Lost Time: How Innocent Men Found Their Way Home

Imagine being ripped from your life, convicted of a crime you didn't commit, and forced to spend decades behind bars while knowing you're innocent. This isn't a fictional scenario – it's the lived reality for thousands of Americans, including the five extraordinary men whose stories we explore in this episode.

When Jacob invited us to attend "The Lynched Among Us," a play performed by actual exonerees sharing their own wrongful conviction stories, we knew we had to discuss it on the podcast. What we witnessed was nothing short of transformative – these men relived their most traumatic experiences on stage to educate the public about the devastating flaws in our criminal justice system.

Michael Sutton's story hits particularly hard. At just 17, with a full scholarship awaiting him, he was arrested, convicted, and sentenced to 46 years for a crime he didn't commit. The play featured his actual parents crying out as police dragged him from his high school graduation ceremony. Charles Jackson injected dark humor into his segment, including an off-key rendition of "Bohemian Rhapsody" while portraying his prison job as a porter. Most shocking was RuEl Sailor's account of prosecutors admitting they knew he was innocent after 13 years – yet still making him take a guilty plea deal and wait two more years for release.

These stories illuminate a troubling truth: our system can easily destroy innocent lives through eyewitness misidentification, prosecutorial misconduct, and inadequate defense representation. The psychological warfare these men endured is incomprehensible – as one exoneree powerfully stated, "I had to become the thing you think I am to survive." This raises profound questions about identity, resilience, and what justice truly means in America.

We urge you to learn more about wrongful convictions and support organizations like Voices of Injustice working to prevent them. While we admire these men's extraordinary resilience, we recognize they shouldn't have needed it – no one should face decades of imprisonment for crimes they didn't commit. Visit voicesofjustice.com to learn how you can help ensure these stories become increasingly rare.

http://voicesofinjustice.com

Chapters

• 0:00 Introducing the Guests and Topic
• 4:59 The Lynched Among Us Play Overview
• 7:59 Michael Sutton's Wrongful Conviction Story
• 18:15 The Psychological Toll of Wrongful Conviction
• 23:19 Laurese Glover's Testimony and Adaptation
• 28:43 Charles Jackson's Story with Humor
• 37:17 RuEl Sailor's Devastating Plea Deal
• 45:09 Resilience vs. Systemic Injustice
• 49:08 Final Thoughts on Wrongful Convictions

Transcript

Speaker 1: 1:04

Hey everybody, welcome back to another episode of Lockdown Legacy. Of course I'm your host, remy Jones, and today I have a guest in half with me, my guest being Jacob Holycross, who has been a guest on the show before. So if you have not reached into our catalog, please go and dissect that and listen to every last episode. I want support. I'm flinching, I'm wavering, I'm sorry, I'm joking. So anyway, my half-dess is the famed and proclaimed Dr Deborah Jones.

Speaker 2: 1:28

I haven't been a doctor yet. On this podcast, no this is your debut. Oh no, I'm not prepared for that, but I'm happy to be here. But I'm not the main focus today.

Speaker 1: 1:35

No, but for those of you who have been following, you guys know that DJ has been working on her doctorate for a long time, which is also the reason why she's been absent from a lot of the journey has come to a close.

Speaker 2: 1:45

It's over baby.

Speaker 1: 1:47

Oh wait, wait, wait, I got the. Is that an applause button? It's a little applause button. How do you know?

Speaker 2: 1:51

Because it's just a yellow button, because it says applause button. Yeah, it's all right. Anyway, I got distracted. We should introduce Jacob, so Jacob.

Speaker 1: 1:59

Yes, what is it that you?

Speaker 3: 2:00

do for a living.

Speaker 1: 2:16

Well, listeners of the podcast, okay, also, um, just for full transparency, jacob is also one of our co-parents of our amazing children, three of them, and so, uh, very close to family, always around, always having these uh insightful conversations, very few of which we get to bless you guys with capture, but I don't think we hate each other so I think that that's great we're just not recording all the time, but we do get a lot of compliments on uh our family dynamics and you know it works. I much uh prefer this to the drama.

Speaker 2: 2:39

So there we go, there we go part of this is kind of aligned right, because today we're going to talk about, uh, a play, a live theater experience, a what would? What do we? It's not a musical, it's a a play.

Speaker 1: 2:49

It was an artistic expression of real life experiences that happened to some people, that, um, at least one of them I knew, which is cool yeah, but um, I think it's fine because we all went together um while grandparents babysat, so, yeah, and I didn't know that I knew anyone there, yeah.

Speaker 1: 3:02

So jacob kind of said hey man, I got these tickets, you guys want to go? And we're like, yeah sure. And once I agreed, I found out what it was about. I was like, oh man, that's right in my alley. And so we went and I enjoyed it.

Speaker 2: 3:10

Do you want to talk a little bit about, um, how the tickets came to you and why you thought it would be good for us all to go any of that background?

Speaker 3: 3:16

well, it's not like a, you know, very exciting story, but, um, I just come across these things in the like columbus area, which is, of course, where I work, and saw that the play was going to be there. The lynched among the Lynched Among Us is what it's called, and you know, kind of read the synopsis, figured DJ and Remy would also enjoy it. So I reached out to them before I bought tickets. I was like, is this something you'd be interested in? And then come to find out it was based on all these real-life experiences of, I believe, five men With you know, I think references to a few other stories as well along the way Did not kind of comprehend the play because there was, as we'll talk about, some various art forms that were displayed, which was pretty cool.

Speaker 3: 3:53

I think the play was mainly geared towards lawyers and I'm not sure why. They had some kind of simulation beforehand that you could have attended. We did not, we just attended the play itself. But again, the performance was very insightful. I think it was a message or a display that many people and the general public need to see, because many people don't understand the possibilities of, and the ramifications of, wrongful convictions.

Speaker 1: 4:11

Yeah, I agree um, I'm always one of those people who think that, um, there's this like blonder, um divide between society and what goes on in the criminal justice system. Um, of course, it's all open to the public, but, um, our culture and society kind of make us believe that only the worst people are involved with the criminal justice system. Nobody's ever. Everybody says they're innocent. Nobody's really innocent, um, or even if they are guilty, like they don't deserve to be treated like human beings. And so I thought this was great in many respects, but in one um, the fact that, so the organization that put on this play is called voices of injustice and, um, they are a wrongful conviction advocacy group and they do uh, plays in other art forms.

