November 30, 2023 • 40 mins
Early on the morning of August 11, 1979, an intruder broke into a Manchester, GA home to find a 74-year-old woman asleep on her couch. The man beat and sexually assaulted the woman and then demanded all her money. She gave the attacker cash from her purse and then he left through the back door.
The victim was taken to a local hospital for treatment, but no rape kit was collected due to the extent of her injuries. At the victim’s house, Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) crime scene investigators collected pubic hairs from a bed sheet that had been on the couch at the time of the rape. Police then created a composite sketch of the attacker from the victim’s description, and a GBI agent who was investigating John Jerome White on another charge thought he resembled the sketch. White was convicted on May 30, 1980 of rape, assault, burglary, and robbery.
To learn more about the junk science of hair microscopy evidence:
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/152-wrongful-conviction-junk-science-hair-microscopy-evidence/
To learn more and get involved, visit:
https://www.ajc.com/news/local/from-2007-snapshot-eyewitness-mistake/TxDolwbHy82ba4w1eefq8H/
https://www.georgiainnocenceproject.org/
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 (00:04):
John Jerome White received compensation for his wrongful conviction in
the state of Georgia, but only after having to convince
a majority of the state legislature that he deserved that compensation.
At the twenty twenty three Innocance Network Conference, we spoke
with John and other Georgia ex honoreies like Clarence Harrison,
who also had to go through the same arduous process,
and they're all in the fight to bring about change
(00:26):
in their home state. John White, man with a common
name and a very uncommon story, and we're excited to
hear what you're up to now. I know you're doing
some very very positive work.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
We've got toil states in the United States that don't
have a compensation law. In Georgia one of them, Man,
I've been strong with advocate they get some type of
compensation law in play.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
That way, if I'm the guy that's coming out, it.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Seems like she would be common knowledge that you know
they did it wrong.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
They should rectify it.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
I mean, they can never rectify it because they can't
give you your years of your life back. But how
can you say to some buddy, oops, we locked you
up for half of your life, three quarters of your life,
whatever it is, but we got nothing for you when
you come home.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
It's amazing how simpathety they are. It's really amazing, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
They they seem to be fighting tooths in nails to
not let this happen.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Let's not forget that guys like yourself spend it all
that time in prison.
Speaker 4 (01:19):
You don't get socials.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
You don't qualify for any of the benefits that anybody
else does just from being free.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
We don't got no Social Security benefit if we weren't
given the opportunity.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
To build oodle benefits.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
So and when we apply for them, they tell us
you don't have nothing.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Built up to receive these farms, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
But they seem to want to keep their eye closed
to the fact that, you know, their wrongs created a
problem for the guy that coming out. We have plans,
that's the reasons getting together and going to these capitals
in these states that don't have these conversation all and
lobby them for ourself and inform these people that is
(01:56):
their responsibility to address these issues. And you know, yup
in their process of uscain in a meaningful liestyle back
in society.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
When it comes to trying to make some kind of
amends for these horrendous injustices. I'm just not sure how
anyone could be against it. So when this legislation comes
up for a vote, maybe keeping John's story fresh in
their minds and all of our minds will help. Here's
our original coverage right now. In the early morning hours
(02:26):
of August eleventh, nineteen seventy nine, a seventy four year
old woman was asleep in her den when she awoke
to find.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
A black man had broken in through.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
The window by the light of her television. He brutalized
and raped her for over an hour. After stealing seventy dollars,
The assailant pulled the telephone court out of the wall
and fled through the back door. When the victim finally
was able to contact the police, she was taken to
the hospital, but in her bloodied state, they decided.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Against performing a rape kit.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
However, other biological evidence was collected from the scene. The
victim helped that Georgia Bureau of Investigation develop a composite
sketchet immediately. One of the investigators said that it looked
like a young man named John Jerome White, who was
a person of interest in a string of burglaries. They
arrested John and collected physical samples from him as well
as his driver's license. Even though none of the physical
(03:20):
evidence was a match for John, the victim identified him
at first in a photo array and.
Speaker 4 (03:24):
Then again at a live lineup.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
And after all that, how could anyone deny her gut
wrench in courtroom identification? So they didn't. This is rawful conviction.
(03:51):
Welcome back to wrongful conviction today. We have a unique story,
but not rare, and it's just as tragic every time
something like this happen. Happens when a black man is
misidentified by a white victim. So there's this double victimization
that happens. And it was much easier for these things
to happen before the dawn of DNA testing. Not that
they don't still happen to it, because they do. But
(04:12):
here to discuss the matter. As the former executive director
of the Georgia Andasis Project, she's now with the Fulton
County Conviction Integrity Unit. So, Amy Maxwell, without further ado,
thank you for joining us here again on wrongful conviction.
Thank you for having me and now the man she represented,
mister John Jerome White. You know I'm sorry for the
(04:34):
reason why you're here joining us today, but we are
really honored to have you.
Speaker 3 (04:39):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
You're very welcome. So, John, as we like to do here,
you know, it's sort of almost a tradition. Now, we'd
like to spend some time getting to know you a bit.
I think our audience get to know you a bit.
So can you tell us a little bit about what
your life was like prior to all this insanity?
Speaker 4 (04:55):
Uh?
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Well, I'm from the Smile what we'd like to call
it the railroad town, Uh, in Manchester, Georgia. Uh, that's
in South Georgia. I'm the only boy's six girls. I
was raised by my grandmother. I'd love to do things
for my grandmother, you know, cut wood and working in
gardens and things of that nature. You know, growed up
(05:15):
and got a chance to experience you know, what we
like to call what cross town. That's you know, the
city of Manchester, you know, and I kind of got
away from my grandmama, you know, hold on me and
you know, making sure I was doing the right thing
and thing. And during the time all this occurred, you know,
I had started to do little miner burgers and things
(05:39):
of that nature. Here around Manchester convenience stores and merchant
stores like that.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
I was going in the wrong direction.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
It was going totally against the way I was brought up,
you know, how it all happened to me, you know,
and the way things happened. I felt like it regards
way of putting that putting that roadblock in my path.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Well, that sounds like one way of taking response ability
for the actual wrong that you've admitted to doing in
the past. And I suppose thinking of your wrongful conviction
like that is a way to make peace with it.
