July 6, 2023 • 47 mins
On September 3, 1994, Rhoda Nathan was murdered in Room 237 of the Embassy Suites Hotel in Blue Ash, OH. Police focused on hotel employee Elwood Jones as a suspect after they saw an infected cut on his hand. There were no eyewitnesses nor was there DNA evidence linking Elwood to the crime, so the case against him relied heavily on hypothetical claims. The prosecution also failed to provide the defense with exculpatory evidence that would have affirmed Elwood’s innocence. Elwood was ultimately convicted of the murder and sentenced to death. Jason speaks to Elwood Jones and David Hine and Jay Clark, Elwood's attorneys.
To learn more and get involved, visit:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/aqvc9-help-elwood-jones-recover-from-30-lost-years
Send an email to Hamilton County’s Prosecutor Melissa Powers and her chief assistant prosecutor Ron Springman, demanding that they do what is just by dropping the charges against Elwood. Make sure to cc the two men responsible for this injustice, Mark Piepmeier and Seth Tieger.
melissa.powers@hcpros.org
ron.springman@hcpros.org
mark.piepmeier@hcpros.org
seth.tieger@hcpros.org 513-946-3000
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/223-jason-flom-with-joe-d-ambrosio/
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava for Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co. No1.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
On Labor Day weekend nineteen ninety four, Rooda Nathan flew
into Cincinnati for a bar mitzvah. She shared a room
at the Embassy Suites in the nearby suburb of Blue
Ash with two friends. On the morning of Saturday, September third,
her friends went down to the complimentary breakfast, leaving Rhoda
behind to shower. They returned less than an hour later
(00:25):
to a bloody scene after life saving measures had failed,
and autopsy revealed blood force trauma to Roda Nathan's head
and torso, as well as that two teeth were missing.
Also missing five hundred dollars had some jewelry, allegedly including
a pendant that Rhoda always wore. There was no sign
of forced entry, so the police narrowed their search to
(00:46):
hotel employees, eventually discovering one staffer named Elwood Jones, who
had injured his hand that day. Further investigation revealed his
access to a master key, as well as various objects
that could have been responsible for Rodin Nathan's injuries, including
a walkie talkie and a door chain found in his car.
(01:06):
During the following week, el was injured hand became infected.
His treating physician noted a bacteria in the wound that
is commonly found in human mouths. The state argued that
Elwood Jones infected himself in knocking out Rooda Nathan's teeth,
which sounded scientific enough to the jury. But this is
raeful conviction. Welcome back to Rafel conviction, where we're covering
(01:39):
yet another story of an innocent man who had been
sentenced to death in Ohio. This time it's out of
Hamilton County, which encompasses Cincinnati, and when it comes to
raefel convictions in Ohio, Hamilton is second only to Cuyahoga County.
And this time it's believed that the prosecutors at trial,
Mark Pete Meyer and Seth Tiger, names you're going to
(01:59):
become fromiliar with. Well, it appears that they knew that
Elwood Jones was innocent but sent him to death. Throw anyway, Elwood,
I'm so sorry about where you've been and what you've
been through, but I'm happy and honored to have you
here today. Thank you, You're very welcome. And joining him
or two of his attorneys, David Hine, first of all, welcome,
(02:20):
thank you, glad to be here, and of course j Clark.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Thanks Jason. I'm glad to be here as well.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
So let's start right from the beginning. As I mentioned,
this is a Cincinnati story through and through, and you
grew up there, right.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
I was born in Susinaoha. I grew up downtown in
West the end. I went to Catholic school. My parents
now moved to the suburbs in the later years.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
And what was Cincinnati like back then?
Speaker 3 (02:48):
You tell him about in the sixties, and what none
spectacular about if you're talking about the criminal justice system
is just as worse as it is now.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, I believe you.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
There was a study that Hamilton County, by zip code,
has more people on death row than anywhere else in
the country.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I think that in Cuyahoga County they had the same problem,
as they have one or two or three prosecutors who
think the rules don't apply and they shouldn't apply. There's
probably a handful of three or four assistant prosecutors whose
names keep coming up constantly in cases that have been reversed.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
I mean, if you think about it, the rules kind
of don't apply to any prosecutor. Their immunity from accountability
leaves them free to chase the tough on crime image,
and with this anything goes mentality, we too often see
a trail of wrongful convictions in their way. And clearly
Cincinnati was, and sad to say, still is no exception.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
It's a very conservative city. And I understand that I
get that and not believe in law and aught that
I do, even though I was on the other side
of the track when I became adult. A couple of
times I was arrested.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
What was that for?
Speaker 3 (03:59):
It was? And burgery? That was it?
Speaker 1 (04:02):
All right? So your record wasn't exactly clean, but no
violent crimes. And I understand that by now you had
paid your debt to society and had a job working
at a hotel, steady job at the Embassy Suites in
the Cincinnati suburb called Blue Ash, and you were in
your early forties by this time, married, so things were stabilized.
(04:23):
And what was your wife's name?
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Ebon. I had a friend on the side, and I
think there was another piece of the paws in tree
that they used that I was having an affair. The
name was Earlene Metcalff non Meta. In ninety four, Erlein.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Was one of Elwood's coworkers at the Embassy suites in
Blue Ash, And obviously, I think most people would agree
that although theft and infidelity are usually not items on
the top of anyone's resume, they just don't merit a
death sentence. These things are also not indicative of someone
being the type of person to bludgeon another human being
to death. In this case, a sixty seven year old
(05:01):
hotel guest named Rhoda Nathan. She had come into Blue
Ash from New Jersey on Friday, September second, nineteen ninety four,
the day before she died.
Speaker 4 (05:11):
Nathan came in for her best friend's grandson's bar mitzvah.
So she was traveling with a friend, Elaine Shubb, and
her friend's boyfriend, Joe Kaplan, when the three of them
were staying in the hotel together, and part of the
state's narrative here is that Roda Nathan's friend and her
boyfriend were coming from Florida and had checked in earlier
(05:33):
in the day, just as two people Rode Nathan was
traveling in from New Jersey. She had a different flight,
she got there later, and the state's position was, whoever
was watching the room thought that there were only two
people in the room and there were actually three people
staying there, and then the next morning Rhoda's traveling companions
got up and went down for breakfast. Rota stayed behind
(05:55):
to shower. So the story goes, whoever was watching this
room room entered the room, expecting the room to be
empty so that they could take whatever they wanted, and
were surprised to find.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
Wrote to Nathan in the room.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
You know what I was reading about this? I thought,
if the goal was to steal, then why not just
pretend to be housekeeping and leave, you know, without murdering someone.
I mean, at first glance, there's already a hole in
the store you could drive a truck through. But okay,
so I would hear from Elwood. I would tell me
about that morning.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
So when I came in that morning at four point
thirty and brought Earleen to work, we clocked in I
think it was about quarter to five. I usually come
in early in the morning to help in the camp breakfast,
and then I would go to the banquet department and
finish my day out.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
On that particular day, one of Elwood's coworkers had called
out sex, so he had to pull double duty, floating
between complimentary breakfast and the banquet departments. So after setting
up camp breakfast, he went up to the banquet halls,
which were not in the best.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
They was trashed, so I had to clean them out
and come downstairs. I think it was around six, and
going to the dumpster, I tripped going up the steps
to the dumpsters the metal stairs. Going up there, I
smashed my hand. Come on back into the kitchen, clean
my hand, put a band aid on it, and went
(07:23):
on back to work. I think it was around eight
or something. After that the scream was upstairs. I was
in compbrepast. Everybody started going upstairs to see what.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Happened, and the scream, you know, presumably came from Elaine Shubb,
who first came upon this literal here scene rode to.
Nathan was naked, covered in blood, and the area around
her was, you know, a bloody mess. So whoever attacked
her would logically and certainly have been covered in blood.
Speaker 4 (07:59):
Within the minute of this vicious attack, Elwood was standing
in the restaurant, completely composed in the clothes that he
was in, not disheveled in any way, not covered in blood.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Whoever did this had to have been covered in blood themselves.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
Right, Jay and At this point, no one knew what happened.
They were just trying to save Rhoda, who had blood
pouring from her mouth.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
I think the initial thought was that she had had
a medical emergency, probably a heart attack or something along
that line. The guest a Hotel who was also a nurse,
they were trying to render her first aid.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
She was still breathing and she still had a pulse,
but she was struggling like she was I think, effectively
choking on the blood. So one of the issues here
is that they kept taking towels and trying to mop
the blood out of her throat and out of her
mouth to kind of clear the airway. All of those
towels used to help clean up the room that would
have had DNA on it were thrown out when.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Blue Ash Fire department arrived. I think they tried to
intubate her, and that gets to another issue about teeth
maybe being dislodged or broken out.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Later on, the States speculated that Rode Nathan's broken teeth
were responsible for the injury and the infection on ELA's hand.
But back to the immediate aftermath. At this point, the
room was not yet being treated as a crime scene.
Evidence was being contaminated or destroyed, and new injuries were
potentially being created by first responders and medical personnel that
(09:24):
added to the overall picture. At the autopsy, she was
pronounced dead Epitheesda North Hospital and then was taken to
the Hamilton County Corner's office.
Speaker 4 (09:33):
What they reported in the autopsy was that there was
Bluntfort's trauma, and I think they said that there were
blows to the torso, the face, and the jaw.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
She also tested positive for hepatitis B right.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
She was actively infected with it.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
Although we cannot be one hundred percent sure. This suggests
that she was infected with hepatitis B prior to the attack,
and that became pretty important later on. However, as soon
as her death was rolled a homicide, two thirty seven
was then considered a crime scene, where they discovered that
about five hundred dollars was missing, along with some jewelry,
allegedly including a pendant necklace that Rhoda's traveling companion, Elaine Shubb,
(10:13):
said that Roda had always worn. I know, you guys
had said that the bloody towels had been tossed, right,
So was there any other probative physical evidence at all.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
So there were fingernails, scrapeigs, some hairs, things of that nature.
There was blood all over the room, so they scraped
it from all over the place, the television, the bed,
the table, the carpets, the walls, the doors, et cetera.
