bam the investigator knows exactly who the killer is. Exactly but the source material we are looking at today paints a wildly different picture. I really want to look at the illusion of infallible forensics or as it's known in the legal community junk science. The term junk science is highly appropriate though it's honestly it's terrifying how long some of these methodologies were accepted as absolute gospel in courtrooms. How does that even happen?

6:19The problem arises when subjective interpretation is disguised as objective data people in lab codes giving opinions but calling it science. That brings me straight to the case of Cameron Todd willing him the details in these files are just they're infuriating. They really are that one is a tough read. He was executed in Texas in 2004 for a 1992 house fire that tragically killed his own children and he maintained his innocence with this kind of desperate ferocity right up until the very seconds before his legal injection. He never once wavered. Never but the science the state used to convict him. It sounds like something pulled out of like a 1980s satanic panic thriller. The investigators claimed the fire was deliberate arson and they pointed to what they called poor patterns on the floor. Right they thought some important accelerant like kerosene. Yeah but get this they claimed it was poured in the shape of a pentagram. A pentagram it's just absurd. Yes they claimed there was a star shaped burn pattern on the floor but we have to look at how fire science actually works which is something the investigators in 1992 completely misunderstood. Which is wild

7:24because that was their entire job. Exactly when a fire breaks out in an enclosed space like a family home it doesn't just burn linearly across the rug. Heat rises it hits the ceiling and it creates this incredibly thick super heated layer of gas. Okay and when that gas reaches a critical temperature often over a thousand degrees Fahrenheit the ambient heat radiates downward. This triggers a phenomenon called flashover. Wait explain flashover because I think most of us like I said we just imagine a fire slowly crawling across the room. Flashover is terrifying. It is the near simultaneous ignition of most of the directly exposed combustible material in an enclosed area. Everything just catches fire at once. Yes literally everything and when flashover happens the floor itself can ignite. That sudden intense burning combined with the way water is later sprayed by the firehoses. Oh that changes the scene too. Romantically it creates these bizarre irregular char patterns on the floor. In Willingham's case modern fire scientists reviewing the files noted that those

8:29supposed poor patterns were entirely consistent with a normal post flashover environment. So it wasn't a pentagram of kerosene at all? No. Furthermore the porch had a barbecue grill on it which perfectly explains the presence of combustible liquid traces in the vicinity. The fire wasn't started with satanic intent. It was just a tragic accidental house fire that reached flash over. But the state didn't stop at just misinterpreting the floorboards. They actually brought in a psychologist named Tim Gregory. Oh this part is just baffling. It's insane. His contribution to this literal life or death trial. He argued that Willingham's iron maiden and lid Zeppelin posters indicated an interest in quote satanic activities. Because of classic rock posters. Yes. You have a father who has just lost his children in an unimaginable tragedy. And the state is pointing to a poster on his wall as evidence of a demonic motive to murder them. It speaks to a very dark human psychological need. You know the desperation to craft a narrative. What do you mean by that? Well when a tragedy

9:30is incomprehensible like the random accidental death of children of fire. Our brains naturally reject the chaos. Human nature demands a villain. Because a villain means someone is responsible. Right. We want a bad guy who did it on purpose. Because that implies the world has some sort of twisted order. The state used pseudoscience and character assassination to force Willingham into that villain role. And to solidify that role they brought in a jailhouse informant Johnny Webb. He claimed Willingham confessed to him about the pentagram pattern. And what did Webb get for that supposed confession? A significantly reduced sentence for his own crimes of course. This is a massive systemic flaw. When you offer a trapped, desperate person, a get out of jail free card in exchange for a story, you are directly incentivizing perjury. And surprise surprise Webb later entirely recanted his testimony. He admitted he completely fabricated the confession under intense pressure from the prosecutors. But the damage was already done. Reversibly and numerous modern fire experts have since reviewed the evidence and unanimously agreed that there was absolutely no proof of

10:33arson. As one of the experts quoted in our sources pointed out there could be hundreds of people sitting in prison right now for accidental fires all based on this outdated, fundamentally flawed understanding of how fire behaves. He really highlights the immense danger of the courtroom theater. Courtroom theater, yeah, that's a good way to put it. Because juries are primed to believe experts. When a person in a nice suit or a sharp uniform takes the stand looks confidently at the jury and says the science proves he did it, the jury rarely has the technical background and thermodynamics to question it. They defer to the authority figure. And it isn't just fire science unfortunately. The files show the exact same tragic flaw in the case of Claude Jones. He was executed in Texas in 1990 for armed robbery and murder. Another one based on highly questionable forensics. Right. The physical evidence linking him to the crime scene, a single strand of hair. Just one one hair. The prosecution presented microscopic hair analysis to the jury as a scientifically reliable way to place him at the scene. This is a perfect example of what we

11:36were just discussing subjective interpretation completely disguised as objective science. A lot of microscopic hair analysis actually work. I feel like TV has lied to me about this too. Oh TV has definitely lied to you. Here's how it worked back then. An examiner takes a hair from the crime scene, puts it under a microscope, and then puts a hair from the suspect under the microscope. Okay, sounds standard so far. Then they look at the medulla, the cortex, the cuticle pattern, and then based entirely on their own visual judgment, they declare if the hairs are visually similar or consistent. Wait, I want to make sure I understand this and that the listener understands this. They aren't mapping genetic markers. No. They aren't looking at DNA sequences or anything concrete like that. Not at all. They're literally just looking at two hairs and saying, yeah, they look alike to me. Exactly. It is a purely visual comparison. Yeah. And it is horrifying. Because even back in the 1980s and 90s, there were FBI whistleblowers sounding the alarm. Really? Even back then. Yes, stating clearly that microscopic hair analysis was unscientific,