Speaker 1: 4:45

Um, one thing I thought was really interesting was that in all these plays or skits, they were played by the actual people who these things happen to. So, as the you know, plays went on and you start realizing, like man, this guy up on the stage was wrongfully convicted and served 25 years, 15 years, like you know, it starts blowing your mind. You know, you hear that, that buzzword you know, uh, resilience a lot, but when you see somebody up there acting out such a dramatic event right from their own life, like you're like wow, you know, like it hits a little different. So I really really appreciated that these guys got up there and did that.

Speaker 3: 5:18

It's selfless and it's courageous to go through that again, to want to share that story with strangers well, not even just as a one-time only, like, uh, you know.

Speaker 2: 5:25

As for me said, this is a uh, the show in columbus. We saw it in columbus at the lincoln theater and this was one night, but they told us at the end that it's traveling, uh, to like five other cities detroit, somewhere in indiana, chicago, etc. And so not just to put it on and tell your story one time, but like to do it in this lived uh, live theater type of an environment over and over and over again. I mean, think about live audience and then traveling to do the same, um, I'm sure there is a healing. Maybe that feels cathartic and those experiences too. I mean, I don't want to uh assume, but I would. I would imagine there has to be some component of that that goes beyond, just like I need people to hear my story.

Speaker 1: 5:54

But maybe this is a little bit for self also yeah, so, yeah, um, because I mean, like you said, just rehearsing could be traumatic, reliving that, um. And like you said, jacob, I really, really thought it was interesting how many lawyers were in the crowd, the audience. I don't know if that was like, if it was really aimed at lawyers or if they just heard about it, but hey, this sounds really interesting. We should go check it out. We also don't know how many of those people were on the prosecution side or former prosecution, because a lot of defense lawyers seem to be former prosecutors, which is weird. But yeah, I mean, that's huge because it kind of gives you what's the word I'm looking for. It helps you view your own craft through a different lens. It makes it just a little bit more important to understand the gravity of making sure you get it right, because some of these guys I believe I can't remember which one, but he said he was sentenced after like 45 days of being charged, which was unheard of.

Speaker 2: 6:46

I've never heard anything like that. Yeah, that was the Ruel Saylor story and I think it was the last one, but they were all really powerful, I think of their own.

Speaker 1: 6:51

What was really powerful about that was that he said that he had such belief in the legal system that he cooperated through the whole thing, thinking that they're going to know this isn't me, they're going to catch the right person, yeah. And then he ended up going to prison and while in prison he maintained that same thought process. It's like they're going to realize I'm innocent, they're going to let me out. And he talked about how his spirit slowly started to crumble over the years. After you know appeal requests and records requests and all of this gets denied. He's like man, like am I really going to get out?

Speaker 2: 7:17

of here. Yeah, I think there was a component of that to each of them. Does it make sense for us to kind talked about? The play is called the Lynched Among Us. It is put on by the Voices of Injustice and we'll put this in the show notes but you can go to that website, voicesofinjusticecom. They're always looking for donations to make sure that this gets spread far and wide. They have a lot of good sponsorship, of course. We said we saw it at the Lincoln I injustice and how that's being amplified through current administration. There was also we Amplify Voices, the Greater Columbus Arts Council let's see what's this one say Youth Ministry Program and of course, the Voices of Injustice themselves.

Speaker 2: 7:58

So the first story well, first Larice Glover hosted and he gave his own testimony, so we'll talk about him in a little bit. But the first story was the Michael Sutton story, which I think is, particularly in Ohio, is a pretty common name. If people are thinking about innocence and the Innocence Project, which came up a lot throughout the play, michael Sutton is a name that comes up pretty frequently. So I'm just going to read the description in the playbill and then we can talk about it, if that makes sense to you both.

Speaker 2: 8:15

Michael Sutton was 17 when he and friends were out driving celebrating their upcoming graduation. On 55th and Woodland adjacent vehicle, cleveland police pulled Michael and his friends over claiming the boys jumped out and fled the scene, shooting at them in the process. For the four young boys who just witnessed the shooting, this is where their nightmare begins. A compassionate judge, however, releases Michael on bond to attend his high school graduation, but the police storm the school and arrest young Michael, where he is booked, afterwards convicted and sentenced to 46 years in prison. This is a heralding story of how one young man with a full scholarship and promising future overcame the toughest trials of his life and won.

Speaker 1: 8:49

Yeah, that's insane. I remember him talking about how I mean he told the cops like hey, you got the wrong guy. Like I'm about to graduate tomorrow, you know, full ride, scholarship and everything, and it's just like I said before, like you have such faith that they got to notice this in me. You know, and it't work out that way.

Speaker 2: 9:06

It's insane I think what was compelling about this one in particular. So, like we said earlier, the michael sutton played himself in in this retelling, but also his parents were there. So when they showed the graduation scene and how the police came in and pulled him out, it was his real parents. They're like with microphones on crying and yelling at them to stop it and I thought that was really powerful. Maybe it's because I am a parent, but like that really got to me in terms of his story at the beginning of that tale.

Speaker 3: 9:26

Yeah, michael Sutton's part of the play, as DJ said, it was the beginning opening story. Each of these five men were, I believe, allowed to choose kind of the artistic form that they wanted to express their story, and so he chose it as a play and chose, like, different scenes from. You know everything that happened to him. So, as Remy said, you know it was like him partying with his friends and then the police arresting him, then a scene of him at trial where the judge released him to go to his graduation, but then immediately following the next scene was the graduation, where the police stormed the graduation and arrested him in front of all his peers and family and friends. So each artistic expression for each individual in this play meant something to them.

Speaker 3: 9:58

There was some comedy to this, even though the stories are very powerful, and so we'll get to kind of the comedic parts in a little bit. But I am just sitting there remembering each of these scenes from Michael's story and how, like you know, he played himself in that interrogation room and then the prosecutor comes in and I believe didn't do a rap, he did a rap, it was really good. It was a really good rap, but it was basically to tell Michael like listen, I don't give a shit about whether you're innocent or not. We're going to put somebody behind bars, and it happens to be you.