But I mean, sometimes on this show we speak with
folks that are pulled completely out of obscurity to be
tried for a crime that had absolutely nothing to do
with But in your case, and this doesn't make it
(06:19):
right by any means, but you were known entity the
police because of those burglaries down in Manchester. But the
crime in question wasn't burglary. It was rape. And you
had never exhibited any sort of violence and certainly no
sexual violence before. So it's really a hell of a
label to get saddled with.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Yeah, I couldn't believe it.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
You know, I always been the type that you know,
I respect the women you know, I was raised by
my grandmother, you know, all alive that you know, that's
all I've been around, you know, women, And it was
kind of hard to believe that, you know, I would
be in charge with, you know, the whole type of crime.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Nevertheless, the burglaries had you on the radar of the
local police when this terrible crime occurred. And it was
in the early morning hours of August eleventh, nineteen seventy nine,
when a man broke into the Manchester, Georgia home of
a seventy four year old woman.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
Well, what we know is that she was in the din.
She was asleep on her couch, and she had her
sheets on the couch, and she did have the light
on in the kitchen, and she had her television on,
so that was the only line available to her. She
also wore prescription glasses and she didn't have her glasses
on and someone broke in through a window in the din.
(07:33):
He attacked her, He raped her, He brutalized her for
over an hour. Then he ripped out the telephone cords
out of the wall and went out the back door.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
He also stole seventy dollars in cash from her purse.
Now she eventually called the cops and was taken to
the hospital. But do I have this right that no
rape kit was collected.
Speaker 5 (07:53):
No rape kit was collected. They said because she was
so damaged during the rape, The rape was so brutal,
and there was just so much blood, they made a
determination that they couldn't get any viable evidence. And you know,
you've got to remember back then, they were only able
(08:14):
to do blood typing. So I think that their thought
process may have been, there's so much of her blood,
you know, his blood type is going to just get
all mixed up in there. They may also have not
wanted to got to remember, this is a small town,
right They might have been concerned that she was already
(08:35):
so traumatized that they didn't want to do any more
of an examination. You know, she was seventy four years old,
and I can't even imagine how she was presenting to
the doctors. Obviously they should have done a sexual assault kit,
they certainly would today, but they did not.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
And since there was no rape kit, there's no seminal evidence.
But there was other blood and biological evidence at the scene,
which we'll get into in a bit. But in nineteen
seventy nine, as Amy mentioned, all we had was sorology,
which had its own limitations. DNA testing, of course, was
not available yet, and I can't imagine collecting a rape
(09:15):
kit would have been an easy thing to do with
this poor seventy four year old woman in the state
that she was in. But the fact that she did
somehow survive, she must have been some tough lady. So
what happened next in this investigation.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
Well, I should point out that this is such a
small town that their local police didn't do the investigation.
They brought in the state police, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
And when they were collecting evidence, they collected the bed
sheet that was on the couch, and the bed sheet
had hairs. Now, I will say that at trial they
(09:50):
only thought there was one hair. It turned out there
were several hairs on that bed sheet, and they preserved that. Yeah,
I will say that at trial the hairs were discussed,
to use the parlance at the time, they were negroid hairs,
and that's pretty much all they could say about them.
(10:11):
They did a microscopic examination of them and they said
that they looked almost exactly alike, that they were almost
positive that they were from the same person. Of course,
what that is is a human eye is looking at
two hairs and their pubic hair, so they're very small hairs, right,
(10:32):
and saying, oh, yeah, they look alike, you know. And
back then that was good evidence, right, Not so much.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Now, yeah, definitely not. We did a whole episode, by
the way of Wrongful Conviction Junk Science that Josh Duben
hosted about hair microscopy, and we're going to link to
it in the episode bio. But to think that someone
could compare hairs from a suspect and a crime scene
just by looking and match them to the exclusion, by
the way of all other potential suspects, every anybody else,
(11:01):
all other people on the whole planet, is absolutely bonkers. Now,
remember they used to do that all the damn time. Now,
they mentioned that these hairs were from a black man,
as the victim had already told them, But what about
this piece of skin that I read about?
Speaker 5 (11:16):
Yes, so apparently when the man came in through the window,
he cut himself on his hand and there was literally
like a triangular piece of his palm that was also
recovered from a scene.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
And it's unclear whether or not they did seriological testing
on that either. But we're going to come back to
the piece of skin in a bit. But at this
point they moved on to relying on cross racial identification. Now,
study after study has shown, these are studies of which
they used a control group that has not seen the crime,
(11:55):
that that control group tends to be more accurate than
victims or witnesses. So get this. Cross racial identification has
been proven to be less accurate than guessing. So if
you actually didn't even witness the crime and were shown
(12:16):
a lineup, you'd have a better chance of picking the
person just by guessing than someone who did witness the crime.
It's an amazing thing, but it's true. Look it up.
I encourage you.
Speaker 5 (12:27):
So they do a composite sketch of her attacker that
she saw in the dark, the only light from the
kitchen and the television while she's being traumatized. Right, So
she does do a composite sketch, and there is a
GBI agent who is part of the investigation. He says, hey,
that looks a lot like John White. And then everything,
(12:49):
of course, is often running at that point.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
So John, this wasn't a big town, so I'm sure
word traveled fast at that point, had you heard about
what had happened?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
We heard, you know, this particular lady had got raped.
You know, I didn't think much of it. I really didn't,
you know. And when all this occurred, they was suspect
me for doing those mount of burgers around town, and
come to find out that they were looking for me.
So I decided to just up and leave Manchester. You know,
I was at the age of nineteen then, and I
(13:20):
went to a little small town and the Corps Georgia,
where I had some people, you know, some cousins staying.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
So this crime happened on August eleventh, and they finally
caught up with you into Core, Georgia and drove you
back to Meriweather County around September twenty first.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
On the ride back, they kept on asking me questions
about this here particular crime involved in the seventy something
year old lady and I had a venera disease they
called goungria, and you know, being a little small addict
like I was, you know, I didn't answer the question directly.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
You know.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
When they kept on asking me, I said, well, if
I did it, she got Goungarria. They took that and
I like to say they ran with it. When they
(14:14):
got me back to the county, JA. They took a
house and apples finger Prince loves an Apple blood from me,
and they took my driving license and I'm a Social
Security car and everything, and you know, they locked me up.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
So they took those samples in order to run tests
on all the physical evidence that they had tried to
match the hair. Like we already mentioned, they probably did
some seriological testing with the patcherskin in your blood. We
don't know that for sure, but that would seem like
it would have been the least thing they could have done.