12:38and its reliability was wildly overstated in court. To give you an idea of how absurd this can get, the source files mentioned a separate historical case where five hairs were analyzed and presented as evidence. And it later turned out three of those hairs were from a coconut. A coconut, are you kidding me? I wish I was. A literal coconut. Yet human lives were ended based on this practice. That is insane. And in the case of Claude Jones, he begged for a DNA test. Because by the year 2000, DNA testing was becoming widely available. It was due standard. Yeah. But Governor George W. Bush denied his final request for a stay of execution to allow for that DNA analysis. And Jones was killed by lethal injection. Just a tragic rush to finality. And he was also convicted based on testimony from an urshtwile friend who later admitted he only testified against Jones to get leniency in another case. Ah, the jailhouse informant problem again. It's a recurring theme. It is. But the real gut punch in the files. In 2010, 20 years after Claude Jones was executed, a DNA test was finally

13:40performed on that single strand of hair. And we know how this ends. It did not belong to Claude Jones, it belonged to the victim. And innocent man is dead because a supposedly infallible expert looked through a microscope succumbed to cognitive bias because he knew who the police wanted to convict and just made a subjective guess. And the pattern just continues with David Wayne Spence. Yeah. He was executed in 1997 in Wake, Texas. I read about this one. It was driven by a homicide investigator named Truman Simons, right? Yes. Simons became entirely obsessed with a deeply convoluted theory. He believed a local gas station owner hired Spence, who was just a roofer, to kill an employee. Why? Because the employee supposedly happened to look like one of the actual victims in a triple homicide. That makes absolutely no sense. It was a wildly complex theory. And the evidence supporting this more testimonies given by inmates in exchange for prison privileges. Unbelievable. But the physical evidence they really hung their hat on was bite-mark analysis. The state brought in forensic odontologist who claimed bite marks on the victims perfectly

14:45matched Spence's teeth. Bite mark analysis. Okay, let's unpack this because that's been so thoroughly discredited today, hasn't it? Completely. It's practically considered medieval pseudoscience now. Right. Yet it was used to secure a death sentence for Spence. Even the police detectives who led the initial investigation later came out and suggested Spence was completely innocent. Why is bite mark analysis considered junk? We have to understand the physical medium. Skin is an incredibly poor medium for recording an impression. It's elastic, you know. It stretches, it swells, it heals, and it distorts based entirely on the posture of the victim. Oh, that makes sense. If your arm is bent versus straight. Exactly. If you bite someone and then their arm moves, the shape of the bite changes entirely. Matching teeth to brew skin is essentially a guessing game. So how do investigators get so locked in on these bad theories? Our mission is 24-7 access to fresh food for all. This is Hota Kati from Joy 101 with Hota Kati and that was Jalea Hemings.

15:45She and her husband created nourish and bloom market. When we decided to open this 24-7 AI grocery store, people thought we were crazy, but our first store was completely community funded. And when your family and your friends bet on you, it hits a little differently. And the city of Atlanta took notice and decided to be part of the change. But the city actually put dollars behind that change and said that the big box stores won't come will build our own. One community funded store became several, but eradicating food deserts across the country takes more than a village. We won the AT&T Small Business Contest ramp and that was what we needed to open the first AI-powered shipping container grocery store in the country. Having a powerhouse like AT&T stand behind you takes it to a whole new level. Connecting changes everything. AT&T. Do we all need to be detoxing ourselves? Before I go asking, how can I detox? I have to look inward. Okay, what am I doing?

16:46Can I identify at least three ways that my body detoxes and ways to support that? I promise if my message was more dramatic like that, I would have millions of dollars and make millions of dollars. But I cannot sleep at night trying to sell someone something that their body already does naturally. We're living in a crazy world now. I think it's a lot of people fear a lack of control. And as a result of this, this is the way of them trying to make sense of the world and try to take control over their own bodies. So by actively doing something, I'm going to detoxify things. Therefore, I'm going to feel better. I think is absolutely one of the reasons that detoxifying has become so popular. Listen to the full episode of Health vs. Hype with the American Medical Association on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.

17:47Fire. Try them all only at McDonald's. Well, this brings us to a crucial psychological concept, known in legal psychology as tunnel vision. When investigators lock on to a suspect early on, cognitive biases just take over. They begin to filter all new evidence through the lens of that suspect's guilt, unconsciously ignoring or suppressing anything that points to their innocence. Okay, let me push back on this tunnel vision idea for a second. Sure. Because on the surface, isn't finding a primary suspect and building a case around them exactly what police are supposed to do. Like you follow a strong lead. At what point does following a lead cross the line into this dangerous tunnel vision you're talking about? That's a great question. It crosses the line when the investigator shifts from being an impartial collector of facts to an advocate for a specific narrative. I see. Let's use an analogy. Imagine you are putting together a jigsaw puzzle, but you've thrown away the box. You don't know the picture. You find a few pieces that are blue,