And there should have been direct evidence of whoever was
involved in this crime, because you were going in there
immediately after the killers.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
DNA should have at least been under her fingernails. None
of it was a match for Elwood. But before any
of that was even tested, they started talking to staff
and hotel guests, and they were leaning towards the staffer
since there was no sign of forced entry. Oh you
know how sometimes they focused on the guy just because
they have a prior record. You think that's why they
(11:04):
focused on you.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
I really can't say, because it was at least thirty
seven of the employees with criminal records, and some of
them worse than mine. From the general managerone down.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
Wow, So there was thirty seven all right, Well, listen,
you know, more power to the hotel for giving guys
a second chance and women too. Right, So when did
you go in for your interview?
Speaker 3 (11:27):
I think around eleven. I went up to be interviewed.
It was Sogeant Lily John Latt, and I'm pretty sure
it was Stokes in there there at that time, and
they asked me what happened. I wrote my statement it
so you were free to go. But eventually they came
back to you, seized and search your car, found or
(11:48):
allegedly found items in your toolbox that they thought were incriminating.
But that didn't happen that Saturday or even the next day. Well,
on the Sunday, I went to Lublin and was at
Earlene's house and I had a guy named Jimmy plus
my radiate out seem the last person used.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
My tool box, right, And what Jimmy saw or didn't
see became very important later on in your case. And
we'll get to that in a minute. So, Dave, what
made them focus on Elwood.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
What ultimately got the police and the state to start
looking at Elwood, was that he had, as he mentioned earlier,
cut his hand that day on the dumpster and then
later when he kind of jammed it in the door,
and a couple days later went to the hospital because
it had gotten quite infected.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Since the victim had been beaten to death, one could
expect that the assailant's hand might have been injured, and
Elwood's infection and hospitalization drew unwanted attention to his coincidental
hand injury, so police spoke to his treating physician, a
doctor McDonough, and although this was a Strep A infection,
there was another bacteria present in the wound called icinella,
which is commonly found in human mouths. This spawned a
(12:57):
theory that the infection came from wrote in Nathan's teeth. However,
according to Elwood, he had licked his own wound soon
after his work related injury had occurred. Elwood saw testing
for akinella to prove his claim, but was told that
his heavy course of antibiotics would have already cleared up
any icinella in his own mouth. Further police interviews with
(13:18):
hotel staff only served to corroborate Elwood's alibi. However, only
Arlene Metcalf could give a solid time and place for Elwood.
At around seven point thirty, the belief time of the murder,
the pair had gone on break together. It appears the
police found this alibi too convenient and brought him in
again for questioning on September twelfth.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
When They questioned me on the twelve. They didn't like
my attitude when God told him that you asked me
what idea that day? And I told you, And they say, what,
you had a master key? And I explained to them,
I say, every key in the hotel is a master key.
I say, guests don't know they mastered the keys.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
Wait, so every key was the same for every room.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
Yeah, but they just didn't tell no what nuts. I
thought it was crazy when I first found out about it.
Speaker 4 (14:15):
It's kind of funny to think about now thirty years later.
But they were all still metal plates for them to
cut new keys when a guest would leave with the
key or something like that.
Speaker 5 (14:24):
They just didn't bother. Everything matched.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Well, I'm certainly glad it's not the nineties anymore. I mean,
I can't get over that. So they already thought that
you were their guy, so this probably looked to them
like you were trying to deflect attention from yourself. Now.
They also brought in your wife, Yvonne, on the twelfth
as well.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Yeah, on the way to the police station, they told
her say, well, by the way, you know your husband
was having an affair. She said, well, I knew he
wasn't coming home on time, she say, but all men
are dogs in a sense, and that just shut that up.
She one told me exactly what she told police, and
(15:02):
the end of that.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Comes, that's a pretty understanding person that you were married to.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
But did weird talk about that later? We just get
through this. She stuck with me.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
So they were probably telling her that to get her
to turn on you. Right, it's not you don't need
to be Columbo to figure this out. But Yvonne didn't bite.
So they seized your car and initially just found a
door chain that they later tried to say was some
sort of a weapon. Right, And we'll get to that
in a bit. But then, if I'm understanding this correctly,
A day or so later, a Blue ash police officer
named Michael Bray claimed to have found miss Nathan's pendant
(15:35):
in your car. Am I getting this correct?
Speaker 4 (15:38):
Can I take this because this is a part that
this is something I am really like.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
This bugs me.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
I wanted, Dave, I want to talk about Yeah.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So, so the story with the pendant. So the police
went to pawnshops and ostensibly couldn't find this piece of
jewelry anywhere. Then they took his car they impounded on
the twelve. They then had it in their possess for
forty eight hours before they took it to the coroner's office,
and multiple people searched the car for hours and didn't
(16:07):
find anything. And then after that one officer decides, well,
I'm going to go back and search again, I guess,
or search the one spot that you would think they
would want to look for evidence, which would be the trunk,
the space where someone might store something. And if Officer
Bray is to be believed, they never looked in the
trunk before. I don't know. But when this guy is
(16:30):
all by himself with no one to corroborate it, he
says that he went into the trunk of the car,
opened the toolbox, and there it was, just sitting there. Now,
did he take a picture of it in the car?
Speaker 2 (16:41):
No.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
Did he take a picture of the trunk open with
the toolbox in it.
Speaker 5 (16:45):
No.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
He took a picture of the pendant in his hand
with the car in the background, and then told people,
look what I found in the car.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
This podcast is brought to you by Ohio Justice and
Policy Center, a nonprofit law firm that seeks justice for
people to directly impact it by Ohio's criminal legal system.
OJPC provides free legal services to currently and formally incarcerated people.
Through its Beyond Guilt Project, OJPC works to free over
punish people who have rehabilitated themselves. Ojpc's Second Chance Clinics
(17:28):
help individuals with criminal records remove barriers to employment and
house it. Ojpc's Human Rights and Prison Project represents people
who face denial of medical care. In its twenty five
year history, OJPC has worked at the policy level and
won numerous victories in Ohio, including ending juvenile life without
parole and exempting seriously mentally ill people from the death penalty.
(17:51):
To learn more about Ohio Justice and Policy Center and
how you can support its mission, visit OHIOJPC dot org. That'shi,
IOJPC dot org. Ohio Justice and Policy Center. We don't
write people off.
Speaker 4 (18:14):
Another officer flies up to New Jersey or New York
with the pendant to meet with Roda Nathan's family, and
all of this is withheld from Melwood at the original trial.
But the family looks at it and goes, that's not it.
And then they tell the police officers, look this pendant though,
it's a really unique piece of jewelry was made from
some family rings, some heirlooms. And then they talk to
(18:37):
another family member who we just refer to as Uncle Ira,
who was Rhoda's brother in law, and he goes, no,
that's not correct. I have those family rings. This was
just bought in a jewelry store of Brooklyn. So there's
evidence that potentially this isn't even the right pendant. There's
evidence that it definitely wasn't the unique piece of jewelry
that the state says that it was. And there are
(18:58):
very very serious ques questions about whether this thing was
ever actually found in the car at all. None of
that was shared, none of that was provided.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
So their big smoking gun turned out to be total
horseshit and they knew it. I mean, this has to
be why they didn't arrest you for over a year. Now.
There was one other item that we mentioned in your car,
the door chain. What's the story with that?
Speaker 3 (19:22):
It was a door chain inside of my tub box
and it's not no type of doorchain used in the hotel.
The hotail used a boar chain. And the first thing
I askeaid, What'd I do go out to my car
get a tool chain? I need something to whooped this
woman with. I say, doesn't it have some type of
blood or provensis or something on it? I said, come
(19:44):
on with the stop it.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
So this freaking door chain wasn't even the type that
would have been available in the room if somebody even
wanted to use that as a weapon, which in itself
is ridiculous. This was just some random ass door chain
in your car. The whole theory is fucking ridiculous.
Speaker 5 (20:00):
And that's not even the worst one.
Speaker 4 (20:01):
One of their theories is they say that whoever it
was beat this woman to death, not just with their
hands and the chain, but then a walkie talkie and
then hit them with multiple objects. In fact, the police
officers for months were trying to send images to the
FBI to get them to confirm, like, hey, this looks
like it could be Elwood shoe, right, And they would
(20:23):
come back and be like, no, no, this is not
consistent with.
Speaker 5 (20:26):
Elwood shoe at all.
Speaker 4 (20:27):
In fact, it looks like it could be X and
something that might implicate somebody else, And they'd be like,
let's try again, how about the walkie talkie And they
finally got them to say something to the effect of
the bruising is potentially consistent with something of that shape,
so like a square or a rectangle. But that's as
close as they would get. And with that, the state
(20:50):
then completely distorted it into aha, a bruise and an
item that's so significantly tied together that it's essentially a fingerprint,
which is just a lie.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
I mean, a walkie talkie. How many other hotel staffers
is probably haven't.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
I'm glad you mentioned that we have several departments. Everybody
have at walkie talkie. But that morning the police was
given information of two people leaving this Nathan's room, one
going left, one going right with a walkee Chlkie in
his hand, and to the day, I feel that's where
(21:27):
they got that theory of a walkie talkie. They never
went back to try to find out who these two
people was or where that walkie talkie is.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
To the day, this is just one of many more
compelling leads that were flatly ignored by Blue Ash PD
and the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office. And we'll reveal more
of those leads later when we talk about the discovery
that happened in post conviction. It's mind boggling. So instead
they focused on Elwood Jones, who had access to a
(21:58):
walkie talkie and a master key. But as we find out,
so did everyone else. He had a criminal record, so
did almost everyone else. And this theory was supported by
the presence of a bacteria in his injured hand commonly
founded you in mouse like canela, and then the pendant
which appears to have been planted, as well as not
(22:18):
even being the right freaking pendent. This is what they
went to a capitol trial with. And it appears that
even they believed so little in this theory that they
waited for over a year to arrest mister Elwood Jones.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
That day when I was arrested at the two Blue
ass offices, Stokes and Lily, they put me in the
car to take me the District one police station to
take me in the back, and at that time they
show me this picture and say this is what we
found in your car. And I'm looking and I told me,
(22:53):
I don't know where did penman come from? And you
found it in there, you put it in there. At
that time, Stokes get up and go out, said to
do and talk on the phone, and he said he
didn't bite. I don't know what he meant. By At
who he was talking to on the phone. He said
he didn't bite, and next I know they was taking
me on to the Justice and that they booked me in.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
He didn't bite. Wow, I mean, it seems like they
thought their lie would make you cave and confess, and
it might have worked on a man who was actually guilty,
but it still wasn't you. And even with Jimmy or
a mechanic corroborated that this pandem was not in the
damn toolbox. Along with so much Brady material that we're
going to get to in a bit. The prosecutors Mark
(23:39):
Pete Meyer and Seth Tieger still went ahead to trial,
seeking the death penalty, by the way, on this bullshit
evidence in November of ninety six in front of Judge
Ralph Winkler. And the case was purely circumstantial evidence.