Speaker 1: 10:28

Directly preceding that rap was a very important, very powerful thing. That, um, it's one of the reasons why I think that the public needs to be more educated about what goes on behind the scenes. And I don't know if you guys saw the same way as I did, but if you notice, in the very beginning, um, michael seemed to be very relaxed. He was very, like, kind of nonchalant, and they asked him questions and he just went along with it. Yeah, yeah, just went along with it. Yeah, yeah, this and that.

Speaker 1: 10:46

And then it wasn't until he realized, like wait a minute, you guys are trying to pin this on me. And they were just like, yeah, basically, like it's you, nobody else, and this is what it's gonna be. And once he realized like there was nothing he could say to get out of that, like that was when it was like, oh man, like let me take this serious. And the reason why I say that that's a very powerful moment is because there are a lot of people who go through this and they have trust in the legal system and they think that I'm just here to help you guys. And then they've already said by the time they take it seriously. They've already said enough damaging or incriminating things, that they pretty much for lack of a better term they fuck themselves. You know, and that's hard to deal with, as especially as an 18, 19 year old person, you know, with no experience a piece that I like about the uh retelling of this was the videos, um that they played for each story.

Speaker 2: 11:26

so so particularly for Michael's story as it went through his time in prison and how he kind of got through his mental demons and those kinds of things, I appreciated the video they also played in the background with some music to that, particularly the live footage of when he got released. I think that was really powerful. It wasn't just a scene of him getting out, they showed the media there helping him get out.

Speaker 2: 11:43

And I thought it was fun because it was the same guy from the innocence project. Like in all three of the videos, the lawyer was the same lawyer and finally made it happen, but it was 2022 and he got convicted in 2007, so I mean, I don't do math, so, but that's a really long time. It's a long time for a child who's innocent, and I think that you know these are contributing factors in all of these cases, but they were just black men in the wrong place at the wrong time, which calls into question like, where is it right to be a black man and what time is right?

Speaker 2: 12:06

Because if you're in cell, which is the wrong place at the wrong time, we assumed it was you. Like, what does that say about the biases that are systemically embedded? Because, like we're talking about, it's the fault of the legal system that Michael was put behind bars in the first place and so for him to kind of then, because part of it was play, and then he came out and kind of just gave a verbal testimony, him getting released, and I thought it was a really powerful, uh, use of media and audio and visual retelling.

Speaker 1: 12:31

So um with michael. There was another very um powerful thing that he said, and we actually talked about this in a previous episode where we talked about what you have to become to survive prison. The prosecution and the judge don't really care, or maybe they don't know what type of environment they send you to and you're just a person who maybe you're not that bad of a, maybe you happen to have a bad situation out there, but on paper it's very like cut and dry. You know, for them they say this was a violent crime. You know this was X, y and Z. So they send you to a high security prison where only violent people go.

Speaker 1: 12:59

Now here we're talking about a kid that was just about to graduate high school and go is very you know, it's a thing that'll get you targeted in prison, because everybody knows you can't afford to get in trouble, you know. So he spoke about how, after exhausting all of these avenues and getting denied, eventually he had to do certain things you know, different hustles that weren't really above board so that he could pay his lawyer, you know, and by the time he got out, I'm not really for certain Is this the one who said he went to Lucasville.

Speaker 2: 13:28

I don't remember the specifics.

Speaker 1: 13:30

He was in solitary when his lawyer called yeah, so I'm not sure for certain if this was the one, but he said he was in solitary confinement when his lawyer came to get him out of prison, which we did an episode on Lucasville, that was real well.

Speaker 2: 13:41

That was the last one. Okay, I had sorry, I will edit that out.

Speaker 1: 13:47

No, that's okay, it's okay, we'll just clarify it when we get there.

Speaker 1: 13:49

But I mean, the point is, though, like you're trying to maintain your innocence, you're surrounded by all this, you know, negativity. You come into a high-security prison there's no peace, you know, but you're trying to cooperate to get out that actually, when we were there and I went and introduced myself to them, I had let them know that, hey, man, I did 10 years in prison and this really inspired me and stuff. But I felt it was important to let them know, like what I did, what I went to prison for, just so we don't think we're gonna bond over this innocence, you know, and so like, because I said before I would hate to tell somebody like that I understand what you're going through, when I have no lived experience of that matter. So it was, it was powerful and it really really opened my eyes to a lot, so much stuff that even I didn't know.

Speaker 3: 14:25

Yeah, you kept saying Remy maintain his innocence. And I've just been thinking about that ever since we saw the play, because I can't even begin to comprehend the psychological turmoil that these men have faced and their experiences to be sent to prison, wrongfully convicted, and almost no one I mean, you know, like general public and institution-wise, you know maybe your family believes you but almost no one to be on your side and to feel that powerless but then, at the same point in time, to know innately that you didn't do anything wrong. I mean that is just like some kind of meta level of like gaslighting that I don't think hopefully anyone listening or, you know, any friend of this podcast will ever have to experience in their lifetime. But it happens and you know we have in America, of course, I'm sure you've mentioned this in the podcast before but the presumption of innocence ends. So while Michael and all these men were being held for questioning, before they were arrested formally or before they were sentenced or convicted, they were all supposed to be, under the law, presumed innocent.

Speaker 3: 15:26

So the idea of maintaining one's innocence is just so crazy. To a I have to maintain a? Um argumentative stance or a belief in that. It's like I'm factually innocent like michael was factually innocent in his case and it like I. I again can't comprehend how you deal with that, on top of the layers of trauma and stuff that you're facing um being sent to any kind of correctional facility.

Speaker 3: 15:43

Um being unable to see the people that you love or care about, um at most, almost every day of your life, not being able to communicate with the outside world, missing out on opportunities that you were about to have, such as, in Michael's case, the fact that he was about to go to college on a full ride. We can't, there's no way to repair the damage that was done in these cases, and so that means to me it's more important that we get these messages out and people understand that it happens, and the fact that even one person is sent to innocent that is innocent, is sent to prison, is an atrocity. It's something akin to some of the worst human rights violations I can think of. Yeah absolutely.

Speaker 1: 16:19

I try to be objective and understand that it's no way to be 100% sure With the way the legal system is set up.