And had any of it matched you, they would have
been shouting it from the rooftops. Now they already had
(14:48):
this composite sketch that they thought looked like you. They
had to catch up with you a few towns away,
and you were being held for the burglaries.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
My grandma came to get me out the next day. Apple,
you know, had brought me back to Milweather County. That's
when she was in on that I would be in
charge with, you know, Ray Rob reggravated so and murgery.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Curiously, she got that news before they had even taken
your driver's license to be viewed by the victim in
an alleged photo array.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
I don't know if they took my driving license or
they took many pictures. They say they took a photo
array to her apartment, but I'm assuming they took my
driver license.
Speaker 5 (15:27):
We don't know much about it because, of course, you know,
they didn't record a lot of information. They certainly didn't
record the photo array, and I don't believe we ever
found that photo array did with John. I don't think
we've ever seen those photos, so we don't know who
else was in the photo and how well they matched,
either the composite or John.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Now, maybe this composite sketch looked enough like you that
your likeness was already imprinted in her mind, So photo
array or not, she had been primed to pick you
with that come positive in mind. And it's also possible
that they only brought along your driver's license rather than
a number of other photos that favored your features. We
don't know, but now you had been chosen from this
(16:10):
alleged photo array, and things started going down how fast?
Speaker 2 (16:13):
A few you know, weeks after they did all this,
here they performed the line up. It was just us
on the room and me standing about ten feet from her,
along with a few other guys. And I couldn't believe,
you know, it would tick with it because they brought another
person up there of a place I had robbed, and
she didn't pick me out, but they bringed it old
(16:35):
lady nine, and she picked me out. Like I said,
I'm quite sure that any take now one of the
other guy pictures that was in that line up to her,
and I'm the only somebody she had seen recently on
a photo.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
Again, we're not sure what happened at that alleged photo lineup,
as no documentation has ever been found, But I want
our audience to note that I witnessed misidentification is a
contributing factor in sixty nine percent of all known convictions,
and in this case, we have a cross racial mis identification. So,
as I mentioned earlier, in study after study, cross racial
(17:10):
identifications are actually less accurate than guessing. But what about
the robbery victim also white and that would have been
the correct identification. It's crazy, but okay, so cross racial
or not, she had already been primed to pick you
out of the lineup by seeing your driver's license in
addition potentially to a composite sketch that may have favored
(17:33):
you or you know, pointed towards you. I mean nineteen seventies, Georgia.
You were already known to police, and then an old
white lady who had been brutally attacked identified you. I
hate to say it, but I think your fate was
pretty much sealed. Did you have a court appointed or
a paid attorney?
Speaker 2 (17:53):
They gave me a quarter pointed attorney. But my mom
and them, you know, they raised the money and they
had you know, Sampa Bishop.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
And he's now a US representative, right.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
He was a part of the legislature back you know,
when I was going to trial. They took me to trial.
You know, they picked a jury which was mainly all white.
They presented the evidence. The finger pressed they said they
collected at the scene of the crime. They said all
of them were sponged to the point that they couldn't
get no kind of identification off of them. They say
the blood test came back negative. I don't know what
(18:25):
they had tested. I don't know they tested the skin.
I don't know what it was. But the crime left
in Bustcat said the houseyble could be mine. I know
they brought up the pigmentation of a black person's hair
and they said it was all of it was somebol.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Which really this technician was testifying that the hair was
a black person's and you were also black, which is
just not that probative. And what was it that they
tested your blood against.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
I don't really remember what it was they tested with
the blood, I have to be honest with you. But also,
you know we talked about the piece of skin, right
that there was the cut, and when they picked John
up five weeks later, he had a cut on his palm,
and so that was another.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Piece, right. But the item that they tested for blood,
which the skin, was more than likely the item it
excluded him. But I suppose none of this matters when
you have the word of a seventy year old white
lady who was a victim of a brutal assault.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
They actually to peak me out in court why she
was on a stand.
Speaker 5 (19:26):
The problem with eyewitness identification is it's unreliable, but it's
incredibly powerful in court. You have a now seventy five
year old woman who is so traumatized the er didn't
even want to do an examination of her. Get on
the stand and say that's the man that did that
(19:48):
to me. You know, the jury at that point is
done right if there's a few little things that they
can put together, like oh, that hair might be the
same or oh when he had a cut too, that
was enough.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
I mean, how do you combat that? Even pointing out
that she wore glasses, that it was dark in there.
It's debatable whether that helps or hurts your client. When
you have an emotionally charged moment like that, how are
you going to try to contradict her the victim?
Speaker 5 (20:17):
Right?
Speaker 4 (20:17):
John?
Speaker 1 (20:17):
At that point, did you have any hope that the
jury might actually still get this right?
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You know, me knowing that I didn't do it, I
didn't have no doubt in my mind that I was
going on. I was that young and I was so
inexperienced that I thought I was going home.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
Can you take us back to that awful moment when
they read the verdict.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
That it broke down and started crying.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
You know, I will convicted of rape, robbery, aggravated the
salt and two council burgery.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
And they asked.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
Me did I have anything to say? I just said
I didn't do it. When they took me back to
the hole and say, well, I know, I broke down
and started crying. I was corresponding with a cousin.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Of my mind. You know.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
He told me, you know, you know, God got his
reasons for everything, you know what I'm saying. And he
said it was a reason behind it, you know for me,
you know, it was a reason behind and I thought,
I just thought that reason behind it, you know, I
just accepted it at God's will, and I moved forward.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
I couldn't go through that their time, all that time that.
Speaker 2 (21:34):
They gave me feeling some type of way, and I
just had to learn how to how to survive inside
the contention. I found what they call it jail house attorney,
and we tried, you know, by buying Ahabor Corpus against
my lawyer that he didn't represent me right. We had requested,
you know, from a transcript and all that everything that
(21:56):
pertained into my trial. But they, you know, the time
of mayor, wealla didn't send me anything but a transfer.
They said they didn't have nothing else to send me.