Speaker 4 (23:53):
So they say, but that's okay, because circumstantial evidence is
even better than direct.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Evidence, which no, well it is obviously not a third
grader can tell you that. But anyway, they presented their
theory that Elwood allegedly waited for a lane shove and
Joe Coplan to leave room to thirty seven before entering
being discovered by Rhoda Nathan, punching her teeth out and
fatally beating her to death and finally stealing five hundred
(24:21):
dollars as well as jewelry, including this alleged signature pendant.
So what did they present to support this theory?
Speaker 4 (24:28):
They told the jerry that Ellwood was in the hotel
that day, that he was on the second floor, that
he had a master key, and that they purportedly found
this pendant in his car, and that he had an
infection in his hand. And the narrative that the state
presented was that it was an Icinella Corridon's infection, and
in fact that's not what it was.
Speaker 5 (24:49):
There happened to be Kinella in.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
The cut right, It was a strip a infection.
Speaker 4 (24:54):
And this doctor, doctor McDonough, who was a hand surgeon
with no expertise at all in microbiology or in infectious diseases,
opined that the only way that Ellwood could have gotten
this was by punching somebody in the mouth, which is
just objectively false.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
But that's where the broken teeth come into it. They
also tried to draw connections between miss Nathan's injuries and
objects that might have been available to Elwood, but really
they were available to any hotel employee, and there were
dozens and dozens of them.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
Their absolute junk forensics suggests that they were able to
match up one of the bruises with the bottom of
a walkie talkie and the scratches. The particular scratches on
the bottom of the walkie talkie can be found in
the bruises. It's completely fabricated. They took pictures of Miss
Nathan's body during the autopsy and effectively skewed the pictures
(25:50):
and admitted that they manipulated the pictures. They said in
order to match a scale, and they used items such
as the walkie talkie and made that the scale so
that when they were distorting the picture, they distorted it
to fit the size of the walkie talkie and what
they were actually told. After repeated attempts of submitting this
(26:11):
evidence to the FBI and the FBI coming back and saying, nose,
this is not consistent with this bruising pattern at all. Finally,
after manipulating the pictures, the FBI came back and said,
this is theoretically consistent with something sort of of that shape,
but they did not say, yes, we can match up
the scratches on the bottom of this wakie talkie so
(26:34):
that it's like a fingerprint.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
They inexplicably then put four experts on the stand who
would not corroborate their nonsensical weapons theory. But the state
still had this random pendent that the jury was led
to believe was the real McCoy, as well as doctor
McDonald's erroneous testimony about Ikinella Ell. Would please tell me
that your attorneys presented something anything to combat McDonough.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
I mean, did they The expert day had he couldn't
testify in person because he had some other arrangements, so
they did it by video.
Speaker 2 (27:09):
The way it played out is you don't have any
way then once the state's expert testifies to call your
doctor and say, hey, this is what he just said.
What's your answer to that?
Speaker 1 (27:19):
So this whole video testimony was never going to work,
let's face it. And this expert was paid for, by
the way, which makes it even a little more insane.
So did they do anything else?
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Julias Sanks was the leading attorney then, and he actually
said some about my criminal record when I've still was
lost to say I didn't even take the stand. Why
would you put that in there?
Speaker 1 (27:43):
Ineffective assistance of counsel doesn't even begin to cover this.
So the I Cainela evidence and dependent both total horseship
were never successfully impeached. And then your own attorney brought
up your criminal record, leaving it wide open for the prosecutors.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
The prosecutor say that I was the only employed with
a criminal record, and at that time I knew it
was some criminals in there. I didn't know as many
as I found out mater when I got the documents,
thirty seven people in there.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
I mean, that's not a misrepresentation that the jury. That's
just a straight out lie, right, I mean, how could
they How could the jury have ever gotten it right?
When they're being led down this crazy.
Speaker 3 (28:24):
Path doing post conviction A few Affi Davids was taken
to the jury. They said they noticed that I had
a criminal record, so what make them think that I
didn't commit this crime? And they came back in there
and they said guilty and recommended death. Judge Winkler's got
(28:44):
ready to send this to me, asked me did I
have anything to say? And I say I do? I say, yesterday, Johanna,
I say even you in this courtroom offered me a
man's laughter. I say, today you want to kill me?
I said, you're telling me this is a court My
(29:19):
daily routine was get up in the morning at four,
take my shower where I took a bath in myself
until they changed over and put showers on the range.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
And when you say take a bath in yourself, what
do you mean by that?
Speaker 3 (29:34):
I wash up in my saint.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Right, that's a bird bath, right.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
This bird bath. Well that's the best you could do.
I got them washed up, and I say my little
prayer and I repair my day. Six o'clock I would
come out.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Can you describe the cell small self?
Speaker 3 (29:50):
About eight by ten. You've got a bed in there,
sank a tilet you can afford. You can have a
TV typewriter in a radio, and that's about it.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
So you're pretty much living in a closet.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
In the cave is a filthy cave.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
And of the men that you serve time with in
there was there one who made a you know, an
impression on you that that helped you get through this
incredible ordeal.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
Well, yes, he's off death row now too. De Ambrosil
was best good friends.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
We spoke with Joe on the show Josie Ambrosio, what
an incredibly inspiring guy, and what a horrible, horrible story.
But he's come through it and he seems to be
doing as well as he possibly could be doing under
the circumstances. So, Joe, if you're listening, we're thinking about
you and talking about you too. So how did you
find the strength, because I'm sure there are other guys
(30:47):
who just go crazy in that situation and lose their
mind and end up killing themselves or doing you know.
Speaker 3 (30:52):
I've seen several guys on death ro commit suicide right
there in the same part with the three guys I
kept theirself and others. But I think what the main
thing w gave me scrapt I knew in my heart
I did nothing wrong. I lost the sister, I lost
my wife, I lost several friends, my mother passed, and
(31:16):
my father and all their uncles. And only thing that
gives me hope and has gave me is to clear
my name and I could look up and tell my
mother she can rest in peace. I understand Miss Nathan
is dead and I'm sorry. I feel sorry for her family,
but I'm also a victim in this case, and I
(31:39):
was determined that I spent day in and day out
trying to prove my anderson. I wrote letters every day.
I had one thing on my plate is to get
my life back.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
And now here you are.
Speaker 3 (31:54):
Yeah, and I'm still having got it fully back. That's
all I want is my life back, and give me
what little I had, and I'm happy and prosecuting them
don't want to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So tell us a bit about how you got here
and what's still left. Starting with your direct appeal they raised.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
I think it was about I want to say about
thirty two heirs. Some was in effected as system new council.
We were denied that all through state court. It wasn't
withholding evidence until we got in the federal courts Brady validation.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
And I think that was about two thousand and five
when your case was moved to the federal Public Defenders.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
They fell for a discovery in the federal courts and
granted me saying that the prosecutor's police department and any
agency who involved in this case had to turn over
their records. As I was going through it, I begin
to see things that I've never seen.
Speaker 2 (32:48):
Herd in the original discovery. I don't remember the exact
number of pages, like two hundred and eighty six pages
something like that. I think there's over forty two hundred
pages that they got in federal habeas and discovery. The
questionnaires that were sent to all the hotel guests, and
I think there were sixteen or seventeen of them that
had i'll say good investigative leads.
Speaker 3 (33:11):
The first thing I came across was the statement of
two hotel employees, Dmitz Williams and Norman Ryan told the
police they woulness two guys coming out of that room,
a black guy and the white guy, one going left,
one going right. The black guy when he came out,
he had a radio in his head. He was going left.
(33:32):
They gave him a full description of what they had
on both of them, and they toldly ignored. And there's
nothing else in the files where the police did any
follow up. Even the prosecuted.
Speaker 4 (33:45):
There were a ton of tidbits will say that they learned,
whether it was from interviewing staff about keys or things
like that, that they just never ever followed up on. Obviously,
the Anthony Lackey information, Anthony Lackett was off on the
day that this happened, but a shuttle driver who drove
employees to and from an employee parking lot remember taking
(34:06):
him back to his car that morning, and when he
was interviewed by police, he denied being there. It was
also reported that later that day he and his girlfriend
went out shopping and he was suddenly flushed with cash,
which is significant because reportedly stolen from the hotel rooms
five hundred dollars in cash that was never recovered.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Oh and mister Lackey also had an extensive criminal record,
a violent record ascent from assaultive behavior in there.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Yeah, and this is what I meant earlier about more
compelling leads. This discovery also revealed that the Blue Ash
Police Department had gone to New York and New Jersey
and spoken with the family about the pendant, which unraveled
that lie as well. There was so much Brady material
with health here that it's hard to even keep track,
But there are two more that are huge.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
The fact that wrote A. Nathan had hepatitis was not
disclosed pre trial.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Elwood knew that they had taken blood for test, but
they didn't tell him what they were testing it for,
and they didn't ever report back that he had a
negative hepatitis B result, where Rodin Nathan had a positive result.
And that's really important because, I mean, the reason EMTs
wear rubber gloves is because the risk of infection from
(35:18):
hepatitis B because it is so infectious.
Speaker 1 (35:21):
So while he could have given himself like canella from
licking his own injured hand, it's almost certain that Elwood
would have tested positive for hepatitis B had he been
the assailant. So the Blue Ash Police Department, Mark Pete Meyer,
Seth Tiger, they all had scientific evidence clearing Elwood all
the way back on September fifteenth, nineteen ninety four, when
it really counted. And here we are, almost thirty years later,
(35:43):
still trying to unravel this injustice. Oh wait, there's more.
I know you're probably going no.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
No more.
Speaker 1 (35:51):
I can't take it. I can't take it. But hang
in there. They had another lead before a trial from
a woman named Dolores Suggs, which didn't come to light,
probably because they kept it in the dark until decades later.
Speaker 3 (36:04):
Yes, that was in two thousand and sixteen. I had
an email from Deloris Sugg's daughter, Terror and she told
me that her mother told her about she was in
jail and a woman named Linda Reed told her that
her husband had killed this woman and framed a black man.
