(dramatic music)
Forensic science begins at the end
of someone else's story,
scrutinizing a violent moment in time.
Samples are collected and preserved.
The scene exhaustively photographed,
evidence prepared for forensic experts to examine.
Television and movies fuel blind faith
in the power of crime scene investigations or "CSI."
But since the emergence of DNA analysis,
a disturbing trend has emerged.
DNA pulled from evidence that spent decades
gathering dust has revealed a surprising number
of wrongful convictions.
In fact, in hundreds of exoneration cases,
DNA did more than free the innocent,
it proved that the forensic evidence
that convicted them was wrong.
It's time to put "CSI" on trial
to find out what's real science,
what has scientific potential and what's just junk?
The stakes couldn't be higher.
Got two death sentences and a life without parole.
I've been 17 and a half years on death row
plus 11 months in the county jail.
(dramatic music)
(children hollering) (dog barking)
Bye, Mom
(mysterious music)
On the morning of February 24th, 1982,
nine-year-old Daralyn Johnson left her home
in Nampa, Idaho for her daily walk
to Lincoln Elementary School.
Daralyn's school was just six blocks away.
Hi. But she
would never arrive.
At that time there wasn't a reporting system
where the school would contact the parents.
She didn't come home from school
and her mother thought, well she's playing with friends,
didn't make it for dinner, her mother was concerned,
made some calls and they couldn't find her.
(dramatic music)
A search party fanned out across Canyon County.
Three days later, the Nampa community was confronted
with a shocking discovery.
Daralyn's lifeless body was found near the Snake River
beaten and raped.
The cause of death drowning.
An examination of the crime scene
by the Canyon County Sheriff's Office
revealed physical evidence, both hair and a footprint.
But the investigation stalled.
Attorney and former director of the Idaho Innocence Project,
Rick Visser recalls the mounting public pressure.
When you have a crime like that, a heinous crime,
there's a real zeal to get it solved.
After months of fruitless investigation,
detectives turned to leads from local school children.
One of the children saw a car in the area.
Law enforcement took the DMV records
and then they weeded through them.
Police discovered that 34-year-old Vietnam vet,
Charles Fain owned a similar car.
He had a prior conviction for robbing a laundry mat
and his hair color matched hairs found at the crime scene.
So, I went down there and they started talking about
this murder of this nine-year-old girl
and I give them some hairs like they asked and left,
figured it was no big deal, hadn't done nothing,
so, I walked out.
Like a typical innocent person, he was happy to cooperate,
he took a lie detector test and passed it.
Six weeks later they called me back down there
and said, "The FBI says the hair matches ones found
on the victim."
And on March 7th, 1983, Charles was arrested
for the kidnapping, rape and murder of Daralyn Johnson.
His sister, Terry Shumway recalls that fateful day.
I was flabbergasted, I couldn't even imagine.
He had been in central Oregon, he wasn't even over there
when that happened.
Charles wasn't in Idaho
on the day of the murder.
He was over 300 miles away visited his parents
in Redmond, Oregon.
But prosecutors asserted he drove five hours to Nampa
murdered Daralyn and drove back to his parent's house
without anyone noticing.
Everybody is like, "You gotta be kidding, he was here,
when that happened he was here."
We just thought it was so bizarre
and we went right to work trying to find things
to prove he was there.
I mean, I can't tell you how many hours we spent on this
and nothing seemed to work.
(dramatic music)
You don't know what to do,
you just sit there and go through it
and hope it comes out right and it didn't.
(dramatic music)
Two jailhouse informants testified
that Charles had confessed to them
while he was awaiting trial.
And the prosecution argued that shoes belonging to Charles
matched the shoe print found at the crime scene.
Prosecutors like to present as much evidence as possible.
They lay the bricks out so they can get a solid wall
of evidence and footprint impressions
really took off in the early 80s.
So one of the pieces of evidence that an FBI expert
presented at trial was a footprint impression
at the crime scene.
This is where the FBI really bungled,
they were gathering this evidence
and the footprint they were comparing it to
was all bungled up.
They had stepped on it and it wasn't a good print
in the first place.
But a forensic examiner from the FBI
testified that the wear pattern on the impression
corresponded exactly to Charles' shoe.
I found, therefore, that the show which made
this impression, and this left shoe which made
this impression, and this left shoe had sustained wear
in the same area to a shoe print examiner,
this would indicated that the individual
walked with these shoes has the same walking gait.
But the shoes they were comparing it to
he didn't even own when the crime was committed.
Charles insisted that he bought the shoes
after the crime was committed.
But this was 1983 and he paid cash,
so there was no way to prove it.
Thank you, have a good one. You have no receipt,
why would you keep a receipt for a pair of six dollar shoes?
They were just desperate to solve the case
and they were gonna do whatever it took
to get a conviction, that's all there was to it.
(dramatic music)
After 13 hours of deliberation
and despite his alibi, the jury found Charles Fain guilty.
(dramatic music)
Got two death sentences and a life without parole.
