Search Term(s):
Blog Tags:
Order by: Date Relevancy
Your search returned 2 entries.
Michigan case highlights causes of wrongful convictions
Posted: August 1, 2007 2:43 pm
A questionable eyewitness identification and the testimony of a jailhouse snitch led to Frederick Freeman’s conviction of a 1986 murder in Michigan. Now, Freeman and his attorneys are seeking to have his conviction overturned on evidence that he was wrongfully convicted, and a two-part series starting today in the Detroit Metro Times investigates his case.
Read the full story here. (Detroit Metro Times, 08/01/07)
Another story in today’s Metro Times considers the role of eyewitness identification in more than 75% of wrongful convictions overturned by DNA testing. The story explores the case of Ronald Cotton, who was misidentified and convicted of rape in North Carolina in 1987. Jennifer Thompson-Cannino was the victim in the case and now speaks nationally about the problems with eyewitness identification.
"Not all eyewitness identification is bad. What I find is that a lot of eyewitness identification retrieves people's memory incorrectly. By the time we make identification, there's so much in our memory that, really, our memories are not pure. That's what happened to me," she says.
Raped for 30 minutes as a college student in North Carolina in 1984 after a man broke into her apartment, Thompson-Cannino says she made it a point to study her attacker at the time."I was a very convincing witness because I honestly believed that I had made the right identification. I was so sure," she says.
Read the full story here. (Detroit Metro Times, 08/01/07)
Part two of the Frederick Freeman will appear next week. Look for the link here on the Innocence Blog.
Tags: Frederick Freeman
Snitch testimony and a possible wrongful conviction in Michigan
Posted: August 8, 2007 1:13 pm
Jailhouse informants have contributed to dozens of the 205 wrongful convictions to be overturned by DNA testing. In the ongoing appeals of Frederick Freeman, who is serving life in Michigan for a murder he says he didn’t commit, defense attorneys have shown that a witness against Freeman lied on the stand in exchange for a better sentence. He told the jury, however, that he would get no special treatment in exchange for his testimony.
One of the few would-be strengths of the prosecution's case was a jailhouse snitch who had shared a holding cell with Freeman for a few hours during the week before Freeman's trial. The snitch, Philip Joplin, testified that Freeman had confessed to killing Macklem. Joplin later recanted, saying he had lied to get a better deal from prosecutors and the judge. Documents show he got favorable treatment within a month after Freeman's trial.Read more about Freeman’s case in today’s Detroit Metro Times. (Part Two of a two-pert investigative report)
Read more about snitch cases in our Understand the Causes section.
Tags: Informants/Snitches, Frederick Freeman