And we buy ourselves an assistant accounseling and they denied that.
So I pretty much lay down on it from that
point on.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
So at that time, it was much easier to be
granted parole even with a sentence like yours.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Which was life plus sixty years.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
And usually, let's face it, they're not going to grant
you parole without an admission of guilt and a show
of remorse, even if you didn't commit the crime. That
that's that's a detail gets washed away. But it appears
that they may have actually believed in your innocence.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
Yeah, after I want to say, eleven years, I came
up a parole. They told me, in order to make
parole that I would have to do some type of
sex offlinal program. And I told the lady that, you know,
I didn't do it. They muster white. Unless you'd get
in some sex offlinal program, you ain't gonna get out
of jail. So they sent me to Metro up here
(22:56):
in Atlanta, George, where they had the programs there.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
And my mamma came.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
Up and she says, go on, get in this program
if it gonna help you get out, even you had
to tell a lie. And they told me to cry
till you for getting in the safe Defending program, which
you had to describe what to play during the crime.
And so I told him, Man, you know I can't
do that. I say, I can't imagine what took play
doing this stair crime. You know, I couldn't make that
lie up. So I basically had just just gave it
(23:22):
up again, you know. And uh So one day I
came in from work and the warden called me to
his office at me. He aad me why I was
at his institution, and I told him that they had
something he there participate in the safe shpical program and
that I couldn't you know, participate in because I couldn't
describe the crime. So he's something on back to the
dormator and some strange things occurred there, told me to
(23:43):
pack my stuff up, that I was going to Hospital
lie and Augusta, Georgia for a year proud I had opposcopic.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Survey then on my knee.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
So one of the inmates that was coming in from
work helping to notice a piece of paper that had
all the transfers on and everything, and he told me
that said, John, you weren't going to Augusta Medical Hospital,
say you going to constantly on Haldway House. And it
totally shocked me that they're all finna get out of Parrison.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
That the par board cut you a brake or was
it the warden points of strings? I don't know, And
no one told you.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
Nobody told them.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
Okay, that's weird. So you got paroled, I guess. And
now you were starting out on a tough road to
reacclimate into society. There are a lot of obstacles to
employment and getting IDs and things like that, and those
are some of the many reasons why recidivism rates can
be as high as they are in some places. Not
to mention that you turned to burglary in the past,
(24:43):
and so where and how did you start that journey?
Speaker 2 (24:46):
When I first got out, I was up in Atlanta
in the halfway house. I parode out of there to
room and house. I got tired of the room and house,
and I moved to moved to manchouse.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Did you move back in with your mom? Your grandma?
Speaker 4 (25:01):
My mom?
Speaker 3 (25:01):
My grandma had passed while I was incarcerated.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Sorry to hear that, But luckily you still had some family,
right Were your sisters around now?
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Most of them had, they had married, they moved on.
It was most of just me and my mom and
my dad was still living at the time, and my niece.
Speaker 5 (25:19):
You know, John got the opportunity to come out on parole,
but he came out as a sex offender, right, who
hires a sex offender? You know, it was a struggle
when he was out on parole.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
So what did you do for work? And I understand
you eventually went back to prison.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
When I was dying back down here, I was doing
odds and then work. And one day I was at
McDonald's and seeing this guy and he pulled his wallet
out and he had a lot of money in it,
and me and another guy follow him and Robin, the
other guy got caught up some kind of way, and
(25:54):
he told you know what that appened. And I turned
myself in again and I revoked my parole and saw
me back.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
I talked with the DA.
Speaker 2 (26:05):
He gave me ten years ran into what I already had,
and that he wouldn't have no kind of negative recommendation
towards if I was to come up with a role again.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Well, I can't say a lot of people are going
to have a ton of sympathy for you on that situation.
But it's like you said earlier about how you made
peace with your wrongful conviction, you kind of felt deserving
of it because of the wrong that you had done.
And I want to point out that in nabbing the
wrong guy for that ultra violent rape and robber all
those years ago, this did a really terrible disservice the
(26:36):
entire community, not least of which to the victim, because
the real perpetrator was still free. So now it's nineteen
ninety seven year back to serve out this new sentence
and your old one. And it's not until about four
years later when the amazing Amy Maxwell became the founding
executive director of the Georgia Innisces Project. Can you run
through how you all came upon John's case?
Speaker 5 (26:57):
The Georgia nisis Project started in two thousand one. Obviously
we got cases coming to us fairly quickly. But as
we were working on the cases, I started thinking, well,
what about all those people who don't know that we
could look at the cases. What about those people who've
not heard that we exist? So in two thousand and four,
(27:19):
first of all, we tried to go through the prison
hierarchy and try to get notices posted in prison, and
they wouldn't do that. So what we did is we
went through the Department of Corrections website and found everybody
who was in prison for rape and sent them a letter.
We sent about twelve hundred letters and we got about
(27:41):
one hundred and twenty, so we got about ten percent
return on our letter. And John was actually one of them.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
I didn't I really didn't even know what to write,
but I wrote it won a week or so late today, Aim,
and I'm gonna responding.
Speaker 5 (27:53):
We looked at his evidence and the hair evidence. They
only really talked about one hair that they compared, and
so we were under the impression from the crime lab
report and from the testimony that there was only the
one hair. But most importantly, we were trying to find
that piece of flesh. In fact, we called it the
piece of flesh case, right, because it was such an
(28:13):
unusual piece of evidence. You know, this was a straight
up If we could find this evidence, we would know
who the perpetrator was. So I had an intern that
went down to Meriwether County looking for that piece of flesh.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Right.
Speaker 5 (28:26):
We just could not find it. We couldn't find it
at the GBI, we couldn't find it anywhere, and so
we just just kept on. It's hard people tell you
that the evidence doesn't exist.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
Or they just haven't looked at all because either they
didn't care or they were instructed to ignore such requestions.
Speaker 5 (28:42):
Well, there might be that. So finally we went in
person to the clerk's office, and what they ended up
finding was not the piece of flesh, but there were
several of their hairs from the crime scene. Now, let
me just say that hair are they're good evidence.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
If they're good evidence, right, if the hairs are pulled
out from the root, then a DNA profile can be developed, right,
if they.