Speaker 4 (36:23):
Delores Sugs is somebody who spent a very short period
of time in the Hamilton County Justice Center in nineteen
ninety five, and she was in there with Linda Reid,
who confided to Dolores Suggs that Linda's husband, Earl a white,
red haired man from Blue Ash, had confessed to killing
(36:44):
somebody in the Embassy Suites in Blue Ash and framing
a black man. And she asked Dolores to do something
about it when she got out, and Dolores was told
by the Blue Ash police this is a close case,
and even though she was reporting on a pair confession,
they just did nothing with it.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, But I read that
Earle Read was quite cozy with the Blue Ash Police department.
Speaker 4 (37:08):
He reportedly would get up in the morning and have
coffee with the Blue Ash Police department. And there were
a number of instances where I believe it's well documented,
he abused Linda Read, and there is a narrative that's
part of the record here where severely beat her. Even
after they were divorced, or separated to the point that
(37:29):
she was in a medical facility and he was not
allowed to come and visit her anymore. Now, I want
to be very clear, we don't know whether Earle did it,
and I think that there are, as I said, a
number of other people in the records that are equally
or potentially more plausible than Earle. But there are other
facts that do kind of make the suggestion that Earle
(37:51):
was there. For example, Robin Budd was a witness who
said that the morning of the murder, at basically the
exact same time that the murder apparently took place, she
saw a man who sort of meets the Earl's description,
bolt from the hotel, run across the parking lot and
into the woods in the same direction to where Earl
Reid's house was like half a mile away. But the
(38:14):
real significance of Earl Reid and the Dolores Suggs tip
isn't so much that, aha, we've now found the killer.
It's the blue Ash police apartment in the Hamilton County
Prosecutor's Office was so polluted by cognitive bias and confirmation
bias and tunnel vision that they didn't even bother to
(38:37):
look into this. Before Elwood had been convicted. They had
him in custody and they just went someone confessed to this, whatever,
we've got our man, And that's true.
Speaker 5 (38:46):
Throughout there are hundreds of.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
Pages of records where people are identifying other potential suspects.
Many of those records are from independent sources that fit
together with each other and really kind of tell a
narrative that it's like, gosh, I think that is a
person that really could have been and it's definitely not Elwood,
And they conceded they never looked at it. The blush
police part never looked into any of it.
Speaker 1 (39:10):
All of this information, the bevy of alternative and more
likely suspects, including Earl Reid Anthony Lackey, these two mystery men,
as well as Dependent not being dependent, never mind it
likely being a totally fabricated piece of evidence in the
first place, and the irreconcilable hepatitis B test results. This
was all information that they had at the time of trial.
(39:30):
It was not shared with the defense. However, from a
post conviction litigation standpoint, the problem with these discoveries is
that they happened over time and were never litigated as
a whole so the twenty nineteen motion for a new
trial was based solely on the alleged Earl Reid confession.
But eventually Judge Winkler's successor, Judge Etna Cooper, granted a hearing.
Jay was already involved, and then came Dave Hein from Vori's,
(39:53):
one of the most widely respected law firms in the country.
Speaker 4 (39:57):
So Jay was that at that point, working with the
Federal Public Defenders, they filed the motion for a new trial.
Judge Cooper said, yep, We're going to give you a
hearing on it.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
And finally all this Brady material would be heard altogether. Now,
an election in twenty twenty brought in Judge Wendy Cross,
and oddly enough, almost thirty years later, Elwood was facing
Seth Tiger again. What stuck out the most about this.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Hearing standing up in a courtroom and calling a prosecutor
by name Mark Pete Meyer a liar, outright line to
put somebody on death row. That doesn't happen every day,
no way. It really got under Seth Tiger's skin. It
really bothered him, and I'm kind of glad it did,
but it was for the wrong reason. He didn't have
the ability to defend his his friend. And I think
(40:40):
to me, what was overall remarkable about it the lack
of any meaningful response from the prosecutor from a litigation standpoint.
We put on doctor Burdett to talk about the hepatitis.
We were specifically told by the judge before the hearing started,
we are not going to relitigate ikinella. Fine. The first
question out of the prosecutor's mouth cross examining doctor Burdett
(41:04):
was about ikinella. We were doing literally almost doing somersaults
at the table when he opened the door, because David
prepared the witness and drove a truck through that door
after that, and they put on no meaningful rebuttal to
anything that we put on. They didn't have anybody come
in and say, hey, the blue ash investigation was fine.
They didn't have anybody come in and say, oh, doctor
(41:24):
Burdet's wrong. Hepatitis bees not that infectious. They did nothing,
And I think it's because of the mindset in Hamilton
County has been for so long. We don't need to
the judge's going to give it to us. Judge Winkler
was a former prosecutor. Judge Winkler's sons were both prosecutors
now they're judges. Prosecutors in robes is the daily norm
down here for us. They didn't put on anything to
(41:44):
justify why he should not get a new trial.
Speaker 1 (41:47):
And so on December twentieth, twenty twenty two, Elwood who
were finally granted a new trial and amazingly he got
a bond set and were released on January fourteenth of
twenty twenty three.
Speaker 3 (42:00):
I had been turned down so many times in the
court that I was totally lost for words that day.
It's the thing about death penalty cases. People just don't
want to touch them or do the right thing. I
was totally shocked, but I was so thankful I got out.
(42:20):
I did the two things I said I was going
to do. I was going to kiss the ground, and
I went to the cemetery to see my mother and
tell us that you rest of peace. So and from
that day, I'm still frightened.
Speaker 4 (42:35):
The state is kind of doing everything that they can
at this point too. It seems like to ignore reality.
They've filed a petition for rid of prohibition, multiple appeals
they've all been denied. It seems like they're doing everything
they can to avoid having any kind of honest evaluation
of the actual evidence, and they still want to litigate
(42:56):
this and hold on to the conviction that they obtained
in the nineties with only a tiny sliver of the evidence.
Speaker 1 (43:03):
And I understand that if this does go to TRILI,
you'll be facing Mark Pete Myer and Seth Tiger again,
potentially in February twenty twenty four. So despite the obvious
and sane choice in front of them, this is not
one hundred percent over. Is there anything our audience can
do to help.
Speaker 2 (43:19):
Mark Pete Pryor refers to people who support Elwood as.
Speaker 1 (43:22):
His groupies, Well, sign me up for that.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
Yeah, I'll wear that badge. I think awareness let Hamley
County Prosecutor's office know that it's being watched, and Melissa
Powers is now the Hamley County Prosecutor. Maybe they can
reach out to her by email, letter, call and leave
a message and follow up and ask her what she's
going to do to write this wrong. Maybe if she
knows people are watching and people have an interest, that
(43:46):
she can do the right thing and dismiss it.
Speaker 1 (43:48):
So we'll have action steps of the bio. And now
that brings us to my favorite part of the show
closing arguments. It works like this. I'm going to thank
each of you again for sharing this incredible, incredible story,
and then I'm going to kick back in my chair,
turn my microphone off, leave my headphones on, and just
listen to anything else you have to say. So, Dave,
(44:08):
why'd you go first? Then Jay? And then ell would
take us off into the sunset.
Speaker 4 (44:14):
It's important that people understand that although Ellwood has very
graciously given Jay and I a lot of credit for this,
there are a lot of people who have been involved
over the years. There's an entire unit of people at
the Federal Public Defender's Office, the Capitol Habeas unit from
Aaron Barnhart, Bridget Kennedy, TC Chansky. I have two colleagues
at VORIS, Emily Saint Cyr and Zach Hollinger. You've got
(44:37):
Dolores Suggs and Tierra Suggs, two experts, Doctor Burdette and
Beth Moore. And you've got Judge Cross, who, frankly, I
think a different judge in this situation would have caved
to the political pressure. You had the prosecutor going on
local radio stations before a decision had been made, calling
her a crazy liberal judge, etc.
Speaker 5 (44:57):
Etc.
Speaker 4 (44:58):
And trying to make this a political issue. And I
think she sat there and just looked at the evidence
and said, politics be damned. I need to make the
decision that is just. And finally, to the prosecutors, I'm
a little bit more cautiously optimistic that the new prosecutor
will take a look at this.
Speaker 5 (45:18):
Please take a look at this.
Speaker 4 (45:20):
Let's have a conversation, let's talk about the evidence, because
there's absolutely no reason to be having a second trial.
Speaker 2 (45:26):
I won't repeat a lot of what Dave said because
I agree with it, but I think the takeaway from this,
I think you're going to find this as a common
thread through the work that you do. You can guarantee
that you will never commit a crime. You can in
no way guarantee you won't be accused of committing a crime.
And when you're accused and it's your day in the box,
you want the system to work the way the system
(45:48):
is supposed to work. You want people to follow the rules.
You want police to do the investigation and prosecutors to
do their job and disclosed all the evidence and right
now in Hamilton County, honestly, in general terms, that doesn't happen,
and so a lot of people can look at this
particular case or any of the other cases that I
know you've you've profiled, and go, well, that would never
(46:08):
happen to me. Don't count on it because you cannot
guarantee you won't be accused someday. Urge people to get involved,
don't stay silent, and speak up.
Speaker 3 (46:17):
I'm very thankful for everyone who took their time, including you,
to help add this and I'm hoping that I could
have my little life back. And I would like to
see the prosecutors be held accountable and two the whole
prosecutors accountable for what they do to take in the
(46:38):
man's life a woman's life. They gonna continue that need
to change if you're going to bring change this system.
Speaker 1 (46:53):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I want to
thank our production team Connor hall Any, Chelsea, Maia Robinson,
Jeff Clyburn, and Kevin Warns. The music in this production
was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph.
Be sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction,
on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast, and on Twitter at
(47:15):
wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good on
all three platforms. You can also follow me on Instagram
at it's Jason Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is a production of
Lava for Good podcasts and association with Signal Company Number
one
On Labor Day weekend nineteen ninety four, Rooda Nathan flew
into Cincinnati for a bar mitzvah. She shared a room
at the Embassy Suites in the nearby suburb of Blue
Ash with two friends. On the morning of Saturday, September third,
her friends went down to the complimentary breakfast, leaving Rhoda
behind to shower. They returned less than an hour later
(00:25):
to a bloody scene after life saving measures had failed,
and autopsy revealed blood force trauma to Roda Nathan's head
and torso, as well as that two teeth were missing.
