Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> WELCOME BACK TO "THE LEAD."
TIME NOW FOR THE BURIED LEAD,
THAT'S WHAT WE CALL STORIES THAT
WE DON'T THINK HAVE GOTTEN
ENOUGH ATTENTION.
THIS STORY, THERE WAS ACTUALLY
SOMETHING LITERALLY BURIED,
EVIDENCE THAT PROVED A MAN WAS
LOCKED AWAY FOR A QUARTER
CENTURY FOR A CRIME HE DID NOT
COMMIT.
MICHAEL MORTON WAS CONVICTED IN
1987 OF KILLING HIS WIFE
CHRISTINE EVEN THOUGH HE
REPEATEDLY DENIED IT.
THE DOCUMENTARY "AN UNREAL
DREAM" AIRING TONIGHT ON CNN,
MORTON RECOUNTS HIS CONFIDENCE
THAT HE WOULD BE FOUND NOT
GUILTY.
>> I DIDN'T THINK I WAS GOING TO
GET CONVICTED.
IT WAS GOING TO BE A LONGISH
TRIAL, BUT THEN IT WOULD BE
REVEALED THAT THERE CAN BE NO
THERE, THERE.
THERE'S NOTHING TO CONVICT.
THERE'S NOTHING HARD.
THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS LOOK,
THIS GUY DID IT.
THERE'S NOTHING BEYOND A
REASONABLE DOUBT.
AND I COULDN'T IMAGINE WHAT
COULD POSSIBLY BE MANUFACTURED
TO MAKE 12 PEOPLE THINK THAT I
HAD KILLED MY WIFE.
>> HE WAS WRONG.
HE WAS SENTENCED TO LIFE AND
SPENT 25 YEARS IN PRISON BEFORE
HIS ATTORNEYS AND A GROUP CALLED
THE INNOCENCE PROJECT FOUND
HOLES IN HIS CONVICTION.
THEY DISCOVERED THAT A
BLOOD-STAINED BANDANNA POLICE
FOUND NEAR THE CRIME SCENE WAS
NEVER DNA TESTED.
IT PROVED THAT A CONVICTED FELON
NAMED MARK NORWOOD WAS THE REAL
KILLER.
MICHAEL MORTON WAS FREED IN
2011.
NORWOOD WAS CONVICTED OF
CHRISTINE'S *** EARLIER THIS
YEAR AND POLICE BELIEVE HE
KILLED ANOTHER WOMAN, DEBORAH
BAKER, IN 1988.
ASHLEIGH BANFIELD SPOKE WITH
MORTON AND ASKED HOW HE FELT
ABOUT BEING WRONGLY CONVICTED.
>> A LOT OF ANGER INSIDE.
I FELT LIKE I WAS JUSTIFIED AT
THE TIME.
BUT TODAY AND NOW, I UNDERSTAND
THAT THAT SORT OF ANGER AND
REVENGE AND HATE ISN'T GOING TO
HELP YOU ANY.
BUT THE ONE THING THAT WILL WORK
THAT PEOPLE SHOULD AND OFTEN DO
LATCH ON TO IS TRANSPARENCY AND
ACCOUNTABILITY.
>> WHILE THIS CASE HAS A
SOMEWHAT HAPPY ENDING WITH
MORTON TRYING TO BUILD A
RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS NOW ADULT
SON, WE HAVE TO ASK HOW MANY
INNOCENT MEN AND WOMEN SIT IN
PRISON RIGHT NOW WHEN DNA
EVIDENCE COULD EXONERATE THEM.
I WANT TO BRING IN CHRIS
ASPLUNDH, FORMER PROSECUTOR, NOW
A DIRECTOR WITH THE ALLIANCE FOR
RAPID DNA TESTING.
THANKS FOR BEING HERE.
I KNOW YOU FOLLOWED THIS CASE
CLOSELY.
WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE FACT
THERE WAS EVIDENCE, THIS
BANDANNA WITH BLOOD AND HAIR
THAT WAS NEVER TESTED FOR DNA?
>> WELL, IT'S CERTAINLY A
TRAGEDY.
IT'S A TRAGEDY IN A NUMBER OF
WAYS.
IT'S A TRAGEDY NOT ONLY FOR WHAT
HAPPENED TO MICHAEL'S LIFE, BUT
WHAT HAPPENED TO HIS SON'S AND
HIS RELATIONSHIP.