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Can give us information. But there's also I mean, there
could be other reasons hairs were there. There was another
Georgia case that involved hairs, and the theory was that
she did her wash at the laundromat and she might
have picked up some random hairs there, which, of course,
these are pubic hairs, right, Why are you picking up
(29:28):
pubic hairs at the laundry. So anyway, but we were
we were concerned, you know, if these hairs didn't match John,
that helped us, but it might not walk him out
of prison. So we you know, had to tell John
we've got these hairs we're going to test on. But
so we sent those hairs for DNA testing, and we
(29:49):
find out that the hairs don't match John, and we
all pile in the car to staff members and our intern,
Cliff Williams. Cliff had been working on the case almost
from the beginning. I can't where were you, John, I
can't even remember where you were Macon State Prison. So
it's like two hours away. We get there and we're
getting all we're putting all of our stuff in the
(30:11):
trunk because you know, you can't take anything into the
prison with you. And I get a call from the
GBI and they tell me that there's been a CODIS match.
And I'm standing in the parking lot going, oh my gosh.
We were just going down to tell him we got
the DNA but to hold on. And I thought, oh
my god, we're going to get to go in and
tell him he's coming home. And I said, who didn't match?
(30:35):
He goes, oh, it matched a man named James Parum.
And at that point my intern goes, James Parham, I
think he was a suspect in this case. So he
pulls out the box, you know, because we of course
carry John's White's box all the way to the prison
with us, you know, his file, and he's going through
(30:57):
the file and he pulls out the photo of the
live lineup, turns it over and James Parum is actually
in the lineup where she picks John White instead of
James Parum. So we don't even know what to do
with all this, right, So we get to go in
(31:17):
and tell John all of this information. And I'm like John,
and don't know how quickly you're coming home, but you're
coming home.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
Yeah, I'm looking at the photo right now and we're
gonna link to it from the bio. I mean, oh
my god, Like John is in the number three spot
of course because he was the target. And James Parham
sure enough, is right there in number five right.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Oh, actually you know Edie institution now was there? Me
and it were roommates that I am a a one.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
What Yeah, Oh my god, I'm rarely at a loss
for words, but that's insane.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
It was a strange thing.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
He helped through it at my whole a journey because
he was in the same room up with me, and
I ended up with his Bible. When I got out,
it had the name on it. I gave it back
to it sister to get him. But yeah, Amy came
down and told me about I was getting out. And
when they did come to get me out, they came back.
They rushed back there because they didn't want no media
(32:19):
down at the institution. They rushed me in, wanted to
know it was anybody come get me. And they went
downtown and bought me some clothes and made sure I
was dressed. And when my mom and them came to
get me, and they they shook me on the way
as quick as they can get me away from there.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
So, Amy, what were the machinations that you had to
go through to finish the job and get him home?
Speaker 5 (32:41):
Well, it was so quick. So you know, we get
all the information, but so does the district attorney. And
so of course when the district's attorney, and at that
time it was Pete Scandalacus, who is now the head
of the Prosecuting Attorney's Council here in Georgia, and he
saw what we saw. And of course I'm on the
phone with him on the way back from the and
I'm like, Pete, they got a codus match. What are
(33:02):
you gonna do? And he contacted the prison and honestly,
John John's family got the notice to come pick him up.
But literally four days later his folks are on the
way down to Oglethorpe, Georgia to pick him up.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
So John was hum So John, what was your first meal?
Where did you go? What did you what did you do?
Speaker 3 (33:24):
It was like a blur. It was like a blur.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
I can't remember too much of the only thing I
can remember looking back, when we passed the Prills and
going out, I think I went to sleep. I think
I went to sleep because somebody were happening. We went
by some my sister house, and then we went straight
to Atlanta for press conferences and sayings of that nature.
(33:48):
And I had me some fride grade tomatoes, had some
some ochre. I've had been warnings. And I remember that
night that I got up and I walked. I walked
up to a restaurant and this guy a chance just
(34:09):
look up at the sky, you know, and look at
the stalls and things, and just it's well, I could
just see beyond that, you know, I could get a
chance to see the sky, you know, in the stall
and in the moon. Some of you didn't very often,
you didn't get to see too much of why you
was any pen attention.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
So James Parham played guilty who since to twenty years
in prison on this rape. Right, and then in two
thousand and nine, the Georgia legislature authorized the payment of
five hundred thousand dollars in compensation to you. Now, no
amount of money would ever be enough, and that's not
even I mean, that's that number is tiny compared to
what it should be.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Yeah, well, you know, Georgia don't have a compensation law.
And I got five hundred thousand dollars a conversation with
prescriptions that I gotta maintain some type of employment. I
got submit to drug tests and every so often I
can't catch another fella there though, I'll lose my conversation.
(35:12):
I believe they put those stipulations in it because they
don't want to get it, they don't want to give
me the money, and that it was done for me
to fail. You know, we asked for a million and something,
they got it down to seven and fifty thousand. It
passed one body of our legislature, then it went to
the other body of our legislation and they rejected it.
(35:32):
They revised it, and they agreed to all these stipulations.
Speaker 1 (35:35):
Yeah, you know, it's just crazy to me that anybody
could look at someone in your shoes and not have
an instinct to immediately want to help, but rather their
first instinct is I'm gonna fight this. I'm gonna fight
to not write this wrong, to keep this wrong as
wrong as it could be. Is there anything our audience
can do for you.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
You know, right now?
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Give them this opportunity to say what I'm about to say,
I never you know, go vote. You know what I'm saying,
Get these unsimpensated people that that's a part of our
legislators wave up there so we can't get some of
the bill pass that would that a and us getting
you know, the support we need not only me, but
(36:16):
other people that's in then you know, the similar situations yea,
you know, I you know, I'm gonna look out for me,
but that's what we need. We need voters, We need
those people that's in office that that's that's voting against this.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
It change to be removed.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
I hope our audience really takes those words to heart.
And what about you, amy, any call to action for
our audience?
Speaker 5 (36:43):
Well, I think folks can obviously follow the Georgia Innocence Project,
particularly about the legislation, but there is also an Exignery Fund,
So if folks wanted to donate to the Georgia Edocence Project,
they could donate and specify that it's for the Exignery
fun That would be great.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
Okay, So we'll have those action steps linked in the bio,
which brings us to my favorite part of the show.