Also missing five hundred dollars had some jewelry, allegedly including
a pendant that Rhoda always wore. There was no sign
of forced entry, so the police narrowed their search to
(00:46):
hotel employees, eventually discovering one staffer named Elwood Jones, who
had injured his hand that day. Further investigation revealed his
access to a master key, as well as various objects
that could have been responsible for Rodin Nathan's injuries, including
a walkie talkie and a door chain found in his car.
(01:06):
During the following week, el was injured hand became infected.
His treating physician noted a bacteria in the wound that
is commonly found in human mouths. The state argued that
Elwood Jones infected himself in knocking out Rooda Nathan's teeth,
which sounded scientific enough to the jury. But this is
raeful conviction. Welcome back to Rafel conviction, where we're covering
(01:39):
yet another story of an innocent man who had been
sentenced to death in Ohio. This time it's out of
Hamilton County, which encompasses Cincinnati, and when it comes to
raefel convictions in Ohio, Hamilton is second only to Cuyahoga County.
And this time it's believed that the prosecutors at trial,
Mark Pete Meyer and Seth Tiger, names you're going to
(01:59):
become fromiliar with. Well, it appears that they knew that
Elwood Jones was innocent but sent him to death. Throw anyway, Elwood,
I'm so sorry about where you've been and what you've
been through, but I'm happy and honored to have you
here today. Thank you, You're very welcome. And joining him
or two of his attorneys, David Hine, first of all, welcome,
(02:20):
thank you, glad to be here, and of course j Clark.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Thanks Jason. I'm glad to be here as well.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
So let's start right from the beginning. As I mentioned,
this is a Cincinnati story through and through, and you
grew up there, right.
Speaker 3 (02:33):
I was born in Susinaoha. I grew up downtown in
West the end. I went to Catholic school. My parents
now moved to the suburbs in the later years.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
And what was Cincinnati like back then?
Speaker 3 (02:48):
You tell him about in the sixties, and what none
spectacular about if you're talking about the criminal justice system
is just as worse as it is now.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Yeah, I believe you.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
There was a study that Hamilton County, by zip code,
has more people on death row than anywhere else in
the country.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
Wow.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I think that in Cuyahoga County they had the same problem,
as they have one or two or three prosecutors who
think the rules don't apply and they shouldn't apply. There's
probably a handful of three or four assistant prosecutors whose
names keep coming up constantly in cases that have been reversed.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
I mean, if you think about it, the rules kind
of don't apply to any prosecutor. Their immunity from accountability
leaves them free to chase the tough on crime image,
and with this anything goes mentality, we too often see
a trail of wrongful convictions in their way. And clearly
Cincinnati was, and sad to say, still is no exception.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
It's a very conservative city. And I understand that I
get that and not believe in law and aught that
I do, even though I was on the other side
of the track when I became adult. A couple of
times I was arrested.
Speaker 1 (03:58):
What was that for?
Speaker 3 (03:59):
It was? And burgery? That was it?
Speaker 1 (04:02):
All right? So your record wasn't exactly clean, but no
violent crimes. And I understand that by now you had
paid your debt to society and had a job working
at a hotel, steady job at the Embassy Suites in
the Cincinnati suburb called Blue Ash, and you were in
your early forties by this time, married, so things were stabilized.
(04:23):
And what was your wife's name?
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Ebon. I had a friend on the side, and I
think there was another piece of the paws in tree
that they used that I was having an affair. The
name was Earlene Metcalff non Meta. In ninety four, Erlein.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
Was one of Elwood's coworkers at the Embassy suites in
Blue Ash, And obviously, I think most people would agree
that although theft and infidelity are usually not items on
the top of anyone's resume, they just don't merit a
death sentence. These things are also not indicative of someone
being the type of person to bludgeon another human being
to death. In this case, a sixty seven year old
(05:01):
hotel guest named Rhoda Nathan. She had come into Blue
Ash from New Jersey on Friday, September second, nineteen ninety four,
the day before she died.
Speaker 4 (05:11):
Nathan came in for her best friend's grandson's bar mitzvah.
So she was traveling with a friend, Elaine Shubb, and
her friend's boyfriend, Joe Kaplan, when the three of them
were staying in the hotel together, and part of the
state's narrative here is that Roda Nathan's friend and her
boyfriend were coming from Florida and had checked in earlier
(05:33):
in the day, just as two people Rode Nathan was
traveling in from New Jersey. She had a different flight,
she got there later, and the state's position was, whoever
was watching the room thought that there were only two
people in the room and there were actually three people
staying there, and then the next morning Rhoda's traveling companions
got up and went down for breakfast. Rota stayed behind
(05:55):
to shower. So the story goes, whoever was watching this
room room entered the room, expecting the room to be
empty so that they could take whatever they wanted, and
were surprised to find.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
Wrote to Nathan in the room.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
You know what I was reading about this? I thought,
if the goal was to steal, then why not just
pretend to be housekeeping and leave, you know, without murdering someone.
I mean, at first glance, there's already a hole in
the store you could drive a truck through. But okay,
so I would hear from Elwood. I would tell me
about that morning.
Speaker 3 (06:26):
So when I came in that morning at four point
thirty and brought Earleen to work, we clocked in I
think it was about quarter to five. I usually come
in early in the morning to help in the camp breakfast,
and then I would go to the banquet department and
finish my day out.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
On that particular day, one of Elwood's coworkers had called
out sex, so he had to pull double duty, floating
between complimentary breakfast and the banquet departments. So after setting
up camp breakfast, he went up to the banquet halls,
which were not in the best.
Speaker 3 (07:00):
They was trashed, so I had to clean them out
and come downstairs. I think it was around six, and
going to the dumpster, I tripped going up the steps
to the dumpsters the metal stairs. Going up there, I
smashed my hand. Come on back into the kitchen, clean
my hand, put a band aid on it, and went
(07:23):
on back to work. I think it was around eight
or something. After that the scream was upstairs. I was
in compbrepast. Everybody started going upstairs to see what.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Happened, and the scream, you know, presumably came from Elaine Shubb,
who first came upon this literal here scene rode to.
Nathan was naked, covered in blood, and the area around
her was, you know, a bloody mess. So whoever attacked
her would logically and certainly have been covered in blood.
Speaker 4 (07:59):
Within the minute of this vicious attack, Elwood was standing
in the restaurant, completely composed in the clothes that he
was in, not disheveled in any way, not covered in blood.
Speaker 2 (08:10):
Whoever did this had to have been covered in blood themselves.
Speaker 1 (08:14):
Right, Jay and At this point, no one knew what happened.
They were just trying to save Rhoda, who had blood
pouring from her mouth.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
I think the initial thought was that she had had
a medical emergency, probably a heart attack or something along
that line. The guest a Hotel who was also a nurse,
they were trying to render her first aid.
Speaker 4 (08:34):
She was still breathing and she still had a pulse,
but she was struggling like she was I think, effectively
choking on the blood. So one of the issues here
is that they kept taking towels and trying to mop
the blood out of her throat and out of her
mouth to kind of clear the airway. All of those
towels used to help clean up the room that would
have had DNA on it were thrown out when.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Blue Ash Fire department arrived. I think they tried to
intubate her, and that gets to another issue about teeth
maybe being dislodged or broken out.
Speaker 1 (09:03):
Later on, the States speculated that Rode Nathan's broken teeth
were responsible for the injury and the infection on ELA's hand.
But back to the immediate aftermath. At this point, the
room was not yet being treated as a crime scene.
Evidence was being contaminated or destroyed, and new injuries were
potentially being created by first responders and medical personnel that
(09:24):
added to the overall picture. At the autopsy, she was
pronounced dead Epitheesda North Hospital and then was taken to
the Hamilton County Corner's office.
Speaker 4 (09:33):
What they reported in the autopsy was that there was
Bluntfort's trauma, and I think they said that there were
blows to the torso, the face, and the jaw.
Speaker 1 (09:42):
She also tested positive for hepatitis B right.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
She was actively infected with it.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
Although we cannot be one hundred percent sure. This suggests
that she was infected with hepatitis B prior to the attack,
and that became pretty important later on. However, as soon
as her death was rolled a homicide, two thirty seven
was then considered a crime scene, where they discovered that
about five hundred dollars was missing, along with some jewelry,
allegedly including a pendant necklace that Rhoda's traveling companion, Elaine Shubb,
(10:13):
said that Roda had always worn. I know, you guys
had said that the bloody towels had been tossed, right,
So was there any other probative physical evidence at all.
Speaker 4 (10:23):
So there were fingernails, scrapeigs, some hairs, things of that nature.
There was blood all over the room, so they scraped
it from all over the place, the television, the bed,
the table, the carpets, the walls, the doors, et cetera.
And there should have been direct evidence of whoever was
involved in this crime, because you were going in there
immediately after the killers.
Speaker 1 (10:43):
DNA should have at least been under her fingernails. None
of it was a match for Elwood. But before any
of that was even tested, they started talking to staff
and hotel guests, and they were leaning towards the staffer
since there was no sign of forced entry. Oh you
know how sometimes they focused on the guy just because
they have a prior record. You think that's why they
(11:04):
focused on you.
Speaker 3 (11:06):
I really can't say, because it was at least thirty
seven of the employees with criminal records, and some of
them worse than mine. From the general managerone down.
Speaker 1 (11:17):
Wow, So there was thirty seven all right, Well, listen,
you know, more power to the hotel for giving guys
a second chance and women too. Right, So when did
you go in for your interview?
Speaker 3 (11:27):
I think around eleven. I went up to be interviewed.
It was Sogeant Lily John Latt, and I'm pretty sure
it was Stokes in there there at that time, and
they asked me what happened. I wrote my statement it
so you were free to go. But eventually they came
back to you, seized and search your car, found or
(11:48):
allegedly found items in your toolbox that they thought were incriminating.
But that didn't happen that Saturday or even the next day. Well,
on the Sunday, I went to Lublin and was at
Earlene's house and I had a guy named Jimmy plus
my radiate out seem the last person used.
Speaker 1 (12:06):
My tool box, right, And what Jimmy saw or didn't
see became very important later on in your case. And
we'll get to that in a minute. So, Dave, what
made them focus on Elwood.
Speaker 4 (12:17):
What ultimately got the police and the state to start
looking at Elwood, was that he had, as he mentioned earlier,
cut his hand that day on the dumpster and then
later when he kind of jammed it in the door,
and a couple days later went to the hospital because
it had gotten quite infected.