18:50so you decide, okay, the picture must be of the ocean. Right. From that moment on, every time you pick up a green piece or a brown piece, you just toss it out because it doesn't fit your ocean theory. You stop looking for what the puzzle actually is and you start forcing the pieces to build the ocean you've already committed to in your head. That is a terrifying way to conduct a murder investigation. It's like a social media algorithm. That's a perfect comparison. Once you click on one conspiracy theory, the algorithm, or in this case, the investigative team only feeds you evidence that confirms your bias and actively hides everything that contradicts it. Why does law enforcement do this? Why ignore conflicting data once they have a suspect in mind? Primarily because ambiguity is incredibly uncomfortable, both psychologically and politically. A massive crime, like a triple homicide, creates enormous pressure from the community, the media, local politicians, they all want to solve it quickly. The public wants to feel safe again. Right. Finding a suspect release that pressure. And once that release is achieved,

19:52the psychological and professional cost of admitting you have the wrong person and having to go back to the public and admit the real killer is still out there is incredibly high. It's a systemic failure rooted deeply in fundamental human psychology. That perfectly sets up the institutional inertia we see in the case of LaDelle Lee. Oh, this case is so frustrating. It is. He was executed in Arkansas in 2017. He spent 22 years on death row for the 1995 assault and murder of Debra Carey's. For 22 solid years, he insisted on his innocence. Never stopped fighting. But the tragedy here isn't just about a flawed initial investigation. It's about the state's active refusal to utilize modern science to verify their own work. Right. He begged the state to test the murder weapon for DNA in 1995 when he was convicted DNA testing wasn't as advanced or widely accessible as it is today. Right. It was still pretty new. But as the decades passed, the technology became highly precise. Yet the state repeatedly aggressively refused to test the evidence. They just wouldn't do

20:55it. They executed him in 2017. His family pleaded with the state to just pause, just examine the DNA before the execution, but they were ignored. The machine had to keep moving. And the aftermath is what really haunts you. It wasn't until 2021. Four years after he was killed by lethal injection, that the weapon was finally tested. The results. Another man's DNA was on the murder weapon, not LaDelle Lee's. The state of Arkansas prioritized the finality of a closed case and the procedural momentum of an execution over the fundamental search for truth. They just wanted it over with. It is a staggering indictment of how the system values finality over accuracy. It's an administrative mindset. We already closed this file. We aren't opening it again. So if faulty science is a tool used to close cases and tunnel vision keeps investigators locked in, what happens when there is no physical evidence at all? That's when things get really dark. Right. Because the easiest shortcut for an investigator is a confession. If they can get the suspect to say I did it,

21:55the case is basically closed. But as we see in these files, that confession is often dragged out of a terrified, highly vulnerable person. A confession is viewed by a jury as the absolute gold standard of evidence. The assumption most people make is, well, I would never confess to a crime I didn't commit, especially when carrying the death penalty. Therefore, if this person confessed, they must be guilty. Right. It seems like common sense. But that assumption completely ignores the brutal realities of psychological coercion. Let's talk about the case of Joe Arity in these files. It's honestly one of the most heartbreaking things I've ever read. It's deeply tragic. Colorado, 1939. Joe was 23 years old, but he had an IQ of 46. The source of state he had the mental capacity of a young child. He didn't understand what was happening to him at all. No. While he was on death row, waiting to die, he spent his time playing with a toy train that the warden had given him. When it's time to walk to the gas chamber, he actually smiled. He physically could not comprehend the concept of his own death or what the state was doing to him. And he was executed for the

22:58assault and murder of a teenager in Preblo, Colorado. Yet the historical record strongly suggests he wasn't even in Quebleau at the time of the crime. So how did they get a confession? His confession was entirely coerced by the police. They fed him the details. They took a person who was profoundly intellectually disabled, isolated him, and manipulated him into signing away his own life. And the most infuriating part is the state actually knew there was another culprit. Oh yes. The system also executed a man named Frank Aguilar for the exact same crime. Aguilar actually stated on the record that he had never even seen Joe Arity before in his life. The police knew they had the real killer, but they executed Arity anyway just to tie up Lucense. It's monstrous. It wasn't until 2011 that Arity finally received a posthumous pardon. But I mean, what good is a piece of paper to a child like man who died choking in a gas chamber 70 years prior? If we connect this to the bigger picture, the modern interrogation room and even the tactics used back in the 30s is designed to be a psychologically

24:03oppressive environment. How so? The goal of an interrogation is almost never fact finding. It is confession gathering. Detectives use techniques that involve severe isolation. They use maximization, which means exaggerating the evidence against the suspect to make them feel hopeless. Like saying, we have your fingerprints when they don't. Exactly. And they pair that with minimization, which is offering moral justification to make confessing seem like the easiest way out. We know you didn't mean to do it. That sort of thing. When you place someone with severe intellectual indications into that high pressure environment, they are incredibly susceptible to suggestion. They will agree with the authority figures simply because they are a condition to obey or because they naively believe that agreeing will finally allow them to go home. So what does this all mean? I want the listener to really think about this. Think of the most high pressure aggressive time share presentation you've ever been trapped in. Good analogy. Right. But instead of trying to sell you a condo in Florida, the people screaming at you are