On the day of his sentencing,
the judge ordered his execution for the following month.
Footprint evidence helped send Charles Fain
to death row.
They said it was similar in tread print.
And the jury, that's all they needed to hear.
But how did footprints
become court room evidence in the first place?
(dramatic music)
It started with another very young victim.
The earliest reference that I'm aware of
is a 1786 case that involved the murder
of a little girl in Scotland.
The investigator noticed that when the suspect fled
he left footwear impressions in mud
and was able to cast those impressions.
Later at the funeral, he was able to take impressions
of the people that showed up
and was able to establish the identity of the murderer.
Two centuries later, in the late 1970s,
an anthropologist garnered worldwide attention
with the discovery
of a 3.6 million-year-old fossilized footprint.
Louise Robbins was on a study in Tanzania
and a footprint was discovered.
And Mrs. Robbins concluded that it was made
by a medium height young woman
that was five and a half months pregnant.
Mrs. Robbins took off thinking that she could be
an expert witness, published a book
and sure enough people started coming to her.
Professor Robbins went on to serve
as a footwear expert in more than 20 criminal cases.
Her testimony helped send at least a dozen people
to prison and one man to death row.
(dramatic rock music)
By the mid-1980s, footwear evidence was seen
as an effective prosecutorial tool
and commonly used in criminal cases.
So common that Unabomber, Theodore Kaczynski
wore shoes with smaller soles attacked
to trick investigators.
(intriguing music)
Since the 1990s, forensic expert, Jon Byrd
has examined and analyzed countless shoe prints.
It originates typically
with the crime scene investigation unit.
Shoe prints found at a crime scene.
Those impressions are either visible
or they have to be processed in order to capture them.
When investigators obtain a shoe
from a subject, that becomes the known shoe.
That shoe is photographed and then processed.
We typically powder the bottom of the shoe
and then transfer that powder from the bottom
of the shoe onto an adhesive contrasting surface.
The result is a comparison print
called the known standard.
Then we can compare that standard
against the questioned imaged from the scene.
If investigators are comparing
a suspect's known shoe to three dimensional imprint
made from a print in mud, for instance,
they create a cast of the imprint.
And then we produce a three dimensional image
of the known shoe in the laboratory
so that we're comparing apples to apples.
With footwear analysis there's two types
of evaluation that is done.
The first is called a class characteristic
where these are the characteristics
that come from the shoe from the manufacturer.
Melissa Giggenbach is a law professor
and director of the West Virginia Innocence Project.
So shoe size, tread, designs
and then different shoes have different molds that are made
and each of those molds
might have a specific characteristic.
So those come from the manufacturing process.
Class characteristics do not provide a basis
for identification but they do lessen the number
of possible donors of a specific impression.
(dramatic music)
Perhaps the best example
of class characteristics narrowing the pool
of potential donors occurred in the OJ Simpson civil trial.
When a bloody shoe print was found at the scene,
an FBI footwear analyst determined it was created
by an Italian-made shoe, a Bruno Magli Lorenzo model
in size 12.
At the time only 299 pairs had been sold
in the United States.
At his criminal trial, Simpson, who wore a size 12
denied owning what he described as the ugly-ass shoes.
But during the civil case,
more than 30 newly discovered photos
showing him wearing a pair of Bruno Magli Lorenzo's
were shared with the jury.
Footwear evidence was a turning point in the case
and Simpson was responsible for the murders.
(dramatic music)
In most cases a class characteristic match
is only the first step in making an identification.
If the suspect's shoe cannot be eliminated,
then they move on to what's called
randomly acquired characteristics.
And these are things that happen to shoes
just for normal wear and tear.
You may step on a piece of glass, a nail,
a piece of jagged metal or a pointed rock
and these introduce characteristics to the bottom
of the shoe in the form of cuts, scrapes, tears,
gauges or even holes.
The theory is is that
these randomly acquired characteristics or RACs
are unique to an individual's shoe, like a fingerprint.
And according to the FBI, RACs are powerful evidence
that can help identify a perpetrator.
In here you can see the randomly acquired characteristics
on the standard actually reproduced with the known shoe
and we look to see if
those randomly acquired characteristics
are present and in the same locations
in order to establish an identification.
(dramatic music)
It was a RAQ on Charles Fain's shoe
that prosecutors claimed connected him to the crime.
There was a slight impression of a nail
on the heel of the one footprint.
So that was one of the pieces of evidence
that led to Charles' conviction.
But can analysts really identify
a slight impression of a nail in a shoe print?
Often when prints are made at a crime scene,
they're not perfect.
You're gonna get a partial print.
Very rarely are you gonna have that perfect,
beautiful print in order to try to make some kind
of comparison.
And if the mold isn't done correctly,
then there could be issues with trying to determine
and use that for comparison.
Third year law student, Eric Lasky
got firsthand experience working with shoe prints
when he was a forensic science undergraduate.
Personally I have done casting of a shoe print
out of mud.
And let me tell you, it's not as detailed
as the TV shows, to get individualizing characteristic
off a mold is very hit and miss what you're gonna get.