Speaker 1 (12:33):
Since the victim had been beaten to death, one could
expect that the assailant's hand might have been injured, and
Elwood's infection and hospitalization drew unwanted attention to his coincidental
hand injury, so police spoke to his treating physician, a
doctor McDonough, and although this was a Strep A infection,
there was another bacteria present in the wound called icinella,
which is commonly found in human mouths. This spawned a
(12:57):
theory that the infection came from wrote in Nathan's teeth. However,
according to Elwood, he had licked his own wound soon
after his work related injury had occurred. Elwood saw testing
for akinella to prove his claim, but was told that
his heavy course of antibiotics would have already cleared up
any icinella in his own mouth. Further police interviews with
(13:18):
hotel staff only served to corroborate Elwood's alibi. However, only
Arlene Metcalf could give a solid time and place for Elwood.
At around seven point thirty, the belief time of the murder,
the pair had gone on break together. It appears the
police found this alibi too convenient and brought him in
again for questioning on September twelfth.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
When They questioned me on the twelve. They didn't like
my attitude when God told him that you asked me
what idea that day? And I told you, And they say, what,
you had a master key? And I explained to them,
I say, every key in the hotel is a master key.
I say, guests don't know they mastered the keys.
Speaker 1 (14:02):
Wait, so every key was the same for every room.
Speaker 3 (14:05):
Yeah, but they just didn't tell no what nuts. I
thought it was crazy when I first found out about it.
Speaker 4 (14:15):
It's kind of funny to think about now thirty years later.
But they were all still metal plates for them to
cut new keys when a guest would leave with the
key or something like that.
Speaker 5 (14:24):
They just didn't bother. Everything matched.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
Well, I'm certainly glad it's not the nineties anymore. I mean,
I can't get over that. So they already thought that
you were their guy, so this probably looked to them
like you were trying to deflect attention from yourself. Now.
They also brought in your wife, Yvonne, on the twelfth
as well.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Yeah, on the way to the police station, they told
her say, well, by the way, you know your husband
was having an affair. She said, well, I knew he
wasn't coming home on time, she say, but all men
are dogs in a sense, and that just shut that up.
She one told me exactly what she told police, and
(15:02):
the end of that.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Comes, that's a pretty understanding person that you were married to.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
But did weird talk about that later? We just get
through this. She stuck with me.
Speaker 1 (15:13):
So they were probably telling her that to get her
to turn on you. Right, it's not you don't need
to be Columbo to figure this out. But Yvonne didn't bite.
So they seized your car and initially just found a
door chain that they later tried to say was some
sort of a weapon. Right, And we'll get to that
in a bit. But then, if I'm understanding this correctly,
A day or so later, a Blue ash police officer
named Michael Bray claimed to have found miss Nathan's pendant
(15:35):
in your car. Am I getting this correct?
Speaker 4 (15:38):
Can I take this because this is a part that
this is something I am really like.
Speaker 5 (15:43):
This bugs me.
Speaker 2 (15:44):
I wanted, Dave, I want to talk about Yeah.
Speaker 4 (15:46):
So, so the story with the pendant. So the police
went to pawnshops and ostensibly couldn't find this piece of
jewelry anywhere. Then they took his car they impounded on
the twelve. They then had it in their possess for
forty eight hours before they took it to the coroner's office,
and multiple people searched the car for hours and didn't
(16:07):
find anything. And then after that one officer decides, well,
I'm going to go back and search again, I guess,
or search the one spot that you would think they
would want to look for evidence, which would be the trunk,
the space where someone might store something. And if Officer
Bray is to be believed, they never looked in the
trunk before. I don't know. But when this guy is
(16:30):
all by himself with no one to corroborate it, he
says that he went into the trunk of the car,
opened the toolbox, and there it was, just sitting there. Now,
did he take a picture of it in the car?
Speaker 2 (16:41):
No.
Speaker 4 (16:42):
Did he take a picture of the trunk open with
the toolbox in it.
Speaker 5 (16:45):
No.
Speaker 4 (16:46):
He took a picture of the pendant in his hand
with the car in the background, and then told people,
look what I found in the car.
Speaker 1 (17:04):
This podcast is brought to you by Ohio Justice and
Policy Center, a nonprofit law firm that seeks justice for
people to directly impact it by Ohio's criminal legal system.
OJPC provides free legal services to currently and formally incarcerated people.
Through its Beyond Guilt Project, OJPC works to free over
punish people who have rehabilitated themselves. Ojpc's Second Chance Clinics
(17:28):
help individuals with criminal records remove barriers to employment and
house it. Ojpc's Human Rights and Prison Project represents people
who face denial of medical care. In its twenty five
year history, OJPC has worked at the policy level and
won numerous victories in Ohio, including ending juvenile life without
parole and exempting seriously mentally ill people from the death penalty.
(17:51):
To learn more about Ohio Justice and Policy Center and
how you can support its mission, visit OHIOJPC dot org. That'shi,
IOJPC dot org. Ohio Justice and Policy Center. We don't
write people off.
Speaker 4 (18:14):
Another officer flies up to New Jersey or New York
with the pendant to meet with Roda Nathan's family, and
all of this is withheld from Melwood at the original trial.
But the family looks at it and goes, that's not it.
And then they tell the police officers, look this pendant though,
it's a really unique piece of jewelry was made from
some family rings, some heirlooms. And then they talk to
(18:37):
another family member who we just refer to as Uncle Ira,
who was Rhoda's brother in law, and he goes, no,
that's not correct. I have those family rings. This was
just bought in a jewelry store of Brooklyn. So there's
evidence that potentially this isn't even the right pendant. There's
evidence that it definitely wasn't the unique piece of jewelry
that the state says that it was. And there are
(18:58):
very very serious ques questions about whether this thing was
ever actually found in the car at all. None of
that was shared, none of that was provided.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
So their big smoking gun turned out to be total
horseshit and they knew it. I mean, this has to
be why they didn't arrest you for over a year. Now.
There was one other item that we mentioned in your car,
the door chain. What's the story with that?
Speaker 3 (19:22):
It was a door chain inside of my tub box
and it's not no type of doorchain used in the hotel.
The hotail used a boar chain. And the first thing
I askeaid, What'd I do go out to my car
get a tool chain? I need something to whooped this
woman with. I say, doesn't it have some type of
blood or provensis or something on it? I said, come
(19:44):
on with the stop it.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
So this freaking door chain wasn't even the type that
would have been available in the room if somebody even
wanted to use that as a weapon, which in itself
is ridiculous. This was just some random ass door chain
in your car. The whole theory is fucking ridiculous.
Speaker 5 (20:00):
And that's not even the worst one.
Speaker 4 (20:01):
One of their theories is they say that whoever it
was beat this woman to death, not just with their
hands and the chain, but then a walkie talkie and
then hit them with multiple objects. In fact, the police
officers for months were trying to send images to the
FBI to get them to confirm, like, hey, this looks
like it could be Elwood shoe, right, And they would
(20:23):
come back and be like, no, no, this is not
consistent with.
Speaker 5 (20:26):
Elwood shoe at all.
Speaker 4 (20:27):
In fact, it looks like it could be X and
something that might implicate somebody else, And they'd be like,
let's try again, how about the walkie talkie And they
finally got them to say something to the effect of
the bruising is potentially consistent with something of that shape,
so like a square or a rectangle. But that's as
close as they would get. And with that, the state
(20:50):
then completely distorted it into aha, a bruise and an
item that's so significantly tied together that it's essentially a fingerprint,
which is just a lie.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
I mean, a walkie talkie. How many other hotel staffers
is probably haven't.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
I'm glad you mentioned that we have several departments. Everybody
have at walkie talkie. But that morning the police was
given information of two people leaving this Nathan's room, one
going left, one going right with a walkee Chlkie in
his hand, and to the day, I feel that's where
(21:27):
they got that theory of a walkie talkie. They never
went back to try to find out who these two
people was or where that walkie talkie is.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
To the day, this is just one of many more
compelling leads that were flatly ignored by Blue Ash PD
and the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office. And we'll reveal more
of those leads later when we talk about the discovery
that happened in post conviction. It's mind boggling. So instead
they focused on Elwood Jones, who had access to a
(21:58):
walkie talkie and a master key. But as we find out,
so did everyone else. He had a criminal record, so
did almost everyone else. And this theory was supported by
the presence of a bacteria in his injured hand commonly
founded you in mouse like canela, and then the pendant
which appears to have been planted, as well as not
(22:18):
even being the right freaking pendent. This is what they
went to a capitol trial with. And it appears that
even they believed so little in this theory that they
waited for over a year to arrest mister Elwood Jones.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
That day when I was arrested at the two Blue
ass offices, Stokes and Lily, they put me in the
car to take me the District one police station to
take me in the back, and at that time they
show me this picture and say this is what we
found in your car. And I'm looking and I told me,
(22:53):
I don't know where did penman come from? And you
found it in there, you put it in there. At
that time, Stokes get up and go out, said to
do and talk on the phone, and he said he
didn't bite. I don't know what he meant. By At
who he was talking to on the phone. He said
he didn't bite, and next I know they was taking
me on to the Justice and that they booked me in.
Speaker 1 (23:17):
He didn't bite. Wow, I mean, it seems like they
thought their lie would make you cave and confess, and
it might have worked on a man who was actually guilty,
but it still wasn't you. And even with Jimmy or
a mechanic corroborated that this pandem was not in the
damn toolbox. Along with so much Brady material that we're
going to get to in a bit. The prosecutors Mark
(23:39):
Pete Meyer and Seth Tieger still went ahead to trial,
seeking the death penalty, by the way, on this bullshit
evidence in November of ninety six in front of Judge
Ralph Winkler. And the case was purely circumstantial evidence.
Speaker 4 (23:53):
So they say, but that's okay, because circumstantial evidence is
even better than direct.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
Evidence, which no, well it is obviously not a third
grader can tell you that. But anyway, they presented their
theory that Elwood allegedly waited for a lane shove and
Joe Coplan to leave room to thirty seven before entering
being discovered by Rhoda Nathan, punching her teeth out and
fatally beating her to death and finally stealing five hundred
(24:21):
dollars as well as jewelry, including this alleged signature pendant.
So what did they present to support this theory?
Speaker 4 (24:28):
They told the jerry that Ellwood was in the hotel
that day, that he was on the second floor, that
he had a master key, and that they purportedly found
this pendant in his car, and that he had an
infection in his hand. And the narrative that the state
presented was that it was an Icinella Corridon's infection, and
in fact that's not what it was.