IT WAS ALSO A TRAGEDY FOR WHAT
HAPPENED TO DEBORAH BAKER AND
THE FACT THAT SHE WAS KILLED
WHEN, IF WE HAD IDENTIFIED THE
RIGHT PERPETRATOR EARLY ON
RATHER THAN HAVE THIS TUNNEL
VISION FOR MICHAEL MORTON, WE
VERY WELL MAY HAVE PREVENTED HER
*** ALSO.
>> WE SHOULD NOTE THAT THE
PROSECUTOR IN THIS CASE FROM
1987 IS NAMED KEN ANDERSON.
HE BRIEFLY SERVED TIME IN JAIL
LAST MONTH FOR CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
OF COURT INVOLVING THIS CASE.
WE HAVE A STATEMENT FROM HIS
ATTORNEY, ERIC NICHOLS.
MR. ANDERSON HAS NOT BEEN AND
NEVER WILL BE PROSECUTED FOR ANY
ALLEGED CRIME IN CONNECTION WITH
THE MICHAEL MORTON TRIAL OR ANY
SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING RELATING
TO THE MORTON TRIAL.
IN LIGHT OF THE DNA RESULTS
OBTAINED IN 2011, MR. ANDERSON
HAS CONSISTENTLY EXPRESSED AND
CONTINUES TO EXPRESS TO MR.
MORTON AND HIS FAMILY HIS REGRET
FOR MR. MORTON'S PROSECUTION AND
INCORRECT INCARCERATION,
UNQUOTE.
HOW COMMON IS THIS, WHERE A
PROSECUTOR IS INVOLVED IN THE
WITHHOLDING OF EVIDENCE FOR
WHATEVER REASON?
>> YOU KNOW, IT'S A SYSTEM RUN
BY HUMAN BEINGS, AND SO THERE
ARE GOING TO BE TIMES WHEN
HUMANS FAIL.
WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY TIMES
WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS ARE THE
RESULT OF PROSECUTOR MISCONDUCT.
IT'S REALLY PROBABLY NOT THAT
MANY.
WE CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE MANY
INSTANCES WHERE PROSECUTORS HAVE
BEEN SUBSEQUENTLY PURSUED FOR
THEIR MISDEEDS ORIGINALLY.
BUT ACTUALLY, THAT'S NOT THE
BIGGER PROBLEM.
THE BIGGER NUMBER OF CASES THAT
WE NEED TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT
ARE ALL THOSE CASES WHEREIN
PROSECUTORS DO THE RIGHT THING
AND THEY THINK THEY'VE GOT IT
RIGHT, WHERE WITNESSES ALL THINK
THEY'VE GOT THE RIGHT PERSON,
WHERE THE OTHER FORENSIC
EVIDENCE SEEMS TO POINT TO THAT
PERSON AND WE STILL GET IT
WRONG.
THAT'S REALLY THE LARGER NUMBER
BY FAR, ARE THE CASES IN WHICH
THE SYSTEM APPEARS TO WORK WELL
AND THEN JUST DOESN'T, BECAUSE
WE DON'T LOOK AT THE KIND OF
EVIDENCE THAT WE CAN LOOK AT
NOW.
>> GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT DNA
TESTING WAS LIKE IN 1987 WHEN
MORTON WAS CONVICTED, COMPARED
TO WHERE WE ARE NOW.
>> WELL, IT WAS -- IT WAS VERY,
VERY, VERY RUDIMENTARY AT THAT
STAGE.
VERY FEW PLACES WERE ACTUALLY
DOING DNA TESTING AT ALL.
ADMISSIBILITY WARS WERE STILL
BEING FOUGHT THROUGHOUT THE
COUNTRY TO TRY TO GET IT LEGAL
IN THE COURTS.
WE ARE NOW LIGHT YEARS AHEAD OF
THAT.
ORIGINALLY, WHAT WE WENT THROUGH
WITH DNA WAS TO TRY TO MAKE IT
RELIABLE AND VERY
DISCRIMINATORY, AND THE
TECHNOLOGY WAS DESIGNED TO TRY
TO DO MORE WITH LESS.
IN OTHER WORDS, HOW COULD WE GET
A GOOD PROFILE FROM SMALLER AND
SMALLER PIECES OF EVIDENCE.
NOW THAT WE CAN GET DNA PROFILES
FROM EVIDENCE WE CAN'T EVEN SEE,
NOW THE ISSUE IS HOW DO WE DO IT
MORE QUICKLY.
NOW IT'S RELIABILITY AND SPEED,