Some analysts may identify a specific spot
in the print as a RAQ, while others simply chalk it up
as an artifact of the print creation process.
One examiner may think this bump
is a randomly acquired characteristic
and another examiner might not.
A 2020 study revealed that given the same sets
of prints to examine, a significant number of analysts
came up with opposite conclusions.
So there is no objectivity of this right now.
And there's no standardization of what makes a match
versus what is a nonmatch.
That means that there's no checklist
for an analyst to look at.
Even if identifying a match was reliable and valid,
a lot of shoes could have created the same print.
Unlike OJ Simpson's Bruno Magli's,
many shoes are very, very common.
One national well-known shoe company
claimed that they sold 10 million pairs
of one specific type of shoe in a particular year.
Fledgling attempts have been made
to create databases and calculate statistical probabilities
around the frequency of RAQs.
But collecting that data is impractical if not impossible.
It is a vast, vast number of variables.
And there may be variables within variables.
There might be a problem with the rubber
on a sole of a particular type of shoe
and so the shoe cracks in exactly the same way
in every single shoe that was made by manufacturer,
you know, in that batch.
Scientists have discovered another reason
why identifying a match may be problematic.
At La Jolla's Salk Institute, vision center lab director,
Thomas Albright studies visual perception.
I thought about the problem of forensics for a long time
and I've always been suspicious of the whole enterprise
because I know how vision works.
(dramatic music)
While eyes capture information,
the brain processes what we see.
The visual brain is largely the cerebral cortex,
it's about three-quarters of the total human brain volume.
It's an enormous part of your brain
and that visual brain depends very heavily upon context.
Context includes
the observer's motivational state,
like hoping to solve a crime.
The natural human tendency
to look at these abstract things
and find stuff, to find visual patterns,
we can't help it because that improvisational ability
of our visual system is fundamental to human survival.
There are enormous contextual factors
that can bias people one direction or the other.
Professor Albright's research
shows how our brain is wired to visual fill in the gaps
between patterns that may not match.
If you have a print from the crime scene
which is noisy for a whole variety of reasons,
it's blurry and missing pieces and so forth
and then you have what's called an exemplar,
you'll look at the exemplar first
and have that in your head, then you will find that pattern
in the noisy thing and you won't even be aware of this
when you're doing it.
We've come to the point of realizing
that we're sending innocent people to jail
and we have to find better techniques that reduce
the probability of wrongful conviction.
(slow music)
For Charles Fain the consequences
of flawed forensic methods were profound.
Charles spent 23 hours of every day in a cell
by himself.
23 hours a day for over 17 years.
His newfound faith helped him endure
the crushing isolation.
He became a Christian just five days
after he went to the penitentiary
and that sustained him.
But he lived under the constant threat
of his own execution.
They always had a stay like right at the ninth hour
but it would be hours before that he would be granted
another stay.
And this went on, I can't tell you how many times.
You don't become immune to it, you know,
you think it's gonna happen.
And my mom, I mean, she'd have nightmares about it
and it was awful, really awful.
Charles was on death row when he learned
of his mother's passing.
He wasn't allowed to attend her funeral.
But years later, scientific breakthroughs in DNA analysis
offered new hope for his case.
The hairs found at the crime scene
now held the potential to reveal information
about the real perpetrator.
There is a nucleus in the root of a hair.
It does have these little organisms going around
called mitochondria.
And mitochondria could be used to test for DNA.
And in 2001, the prosecutor
and the Charles' federal defense attorney
agreed to do the testing.
The prosecutors were confident
the results would confirm Charles' guilt.
The DNA test was done and the prosecution was sure
that it would seal the case.
But they were wrong.
The test conclusively prove that the hairs
did not belong to Charles Fain.
The prosecutor's jaw dropped and they had a problem,
they said, "Well, let's do it again."
They sent another hair off, again it excluded him.
After that first DNA test, they did three more
and all three of them, they all cleared me.
The prosecutor made a motion
for another lab to do it and the judge denied it,
said enough is enough, you need to decide within 60 days
to release or retry Charles Fain.
57 days later, the prosecutor decided to release him.
(dramatic music)
Charles found out like everyone else,
he saw it on TV.
I was in my room reading the Bible
and I had my TV on but the volume was down,
I saw my picture on the television
and by the time I go over there and turned it on,
it was over with, so I went back to reading my Bible
and about a half hour later, guards came and took me
out of my cell and gave me some clothes,
three sets of pants, shirts, T-shirts, underwear, socks.
I left there at four o'clock in the afternoon
on August 23rd, 2001.
I'd been 17 and a half years on death row
plus 11 months in the county jail.
I'd moved on, I'd moved on when I was in the jail cell.
If you grow negative on it, why they're winning and not you.
I started thanking God for DNA.
He said, I'd always felt I'd be freed.
I just knew somehow, somewhere an answer would come.
His attitude is so unbelievable to this day
that he has no anger about it.
He's the only one out of the whole thing
that wasn't really angry about it.