Speaker 5 (24:49):
There happened to be Kinella in.
Speaker 1 (24:51):
The cut right, It was a strip a infection.
Speaker 4 (24:54):
And this doctor, doctor McDonough, who was a hand surgeon
with no expertise at all in microbiology or in infectious diseases,
opined that the only way that Ellwood could have gotten
this was by punching somebody in the mouth, which is
just objectively false.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
But that's where the broken teeth come into it. They
also tried to draw connections between miss Nathan's injuries and
objects that might have been available to Elwood, but really
they were available to any hotel employee, and there were
dozens and dozens of them.
Speaker 4 (25:26):
Their absolute junk forensics suggests that they were able to
match up one of the bruises with the bottom of
a walkie talkie and the scratches. The particular scratches on
the bottom of the walkie talkie can be found in
the bruises. It's completely fabricated. They took pictures of Miss
Nathan's body during the autopsy and effectively skewed the pictures
(25:50):
and admitted that they manipulated the pictures. They said in
order to match a scale, and they used items such
as the walkie talkie and made that the scale so
that when they were distorting the picture, they distorted it
to fit the size of the walkie talkie and what
they were actually told. After repeated attempts of submitting this
(26:11):
evidence to the FBI and the FBI coming back and saying, nose,
this is not consistent with this bruising pattern at all. Finally,
after manipulating the pictures, the FBI came back and said,
this is theoretically consistent with something sort of of that shape,
but they did not say, yes, we can match up
the scratches on the bottom of this wakie talkie so
(26:34):
that it's like a fingerprint.
Speaker 1 (26:35):
They inexplicably then put four experts on the stand who
would not corroborate their nonsensical weapons theory. But the state
still had this random pendent that the jury was led
to believe was the real McCoy, as well as doctor
McDonald's erroneous testimony about Ikinella Ell. Would please tell me
that your attorneys presented something anything to combat McDonough.
Speaker 3 (26:59):
I mean, did they The expert day had he couldn't
testify in person because he had some other arrangements, so
they did it by video.
Speaker 2 (27:09):
The way it played out is you don't have any
way then once the state's expert testifies to call your
doctor and say, hey, this is what he just said.
What's your answer to that?
Speaker 1 (27:19):
So this whole video testimony was never going to work,
let's face it. And this expert was paid for, by
the way, which makes it even a little more insane.
So did they do anything else?
Speaker 3 (27:30):
Julias Sanks was the leading attorney then, and he actually
said some about my criminal record when I've still was
lost to say I didn't even take the stand. Why
would you put that in there?
Speaker 1 (27:43):
Ineffective assistance of counsel doesn't even begin to cover this.
So the I Cainela evidence and dependent both total horseship
were never successfully impeached. And then your own attorney brought
up your criminal record, leaving it wide open for the prosecutors.
Speaker 3 (27:58):
The prosecutor say that I was the only employed with
a criminal record, and at that time I knew it
was some criminals in there. I didn't know as many
as I found out mater when I got the documents,
thirty seven people in there.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
I mean, that's not a misrepresentation that the jury. That's
just a straight out lie, right, I mean, how could
they How could the jury have ever gotten it right?
When they're being led down this crazy.
Speaker 3 (28:24):
Path doing post conviction A few Affi Davids was taken
to the jury. They said they noticed that I had
a criminal record, so what make them think that I
didn't commit this crime? And they came back in there
and they said guilty and recommended death. Judge Winkler's got
(28:44):
ready to send this to me, asked me did I
have anything to say? And I say I do? I say, yesterday, Johanna,
I say even you in this courtroom offered me a
man's laughter. I say, today you want to kill me?
I said, you're telling me this is a court My
(29:19):
daily routine was get up in the morning at four,
take my shower where I took a bath in myself
until they changed over and put showers on the range.
Speaker 1 (29:31):
And when you say take a bath in yourself, what
do you mean by that?
Speaker 3 (29:34):
I wash up in my saint.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Right, that's a bird bath, right.
Speaker 3 (29:38):
This bird bath. Well that's the best you could do.
I got them washed up, and I say my little
prayer and I repair my day. Six o'clock I would
come out.
Speaker 1 (29:48):
Can you describe the cell small self?
Speaker 3 (29:50):
About eight by ten. You've got a bed in there,
sank a tilet you can afford. You can have a
TV typewriter in a radio, and that's about it.
Speaker 1 (30:01):
So you're pretty much living in a closet.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
In the cave is a filthy cave.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
And of the men that you serve time with in
there was there one who made a you know, an
impression on you that that helped you get through this
incredible ordeal.
Speaker 3 (30:20):
Well, yes, he's off death row now too. De Ambrosil
was best good friends.
Speaker 1 (30:26):
We spoke with Joe on the show Josie Ambrosio, what
an incredibly inspiring guy, and what a horrible, horrible story.
But he's come through it and he seems to be
doing as well as he possibly could be doing under
the circumstances. So, Joe, if you're listening, we're thinking about
you and talking about you too. So how did you
find the strength, because I'm sure there are other guys
(30:47):
who just go crazy in that situation and lose their
mind and end up killing themselves or doing you know.
Speaker 3 (30:52):
I've seen several guys on death ro commit suicide right
there in the same part with the three guys I
kept theirself and others. But I think what the main
thing w gave me scrapt I knew in my heart
I did nothing wrong. I lost the sister, I lost
my wife, I lost several friends, my mother passed, and
(31:16):
my father and all their uncles. And only thing that
gives me hope and has gave me is to clear
my name and I could look up and tell my
mother she can rest in peace. I understand Miss Nathan
is dead and I'm sorry. I feel sorry for her family,
but I'm also a victim in this case, and I
(31:39):
was determined that I spent day in and day out
trying to prove my anderson. I wrote letters every day.
I had one thing on my plate is to get
my life back.
Speaker 1 (31:53):
And now here you are.
Speaker 3 (31:54):
Yeah, and I'm still having got it fully back. That's
all I want is my life back, and give me
what little I had, and I'm happy and prosecuting them
don't want to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So tell us a bit about how you got here
and what's still left. Starting with your direct appeal they raised.
Speaker 3 (32:11):
I think it was about I want to say about
thirty two heirs. Some was in effected as system new council.
We were denied that all through state court. It wasn't
withholding evidence until we got in the federal courts Brady validation.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
And I think that was about two thousand and five
when your case was moved to the federal Public Defenders.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
They fell for a discovery in the federal courts and
granted me saying that the prosecutor's police department and any
agency who involved in this case had to turn over
their records. As I was going through it, I begin
to see things that I've never seen.
Speaker 2 (32:48):
Herd in the original discovery. I don't remember the exact
number of pages, like two hundred and eighty six pages
something like that. I think there's over forty two hundred
pages that they got in federal habeas and discovery. The
questionnaires that were sent to all the hotel guests, and
I think there were sixteen or seventeen of them that
had i'll say good investigative leads.
Speaker 3 (33:11):
The first thing I came across was the statement of
two hotel employees, Dmitz Williams and Norman Ryan told the
police they woulness two guys coming out of that room,
a black guy and the white guy, one going left,
one going right. The black guy when he came out,
he had a radio in his head. He was going left.
(33:32):
They gave him a full description of what they had
on both of them, and they toldly ignored. And there's
nothing else in the files where the police did any
follow up. Even the prosecuted.
Speaker 4 (33:45):
There were a ton of tidbits will say that they learned,
whether it was from interviewing staff about keys or things
like that, that they just never ever followed up on. Obviously,
the Anthony Lackey information, Anthony Lackett was off on the
day that this happened, but a shuttle driver who drove
employees to and from an employee parking lot remember taking
(34:06):
him back to his car that morning, and when he
was interviewed by police, he denied being there. It was
also reported that later that day he and his girlfriend
went out shopping and he was suddenly flushed with cash,
which is significant because reportedly stolen from the hotel rooms
five hundred dollars in cash that was never recovered.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
Oh and mister Lackey also had an extensive criminal record,
a violent record ascent from assaultive behavior in there.
Speaker 1 (34:31):
Yeah, and this is what I meant earlier about more
compelling leads. This discovery also revealed that the Blue Ash
Police Department had gone to New York and New Jersey
and spoken with the family about the pendant, which unraveled
that lie as well. There was so much Brady material
with health here that it's hard to even keep track,
But there are two more that are huge.
Speaker 2 (34:52):
The fact that wrote A. Nathan had hepatitis was not
disclosed pre trial.
Speaker 4 (34:56):
Elwood knew that they had taken blood for test, but
they didn't tell him what they were testing it for,
and they didn't ever report back that he had a
negative hepatitis B result, where Rodin Nathan had a positive result.
And that's really important because, I mean, the reason EMTs
wear rubber gloves is because the risk of infection from
(35:18):
hepatitis B because it is so infectious.
Speaker 1 (35:21):
So while he could have given himself like canella from
licking his own injured hand, it's almost certain that Elwood
would have tested positive for hepatitis B had he been
the assailant. So the Blue Ash Police Department, Mark Pete Meyer,
Seth Tiger, they all had scientific evidence clearing Elwood all
the way back on September fifteenth, nineteen ninety four, when
it really counted. And here we are, almost thirty years later,
(35:43):
still trying to unravel this injustice. Oh wait, there's more.
I know you're probably going no.
Speaker 3 (35:50):
No more.
Speaker 1 (35:51):
I can't take it. I can't take it. But hang
in there. They had another lead before a trial from
a woman named Dolores Suggs, which didn't come to light,
probably because they kept it in the dark until decades later.
Speaker 3 (36:04):
Yes, that was in two thousand and sixteen. I had
an email from Deloris Sugg's daughter, Terror and she told
me that her mother told her about she was in
jail and a woman named Linda Reed told her that
her husband had killed this woman and framed a black man.
Speaker 4 (36:23):
Delores Sugs is somebody who spent a very short period
of time in the Hamilton County Justice Center in nineteen
ninety five, and she was in there with Linda Reid,
who confided to Dolores Suggs that Linda's husband, Earl a white,
red haired man from Blue Ash, had confessed to killing
(36:44):
somebody in the Embassy Suites in Blue Ash and framing
a black man. And she asked Dolores to do something
about it when she got out, and Dolores was told
by the Blue Ash police this is a close case,
and even though she was reporting on a pair confession,
they just did nothing with it.