25:03armed detectives. You haven't slept in 24 hours. You have no lawyer and the stakes are your actual life. It's no wonder people break. Anyone would break. You see this exact same vulnerability exploited with youth too. Let's look at George Stinney. 1944 in Alcole, South Carolina. He was a 14-year-old African-American boy accused of murdering two white girls. The Jim Crow context of this case is vital to understanding the speed and the brutality of the system here. Right. The racial dynamics were everything. The police claimed he confessed, but there was no signed confession ever produced. Instead, the prosecution presented two different highly conflicting versions of this supposed verbal confession provided by the police officers themselves. And the trial itself, based on the historical documents, was just a complete farce. He was tried before an all-white jury. Guess how long they took to deliberate the fate of a 14-year-old boy? It's sickening. 10 minutes, 10 minutes to decide a child's life is over. And he was rushed to execution just 83 days after

26:06his arrest. 83 days. Think about that timeline. 83 days from being a kid playing in his hometown, to being strapped into an electric chair built for adults. He was so small they had to use a Bible as a booster seat so the electrodes would reach his head. His conviction was finally vacated in 2014. The presiding judge noted he had not received anything remotely resembling a fair trial, and that executing a 14-year-old constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The system utilized his youth in a sheer terror to railroad a conviction without a shred of physical evidence. And vulnerability isn't just about age or intellectual capacity. It can simply be the sheer physical and psychological terror inflicted by law enforcement. Look at Leo Jones. Another deeply troubling case. Convicted of a 1981 murder in Florida and executed in 1998. He signed a confession, but he adamantly claimed he had been brutally beaten by the police into signing it. And the historical record backs up his claim of a violent interrogation culture. Because the lead interrogating officers in his case were later fired from the force for documented brutality

27:10in other cases. When the people extracting the confession are known abusers, it completely invalidates the integrity of the document. Furthermore, another man, Glenn Scofield, was named by multiple prisoners and even his own girlfriend as the actual perpetrator of the murder. But they still executed Jones. Yet Jones was the one put to death because the state had that piece of paper with his signature on it. Which brings us to a case from across the Atlantic that perfectly illustrates the absolute madness of forced confessions under extreme emotional duress. Timothy Evans, hanged in London in 1950 for the murder of his wife and one-year-old daughter. This one is so twisted, it feels like a dark psychological thriller, but it's entirely real. It really does. Evans initially went to the police in a state of to sheer panic and claimed he had killed his wife during a botched medical procedure and illegal abortion at their home in Notting Hill. Yeah, but then he changed his story. Right. He later had made it that he and his wife had actually asked their downstairs neighbor, a man named John Christie, to perform the procedure.

28:13Christie had told Evans that the wife's death during the procedure was a tragic accident. But then when the police investigated the property, they didn't just find the wife dead from a medical procedure. They found both the wife and the infant daughter strangled to death. Daring old. During the trial, Evans, who the files note was intellectually limited, terrified and just overwhelmed by grief, tried to tell the court that John Christie must have killed them. He realized he had been lied to by his neighbor. But the court had Evans' initial confused statements to the police. They viewed him as a liar trying to shift the blame so he was hanged. And the horrifying, tragic twist that reshaped British legal history. John Christie, the downstairs neighbor, was later discovered to be a highly prolific serial killer. A serial killer. Yes. When police eventually searched the rest of the property years later, they found bodies hidden in the walls and buried in the garden. The police had completely missed massive glaring evidence of Christie's other murders happening right there in the exact scene building.

29:14So Evans was pressured, manipulated and confused into taking the fall for a literal serial killer living beneath his floorboards. It forces us to completely reevaluate the psychology of the confession. A person in a state of profound shock, having just lost their family, dealing with authority figures who are feeding them information, the reality fractures, they will agree to narratives just to make the overwhelming sensory input stop. I really want the listener to sit with this for a moment. Think about the most stressed, the most exhausted, the most fundamentally terrified you have ever been in your entire life. Now multiply that feeling by a thousand. It's unimaginable. Add aggressive interrogator standing over you, sleep deprivation, physical threats, and the sheer crushing weight of the legal system bearing down on you. It completely destroys the armchair myth that an innocent person would never confess. Exactly. The survival instinct kicks in and ironically it tells the brain to submit to the immediate threat the interrogator ignoring

30:16the long-term threat of the executioner. Because the long-term threat feels abstract. Right, and it is vital to recognize that it isn't just youth or intellectual disability or the overwhelming stress of an interrogation room that makes someone a target for the system. Do we all need to be detoxing ourselves? Before I go asking, how can I detox? I have to look inward. Okay, what am I doing? Can I identify at least three ways that my body detoxes and ways to support that? I promise if my message was more dramatic like that, I would have millions of dollars and make millions of dollars, but I cannot sleep at night trying to sell someone something that their body already does naturally. We're living in a crazy world now. I think it's a lot of people fear a lack of control. And as a result of this, this is the way of them trying to make sense of the world and try to take control over their own bodies. So by actively doing something, I'm going to detoxify things, therefore I'm going to feel better. I think is absolutely one of the reasons that detoxifying has become so popular.