It's called, of course, closing arguments. And this is the
part of the show where I thank you both for
being here and just sharing this unbelievable, horrible story. And
with that, I'm going to kick back in my chair,
turn my microphone off, leave my headphones on, and close
(37:25):
my eyes and just listen for anything else you want
to share with me and our amazing audience.
Speaker 5 (37:32):
I would highly recommend people google the live lineup photo
in John's case. When you get a chance to look
at the live lineup, you're going to see how different
James Parham looked from everybody else in that lineup. And
it just goes to show how incredibly difficult it is
(37:55):
to deal with eyewitness identification. I mean, the actual perpetrator
was there live in front of her and she still
picked the wrong man. So I think that we all
need to be very cautious because as we said earlier.
When the eyewindness takes the standard trial and says that's
the person, it is incredibly powerful, but we need to
(38:16):
be very careful. The other thing is how really hard
it is to come out of prison. You know, even
though he comes out of prison an innocent man, prison
does a number on you. Prison physically changes you, you
and mentally for sure changes you. And there's really no
support other than the people who rally around him. So,
(38:38):
you know, we've got to got to do better because
people are going to come out of prison and we
want them to be able to succeed or they're going
to What's going to happen is their struggle and they
end up committing a crime because they're struggling.
Speaker 3 (38:53):
I'm there, I'm thankful. I'm thank buy, you know.
Speaker 2 (38:56):
I love and her determination to start to answer the project.
My experience being incost rated, it's like PGSD soldiers. I
don't have too much trust for nobody. I'm pretty much
a loner. I don't you know.
Speaker 3 (39:13):
I don't deal with a whole lot of people. It's hard.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It's hard, and I just want the government to step
up to the plate and establish our social security benefits,
our medical benefits and make these things are possible so
we can you know, at least live, you know, when
we do get sick or something like that, that we
can go see a doctor. We constantly being denied either
(39:39):
easier benefit because we were wrongly convicted. We weren't given
an opportunity to build up to you know, to have
no kind of social security in our benefits built up,
it would take them from us, so it still be
given back to us.
Speaker 3 (39:52):
That's what I want.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I'd like to
thank our production team Connor Hall, Jeff Cleibern, and Kevin Wardis,
with research by Lyla Robinson. 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
(40:21):
wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good.
Speaker 4 (40:24):
On all three platforms.
Speaker 1 (40:26):
You can also follow me on both TikTok and Instagram
at it's Jason Flam. Wrongful Conviction is the production of
Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number
one
John Jerome White received compensation for his wrongful conviction in
the state of Georgia, but only after having to convince
a majority of the state legislature that he deserved that compensation.
At the twenty twenty three Innocance Network Conference, we spoke
with John and other Georgia ex honoreies like Clarence Harrison,
who also had to go through the same arduous process,
and they're all in the fight to bring about change
(00:26):
in their home state. John White, man with a common
name and a very uncommon story, and we're excited to
hear what you're up to now. I know you're doing
some very very positive work.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
We've got toil states in the United States that don't
have a compensation law. In Georgia one of them, Man,
I've been strong with advocate they get some type of
compensation law in play.
Speaker 3 (00:46):
That way, if I'm the guy that's coming out, it.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Seems like she would be common knowledge that you know
they did it wrong.
Speaker 3 (00:53):
They should rectify it.
Speaker 1 (00:54):
I mean, they can never rectify it because they can't
give you your years of your life back. But how
can you say to some buddy, oops, we locked you
up for half of your life, three quarters of your life,
whatever it is, but we got nothing for you when
you come home.
Speaker 3 (01:07):
It's amazing how simpathety they are. It's really amazing, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
They they seem to be fighting tooths in nails to
not let this happen.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
Let's not forget that guys like yourself spend it all
that time in prison.
Speaker 4 (01:19):
You don't get socials.
Speaker 1 (01:21):
You don't qualify for any of the benefits that anybody
else does just from being free.
Speaker 2 (01:24):
We don't got no Social Security benefit if we weren't
given the opportunity.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
To build oodle benefits.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
So and when we apply for them, they tell us
you don't have nothing.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Built up to receive these farms, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:36):
But they seem to want to keep their eye closed
to the fact that, you know, their wrongs created a
problem for the guy that coming out. We have plans,
that's the reasons getting together and going to these capitals
in these states that don't have these conversation all and
lobby them for ourself and inform these people that is
(01:56):
their responsibility to address these issues. And you know, yup
in their process of uscain in a meaningful liestyle back
in society.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
When it comes to trying to make some kind of
amends for these horrendous injustices. I'm just not sure how
anyone could be against it. So when this legislation comes
up for a vote, maybe keeping John's story fresh in
their minds and all of our minds will help. Here's
our original coverage right now. In the early morning hours
(02:26):
of August eleventh, nineteen seventy nine, a seventy four year
old woman was asleep in her den when she awoke
to find.
Speaker 4 (02:33):
A black man had broken in through.
Speaker 1 (02:34):
The window by the light of her television. He brutalized
and raped her for over an hour. After stealing seventy dollars,
The assailant pulled the telephone court out of the wall
and fled through the back door. When the victim finally
was able to contact the police, she was taken to
the hospital, but in her bloodied state, they decided.
Speaker 4 (02:55):
Against performing a rape kit.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
However, other biological evidence was collected from the scene. The
victim helped that Georgia Bureau of Investigation develop a composite
sketchet immediately. One of the investigators said that it looked
like a young man named John Jerome White, who was
a person of interest in a string of burglaries. They
arrested John and collected physical samples from him as well
as his driver's license. Even though none of the physical
(03:20):
evidence was a match for John, the victim identified him
at first in a photo array and.
Speaker 4 (03:24):
Then again at a live lineup.
Speaker 1 (03:27):
And after all that, how could anyone deny her gut
wrench in courtroom identification? So they didn't. This is rawful conviction.
(03:51):
Welcome back to wrongful conviction today. We have a unique story,
but not rare, and it's just as tragic every time
something like this happen. Happens when a black man is
misidentified by a white victim. So there's this double victimization
that happens. And it was much easier for these things
to happen before the dawn of DNA testing. Not that
they don't still happen to it, because they do. But
(04:12):
here to discuss the matter. As the former executive director
of the Georgia Andasis Project, she's now with the Fulton
County Conviction Integrity Unit. So, Amy Maxwell, without further ado,
thank you for joining us here again on wrongful conviction.