The DNA evidence proved,
not just beyond a reasonable doubt
but beyond all doubt that Charles Fain
was not the perpetrator of that crime.
Even in the face of irrefutable DNA evidence,
the prosecutor and judge who sent Charles to death row
refused to acknowledge his innocence.
And at the time of his release, Idaho did not have
a compensation statute.
Charles had not worked in almost two decades
and struggled to make ends meet.
But his fate was about to intersect
with one of America's leading DNA experts,
Dr. Greg Hampikian.
In 2004, Hampikian relocated to Idaho
to teach at Boise State University
and run the Idaho Innocence Project.
My first interest in Charles' case
was to find out if he got compensated.
So when I got out here, I'm like, oh we should do something
for this guy.
He hired attorney, Rick Visser
to pursue compensation for Fain.
It was probably one of the most life changing jobs
I've ever had to meet truly innocent people
that had been wrongfully convicted.
Rick got on the case, was very conscientious about it,
he thought we were going somewhere with this.
We met with some of the legislators
and then it turned out there was opposition.
I went to the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee
and said, "This is about justice, this is a serious problem
that's happened to this man he's never been compensated."
And the abrupt response was, "That's not gonna happen
in Idaho and I'm never gonna let it get to my committee."
(dramatic music)
The compensation efforts hit a wall
but over the years, Dr. Hampikian forged connections,
educating local police about DNA.
I was training these police officers, see,
they'd come in, we'd talk, I'd bring them in the lab
and then they started asking me, "Well, look,
we're interested in closing this case."
Charlie Fain was fully exonerated
but Daralyn Johnson's real killer was still unknown.
They would bring samples to the lab
where they would get a sample from someone they thought
was the actual rapist/murderer in the young girl's death.
They tested samples for over eight years
without finding a match.
We were stymied because that's all the evidence
was left was this very precious small amount of pubic hair.
Hampikian reached out to a paleobiologist
doing cutting edge research on ancient DNA
found on dinosaur bones.
I was like, "Wow, is there a way that you could get
more information like you do with these tusks,
you know, for mastodons and such?"
And he said, "Yeah, I think I could get
single nucleotide polymorphisms what's used for genealogy
and low and behold, some of the hair owner's relatives
had contributed to genealogy data bases
that were available to the police.
An FBI team did the analysis of genealogy
and they came down the trail of ancestors and so forth.
And they got a last name, they reopened the case,
they found a suspect.
Hi.
Hey, excuse me, do you live around here?
No surprise to me, the individual's already in prison
serving a life sentence for sexual assault of a child.
Exactly 38 years
after Daralyn Johnson's murder,
investigators obtained a court order
to test the DNA of David Dalrymple.
And it proved that David Dalrymple
was the true perpetrator and the only perpetrator
of the kidnap, rape and murder
of nine-year-old Daralyn Johnson.
Although he lived on the route Daralyn
took to school, Dalrymple was never a suspect.
When the DNA match identified him, he was already in prison
serving 20 to life for kidnapping and sexually abusing
a different child after the murder of Daralyn Johnson,
a crime that could have been prevented.
The new charges may result in the death penalty
for David Dalrymple.
(dramatic music)
Charles was so excited that they finally caught somebody
met more to him than the day he got out to know that.
That was a happy, happy moment for all of us.
We can't give you 20 years back, we can't.
And there was another reason to celebrate.
But we can do is say we are paving a path forward.
The media attention
surrounding Dalrymple's indictment
helped shift public opinion regarding compensation.
Not only did Fain receive over a million dollars,
Idaho passed the Wrongful Conviction Act,
providing state compensation for others like him.
I bought me a house, a pickup, got me a pup.
I've been doing a lot of fishing since then.
A little rough at times but I got through it.
And that's another thing you need to know,
you'll get through it, one way or the other,
you'll get through it.
(slow music)
Charles Fain is one of thousands exonerated
through DNA analysis.
In the early 90s, DNA technology becomes ripe enough
for us to use in criminal cases.
We didn't have this ability before.
We can go back and test samples that have never been tested
and what they've learned was that actually
we have convicted a lot of innocent people
and one of the major contributing factors they found
was some sort of shotty forensic evidence
that was used in the first place.
Assistant professor at the Maryland School
of Law, Maneka Sinha studies how forensic science
can contribute to wrongful convictions.
And in the wake of these growing numbers
of finding people who are innocent having been convicted,
people start to worry about forensics.
(dramatic music)
In 2009, Congress founded a study
by the National Academy of Sciences
to look at the state of forensic science in America.
This central recommendation is that we need
to establish a national institute of forensic science,
a sort of national governing body that's going to
make sure that we're using forensics in ways
that are legitimate and ethical and reliable.
But the Department of Justice fought hard
against an independent, scientist-led body.
This report came out in 2009, it's many, many years
after that and there's no national governing forensic body,
it never happened, it never got off the ground.
Seven years later, the Obama Administration
picked up where the congressional study left off.