31:19Listen to the full episode of Health vs. Hype with the American Medical Association on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. McDonald's is putting value back on the menu. Whether you're craving a Big Mac, McNuggets are sausage egg and cheese, McGrittle's, make it a meal and save. Your favorite is now your wallet's favorite too. Extra value meals are back. Get a big something extra. With a Big Mac or 10-piece McNuggets, fries and a medium Coke all for just $9. Limited time only, promotion pricing may be lower than meal pricing. It's not just electric. It's Toyota Electric and during Toyota's Easy Choi sales event, going electric is easier than ever. Right now, save instantly on a new Toyota EV with special incentive programs for first time EV buyers and prior EV owners. Choose the sleek Beasy, the adventurous Beasy woodland or the sporty CHR. But don't wait,

32:24these special savings won't last. Me and make it easy. Toyota, let's go places. Often the target is painted on their back before they even enter the room simply by the culture and society they live in. Which brings us to the most uncomfortable but really necessary part of these files. We need to look at how societal prejudices acted as a massive accelerant in the justice system. The blind spots of justice. It's unavoidable when looking at history. And looking at the source material here, we are striving to be completely impartial reporters of history. We're not taking political sides here. The files are just explicitly clear on the systemic prejudice in xenophobia that drove these specific executions. The historical consensus in these files suggests that the justice system, particularly in the past, frequently operated not as an impartial arbiter of facts, but as an instrument of social control. When marginalized groups are presumed guilty by the culture at large, the burden of proof in the courtroom effectively inverts. The state no longer has

33:26to rigorously prove guilt. The accused is forced to try and prove their innocence against an insurmountable wall of societal bias. Let's examine the Martinsville 7 in Virginia in 1949. Seven black men were arrested for the assault of a white woman. The historical context of the Jim Crow South is the defining factor of this case. The legal apparatus was deeply intertwined with racial segregation and the strict enforcement of racial hierarchies. The sources indicate that several of these seven men recanted their confessions almost immediately, with some explicitly claiming the police had edited, manipulated, or outright fabricated the documents. And the hearings were incredibly short, almost performative. All seven men were executed in 1951. Now here is the detail in the files that really stops you in your tracks. Historians note that if the defendants had been white, based on sentencing data from that exact era in Virginia for that specific crime, the maximum sentence anybody would have gotten was 20 years in prison. That was the absolute ceiling. Right. Instead, seven black men were sent to the electric chair.

34:28It is the ultimate manifestation of a two-tiered justice system documented in these archives. The severity of the punishment was dictated not solely by the severity of the crime, but by the race of the accused and the race of the victim. In 2021, the governor of Virginia granted them posthumous pardons, formally acknowledging that they hadn't been granted the full impartial legal rights entitled to the accused. But again, it's decades too late. Far too late. The story of Thomas and Meeks Griffin in 1913, South Carolina, hits me so hard because of the compounded tragedy. These were two brothers, black men, who were incredibly wealthy and well-known farmers in their community. They had built a real legacy. They had, and they were accused of slaying a Confederate veteran. Why? Because the actual killer, another suspect, entirely offered them up to the authorities specifically to secure a life sentence for himself instead of the death penalty. The real killer weaponized the societal racial bias against them. The historical file suggests he knew the local authorities would eagerly accept

35:31wealthy, prominent black men as scapegoats. As their success in the Jim Crow South was already viewed with intense suspicion and hostility by the white establishment. And despite there being zero physical evidence against the brothers, they were convicted. Yeah. The double tragedy here, the thing that makes it so devastating, is what happened to their family. They were forced to sell their land, their massive generational wealth, just to afford a lawyer to try and defend themselves against this fabricated lie. And they still lost. They were electrocuted in 1915. Decades later, a descendant of theirs, the radio host Tom Joyner, helped secure their 2009 pardon. But you can't pardon away the loss of generational legacy. They lost their lives and their family was financially destroyed. It demonstrates how a malicious prosecution doesn't just kill the accused. It is a mechanism for stripping resources and power from a marginalized community. We see this presumption of guilt again in Dallas with Tommy Lee Walker in 1953. A white woman, Venice Parker, was brutally attacked and killed. The files show that Tommy Lee Walker was racially profiled, brought in and interrogated

36:36until he confessed under total duress. But he had an alibi. A rock solid one. He immediately recanted when he got a lawyer and provided a verifiable alibi. He had been at the hospital with his pregnant girlfriend at the exact time of the crime. But according to the case review, the alibi didn't matter. The fabricated evidence and faulty questioning created by a bias system were enough for the jury. He was electrocuted in 1956. It took 70 years until 2026 for Dallas County to finally pass a resolution, acknowledging his absolute innocence and the massive, unquantifiable damage this fabricated case did to his family and the broader community. And the source compilation shows that this prejudice isn't limited to race. It extends heavily to political beliefs in xenophobia. Look at the internationally infamous case of Saco and Venzetti in 1921. Two Italian immigrants who were also very vocal anarchists. They were tried for robbery and murder in Massachusetts. Their trial is widely considered by legal historians as a master class in an unfair proceeding. The geopolitical climate of 1921 was dominated by the red scare. A

37:41massive cultural paranoia regarding communism and anarchism. The files indicate they were targeted primarily for their immigrant status and their highly unpopular political views rather than the strength of the evidence, right? Yes, modern historical consensus heavily leans toward their actual innocence. They were convicted after just a few hours of jury deliberation. Despite conflicting ballistics evidence, and despite another known criminal literally confessing to the crime, Saco and Venzetti were electrocuted in 1927. Their execution sparked massive, violent, worldwide protests from Paris to Tokyo because the injustice was so blatant on a global stage. 50 years later, the governor of Massachusetts issued a proclamation stating they had been unfairly treated, noting that the atmosphere of their trial was permeated by prejudice against foreigners. The machinery of justice was weaponized to eliminate political undesirables. We see the exact same xenophobia operating in the UK in the case of Mahmoud Hussein Matan in Wales 1952. Matan was a Somali merchant semen living in a thriving multicultural community in Karte.