Thank you for having me and now the man she represented,
mister John Jerome White. You know I'm sorry for the
(04:34):
reason why you're here joining us today, but we are
really honored to have you.
Speaker 3 (04:39):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (04:40):
You're very welcome. So, John, as we like to do here,
you know, it's sort of almost a tradition. Now, we'd
like to spend some time getting to know you a bit.
I think our audience get to know you a bit.
So can you tell us a little bit about what
your life was like prior to all this insanity?
Speaker 4 (04:55):
Uh?
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Well, I'm from the Smile what we'd like to call
it the railroad town, Uh, in Manchester, Georgia. Uh, that's
in South Georgia. I'm the only boy's six girls. I
was raised by my grandmother. I'd love to do things
for my grandmother, you know, cut wood and working in
gardens and things of that nature. You know, growed up
(05:15):
and got a chance to experience you know, what we
like to call what cross town. That's you know, the
city of Manchester, you know, and I kind of got
away from my grandmama, you know, hold on me and
you know, making sure I was doing the right thing
and thing. And during the time all this occurred, you know,
I had started to do little miner burgers and things
(05:39):
of that nature. Here around Manchester convenience stores and merchant
stores like that.
Speaker 3 (05:44):
I was going in the wrong direction.
Speaker 2 (05:46):
It was going totally against the way I was brought up,
you know, how it all happened to me, you know,
and the way things happened. I felt like it regards
way of putting that putting that roadblock in my path.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Well, that sounds like one way of taking response ability
for the actual wrong that you've admitted to doing in
the past. And I suppose thinking of your wrongful conviction
like that is a way to make peace with it.
But I mean, sometimes on this show we speak with
folks that are pulled completely out of obscurity to be
tried for a crime that had absolutely nothing to do
with But in your case, and this doesn't make it
(06:19):
right by any means, but you were known entity the
police because of those burglaries down in Manchester. But the
crime in question wasn't burglary. It was rape. And you
had never exhibited any sort of violence and certainly no
sexual violence before. So it's really a hell of a
label to get saddled with.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
Yeah, I couldn't believe it.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
You know, I always been the type that you know,
I respect the women you know, I was raised by
my grandmother, you know, all alive that you know, that's
all I've been around, you know, women, And it was
kind of hard to believe that, you know, I would
be in charge with, you know, the whole type of crime.
Speaker 1 (06:54):
Nevertheless, the burglaries had you on the radar of the
local police when this terrible crime occurred. And it was
in the early morning hours of August eleventh, nineteen seventy nine,
when a man broke into the Manchester, Georgia home of
a seventy four year old woman.
Speaker 5 (07:09):
Well, what we know is that she was in the din.
She was asleep on her couch, and she had her
sheets on the couch, and she did have the light
on in the kitchen, and she had her television on,
so that was the only line available to her. She
also wore prescription glasses and she didn't have her glasses
on and someone broke in through a window in the din.
(07:33):
He attacked her, He raped her, He brutalized her for
over an hour. Then he ripped out the telephone cords
out of the wall and went out the back door.
Speaker 1 (07:43):
He also stole seventy dollars in cash from her purse.
Now she eventually called the cops and was taken to
the hospital. But do I have this right that no
rape kit was collected.
Speaker 5 (07:53):
No rape kit was collected. They said because she was
so damaged during the rape, The rape was so brutal,
and there was just so much blood, they made a
determination that they couldn't get any viable evidence. And you know,
you've got to remember back then, they were only able
(08:14):
to do blood typing. So I think that their thought
process may have been, there's so much of her blood,
you know, his blood type is going to just get
all mixed up in there. They may also have not
wanted to got to remember, this is a small town,
right They might have been concerned that she was already
(08:35):
so traumatized that they didn't want to do any more
of an examination. You know, she was seventy four years old,
and I can't even imagine how she was presenting to
the doctors. Obviously they should have done a sexual assault kit,
they certainly would today, but they did not.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
And since there was no rape kit, there's no seminal evidence.
But there was other blood and biological evidence at the scene,
which we'll get into in a bit. But in nineteen
seventy nine, as Amy mentioned, all we had was sorology,
which had its own limitations. DNA testing, of course, was
not available yet, and I can't imagine collecting a rape
(09:15):
kit would have been an easy thing to do with
this poor seventy four year old woman in the state
that she was in. But the fact that she did
somehow survive, she must have been some tough lady. So
what happened next in this investigation.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
Well, I should point out that this is such a
small town that their local police didn't do the investigation.
They brought in the state police, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.
And when they were collecting evidence, they collected the bed
sheet that was on the couch, and the bed sheet
had hairs. Now, I will say that at trial they
(09:50):
only thought there was one hair. It turned out there
were several hairs on that bed sheet, and they preserved that. Yeah,
I will say that at trial the hairs were discussed,
to use the parlance at the time, they were negroid hairs,
and that's pretty much all they could say about them.
(10:11):
They did a microscopic examination of them and they said
that they looked almost exactly alike, that they were almost
positive that they were from the same person. Of course,
what that is is a human eye is looking at
two hairs and their pubic hair, so they're very small hairs, right,
(10:32):
and saying, oh, yeah, they look alike, you know. And
back then that was good evidence, right, Not so much.
Speaker 1 (10:39):
Now, yeah, definitely not. We did a whole episode, by
the way of Wrongful Conviction Junk Science that Josh Duben
hosted about hair microscopy, and we're going to link to
it in the episode bio. But to think that someone
could compare hairs from a suspect and a crime scene
just by looking and match them to the exclusion, by
the way of all other potential suspects, every anybody else,
(11:01):
all other people on the whole planet, is absolutely bonkers. Now,
remember they used to do that all the damn time. Now,
they mentioned that these hairs were from a black man,
as the victim had already told them, But what about
this piece of skin that I read about?
Speaker 5 (11:16):
Yes, so apparently when the man came in through the window,
he cut himself on his hand and there was literally
like a triangular piece of his palm that was also
recovered from a scene.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
And it's unclear whether or not they did seriological testing
on that either. But we're going to come back to
the piece of skin in a bit. But at this
point they moved on to relying on cross racial identification. Now,
study after study has shown, these are studies of which
they used a control group that has not seen the crime,
(11:55):
that that control group tends to be more accurate than
victims or witnesses. So get this. Cross racial identification has
been proven to be less accurate than guessing. So if
you actually didn't even witness the crime and were shown
(12:16):
a lineup, you'd have a better chance of picking the
person just by guessing than someone who did witness the crime.