The President's Council of Advisors
on Science and Technology or PCAST dug deeper
into specific forensic science areas.
PCAST was made up of the nation's top scientific talent.
Brown University's Physic Professor Jim Gates
was a principle author.
Science is all about measurement.
The PCAST report said we are going to look out
that parts of forensic science that are based on measurement
or matching and unfortunately
not much improvement had occurred.
Professor Albright also contributed
to the report.
The PCAST report broadly condemned a particular category
of forensic practice known
as the feature comparison techniques.
The kind of forensic techniques used
to wrongfully convict Charles Fain.
It pointed out a number of serious failures
with the forensic sciences, just to put it bluntly
that many of these so-called forensic sciences
weren't really sciences.
As an outside scientist we simply ask
where is the scientific study upon which this is based?
Someone's gotta do the measurements,
someone's gotta quantify error bars
and then you can say it's science.
Error bars represents error rates.
How many times an analyst gets the wrong answer.
The PCAST report was clear.
We don't know about errors in footwear analysis
because there are no studies to support it's validity.
They took a very hard line on it.
They literally said it means nothing
until you test the expert, I wanna see how often
you get it right and how often you get it wrong.
But once again, the Department of Justice
refused to acknowledge the need for change.
And on the day of it's release,
Attorney General Loretta Lynch says,
"No, thank you PCAST, we appreciate your efforts
but we are not going to adopt your recommendations.
Advocates point to a pro-law enforcement,
anti-science culture driving the resistant.
A large part of the push back are
that it comes from prosecuting attorneys.
Forensic science is a tool that basically they can use
to get convictions.
And so to have any challenge to the quality of that science
is for them a threat to achieving convictions.
Of course the counter argument is if you're using
a faulty technique you might have teeth
but you're gonna lock up the wrong people
some fraction of the time.
(dramatic music)
Scientific studies reveal
that forensic science testimony has outsized influence
on juries.
Jay Koehler teaches at Northwestern's Pritzker School of Law
and studies behavioral decision theory.
Because this testimony is often technical in nature,
jurors tend to rely on the expert's credentials
and experience when deciding how much weight
to give to the testimony.
If the expert appears to be well-trained
and has sufficient experience,
jurors will defer to the expert's conclusions.
Sometimes you have experts who come in in lab coats
and it feels really scientific even when it's not.
It can have this affect of making other aspects
of a case that are questionable,
just sort of wash them away
because oh I have this forensic evidence
and it feels super reliable and super accurate.
And unfortunately science and the word scientist
has totemic power.
So when they hear the word science or scientist
they think that's it, that word is the truth.
And that's a fundamental problem
because jurors don't know about the criticism
and the scrutiny that these disciplines have received
for failing to really shore up the scientific underpinnings.
Many of us outside the field say
you're using the power of science
but you're not doing science and this is a deep moral
as well as practical problem.
(dramatic music)
In March of 2020, a North Carolina commission
dedicated in reviewing potential wrongful convictions
met to grapple with these moral and practical problems
in another landmark case.
Almost 20 years ago five boys were convicted of a murder
they claimed they did not commit.
Rayshawn Banner, Nathaniel Cauthen Christopher Bryant,
Jermal Tolliver and Durrel Brayboy were all between the ages
of 14 and 15 years old.
The Innocence Inquiry Commission is the first
of it's kind in the country.
Since 2007 it's reviewed over 3,000 cases
resulting in 15 exonerations.
Sir, do you solemnly.
In 2022 the commission met to examine
the case of the boys now men in their 30s.
Christopher, Jermal and Dorrell were released in 2017
for time served but Rayshawn and Nathaniel
remain in prison.
They have all maintained their innocence since 2002.
Good morning Mr. Banner. Good morning.
My name's Lindsey Guise Smith,
I'm the executive director
of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission.
I've got several questions for you today.
Did you rob Nathaniel Jones? No ma'am.
Did you kill Nathaniel Jones?
No ma'am.
Were you involved in any way in the robbery
and death of Mr. Jones? No, ma'am.
Were you present when Mr. Jones was robbed, tied up
and killed? No ma'am.
Are you aware of who committed the crime?
No ma'am.
As part of their investigation,
the Innocence Commission reviewed thousands of pages
of police reports and trial documents
to determine what really happened on November 15th, 2002
when 61-year-old Nathaniel Jones was murdered.
(dramatic music)
7:45 p.m. in Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Mr. Jones is found unconscious laying facedown
in his carport bloody and gagged.
His hands bound behind his back.
A neighbor makes a frantic 911 call.
911 what's your emergency?
I need an ambulance quickly
to 905 Robby Street. (sirens blaring)
(radio chattering) (dramatic music)
EMTs attempt to revive Jones
but he is already gone.
(dramatic music)
The cause of death cardiac arrhythmia
from the stress of the assault.
(dramatic music)
Detectives process the gruesome scene.
Blood is found on the concrete floor
and smeared across the driver's side door of Mr. Jones' car
indicating a struggle.
Two partial shoe prints are found on the hood of the car.