Speaker 1: 16:25

Of course there's going to be some people who slip in there, who are wrongfully convicted. For me, I hate the way that they have to go to all these extents to prove their innocence and in some cases they prove it and still have to stay in there because of the process, the formal process you have to go through. So there was one guy I'm sorry my memory isn't the best so I can't really remember whose story it was but he said he went to the parole board and the parole board had zero sympathy for him because he would not show remorse, which is one of the big things that the parole board wants to see if they want to decide to let you go. But they were saying we can't let you go, you haven't shown any remorse. And he's like I didn't do it. And they're like well, go back and think about it, do some more time. It's on them to collect and hunt down the information that will prove their innocence, and they have to do it all from a jail cell.

Speaker 2: 17:11

Yeah, do you want to talk about the next piece? So the next component was a testimony. So Larise Glover gave that testimony. He was also the host of the Evening, so not Charles' story, it wasn't theatrical, he just stood up no-transcript, broad daylight and authorities quickly identified three teenagers luis glover, derrick wheat and eugene johnson as the prime suspects. The the gunshot residue found on Wheat's clothing, which they argued was evidence of his involvement. However, the defense contested the claim, emphasizing that the lack of forensic evidence linking the three to the crime and argued that Harris's vantage point made it unlikely that she could clearly identify the shooter. Despite these concerns, all three teenagers were convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison, with parole eligibility after 18 years.

Speaker 2: 18:04

Years later, critical evidence emerged that undermined the prosecution's case. Harris recounted her testimony, admitting that she had been pressured by police into identifying them as the defendants. Moreover, police files that were never disclosed to the defense that was my favorite part of the story, so I want to highlight that so that you can tell me to remember to come back, because I'll forget contained records pointing to alternate suspects and threats against Hudson before his murder. These suppressed documents suggested that authorities may have ignored other leads in their rush to convict the three teenagers. With this new evidence, leverett, wheat and Johnson's convictions were overturned in 2015. That's 20 years. By the way, the following year, all charges were dismissed, officially exonerating them after they had spent two decades behind bars for a crime they did not commit. Their case highlights systemic issues of wrongful convictions, including unreliable witness testimony, prosecutorial misconduct and the failure to disclose evidence.

Speaker 2: 18:49

I was going to get there in the end, but I appreciate that. Yeah, I think, before anybody else, if it's okay. I think what was really compelling to me about Louise's testimony was about the documents. I know you just started to talk about this that they tried to subpoena these public records from the police department for 20 years and when they finally got like they tried and tried and tried, their defense lawyers and the Innocence Project tried and they couldn't get them. And then they gave it like one last hail, mary, and there'd been transitions within the documents in public records department and so they just on a fluke, got them. Uh, the last, the very last time they were going to request them as an appeal um, and when they received the documents, the very front page said that if the, if the um public records department released the police files, they could be charged with um misconduct which I thought was super by the police department, which is crazy. So the police were threatening the public records department, the prosecutor.

Speaker 1: 19:28

I'm sorry the prosecutor. The prosecutor wrote on there do not release these or you'll be prosecuted. Yes, thank you, but the thing about that which I thought was insane was 20 years went by 20. 2-0. These records requests were the primary thing in the battle. I mean, they were the first thing you do is make requests for the records before you even start fighting in other places. So the fact that they never acknowledged it and they didn't acknowledge it, no matter how many times they asked for it, so I thought that was insane I also thought that there was um in larissa's.

Speaker 2: 19:59

Can you hear my carbonation, is it? I can hear you asking about it. You should leave that too. Um, for larissa's uh testimony, I was. He said the statement and you alluded to this earlier.

Speaker 2: 20:08

When he um, he said that he was a completely innocent person, but now he has to adapt to this. Earlier, remy, he said that he was a completely innocent person, but now he has to adapt to this environment where not everybody is and he's like so by putting me in here as an innocent person. I now have to become the thing you think I am, and I thought that was a really powerful thing about. I have to now survive in this environment, so I have to become the very thing you think or have told me that I am, when it never was who I was, and that was a really powerful takeaway. Back to your point, jacob, about like that psychological toll. Like I can't imagine the mental fortitude one would have to take if they've never been kind of in that type of an environment or if you're innocent of this thing and you're not really caught up in these other things, like how eye-opening prison environment would be.

Speaker 1: 20:42

Uh, and you also have to change your rhetoric right, because you have to survive in there, you have to maintain your safety, and so you can't even say stuff like I'm not even supposed to be in here, because you're kind of alluding to the fact that everybody else is supposed to be here. What are you saying? You're not like us, you're better than us, you know. So I mean, it's insane. It was pretty heartbreaking to tell these stories.

Speaker 3: 20:58

I've been thinking a lot about, not just in this context but in kind of my professional work and everything about stigma and shame and kind of my own definitions would be like shame is something, a feeling that you have, that is, internal control.

Speaker 3: 21:12

You have internal locus control, so I can feel ashamed that I did something usually is accompanied by guilt, not always because you can be ashamed that you're associated with something you know that you maybe don't want to be, or something where you didn't have any guilt or any wrongdoing, but a lot of times it is associated with guilt, whereas stigma is externally controlled and is forced upon you by other people, by society at large, and so anyone who enters the criminal justice system faces stigma of some degree.

Speaker 3: 21:34

It's usually, I assume, pretty bad, because you're either found guilty and you know you're guilty and your life is going to always be, you know a kind of product of the fact that you made this mistake and that, even though you might have paid for it with prison time or whatever, it's following you the rest of your life, or the fact that you weren't guilty but everyone thinks you were, and so you know like him, well, all these men, but um, in this case, um, him going in there and having to change who he is at the core because he didn't.

Speaker 3: 22:03

Um, he wanted to one survive prison and but while he was trying to still say I'm an innocent person or keep that belief inside himself. That to me is just like an egregious form of stigma. Like how, how does one cope with that, knowing that I can't control that everyone perceives me this way, even though I, you know they shouldn't? They shouldn't perceive me that way and um, that almost causes you, I would think, to have some kind of shame. That isn't, that's unfounded, like the shame shouldn't be there. But you, I, people in a situation could go through some kind of shame feeling because they are starting to believe, because they're in a situation, that they are what people tell them they are.

