In this episode, we meet John Collins (an authoritative leadership and expertise coach in forensic science), Tiffany Roy (a forensic DNA expert), Michael Ware (Executive Director for the Innocence Project of Texas), and Peter Valentin (Chair of the Forensic Science Department at the University of New Haven).

They delve into the role and importance of post-conviction DNA testing and why it should be embraced by those in the justice system instead of avoided by sharing their own experiences on working post-conviction cases.

One such case is that of Johnny Pinchback, who was sentenced to life in prison for an aggravated sexual assault that he did not commit. After 27 years, he was exonerated thanks to the Innocence Project of Texas.

On March 22, 1984, two teenage girls were confronted by a man with a gun as they walked along Illinois Avenue in Dallas. The man took them to a nearby vacant lot where he sexually assaulted them. The man fled on foot and the victims went to a nearby home and called police.

A few days later, the two were at the apartment where one of them lived when they noticed a man in the parking lot who they believed was the man who attacked them. They recorded the license plate number of the man’s car and called the police.

Police spoke with the owner of the vehicle who said he had loaned the car to 28-year-old Johnny Pinchback. When Johnny learned that the police were looking for him, he went to authorities. After briefly questioning him, Johnny was released. On April 4, police presented a photo line-up to the two girls, who both identified Johnny as their attacker.

On October 5, 1984, Johnny was convicted based almost solely on the identifications of the victims. He was found guilty of two counts of aggravated sexual assault and was sentenced to 99 years in prison.

After his conviction, Johnny learned the name of a man that his friends claimed had confessed to committing the sexual assaults. A motion for a new trial was filed based on newly discovered evidence but was rejected. Johnny lost his appeals and in October 2007 wrote a letter to the Innocence Project of Texas (IPTX). In May 2009, IPTX launched an investigation of his case.

On July 13, 2010, the Dallas County District Attorney’s Office joined with IPTX to request DNA tests of remaining physical evidence. The testing found a small amount of seminal fluid and isolated a male DNA profile from the fluid that was different from Johnny’s, proving that he was not the rapist. On May 12, 2011, Johnny was released from prison.

Today, Johnny is a board member for the Innocence Project of Texas, helping others who have been wrongfully convicted. The science that was used to retest evidence in his case did not exist in 1984, underscoring the importance of post-conviction DNA testing and those who perform this work.

In this episode, our experts discuss how cases are selected for re-examination. Is there an alternative narrative of innocence? Can it be proven? Is there DNA evidence to test?

We also look at the process for having a case re-examined; differences between states, the personnel involved, finances required, and the legal procedures, including the ramifications of self-representation.

One such case is that of Johnny Pinchback, who was sentenced to life in prison for an aggravated sexual assault that he did not commit. After 27 years, he was exonerated thanks to the Innocence Project of Texas.

Michael Ware discusses the first Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU) established in Dallas County in 2007, dedicated to both reviewing cases involving allegations of actual innocence and cases involving instances of wrongful conviction when related to an innocence claim as well as a result of systematic errors. Currently, there are over 115 CIUs in the United States.

One example of a conviction being overturned due to review by a CIU is the case of Patrick Waller, who served 16 years for a robbery and kidnapping that he didn’t commit.

On March 25, 1992, a Dallas couple was abducted at gunpoint by two men. The men forced themselves into the couple’s car and had the couple drive the car to another neighborhood, withdraw $200 from an ATM, and later to an abandoned house, where the abductors tied them up and sexually assaulted the woman.

During the assault, another couple unexpectedly drove up to the abandoned house. One of the abductors forced the second couple into the house at gunpoint. When a school district security officer drove by the home, the perpetrators fled the scene separately in the couples’ two vehicles.

One week after the crime, three of the four victims picked Patrick Waller out of a photo lineup. The fourth victim would later pick Patrick out from a live lineup. Patrick was identified by the first couple as the man who held the gun during the attack and committed the sexual assault.