Investigators theorize the perpetrators stood on the car
to unscrew the carport light bulb.
The shoe prints are photographed and two cardboard boxes
are taped to the hood to protect them
for further processing.
(dramatic music)
Police canvass the neighborhood.
An eyewitness reports seeing a Hispanic man
running away from the carport around the time of the crime.
(dramatic music)
According to police reports, four days later
local mom, Arlene Tolliver calls a detective she knows
with a tip, her son might know who was responsible.
15-year-old Jermal Tolliver is picked up for questioning.
Jermal, I need you to tell me a little bit
about what happened Friday the 15th.
I didn't do it.
Initially Jermal denies any knowledge of
or involvement in the murder.
But after hours of interrogation.
Did you see somebody assault this man
who lives in this house? Yes.
He implicates his friends, Christopher,
Dorrell, Rayshawn and Nathaniel.
Rayshawn and Nathaniel's mother, Teresa Ingram
recalls that pivotal day.
Rayshawn called me at work.
He said that, "Momma the police is wanting
to take us downtown and question us about Mr. Jones."
Rayshawn refused to comply
but his older brother Nathaniel, nicknamed Stinky
went willingly.
He said, "Stinky went with them,
'cause he said he didn't have nothing to hide,
so he went with them."
He didn't think nothing of it, the kid didn't do anything.
He said he didn't do anything so, I felt like
he would be all right.
But after hours passed, Teresa knew something
was seriously wrong.
Okay, well, I'm looking at my watch,
okay, so this has been since you know, 3:30, 4:30,
5:30, 6:30, 7:30, okay now
we're till four and a half hours.
Okay, so now I go down to the station there
on Cherry Street.
A detective investigating the murder
came out to speak to Teresa.
And he asked me did I know Nathaniel Jones,
then did I know he had been murdered
and I said, "I seen it on the news."
And he said, "Yeah, your sons are dead smack
in the middle of it."
Those were the words he used,
"dead smack in the middle of it."
But her son Nathaniel maintained his innocence.
He requested and was denied a lie detector test.
I went into the interrogation room and spoke
with Nathaniel trying to get him,
you know, "Son if you know anything about this,
please tell these people, please let them know,
if you know anybody that had anything to do with it,
let them know, just tell the truth."
And my son got up in his seat, he threw the seat down,
and he said, "I ain't killed no f'ing body."
He still kept saying the same thing.
"I ain't killed nobody."
So they escorted me back out the room
and then about 10 minutes after that,
Detective Byron, he came in and he said,
"I need for you to go tell your son,
I love you and goodbye."
And that's what I did.
Distraught, Teresa returned home.
At around 10:30 p.m., two detectives came for Rayshawn.
(dramatic music)
And Rayshawn said, "What do you mean,
I haven't done anything, we ain't have nothing to do
with that.
Why are you all still bothering us?"
And Rayshawn just got really upset
and I was trying to tell Rayshawn, Rayshawn, please
just calm down, just go ahead, just go ahead.
And he's all, "So, you all gonna put, you know, handcuffs
on me in front of my mother"
and yeah he was really hysterical.
We read you a juvenile rights waiver.
You signed this rights waiver acknowledging
that you understood your rights
and agreed to talk to us, is that correct?
Yes. Okay.
Questioned for hours, all five boys
claim interrogators threatened them with the death penalty
and lethal injection when they denied involvement.
They was like, "You know you get the death penalty
for this so just tell us what you wanna know so you can go."
And how old were you at the time.
14. You were 14 years old.
Yes, sir.
The US Supreme Court prohibits the execution
of 14 year olds but lying to a suspect of any age
is legal in most states
and an accepted interrogation tactic.
As the hours passed all five boys claimed they were told
they go home if they just confessed to the crime.
He still wanna tell you that you
would go home? Yes, ma'am.
They actually told you
that you would go home?
Yes, ma'am.
Nathaniel, so you're 15 years old right?
Yeah.
Ray Shawn is spelled R-A-Y S-H-A-W.
Same statement with Christopher Levon Bryant.
Dorrell Brayboy. Hmm-mm.
When I first came in and talked with you,
we didn't get very far with our conversation, did we?
No.
And then we started talking about
what the truth was, correct?
Is that right? Yes.
And then you said that everybody
was beating him, I believe that was the words out
of your mouth, correct? Yeah.
Who all are you talking about
when you said everybody?
Me, Bubba, Dorrell, Rayshawn and that's it.
By midnight, all gave what they now claim
were false confessions.
So you beat him down and stole his money?
I did.
Did you hit him four or five times
in the stomach? Yeah.
Okay, so you beat him?
Yeah. Huh?
Yeah.
Rayshawn dropped him with a punch
to the face, correct? Guess so.
Dorrell hit him in the head with a pole?
Guess so.
No, I'm not asking for you to guess,
I'm asking what your answer is.
Yes.
That's what you told me earlier, correct?
Is that the truth? Yes.
By 3 a.m. on November 20th, 2002,
all five boys were charged with first degree murder.