Speaker 1: 22:36

I think that kind of piggybacks with your other comment about the mental assault. We're not talking about a couple weeks, a couple months or even a couple years. We're talking about decades. That somebody is being assaulted with their reality. That is unfounded. That somebody's being assaulted with their reality. That is unfounded. And not only are you approaching the legal system which you are petitioning to advocate on your behalf because you're innocent. You think, hey, you guys should get this right, you should make it right. But when you approach the system like that, they're like everybody says they're innocent. You know you're just another person who's coming trying to get over the system. You know no-transcript. But really even your family, after a decade and a half, two decades, and they're seeing how much fight you're putting up and you're getting nowhere even them they will probably start to think like, yeah, maybe they do it. And that's sad, that's really. Over the years many people come and go in your support circle and they themselves have a mental battle to deal with. Their peers are out there like now are you? Why are you supporting that guy? You know a story like this I'm sure made the news. People are like, why are you supporting that guy? Hey, I'm sure he did. You know, it's not until you finally make it out. You, you know, you uh emerged victorious.

Speaker 1: 23:46

That then all the naysayers started oh man, we always knew the whole time. You know, thank goodness he made it home, but I'm sure there were many people that were like he was in the center of this. It used to be kind of sneaky. I've heard people say the most ridiculous things. I remember a time he stole a candy bar Get the fuck out of here. Or even stuff that's pretty stereotypical, chewing out stuff Like oh man, I remember I caught them skipping school one time. Yeah, but skipping school is not a murder. Let's just not try to relate the two, you know, and let's just look at the evidence for what it is, because people will even come to those terms in spite of the evidence that they're in. They'll just use the fact that they haven't gotten out yet to justify in their mind that maybe they are guilty. That's sad.

Speaker 3: 24:24

It is sad. Real quick I want to interject with a I recently came across well, was made aware, I should say, of a framework that is called the social safety theory and basically it's the idea that minority people especially face a lot of cumulative or multiplicative stress in their lifetimes and so that, you know, can contribute to really bad mental health and physical health outcomes across the lifespan. But also that there's this fact of social safety where you know if people are in an environment they feel are associated with safety, or they're with someone that they feel are associated with safety, then that can help improve their outcomes and their functioning overall. So now, incorporating that into what you're saying, like I'm wondering and I would like to ask people that have gone through this experience, like, did you at any point at least have one person that you felt like was in your corner the whole time? Because I would be like, from the social safety perspective, if you have at least one person, then you're more likely to maintain resiliency.

Speaker 3: 25:12

There's that buzzword again, which I am, so you know, I want to kind of shout out to people that I wish there was a world where they didn't have to maintain resiliency, that you know people didn't have to suffer and then be told that you know they're a better person because of it, like that's terrible. We should want better for all humanity, but given that that's the state of the world that we're in, I think that people that are in prison, and especially those who are wrongfully convicted and sent to prison, if they have even one person you know inside, outside, you know whatever that they feel like, is still fighting for them, still believing in them, I would guess that they would fare better. Of course, that's all relative to the total outcome of the experience, whether they actually make it out of prison or if they go through their entire sentence and are finally released on parole or something, but in this case, I hope that he had someone that he could still believe in, and I believe in him, I hope he does.

Speaker 1: 26:04

Usually that person in a situation when it comes to incarceration usually that person is your parents, but we have to recognize that not everybody has parents Correct. Also, when you talk about resiliency, we have to understand that not everybody keeps their parents through the situation Correct Two decades. I know plenty of people who have done a lot less than two decades in prison, who have lost their parents or grandparents, which was another story.

Speaker 1: 26:24

Yeah, he talked, I forget whose story it was, but gentleman released and he was able to go see his mom and it was his mother was, uh, in a coma, yeah, and he got to hold her hand and speak to her and she woke up and, uh, I think she she lived for a few more months, I think that was also real well, uh, because charles had the kidney, the kidney transplant yeah, charles got to give a kidney to his nephew.

Speaker 2: 26:42

Yep, but I think it was real story. But I'm gonna, yeah, yeah, sorry, keep going. Oh, it's cool. I was just trying to remember whose name it was so we could attach it sorry, it's like three or four weeks ago at this point we don't have super bad memory and the thing that you talked about, um, kind of looks like.

Speaker 1: 26:56

When you talk about um, these guys experiences, I mean, they're all innocent, regardless of what walk of life they had. I mean, some of them were just like young school kids, um, who had the most innocent of stories. Some one guy, um, I think was real who said, like I was a street guy, you know, I didn't do this crime, but I was in the streets. So, yes, he at least owned and knew what he was and what situation he was in. But my point is there's all this talk about black people or low-income people don't trust law enforcement. And when you talk about resiliency and how we praise these guys for making it out, we have to understand that yes, they made it out, but they didn't make it out unscathed. They lost a lot more than just the years. The people Like they have scars from the situation and when you already come from a place where you don't really trust law enforcement, the fact that they did and that they gave them their trust and thought that they would get them out of the situation is kind of a testament to itself of why people don't.

Speaker 1: 27:47

I've always heard people say, well, why wouldn't you? You live in a high crime rate. Why wouldn't you trust law enforcement? I think me and you actually, debbie when, early in our relationship, I believe, we had a conversation where I told you I feel more safe in the hood than I do in the suburbs or than I do in rural areas. I'll go somewhere where I can clearly hear gunshots in the background and I was like cool as a cucumber, but driving into the suburbs is giving me anxiety. When I'm like, uh, you know, make sure you see me. I was like, well, we'll give him no reason to pull us over, you know, because you never know, as soon as you have that law enforcement situation, whether you know you fit the description of somebody they're looking for.

Speaker 3: 28:22

And of course, you have it no-transcript circumstances, as remy, or that you know you've never been to prison yourself or something, then you know. Also think about the different ways that people might experience the same kind of trauma.

Speaker 1: 29:06

I mean, I really myself, I don't, really. I don't really let it bother me a lot, except for times when I'm with my kids, because I would hate for my kids to have to witness something like that. But what we're talking about is, yeah, I have a criminal record, we all know that. But when you get pulled over and they run my plates, when I get pulled over and they run my plates, man, I got insurance to the max. I'm gainfully employed, I do mentorship, I do all this stuff. I am a perfect model of a citizen. I pay my taxes.