38:45He was accused of murdering a local shopkeeper named Lily Volpert. The historical sources explicitly note he had been subjected to severe hate and prejudice by the local police force beforehand simply due to his immigrant status and his broken English. The authorities detained him with virtually no proof. What was their smoking gun? Two tiny spots of blood found on a pair of secondhand shoes he owned. The subsequent legal proceedings were completely riddled with bias. The presented evidence was thin and witness statements were highly contradictory, driven by a cultural bias that viewed him as an inherently dangerous outsider. Yet he was convicted and hanged in September of that year. It took until 1998 for the Criminal Cases Review Commission to formally admit the trial was flawed and overturn the sentence. His family finally received an official apology from the police in 2022. It took 70 years to acknowledge what the Somali community and Karte's knew all along. He was an innocent man murdered by a prejudice state. But here is the most insidious part about prejudice. It doesn't just infect the jury box or the

39:46investigators. It actively distorts the literal retinas of the people witnessing the crime. It changes what people think they see. This is a perfect transition to the fundamental unreliability of human memory. It raises a massive question. How much faith should we actually put in eye witness testimony? Because the legal system treats a pointing finger in a courtroom, he's the one who did it as irrefutable ironclad proof. But cognitive psychology tells us that human memory is incredibly fragile. It is highly malleable and deeply susceptible to stress, bias and suggestion. I want to unpack this because it's terrifying. If you can't trust your own eyes, what can you trust? Let's look at Carlos D'Aluna. Executed in Texas in 1989 for the tragic stabbing of a gas station named Wanda Lopez. This case is maddening. From the moment he was arrested, Delina maintained his innocence and literally told the police who the real killer was. Another Hispanic man from the neighborhood named Carlos Hernandez.

40:46And there were two eye witnesses at the scene who identified Delina as the killer. But when researchers later looked closely at the physical description, one of the witnesses originally gave of the attacker, it actually fit the real killer, Carlos Hernandez. Much better than it fit Delina. This is a textbook, tragic example of a psychological phenomenon known as cross-ethnic or cross-racial identification failure. That's exactly. Wait, I need you to explain the mechanics of that. Are you saying our brains are evolutionarily wired to misidentify people from other groups? How does that actually work? In cognitive psychology, it's related to something called the outgroup homogeneity effect. Essentially, when we look at faces of people within our own racial or ethnic group, our brains are highly trained to recognize subtle individual variations. Like the shape of the nose or the distance between the eyes? Yes, exactly. But when we look at faces from an outgroup, a different race or ethnicity, our brains categorize them more broadly by the features that define the group as a whole. Rather than the individual markers, we literally lose the neurological resolution to tell

41:50individuals apart accurately. So to the witness, they just saw a Hispanic man with dark hair, and when the police presented Delina, the brain just filled in the blanks and said, yes, that matches the broad category. Precisely. Combine that inherent neurological limitation with the extreme adrenaline and stress of witnessing a violent murder and the error rate for eyewitness identification skyrockets, memory is not a video camera recording onto a hard drive. What is it like then? It is more like a wiki pd page. You can go in and edit it, but other people, like police officers, can also go in and edit it through suggestive questioning. And the file show the police definitely edited this page. They found Delina hiding under a truck nearby. They dragged him out, put him in the back of a squad car, and brought the witness over. The environment itself is incredibly suggestive. A police officer basically implied, we caught the guy is this him. If the police hadn't done a highly suggestive show up identification like that, the witness later admitted he would have been less than 70% sure it was Delina. Do we all need to be detoxing ourselves? Before I go asking, how can I detox? I have to look

42:56inward. Okay, what am I doing? Can I identify at least three ways that my body detoxes and ways to support that? I promise if my message was more dramatic like that, I would have millions of dollars and make millions of dollars, but I cannot sleep at night trying to sell someone something that their body already does naturally. We're living in a crazy world now. I think it's a lot of people fear a lack of control. As a result of this, this is the way of them trying to make sense of the world and try to take control over their own bodies. By actively doing something, how many detoxify things, therefore I'm going to feel better, I think is absolutely one of the reasons that detoxifying has become so popular. Listen to the full episode of Health Versus Hive with the American Medical Association on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast. It's not just electric, it's Toyota Electric and during Toyota's easy-to-choice sales event, going electric is easier than ever. Right now, save instantly on a new Toyota EV with special

44:01incentive programs for first time EV buyers and prior EV owners. Choose the sleek busy, the adventurous busy woodland or the sporty CHR. But don't wait, these special savings won't last. We make it easy. Toyota, let's go places. Kitchen and bathroom professionals know what goes behind the tile matters. That's why trade pros trust Fiber-Sement Party Backer Board to keep tile firmly in place, resist cracking, and help block moisture. Chosen over 40 million kitchen's and bathrooms, Party Backer Board, what the best build on. Shop now at participating Home Depot, Lowe's, and Floor into core stores. For more information, visit jameshardy.com slashhardybacker. Meanwhile, the real killer, Carlos Hernandez, was a known career criminal who carried the exact type of unique lock blade knife used in the murder. And the most egregious detail in the entire file. According to multiple witnesses, Hernandez literally boasted about murdering the victim and

45:07laughed about letting Deluna take the fall for it. Here's where it gets really interesting, though. The real killer bragged about it in the community, and the state proceeded with executing Carlos Deluna anyway. A massive 2012 investigation by the Columbia Human Rights Law Review found overwhelming evidence pointing to Hernandez. The state had evidence, another man did it, they were told another man did it, and they just chose not to look. Why? Because administratively, it was easier to execute the wrong Carlos than to halt the machinery, admit a massive failure, and start the investigation over. We see police pressure corrupting eye witness memory again with ribbon can, too, executed by lethal injection in Texas in 1993. Police claim can, too, robbed and shot to workman. There was a survivor, Juan Moreno. But Moreno only identified can, too, as the killer after facing intense repeated pressure from the police during his recovery in the hospital. He has since fully recanted that identification, stating the police effectively forced him to point the finger at can, too. And once again, just like Deluna case, the real killer came forward later.