Although they admitted guilt
each told a different contradictory story
inconsistent with the known facts.
(dramatic music)
With confessions in hand, the hunt
for corroborating evidence began.
The law says you can't just have a confession,
you have to have some type of corroborating evidence.
Investigators had footprints,
so they went looking for a matching shoe.
That same particular night, they took a bunch of shoes.
Rayshawn told detectives he was wearing
Nike Air Force Ones the night of the murder.
Police seized four pair of Nike shoes from his home.
(dramatic music)
That same month the case received national attention
when the victim's grandson and rising basketball star,
Chris Paul scored 61 points in a high school game.
One point for each year of his grandfather's life cut short.
The state's star witness. Attorney and Fox News
chief legal correspondent, Seema Iyer
reported extensively on the story.
Chris Paul, famous basketball player, hometown hero,
absolutely beloved in the state of North Carolina
and of course Winston-Salem, he's from Winston-Salem.
The day before his grandfather's murder,
Chris Paul had signed with basketball powerhouse
Wake Forest University.
He would eventually be drafted to the NBA.
The five boys were now in the spotlight.
And in August of 2004, the brothers now 16 and 17 years old
were tried as adults.
Nathaniel's attorney tried to suppress what all five boys
claimed were coerced confessions
but the motion was denied.
Prosecutors offered a second degree murder plea
with 15 years in prison.
The brothers refused.
I said Stinky, "Are you sure?"
He said, "Yes, ma'am."
I said, "Okay."
Went in to talk to Rayshawn, Rayshawn saying,
"No mama, he say I ain't taking a plea bargain."
And he said, "He will sit in this prison and he will rot
before he say he done something that he didn't do."
At trial the jury heard that none
of the 12 latent fingerprints found at the scene
matched any of the five boys.
Blood and fibers from the scene didn't match them either,
only the two partial footwear impressions
from the hood of the car tied any of the boys
to the scene of the crime.
Forensic print analyst, Joyce Peska took the stand.
I've testified approximately 85 times
in fingerprints and approximately 39 in footwear.
Peska outlined her process in exacting detail.
I received four different pair
of Nike athletic shoes.
I also received 58 different photographic frames
and I received 39 photographs.
She then created a known standard
from the suspect's shoe to compare
with the questioned impression.
I determined that one of the impressions
was consistent in design, size and wear
with the right shoe.
And one of the impressions was consistent in design,
size and wear with the left shoe.
The shoes presented as evidence
belonged to Rayshawn,
a pair of size nine Nike Air Force Ones.
But during cross examination, Peska conceded
that both the model and size of the shoes
were very common.
I think at the time, those sneakers were worn
by a lot of kids.
(upbeat hip hop music)
A lot might be an understatement.
Nike Air Force Ones are the number one seller
in the history of athletic footwear.
Just days before the murder, rap star Nelly
released the hit single, "Air Force Ones,"
a tribute to the shoe's popularity.
(upbeat hip hop music) The song eventually hit number three
on Billboard's top 100.
The year of the trial, an estimated 10 million pairs
were sold.
They got so popular and I thought they were cute
and I even wanted some.
They were just a popular shoe and they had them,
even they friends had them, they shared shoes, you know?
They swapped shoes and clothes all the time.
Given the limited detail of the impressions
and popularity of the shoe,
Agent Peska admitted under oath
that another pair of Nike Air Force Ones
could have produced the impression.
(dramatic music)
We don't know how many pairs of a specific shoe
are currently walking around.
There might be 50 of the same shoe for all we know.
The jury wasn't warned that scientists
consider partial footprints
to be an unreliable identification method.
You get a lot of testimony that says something like,
"Well, I've looked at the shoe print
and I've looked at the shoe
and there are some areas here of similarity."
What does that mean? So a jury's kind of left to say,
oh, so there's some areas of similarity
but they don't think, well, wait a minute,
that means, that there's areas of dissimilarity.
So is there something that possible could have eliminated
this print?
And you're just kind of left with the jury hearing
a bunch of words without having any context
for what that means.
In closing arguments the prosecution
went even further repeatedly arguing Rayshawn's shoe
was a match to the imprint,
even though their own expert conceded it was not.
But the damage was done.
The jury came back in a little of no time,
good gracious, I would say it probably
wasn't even 45 minutes before they came back.
The verdict guilty of first degree murder.
(dramatic music)
Rayshawn Banner and Nathaniel Cauthen
were sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.
Rayshawn just dropped his head,
Nathaniel just started crying.
He stood up and he addressed the Paul's family.
You know, he don't know what happened to this man.
He's sorry for what has happened to your father.
Then he addressed the jury and said,
"You all got all my clothes, my shoes,
you all got everything down here
and you all don't have anything on it."
And that's all he said, that's what he said.
And I held back the tears.
(slow music)
Rayshawn and Nathaniel have been in prison
for 18 years.
Nathaniel calls a lot.
That boy so handsome.
Rayshawn, he calls probably about every two to three weeks,
he's not as dependent as Nathaniel is.