Speaker 1: 29:36

I can't say I go to church too much, but whatever, what I'm trying to say is, theoretically, I have zero to worry about, absolutely nothing to worry about when I get pulled over. But when I get pulled over, I got a lot to worry about, because the first thing that's going to come up beside my name, I'm sure, is going to say that I'm a violent felon. I have criminal history. They don't care that that was 16, 17 years ago. They're like, oh, okay, so now they're walking into their car with their hand on their pistol or something. That's the same for people who have citizenship issues or anything else Like, oh, they have an accent. Well, now they're probably thinking like, oh shit, I hope this cop doesn't think I'm an illegal. You know, just try to give me a hard time when they themselves also should have zero to worry about, absolutely.

Speaker 2: 30:14

So I just wanted to recall we were talking about an individual whose mom was sick. That was Lamont Clark, and so we're going to talk about Lamont at the end, but just want to make sure we're putting the right names to things. So I did some back research while we were talking that through. The next story is when you're talking about injecting a little bit of humor. So the next story was the Charles Jackson story, and so I'm going to read the bio and we can talk about how Charles chose to showcase his story. So Charles Jackson.

Speaker 2: 30:36

Fifteen-year-old Charles Jackson lived in fear of his older brother, tony, whose addiction had altered his behavior. But when Charles' young nephew, houston, bravely stood up to Tony, they both realized they're the true source of his intimidating behavior the grip of addiction. Charles' love and admiration for Tony remained unwavering, but he struggled to reconcile that with the harm caused by his addiction. This pain and experience forged an unbreakable bond between Houston and Charles, one that would last a lifetime. Charles Jackson's life took a devastating turn when he was falsely accused and framed by police for a murder he did not commit. Despite having two police officers as his alibis, charles was persuaded by his public defenders to withhold this crucial evidence from the jury. The consequences were dire. Charles was convicted and sentenced to 30 years to life in prison. While Charles languished behind bars, his nephew Houston's health began to deteriorate rapidly. Houston's kidneys were failing and he was forced to undergo dialysis. Charles, aware that he was a matching donor, was tormented by his inability to help.

Speaker 1: 31:23

Charles. I appreciate it, charles' injection of humor into a story. No-transcript. Be a donor. Um, the lawyers, I mean when he talked about, hey, the officer out there at the desk, it's my alibi, I go talk to them. And his lawyers told him straight up, like you can't say you were running from a cop and that's why you didn't commit this murder. But it was true. But it was true. I mean, he said, like you know, hey, I stumbled out of the bar and these two cops approached me and I ran, mm-hmm.

Speaker 2: 31:59

But obviously, and they chased him, yeah, they chased him, they were involved in a chase with him at the same time this murder was being committed.

Speaker 1: 32:03

It's not the best excuse, it's not the best alibi, but it is one nonetheless. And the fact that he just so happened while coming to this meeting with his lawyers, he just so happened to pass the cop that was chasing him. It was like, wow, what else could you ask for? And he said no.

Speaker 2: 32:30

I think what was fun I guess if there's anything fun about Charles' story was that he was the oldest man on the stage and so he had to play himself as the 27-year-old right and he literally ran, yeah, literally ran on stage.

Speaker 2: 32:35

And then he paused because he was out of breath, you remember. So, like, this crime happened in 1991, and he was 27 years old when he got his conviction. So I think that that's important because obviously it's 2025 when he's putting on this play and he had been out since 2019. So I think we saw in everybody's stories, but his was more about collecting intel and stuff and making sure it was a fun time for him. So he sang Bohemian Rhapsody during a part where he was cleaning out the prison.

Speaker 1: 33:11

So his job in prison was cleaning the hallways, but he just he said that being a porter was something that gave him a bit of freedom in there and helped him maintain his sanity.

Speaker 2: 33:18

But he poorly, poorly sang that song for a solid three minutes, and it was he. Had the crowd behind him, though, so I just On the side of the innocence.

Speaker 1: 33:27

You know, trying to prove his innocence, it wasn't just the fact that he had this altercation with two cops and that could be his alibi, it's the fact that when you have an altercation with two police officers like that, it is well documented, you know. Obviously they knew who he was. Although he ran, he left his car there, he you know. So it's not like they could say, oh, we didn't know like the car was, might have been impounded, even I don't remember. There had to be numerous records that would say, oh yeah, this is what I got.

Speaker 1: 33:54

Good thing we got him, though, because now we can hold him, you know, accountable for this other thing. But this isn't the fit for this. And instead his lawyer chose to say, no, we shouldn't tell him that, we should just take our chances, and that was a big miscarriage of justice, um big. I mean. I don't know if anything ever happened to those lawyers from like the Association or anything, but I would imagine that that was very frowned upon. Very, very bad advice for a lawyer to give somebody. It's a really good piece of evidence, but we should not talk about it at all.

Speaker 3: 34:18

Yeah, charles' story. Just the ridiculousness and kind of humor of the fact that it's so crazy that he was running from the cops and then convicted for a crime while running from the cops, I think it sets the stage for the humor that he displayed throughout. I mean he incorporated, as DJ said, music, his singing. He's not going to have a career as a singer but as an entertainer. Yes, he brought a lot of entertainment to his segment of the show and it definitely livened up the crowd and helped, because you know, like these stories aren't just, you know, fun they're not supposed to be. But it helped to change the tone and provide a little bit of relief for the remaining stories that came.

Speaker 2: 34:56

And, as we shared with the earlier stories, there was a mixed media method. So, even though in his last scene he really did run through the audience and then back up onto the stage and those pieces, there was also the video of him being released too. Again, it was the pullback at the end be like no, this was my lived experience. You know, even with the humor, my lived experience was this, and here's where you can see it, because you can see me walking out of the courtroom finally a free person. Um, and listener, I know you're worried. So he did get to donate his kidney to his nephew. He's dead and they have a lifelong relationship. At this point, they're still the best of friends. He said so.

Speaker 1: 35:29

Um, I really loved that too so, on a latter note, I gotta commend these guys for not only just gaining their freedom and that being enough, but that they all came together. I'm not sure how they all found each other, but I know that they all came together and they all said, hey, we have to spread the word. You know, we have to share these stories because they are very impactful, not only the people who have gone through it, but for the loved ones of people who have gone through it and the community as a whole, because I'm sure when this made the news, the community didn't feel safe. I'm sure the community knew like, hey, those birds are innocent and they're getting railroaded. So the fact that these guys came out and took it upon themselves as their mission to spread this word being free wasn't enough for them. I really got to commend that.

