Jan 12, 2016|
Jenifer McKim, NECIR, on the Trial of Darrell Jones
Transcript - Not for consumer use. Robot overlords only. Will not be accurate.
The children of your make him yep she's with the new England center for investigative reporting and they're the ones too and covered this Jennifer thank you for joining us this morning. Now I've seen the video I want you explain to everybody. About this video and what comes up and what why this is suddenly throw this whole case in to sort of turmoil. It's honestly bizarre and it is feel free to go look at it on our web site but. This with a key. Videos that was aired during the trials of Darryl diamond Jones in 1986. When he is convicted of murder and a bit of an eyewitness. Who pick out a picture of diamond and then issued her. And it's the only real concrete evidence means higher trial in which he is sort of pointed healing and in fact this was the guy because everybody else who went. In the court during the days of the trial kind of and I'm not sure I'm not a 100% sure I'm not sure if that guy. Kind of maybe look like the guy. I don't know but in this one video of this woman hairy in fact pick up a picture and give it to. The cop who is investigating. And I'm in the middle of this. Videos. Popped up he. Little clip of a 1950s. TV showed up filled builders are still goes singing hot and it's yeah. It's got. An app that drives. The cop said it was an accident it was a malfunction something happened that push play in this TV show popped up. But now Terrel Jones legal team is saying that they have forensic evidence that says. There's no way it could happen in the way that that happened and that was done to hide something that she said that would have capped out. On the whole trial. So it's a bad actually ear in the courtroom and they said oh that was a mistake. And they just moved right along with the trial. It. Exactly you tell you at the time who is now a defeat and was in the middle. Earrings in his own troubles at the time her for something else and it said that I know what I where did Connecticut well never mind it's immaterial. And and defense attorney. And apparently so. Throughout you know that kind of pulling this out is a key piece of new evidence that opened his trial at the third motion that he's filing to give it back. He's been saying since he was in prison thirty years ago that he did not commit this crime and he was wrongfully convicted. And we have and I'm looking at this case and to sort of pulling apart all the different areas in which. They're huge questions battle you know whether. Whether they gave him a fair trial. Now there was no DNA evidence associated with this trial correct. Exactly that's what makes it's so interesting so you know over the last decade or so there as you'd said there have been needed. DNA cases that pretty much has exonerated people with a third silver bullet. Yes we know this guy didn't do it and because of bad I think though that. The public the justice system everybody started to realize how we really do. Get the wrong got all that I mean how often met hundreds of time that this has occurred and pillage they started to pull apart. Other cases in real life what happened how does this happen that we do this over and over again and they look at these issues like bad lawyering. And informants and false confession to make and so now that the whole other group of folks without DNA who are now kind of like Terrel Jones thing but. You don't do these that the reason why these cases went wrong and I'm innocent kids. Now let me direct this to roll. Those two officers who were in that video. They had the obviously commander somewhere and now it is from understanding that that chain of events here. Now he has come out and said he start to question whether that was so doctored that video. Exactly he was the key to detective at the time of the trial and I mean ethic that that time and he. Has looked he was freaked out by derail investigators and we found him and talked to him on record and he said you know advocates and I'm saying. There that this guy did it there's no physical evidence again there's no eyewitness that. Point they can definitively in court. On to say that he didn't and they never provide even a motive and court has yet and it's also interesting because I'm this this police officer also. Had his own troubled. He pled guilty to stealing cocaine during that period of. I refuse an interesting story all the way around. Is it really is soaps are the that video. Oriented and that's something you wouldn't even see a map like Jennifer is I'm gonna look. It looked really have happened and and yet again and there's a guy named Gil who's been sitting there for thirty years and he says. That he wakes up everyday and says how is that possible I got in here on this evidence and how does the possible that I bet that that that I'm here. And you have to wonder how is it possible that the judge. You know whether it's 1986 or today said in a courtroom and allow that to pop up on what turned out to be. That I guess they did they have evidence that put the guy behind bars and allowed some kind of strange you know happening to a car. There was a lot of questions that happened in that town not just that any one of the other things that happened in that trial with that derailed Jones would put. To sit back and what they called the prisoner's dock he was not hitting rate at which hit a good attorney at that depend cable which. I've talked to many that legal specialists if she's got a third you need to if you're gonna be adequately protected by your unique connection to panic. You know William and say that's stronger this is wrong I think is what I think he would feet behind unable to talk to an attorney during the entire casts and that's. Just one of the things that we found and as part of the third day protecting of these child that if I'm wrong they've realized it's not generally this one thing that multiple things that go rock. What Jennifer it sounds like to me that the prosecution had made the decision that derailed Jones was their guy. What what's the reasoning behind that is anything in uncovered is your reason why they wanted to rolled Jones. Well I still think that we've learned also Alec had they talk often now in this sort of language is learning about. Unwinding these cases is something they called tunnel leading which is a term that that that sometimes prosecutors and investigators whether or not. You know there's anything that that they that they just kind of decide that the sky is the guy and they stop looking at any other evidence and says that whether or not you know there was something. You don't bad going on it was more just based started to look at him and they stop seeing what else happening there are other people who lead week. There drill down through his own legal effort contained police records. Several years ago that you know decades ActiveX. He was convicted that showed how the police did their investigation and there are other suspects named or other people who aren't. The good work questionable and they never once talked to back. Well it's a fascinating case and fantastic investigative reporting job margin information and the new England center for investigative reporting.