Always thought Rayshawn was the momma's boy
but I think Nathaniel is.
The family bond remains strong.
We used to hang out all the time.
I was always getting off work and going down
to the recreation centers.
They would be just in their gym playing basketball,
running around.
This was every single day, every single day,
I hung out with my boys.
Teresa has never stopped supporting
and advocating for her boys.
I done a lot with them, you know,
to try to keep them strong, keep them engaged.
I ain't gonna say they accepted the life they got dealt with
but one certainly can deal with it
a lot better than the other.
Rayshawn dealt with it better than Nathaniel did.
In 2014, Nathaniel wrote a suicide note
to his mother and brother maintaining his innocence
before trying to end his life.
According to prison records, it was his third attempt.
But in 2020, the family was offered a ray of hope
when the Innocence Inquiry Commission
agreed to hear their case.
It was 2020, going right out of 2019 to 2020
is when I learned they were getting ready to get some help.
But I never thought it would lead to where we are now.
If the commission exonerates Rayshawn
and Nathaniel, they will be freed.
Over the years, the public has learned more
about false confessions and Rayshawn, Nathaniel
and their co-defendants are now known
as the Winston-Salem five.
They're named that after the famous case
known as the Central Park five.
Five other boys, also wrongfully convicted
who spent 11 years in prison because of coerced confessions.
The similarities are striking.
As time goes by more and more people
believe this could be a wrongful conviction.
It is difficult to comprehend
why someone would admit to something they simply did not do
even Rayshawn and Nathaniel's mom initially struggled
to understand.
Though the boys have always said that you know,
"Momma, they didn't do this, they made us say that,"
and I questioned that, you know,
why would you confess to something you didn't do?
That's when I learned they were coerced into saying
what they said.
Studies show that juveniles
are especially vulnerable to what
are called maximization techniques
designed to illicit confessions.
This is after the police had already threatened me
several times.
What you want me to do I'm 15 years old,
I can't read or write, I know no better.
Only thing I know is my momma's at home,
I don't know where I'm at, what you want me to say?
Any kid would do that,
any kid would actually sit right here and lie
to make the situation better so they can go home.
Seema Iyer has reported on the issues
of false confessions.
Number one the male brain, sorry to disappoint
you fellows is not fully formed until the age of 25.
That's the first hurdle when you're talking about
young men who falsely confess.
You're also having to factor in the law which states
law enforcement can trick people.
Two detectives who interrogated the boys
threatened them with execution even though they knew
it was a lie.
If you're 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, how do you know any better?
You don't the justice system,
so you think I have to just say this
and then I get to go home.
But Rayshawn and Nathaniel never got home.
The interrogation techniques also worked
on a friend of the boys who confessed to driving them
to the scene of the crime.
So it would Bubba, Rayshawn, Stinky
and Dorrell in your car?
Yes sir.
And you drove? Yes sir.
But 18 years later Jessicah Black
came forward to admit she lied because she was afraid
she would be sent to prison.
Everything I said on the stand, I can tell you, them,
anybody, all that shit's not true.
But I said what I said because I scared to death
I was getting charged and going to jail.
I was scared I was going to jail.
And nothing that I said was right
and they weren't satisfied until like I gave them the answer
that they wanted.
(dramatic music)
Without the confessions
and the footwear evidence,
there wouldn't have been a case against the boys.
Both were now being called into question.
In the case of State versus Nathaniel Cauthen
Melissa Ethery, yes.
On March 13, 2020,
five of the eight commission members concluded
that there was sufficient evidence of factual innocence
to merit judicial review.
Johnson Pritt, yes. (dramatic music)
And in April, 2022,
Rayshawn and Nathaniel's case went
before a three judge panel who had the power
to exonerate them.
But the burden of proof was set extremely high
clear and convincing evidence of innocence.
Footwear evidence again took center stage
with testimony clarifying that Rayshawn's Air Force Ones
were very common and to claim a match was very misleading.
But after 20 years, Teresa barely dared to hope.
In the back of my mind, something still could go wrong.
So I don't put all the eggs in one basket and say,
oh yeah, they're coming home
because at the end of the day,
those three judges still gotta have an unanimous vote,
yeah.
And with the victim's grandson, Chris Paul
an NBA star, media frenzy added to the scrutiny.
(dramatic music)
On April 28, 2022 the three judge panel
voted to deny their claim
on the grounds that revealing flaws in the case
against them isn't the same thing
as proving their innocence.
So the fight goes on.
(slow music)
A reward is on offer for information leading
to the real killer.
Nathaniel and Rayshawn's attorney is seeking a retrial
and Teresa can only stay strong for her boys.
They've been away now for 20 years, for 20 years,
20 long years.
They could have been home by now if they'd agree
to the plea deal but they didn't do it
and they wasn't gonna say they did it.
So we're gonna have to just remain strong together,
how hard it's gonna be and it has been some days
and years but you still stand strong.
17, 18, 20 years later, still fighting for innocence, yeah.
(dramatic music)