Speaker 1: 36:06

Also, I would like to give a shout out to Al Cleveland. He's one of the guys who, uh, promotes this a lot. Uh, you guys can look him up on facebook. He's involved in a lot of stuff. Um, and lamont clark, who is actually the guy I was hooked up with. You know, we were pretty cool in there, so it's nice to see him up on stage and uh literally get their flowers, yeah, yeah. But also shout out to all these guys, man, the fact that they would go out there and share their own stories like this. It's amazing. I really uh encourage all you guys if you see this play going on in your area, like, please grab some tickets, have a night out, go see it. I'm pretty sure, um, you'll learn something. There's a lot in there that even I haven't gone through the system, uh didn't know. And check out their website, voices of injustice.

Speaker 2: 36:41

You can also check them out on facebook and instagram was there anything else on charles's story we wanted to talk about before we transition to well?

Speaker 2: 36:47

I think we're good, proceed that up uh, the third and final story was that? No, it wasn't the final story, because Lamont came up and gave some closing remarks and told a little bit of his story with him and his mom, so Ruel's story was the last one that was done theatrically. And so, in 2002, ruel Saylor was wrongfully convicted of murder, kidnapping and assault in Cleveland, ohio, following the fatal shooting of Omar Clark. The case against Saylor was the shooter. Another witness, larry Braxton, also identified Saylor. So, despite Saylor maintaining his innocence and presenting an alibi that replaced him elsewhere at the time of the crime, he was convicted in 2003 and sentenced to 25 years to life.

Speaker 2: 37:24

Years later, new evidence surfaced proving Saylor's innocence. Williams admitted his identification had been influenced by suggestion, and other witnesses, including Cordell Hubbard and Nicole Hubbard, provided sworn statements supporting Saylor's alibi. Anthony McKenzie and William Sizemore further corroborated that Saylor was not present at the crime scene. In 2018, after spending more than 15 years in prison, saylor's convictions were vacated and he was released. In 2023, he was awarded $652,000 in state compensation for his wrongful conviction, highlighting the flaws in eyewitness identification and the devastating impact of prosecutorial errors.

Speaker 1: 37:50

Now this story, I think, is important because this is the story where he took the deal right. Yes, that's correct. So after, let me see, he did 15 years right. So I think he said I think it was like year 12 or 13. He said the prosecutor came to visit him in prison. He also injected a little bit of comedy because he said oh, they're coming for me and he gave all this stuff away. And you know they're coming down here themselves. They must be here to get me out. Gave all this stuff away. He said.

Speaker 1: 38:15

He went into this conference room and the prosecutor flat out says we know you're innocent. At that point, what else is there to talk about, right, right? But they also said well, we know you lied in court for your friend and so if you sign this plea agreement saying you know, yeah, you lied for your friend in court, we'll call it a wash. You know you'll only do this time that you did. You can go home. And his lawyer is like this is really bad advice. As your lawyer, I will tell you this is a shit deal, but as a friend, I will tell you to take the deal and fight from outside. I thought who the hell said something like that. I wanted to stand up and scream at that moment. Yeah, that was the most horrible advice ever, but he signed the deal.

Speaker 2: 38:52

You know I don't know that it was the most horrible advice ever. I'll push back because she had tried a lot of appeal processes and it was in the hands of like it was up to whoever was going to hear it or sign it, and they've been trying for 15 years to get an appeal heard and so this was a deal that gave immediate freedom or he could have not. Sondra and her continued her efforts that for 15 years had been fruitless, so I don't know that it was the worst advice ever.

Speaker 1: 39:13

From my point of view, I want to tell you why I thought this was the worst ever. When you admit guilt, you lose all appeal process, all appeal power. You cannot appeal a guilty verdict, no matter if it was coerced, no matter if it was prosecution, misconduct or anything. You said you did it. Nobody made you say you did it. So by them saying we'll let you go only if you admit to this and accept the time you've done, as you know punishment for this, this uh deal that you're taking, you basically say, yeah, I can go home today. You'll never compensate me for this time I did. I'm still going to be a felon. I'm still going to be you know, like you're not going to go home a free man.

Speaker 2: 39:43

You know you still might go home on supervision, you like I understand, I get it, I know the depth of that, but I think from ruel's perspective, like he shared on the stage, and from his lawyer's viewpoint, who was his friend at that point of over a decade and a half of working alongside each other, like she could see him mentally deteriorating, as we talked about earlier. He was in solitary confinement at the time of this visit from this prosecutor and was really struggling with his mental health and his wellness, knowing he should be at home. He kept his faith. That was one of his big through lines was his faith. But like I understand why she left it up to him for advice.

Speaker 1: 40:14

I understand why she said what she said. It doesn't change the fact that it was horrible advice, because the same way he got railroaded here right, the same way they're trying to give him this deal to cover up their tracks and justify what they did to him. He goes home on supervision. By the time he did, it would be five years of mandatory post-release control. What's to stop them from violating his parole and putting him back in prison?

Speaker 2: 40:30

Well, I don't know that there is any, but what's the likelihood that he wouldn't have gotten out at all? I mean, there's the component of— but if he did his whole time?

Speaker 1: 40:37

and got out, he would still be able to fight for the injustice that he gone through. If he admitted that he was guilty and deserving of this punishment, he would have no basis, no grounds to stand on.

Speaker 2: 40:46

I would have done what he did no-transcript.

Speaker 3: 40:56

At that point I don't see and maybe I'm just living in this idealized world, but I don't see how they have any power at that point If you admit to me that you know, by some ethics or some kind of legal standards maybe they can't do anything directly about this. But who's to say that some newspaper doesn't get a hold of this story and find out that prosecution wrongfully convicted a person and then went to said person and said we know you're innocent but we're not releasing you. I'm sure they did not allow that to for people, other parties, that if you say, hey, this happened, for them to investigate that would 100% renew my vigor.

Speaker 2: 41:34

I think that's a really well-made point, because I think you and I are sitting here talking about the advice, but in reality that's not the part of the problem. Prosecution was the problem and the injustice of the system is the complicated component here. So, regardless of the deal he took or didn't take, he shouldn't have been after we know you're innocent, right like that. Should. That should have been the end of the sentence, not the aftermath that followed, I guess.