46:12Another man admitted that he committed the robbery with an accomplice, and that accomplice was definitively not, Roop and can, too. Can, too, maintained until his dying breath, that he was being framed by the local authorities in retaliation for a completely separate previous incident, where he had wounded an off-duty plane-close police officer in a bar dispute. The file strongly suggests he was executed as a convenient scapegoat for a police force holding a grudge. It demonstrates how easily a traumatized eyewitness can be molded by investigators to provide the necessary evidence to close a case, regardless of the objective truth. And sometimes, the convenient scapegoat is manufactured not by the police, but by the actual perpetrators pointing the finger to save themselves. Which brings us to the horrific execution of Jesse Taferro in 1990. Taferro and his partner, Sunny Jacobs, were convicted of killing two police officers during a routine traffic stop. Why? Because a third person in the car, a man named Walter Rhodes, testified that they did it. But on multiple occasions later,

47:13Walter Rhodes admitted that he was actually the one who shot the officers. And the physical science, the gunpowder residue test from the initial investigation perfectly backed up Rhodes' confession. The residue was heavily concentrated on Rhodes, completely contradicting his testimony against Taferro and Jacobs. Yet, the state ignored the science, accepted the word of the actual killer, and put Taferro to death. And we have to mention, according to the files, this execution was famously agonizingly botched. They put him in the Florida electric chair known as Old Sparky. It's gruesome to even read about. Because the execution team negligently used a synthetic sponge, instead of a natural sea sponge on his head, the electricity caused the sponge to catch fire, flames shot out of his head. It took three separate jolt of electricity and seven horrific minutes for him to die. A man who the physical evidence strongly suggested was innocent, literally tortured to death by the state. The contrast between the sheer brutal finale of the execution act and the absolute fragility of the evidence used to justify it is chilling. It echoes

48:16the 1952 UK case of Derek Bentley. This was a 19 year old with severe developmental delays, who was committing a burglary with a 16 year old accomplice named Christopher Craig. During the crime, they were cornered on a rooftop. Craig, the 16 year old, pulled out a gun and shot and killed a police officer. Bentley, who didn't have a gun, just watched. But because Craig was only 16, he was legally too young for the death penalty under UK law. So what did the justice system do? They couldn't hang the shooter, so they turned their sights on the 19 year old bystander Bentley. They utilized a legal concept of joint enterprise and argued that Bentley had provoked the shooting, relying on a highly disputed verbal statement where police claimed Bentley yelled, let him have it. Bentley's defense argued he meant hand over the gun, but the police argued he meant shoot him. He was found complicit and hanged in 1953. When the case was finally reexamined in the 1990s, it was found the judge made massive prejudicial errors, essentially directing the jury to convict him.

49:17The sources quote a historical observer saying, everybody knew at that time that if a policeman dies, somebody has to pay for it. That is what we call the conspiracy of convenience. The state needed a body to hang to satisfy the public's emotional man for retribution. They couldn't legally hang the kid who pulled the trigger, so they took the only available life, regardless of actual culpability. Bentley's sentence was posthumously overturned in 1998, but again, a posthumous pardon doesn't unhang a teenager. It is a dark reflection on how the societal desire for vengeance can entirely eclipse the search for objective justice. When the public demands a sacrifice, the system is designed to provide one. While modern cases highlight these devastating flaws in science, psychology, and memory, if we look even further back into history within our source files, we see that sometimes the barrier to justice is even more fundamental. Sometimes the accused literally cannot even comprehend the words being spoken to them. Let's look at history's tragic misunderstandings. These historical cases perfectly illustrate the core theme of our deep drive today.

50:21The blind, unthinking momentum of the machinery of death. Once the gears of execution start turning, they become almost impossible to stop, even in the face of profound absurdity or blatant procedural failure. Let's travel to Ireland in 1882. The case of Mail Rosioia, known to many in the legal files by his anglicized name, Miles Joyce. He was accused of taking part in the brutal murder of a local family. Here is the vital tragic detail. Miles lived in a rural area and spoke exclusively Irish Gaelic. He did not know a single word of English. And his trial, Heldon Dublin, was conducted entirely in English. He was not granted an interpreter who could accurately translate the proceedings. His own defense lawyer did not speak Irish. He was completely fundamentally alienated from his own trial for his life. I really want you to imagine the pure psychological horror of that. Imagine you are arrested in a foreign country. You are placed in a crowded courtroom. Men in strange