Patrick, who was on probation for an unrelated incident, was arrested and charged with aggravated robbery and aggravated kidnapping. The Dallas Police Department never identified or charged a second suspect.

At the trial, the four victims identified Patrick as one of the men who attacked them. An analyst who testified for the state said she had conducted blood type testing on a rape kit collected from the sexual assault survivor, and that Patrick could not be excluded as a potential contributor of the semen, even though 58% of the population could be excluded.

DNA testing was conducted in Patrick’s case in late 2007 as part of a joint effort conducted by the Innocence Project of Texas (IPTX) and the Dallas District Attorney’s Office Conviction Integrity Unit. The results revealed a male profile and excluded Patrick Waller as the perpetrator.

Officials then ran the DNA profile through the national DNA database, and found a match to Byron Bell, a Dallas man serving a 45-year-sentence for a burglary that took place months after the abduction. Bell eventually confessed to the original crime when confronted, telling police he had an accomplice, who police would soon learn was Lemondo Simmons.

County officials told local press that Simmons, who had been convicted and incarcerated in 2002 for assault on a public servant and released in 2004, admitted to his role in the crime but could not be charged since the statute of limitations on the crime had passed.

In this episode, our experts discuss the process for re-examining a case, which has been described in Texas as a ‘Herculean Effort’ and begins with an inmate claiming their innocence.

Throughout this process, it’s important to consider how technology and the process for examining evidence has dramatically changed since the use of DNA became commonplace.

Beyond that, the technology available for analyzing DNA has drastically changed in a relatively short period of time. Whereas it was once necessary to consume larger quantities of evidence to obtain a profile and mixtures remained inconclusive, we can now deconvolute those mixtures with greater accuracy and can retest much smaller amounts of evidence. All of this is important to consider when re-examining a case.

If everything goes smoothly, the full process can take between 8-10 years, which is an eternity to someone who is incarcerated for a crime that they did not commit. Such was the case for Stephen Brodie.

In September of 1990, a 5-year-old girl was abducted from her home in Richardson, Texas and molested. With little information to go on aside from the victim describing her attacker as a “fat white man” and a fingerprint from the window screen where the attacker had entered the home, the case started to turn cold.

In August of 1991, Stephen Brodie was arrested for burglary of a coin-operated soda machine at a swimming pool in Richardson near where the girl had been assaulted. The police brought him in for questioning where he quickly confessed to the burglary. They then began to question him about the crime which had occurred the year prior.

Stephen was interrogated over 18 hours about the assault. He was deaf, so much of the questioning was done through writing and without the benefit of an interpreter. Ultimately, Stephen did confess to the crime, but had gotten a 44 of 46 details of the crime wrong or failed to mention them at all. Faced with a possible 99-year sentence, Stephen pled guilty to rape and received a 5-year sentence.

Stephen subsequently filed a state law petition for a writ of habeas corpus but was denied. Stephen served his five-year term and was released in 1998. However, he was subsequently convicted three times for failure to register as a sex offender. He was sentenced to five years in prison for two of the cases and two years in prison for the third.

It was later discovered that Stephen was excluded as a match to the fingerprint on the victim’s screen. Analysis had linked the print to Robert Warterfield, who had previously been convicted of sexually assaulting a child less than a mile from the Richardson attack and was suspected in a number of other assaults in the area. Stephen’s case was re-opened by the Dallas County District Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit.

In 2010, prosecutors in that unit argued for Stephen’s release, and in September 2010, a Texas District Court judge granted a second state law petition for a writ of habeas corpus and vacated his conviction on the grounds of actual innocence. On November 10, 2010, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted the writ and ordered the conviction vacated. The case was then dismissed in Dallas County Criminal District Court.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals also granted a separate habeas writ and vacated his convictions for failing to register as a sex offender. The appeals court found Stephen "actually innocent."

In 2012, Robert Warterfield was convicted of two other abductions and assaults of young girl--one in Dallas County and the other in Collin County--after he was linked to the crimes through DNA testing. He was sentenced to two life terms in prison.