Speaker 1: 41:55

So but if you guys caught it, what I said was at year 12 or 13 the prosecutor came to him. Yeah, he took the deal, stayed in prison for another two years waiting to be released and they never came for him. Right, they took the signed deal and totally forgot about him and as he started beating on their door like hey, what's going on, they said I'm gonna take the deal back and just left him there. So basically they got him to give up his fight and just sit and wait. Now, who knows what that was for. I mean, it could have been a reelection season, who knows?

Speaker 1: 42:20

But I mean the mental warfare that they just put on this guy. You know the one. Tell him hey, we know you're innocent. Like, oh, my, that started out. I would have cried right there my God, you know, you recognize that I'm innocent. What else could I ask for? Right, just then spring on me. This deal was like damn, that's a little defeating, but you still got hope right To take the deal. Like you had to go through a lot to convince yourself to take that deal and then still not go home. That was horrible. And we're talking about people who are are I mean, if you talk about us versus them mentality. From their point of view, they're pillars of society, you're the slime of the earth and we're upholding the law and justice and whatnot, and they're inflicting this upon people who they know are innocent. It's just cruel.

Speaker 3: 43:04

Again, I can't speak for what his choice was, because I'm not him and didn't go through what he went through. But from the outside I would have looked at him and been like I trusted you guys that the legal system would not convict me because I'm an innocent person. And here I am, 13 years later and now you're telling me you're going to trust me again. To me it was so blatant of like why would you make the same mistake twice? But again, I didn't go through what he went through. So, to be in his mental state at that exact moment, I'm sure I might have made the same choice that you made. I. I might have made the same choice that you might very well could have made the same choice.

Speaker 1: 43:31

This is like playing with a revolver and somebody's like, oh, it's empty. And then you mess around and shoot yourself in the foot and they're like, no, the next one's empty, don't worry about it. You're like, how are you going to get me this way? It's a trigger game, it's well, I guess it is what it is.

Speaker 2: 43:54

Luckily, I renewed the fight and made it out, and I sound a lot like my own lawyer, but they made it out with enough life left to still enjoy Well, so I have two points to make. So first was Lamont Clark. I don't know if you wanted to share anything about him or any other than that you knew him, but Lamont offered some closing remarks, similarly sharing his own case. We talked about it a little bit earlier, about he needed to get out because his mom was dying, had a terminal illness, and so by the time he fought his fight so he could go home for a little bit, he did get to see his mom and she was in a coma and he was able to talk to her and it wasn't very long that she passed away, but there were—well, munt's case is a little different and more complicated than the other individuals that were part of this play, but the thing that remains true is that he had to demonstrate this consistent resiliency, and that was the other point I was going to make was we talked a lot about this term resiliency and what it means and why it's trendy and all these things.

Speaker 2: 44:38

So I want to give a quick shout out to a friend of the pod, jesse Schrader, my friend and confidant for a long time, but we used to do a lot of training around resiliency and the term and what we often shared with people was, yes, resiliency is important, but we can't high-five people that are drowning right. We have to recognize that praising people for their strength without acknowledging the thing that has had to make them strong doesn't fix anything, and so I think that, as an overall takeaway for me from this event, it was man, these people are amazing and it shouldn't have to be like this, and I hope that more people in the audience kind of grappled with that same little reality of these are people's lived experiences, and the system is flawed that makes it such um. So those are my closing thoughts. I know we're wrapping up, so I just wanted to get mine in there so that you all can say yours too.

Speaker 3: 45:16

To follow up on what you just said, dj, I would just say that, from my viewpoint, resiliency should be a thing that we praise in individuals when the circumstances that they went through weren't something that could be prevented.

Speaker 3: 45:29

But we too often ascribe resiliency to people that went through preventable circumstances, whether that be abuse, whether that be a wrongful conviction, whether that be stigmatization by society. These are all social constructs that are all things that we, as you know, as a society, could just like work to stop. You know someone going through a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or something. You know that's terrible, but that's not something that we can control, and so them being resilient in the face of that, that is something admirable, and I'm saying that being resilient in these cases, these other cases, isn't admirable. I'm just saying that it drives home BJ's point of the fact that they shouldn't have to have been resilient, and so it saddens me to have to give them that admiration for something that we put them through and I include myself in that Like we as a country, as a society, are responsible of society are responsible.

Speaker 1: 46:13

I totally agree. And to piggyback off of that, we're talking about resiliency through something that if, given the opportunity, I would not go through. We're not talking about like, oh man, I'm Kobe Bryant, I was in the gym three times a day and I was so resilient to overcome this and be a whatever time NBA champion. We're not talking about that. We're talking about, no, I was plucked out of my life and forced to go through this, and now you're praising me for making it through. Yeah, I'm happy I made it through.

Speaker 1: 46:34

But if, given the opportunity, like if you ask Kobe Bryant, hey, would you still go through this? Do you think it was worth it? He'd be like hell, yeah, I'm so glad I was resilient through that. But if you ask these guys, hey, would you do it again? They're like fuck, no. So Give them their praise and, you know, give them their flowers, thanks for coming home and sharing your story, but recognize that it's not something that they went through by choice. It's not something that they would probably choose to go through again and recognize their losses through all of this.

Speaker 3: 46:58

I'd much rather live in a world where we didn't have to put on a play call the lynch among us. But I'm glad I saw it and I'm glad that hopefully it's going. It didn't happen and these people didn't go to prison wrongfully or that really almost anybody doesn't go to prison. But that's a different episode for the podcast.

Speaker 2: 47:15

Thank you, jacob, for joining us to talk about this. Thank you for inviting us to attend it with you. I think it was really impactful. Through each of our respective lenses, we took different things away from it, and it was a really good way to spend time. Part of it Donate if you have capacity, whether that's time, whether that's monetary gifts, whether that's sharing it on social media, whatever way you can contribute to make sure that this is circulated in the way that it should be. And, yeah, thank you for listening. Right, we're going to close out with that.

Speaker 1: 47:47

Like I said, these guys on Facebook and Instagram, as well as the Voices of Justice page. Just give it a look. I know personally, with us three here being co-parents, it was important to learn this, to see this and communicate it somehow to our children, because it may not impact us, but it could impact the next generation or somebody you know. So, like DJ said, please go to their page. Please support them however you can, and with that we're done. Peace. Please go to their page. Please support them however you can, and with that we're done. Peace. Applause for you guys. We're out of here.