Speaker 1 (37:02):
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, But I read that
Earle Read was quite cozy with the Blue Ash Police department.
Speaker 4 (37:08):
He reportedly would get up in the morning and have
coffee with the Blue Ash Police department. And there were
a number of instances where I believe it's well documented,
he abused Linda Read, and there is a narrative that's
part of the record here where severely beat her. Even
after they were divorced, or separated to the point that
(37:29):
she was in a medical facility and he was not
allowed to come and visit her anymore. Now, I want
to be very clear, we don't know whether Earle did it,
and I think that there are, as I said, a
number of other people in the records that are equally
or potentially more plausible than Earle. But there are other
facts that do kind of make the suggestion that Earle
(37:51):
was there. For example, Robin Budd was a witness who
said that the morning of the murder, at basically the
exact same time that the murder apparently took place, she
saw a man who sort of meets the Earl's description,
bolt from the hotel, run across the parking lot and
into the woods in the same direction to where Earl
Reid's house was like half a mile away. But the
(38:14):
real significance of Earl Reid and the Dolores Suggs tip
isn't so much that, aha, we've now found the killer.
It's the blue Ash police apartment in the Hamilton County
Prosecutor's Office was so polluted by cognitive bias and confirmation
bias and tunnel vision that they didn't even bother to
(38:37):
look into this. Before Elwood had been convicted. They had
him in custody and they just went someone confessed to this, whatever,
we've got our man, And that's true.
Speaker 5 (38:46):
Throughout there are hundreds of.
Speaker 4 (38:48):
Pages of records where people are identifying other potential suspects.
Many of those records are from independent sources that fit
together with each other and really kind of tell a
narrative that it's like, gosh, I think that is a
person that really could have been and it's definitely not Elwood,
And they conceded they never looked at it. The blush
police part never looked into any of it.
Speaker 1 (39:10):
All of this information, the bevy of alternative and more
likely suspects, including Earl Reid Anthony Lackey, these two mystery men,
as well as Dependent not being dependent, never mind it
likely being a totally fabricated piece of evidence in the
first place, and the irreconcilable hepatitis B test results. This
was all information that they had at the time of trial.
(39:30):
It was not shared with the defense. However, from a
post conviction litigation standpoint, the problem with these discoveries is
that they happened over time and were never litigated as
a whole so the twenty nineteen motion for a new
trial was based solely on the alleged Earl Reid confession.
But eventually Judge Winkler's successor, Judge Etna Cooper, granted a hearing.
Jay was already involved, and then came Dave Hein from Vori's,
(39:53):
one of the most widely respected law firms in the country.
Speaker 4 (39:57):
So Jay was that at that point, working with the
Federal Public Defenders, they filed the motion for a new trial.
Judge Cooper said, yep, We're going to give you a
hearing on it.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
And finally all this Brady material would be heard altogether. Now,
an election in twenty twenty brought in Judge Wendy Cross,
and oddly enough, almost thirty years later, Elwood was facing
Seth Tiger again. What stuck out the most about this.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Hearing standing up in a courtroom and calling a prosecutor
by name Mark Pete Meyer a liar, outright line to
put somebody on death row. That doesn't happen every day,
no way. It really got under Seth Tiger's skin. It
really bothered him, and I'm kind of glad it did,
but it was for the wrong reason. He didn't have
the ability to defend his his friend. And I think
(40:40):
to me, what was overall remarkable about it the lack
of any meaningful response from the prosecutor from a litigation standpoint.
We put on doctor Burdett to talk about the hepatitis.
We were specifically told by the judge before the hearing started,
we are not going to relitigate ikinella. Fine. The first
question out of the prosecutor's mouth cross examining doctor Burdett
(41:04):
was about ikinella. We were doing literally almost doing somersaults
at the table when he opened the door, because David
prepared the witness and drove a truck through that door
after that, and they put on no meaningful rebuttal to
anything that we put on. They didn't have anybody come
in and say, hey, the blue ash investigation was fine.
They didn't have anybody come in and say, oh, doctor
(41:24):
Burdet's wrong. Hepatitis bees not that infectious. They did nothing,
And I think it's because of the mindset in Hamilton
County has been for so long. We don't need to
the judge's going to give it to us. Judge Winkler
was a former prosecutor. Judge Winkler's sons were both prosecutors
now they're judges. Prosecutors in robes is the daily norm
down here for us. They didn't put on anything to
(41:44):
justify why he should not get a new trial.
Speaker 1 (41:47):
And so on December twentieth, twenty twenty two, Elwood who
were finally granted a new trial and amazingly he got
a bond set and were released on January fourteenth of
twenty twenty three.
Speaker 3 (42:00):
I had been turned down so many times in the
court that I was totally lost for words that day.
It's the thing about death penalty cases. People just don't
want to touch them or do the right thing. I
was totally shocked, but I was so thankful I got out.
(42:20):
I did the two things I said I was going
to do. I was going to kiss the ground, and
I went to the cemetery to see my mother and
tell us that you rest of peace. So and from
that day, I'm still frightened.
Speaker 4 (42:35):
The state is kind of doing everything that they can
at this point too. It seems like to ignore reality.
They've filed a petition for rid of prohibition, multiple appeals
they've all been denied. It seems like they're doing everything
they can to avoid having any kind of honest evaluation
of the actual evidence, and they still want to litigate
(42:56):
this and hold on to the conviction that they obtained
in the nineties with only a tiny sliver of the evidence.
Speaker 1 (43:03):
And I understand that if this does go to TRILI,
you'll be facing Mark Pete Myer and Seth Tiger again,
potentially in February twenty twenty four. So despite the obvious
and sane choice in front of them, this is not
one hundred percent over. Is there anything our audience can
do to help.
Speaker 2 (43:19):
Mark Pete Pryor refers to people who support Elwood as.
Speaker 1 (43:22):
His groupies, Well, sign me up for that.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
Yeah, I'll wear that badge. I think awareness let Hamley
County Prosecutor's office know that it's being watched, and Melissa
Powers is now the Hamley County Prosecutor. Maybe they can
reach out to her by email, letter, call and leave
a message and follow up and ask her what she's
going to do to write this wrong. Maybe if she
knows people are watching and people have an interest, that
(43:46):
she can do the right thing and dismiss it.
Speaker 1 (43:48):
So we'll have action steps of the bio. And now
that brings us to my favorite part of the show
closing arguments. It works like this. I'm going to thank
each of you again for sharing this incredible, incredible story,
and then I'm going to kick back in my chair,
turn my microphone off, leave my headphones on, and just
listen to anything else you have to say. So, Dave,
(44:08):
why'd you go first? Then Jay? And then ell would
take us off into the sunset.
Speaker 4 (44:14):
It's important that people understand that although Ellwood has very
graciously given Jay and I a lot of credit for this,
there are a lot of people who have been involved
over the years. There's an entire unit of people at
the Federal Public Defender's Office, the Capitol Habeas unit from
Aaron Barnhart, Bridget Kennedy, TC Chansky. I have two colleagues
at VORIS, Emily Saint Cyr and Zach Hollinger. You've got
(44:37):
Dolores Suggs and Tierra Suggs, two experts, Doctor Burdette and
Beth Moore. And you've got Judge Cross, who, frankly, I
think a different judge in this situation would have caved
to the political pressure. You had the prosecutor going on
local radio stations before a decision had been made, calling
her a crazy liberal judge, etc.
Speaker 5 (44:57):
Etc.
Speaker 4 (44:58):
And trying to make this a political issue. And I
think she sat there and just looked at the evidence
and said, politics be damned. I need to make the
decision that is just. And finally, to the prosecutors, I'm
a little bit more cautiously optimistic that the new prosecutor
will take a look at this.
Speaker 5 (45:18):
Please take a look at this.
Speaker 4 (45:20):
Let's have a conversation, let's talk about the evidence, because
there's absolutely no reason to be having a second trial.
Speaker 2 (45:26):
I won't repeat a lot of what Dave said because
I agree with it, but I think the takeaway from this,
I think you're going to find this as a common
thread through the work that you do. You can guarantee
that you will never commit a crime. You can in
no way guarantee you won't be accused of committing a crime.
And when you're accused and it's your day in the box,
you want the system to work the way the system
(45:48):
is supposed to work. You want people to follow the rules.
You want police to do the investigation and prosecutors to
do their job and disclosed all the evidence and right
now in Hamilton County, honestly, in general terms, that doesn't happen,
and so a lot of people can look at this
particular case or any of the other cases that I
know you've you've profiled, and go, well, that would never
(46:08):
happen to me. Don't count on it because you cannot
guarantee you won't be accused someday. Urge people to get involved,
don't stay silent, and speak up.
Speaker 3 (46:17):
I'm very thankful for everyone who took their time, including you,
to help add this and I'm hoping that I could
have my little life back. And I would like to
see the prosecutors be held accountable and two the whole
prosecutors accountable for what they do to take in the
(46:38):
man's life a woman's life. They gonna continue that need
to change if you're going to bring change this system.
Speaker 1 (46:53):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I want to
thank our production team Connor hall Any, Chelsea, Maia Robinson,
Jeff Clyburn, and Kevin Warns. The music in this production
was supplied by three time OSCAR nominated composer Jay Ralph.
Be sure to follow us on Instagram at Wrongful Conviction,
on Facebook at Wrongful Conviction Podcast, and on Twitter at
(47:15):
wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good on
all three platforms. You can also follow me on Instagram
at it's Jason Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is a production of
Lava for Good podcasts and association with Signal Company Number
one
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Bright Pacheco
Maggie Freleng
Jason Flom
Popular Podcasts
True Crime Tonight
If you eat, sleep, and breathe true crime, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT is serving up your nightly fix. Five nights a week, KT STUDIOS & iHEART RADIO invite listeners to pull up a seat for an unfiltered look at the biggest cases making headlines, celebrity scandals, and the trials everyone is watching. With a mix of expert analysis, hot takes, and listener call-ins, TRUE CRIME TONIGHT goes beyond the headlines to uncover the twists, turns, and unanswered questions that keep us all obsessed—because, at TRUE CRIME TONIGHT, there’s a seat for everyone. Whether breaking down crime scene forensics, scrutinizing serial killers, or debating the most binge-worthy true crime docs, True Crime Tonight is the fresh, fast-paced, and slightly addictive home for true crime lovers.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.