51:21wigs and robes are pointing at you, arguing aggressively in a language you don't understand. The confusion must have been overwhelming. The judges slamming a gavill. Witnesses are pointing at you. And it is all just noise. Your literal existence on this earth is being negotiated away. And you can't even offer a defense because you don't know what they are accusing you of. It's the ultimate nightmare of powerlessness. To make it worse, the historical files show that his co-defendants, who admitted to the crime, clearly stated to the authorities that Miles Joyce was completely innocent and not involved. But this key exculpatory evidence was actively concealed by the prosecution. The sources describe this trial as a combination of systemic, colonial contempt for the Irish speaking accused and an extraordinary, unbending zeal by the British authorities to secure convictions at any cost to quell local unrest. He was executed that same year. It wasn't until 2018, over 130 years later, that the president of Ireland granted him a posthumous pardon, officially noting that the trial had denied him the most basic fundamental legal rights of a fair defense. We see another devastating misunderstanding or perhaps deliberate malicious

52:25ignorance in the United States during the 1862 Dakota uprising. This is a horrific chapter of American history. After starring Dakota Bans rose up against white settlers due to broken treaties and withheld rations, the US Army retaliated violently. After defeating the Bans, they held hasty military tribunals and hanged 38 Dakota tribesmen in a single day in Mancado, Minnesota. It remains the largest mass execution in US history. The logistics of hanging 38 people simultaneously required a massive custom build scaffold. But among those scheduled to die was a man named Chaska. The historical consensus is that Chaska was entirely innocent of the violence. In fact, he had actively protected a white woman and her children during the conflict, keeping them safe from harm at great personal risk. Because of this documented heroism, he actually received a direct, written pardon from President Abraham Lincoln. He had a presidential pardon for Abraham Lincoln himself, but he was marched up onto that scaffold and hanged with the rest of the 38 men anyway. The official government story

53:28is that it was a tragic clerical error, a mix up with another man's name, Chaskaeden, due to language barriers and poor record keeping. But the source is note a much darker theory. The woman he had saved suspected it wasn't an accident at all. There were rumors that they were lovers and that the local military authorities intentionally executed him out of spite or racial prejudice, actively ignoring the presidential pardon to exact revenge. Whether it was fatal bureaucratic incompetence or deliberate malice, the end result is exactly the same. The machinery of execution could not be bothered to pause, verify the identity of the man on the scaffold, and respect the rule of law. The momentum of the mass execution was deemed more important than the life of an innocent man. And finally, perhaps the most famous historical example of a state executing someone purely for challenging their authority, Joan of Arc in 1431. She was tried for heresy by an English-allied court, but when you look at the specific crimes according to the court transcripts they are absurd. Her main offenses were wearing masculine

54:30clothing which she did to protect herself from assault in prison and refusing to confess to the church's interpretation of her divine visions. She caused no physical harm to anyone in the context of her trial specific charges. But her conviction was an automatic death sentence. She was burned at the stake. Even the people on the opposing side knew it was a grotesque travesty of justice. The historical files quote, the King of England secretary who watched her burn weeping and saying, we are all lost for we have burnt a good and holy person. Her case is the ultimate historical precedent for the state using capital punishment not to protect the public from physical danger, but to enforce ideological conformity. It was a political assassination disguised as a trial. Decades later a retrial found massive procedural errors and she was ultimately awarded sainthood in 1920. But she still burned. So as we pull all these threads together from the completely subjective microscopic hairs in Claude Jones's case in 1990 to the terrifying psychology of false confessions all the way back to the language barriers in 1882 Ireland, what is the ultimate

55:35takeaway from this deep dive? The thread connecting every single one of these tragedies is the absolute unquestioning certainty of the state. It is the incredibly dangerous belief that the justice system once it is aimed at sites on a target cannot possibly be wrong. We see through these files that knowledge, science and justice are most valuable. Not when they are wielded as a blunt final instrument, but when we are willing to pause, review and fundamentally question our own assumptions. The margin for error and capital punishment is zero, but as we've seen, human error is infinite. I think that is the perfect synthesis. We see all these posthumous partings being handed out in 2009, 2011, 2021, 2026. And while those partings are historically important and they matter deeply to the surviving descendants trying to clear their family names and reclaim their dignity, a piece of paper signed by a governor does not bring the victims back from the gas chamber or the electric chair or the gallows. It makes me think about the future. The future of forensics. With a rapid advent of artificial intelligence, predictive policing algorithms and highly complex

56:38new forensic technologies, are we entering a utopian era where these wrongful convictions will finally be eliminated? Or are we just creating new, invisible, highly complex, infallible junk sciences that future generations in 100 years will look back on in absolute horror? It is a profoundly sobering thought. If we rely on Black Box algorithms to dictate justice, we must be incredibly vigilant to ensure we aren't just coding our ancient systemic biases into new, impenetral machines. If a computer tells a jury a person is guilty, how can a defense attorney cross-examine an algorithm? And that is exactly what we want to hear from you about. After taking this deep dive into the source material with us today, which of these historical cases do you feel is the most glaring example of the system's failure? Was it the junk science, the coerced confessions, or the systemic prejudice? And looking forward into the future, how do we balance the societal desire for swift, decisive justice with the absolute non-negotiable necessity of getting it right? Leave a comment and let us know where you stand. The conversation absolutely doesn't end here. True justice requires all of our active,

57:45critical participation. Thank you so much for joining us on this incredibly important exploration today on thrilling threads. Remember, the machine only works as well as the humanity we put into it. Keep questioning, keep listening, and we'll catch you on the next one. JamesHearty.com slash hearty backer.