It's an amazing thing, but it's true. Look it up.
I encourage you.
Speaker 5 (12:27):
So they do a composite sketch of her attacker that
she saw in the dark, the only light from the
kitchen and the television while she's being traumatized. Right, So
she does do a composite sketch, and there is a
GBI agent who is part of the investigation. He says, hey,
that looks a lot like John White. And then everything,
(12:49):
of course, is often running at that point.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
So John, this wasn't a big town, so I'm sure
word traveled fast at that point, had you heard about
what had happened?
Speaker 2 (12:59):
We heard, you know, this particular lady had got raped.
You know, I didn't think much of it. I really didn't,
you know. And when all this occurred, they was suspect
me for doing those mount of burgers around town, and
come to find out that they were looking for me.
So I decided to just up and leave Manchester. You know,
I was at the age of nineteen then, and I
(13:20):
went to a little small town and the Corps Georgia,
where I had some people, you know, some cousins staying.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
So this crime happened on August eleventh, and they finally
caught up with you into Core, Georgia and drove you
back to Meriweather County around September twenty first.
Speaker 2 (13:34):
On the ride back, they kept on asking me questions
about this here particular crime involved in the seventy something
year old lady and I had a venera disease they
called goungria, and you know, being a little small addict
like I was, you know, I didn't answer the question directly.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
You know.
Speaker 2 (13:52):
When they kept on asking me, I said, well, if
I did it, she got Goungarria. They took that and
I like to say they ran with it. When they
(14:14):
got me back to the county, JA. They took a
house and apples finger Prince loves an Apple blood from me,
and they took my driving license and I'm a Social
Security car and everything, and you know, they locked me up.
Speaker 1 (14:27):
So they took those samples in order to run tests
on all the physical evidence that they had tried to
match the hair. Like we already mentioned, they probably did
some seriological testing with the patcherskin in your blood. We
don't know that for sure, but that would seem like
it would have been the least thing they could have done.
And had any of it matched you, they would have
been shouting it from the rooftops. Now they already had
(14:48):
this composite sketch that they thought looked like you. They
had to catch up with you a few towns away,
and you were being held for the burglaries.
Speaker 2 (14:57):
My grandma came to get me out the next day. Apple,
you know, had brought me back to Milweather County. That's
when she was in on that I would be in
charge with, you know, Ray Rob reggravated so and murgery.
Speaker 1 (15:09):
Curiously, she got that news before they had even taken
your driver's license to be viewed by the victim in
an alleged photo array.
Speaker 2 (15:16):
I don't know if they took my driving license or
they took many pictures. They say they took a photo
array to her apartment, but I'm assuming they took my
driver license.
Speaker 5 (15:27):
We don't know much about it because, of course, you know,
they didn't record a lot of information. They certainly didn't
record the photo array, and I don't believe we ever
found that photo array did with John. I don't think
we've ever seen those photos, so we don't know who
else was in the photo and how well they matched,
either the composite or John.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Now, maybe this composite sketch looked enough like you that
your likeness was already imprinted in her mind, So photo
array or not, she had been primed to pick you
with that come positive in mind. And it's also possible
that they only brought along your driver's license rather than
a number of other photos that favored your features. We
don't know, but now you had been chosen from this
(16:10):
alleged photo array, and things started going down how fast?
Speaker 2 (16:13):
A few you know, weeks after they did all this,
here they performed the line up. It was just us
on the room and me standing about ten feet from her,
along with a few other guys. And I couldn't believe,
you know, it would tick with it because they brought another
person up there of a place I had robbed, and
she didn't pick me out, but they bringed it old
(16:35):
lady nine, and she picked me out. Like I said,
I'm quite sure that any take now one of the
other guy pictures that was in that line up to her,
and I'm the only somebody she had seen recently on
a photo.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
Again, we're not sure what happened at that alleged photo lineup,
as no documentation has ever been found, But I want
our audience to note that I witnessed misidentification is a
contributing factor in sixty nine percent of all known convictions,
and in this case, we have a cross racial mis identification. So,
as I mentioned earlier, in study after study, cross racial
(17:10):
identifications are actually less accurate than guessing. But what about
the robbery victim also white and that would have been
the correct identification. It's crazy, but okay, so cross racial
or not, she had already been primed to pick you
out of the lineup by seeing your driver's license in
addition potentially to a composite sketch that may have favored
(17:33):
you or you know, pointed towards you. I mean nineteen seventies, Georgia.
You were already known to police, and then an old
white lady who had been brutally attacked identified you. I
hate to say it, but I think your fate was
pretty much sealed. Did you have a court appointed or
a paid attorney?
Speaker 2 (17:53):
They gave me a quarter pointed attorney. But my mom
and them, you know, they raised the money and they
had you know, Sampa Bishop.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
And he's now a US representative, right.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
He was a part of the legislature back you know,
when I was going to trial. They took me to trial.
You know, they picked a jury which was mainly all white.
They presented the evidence. The finger pressed they said they
collected at the scene of the crime. They said all
of them were sponged to the point that they couldn't
get no kind of identification off of them. They say
the blood test came back negative. I don't know what
(18:25):
they had tested. I don't know they tested the skin.
I don't know what it was. But the crime left
in Bustcat said the houseyble could be mine. I know
they brought up the pigmentation of a black person's hair
and they said it was all of it was somebol.
Speaker 1 (18:38):
Which really this technician was testifying that the hair was
a black person's and you were also black, which is
just not that probative. And what was it that they
tested your blood against.
Speaker 5 (18:49):
I don't really remember what it was they tested with
the blood, I have to be honest with you. But also,
you know we talked about the piece of skin, right
that there was the cut, and when they picked John
up five weeks later, he had a cut on his palm,
and so that was another.
Speaker 1 (19:06):
Piece, right. But the item that they tested for blood,
which the skin, was more than likely the item it
excluded him. But I suppose none of this matters when
you have the word of a seventy year old white
lady who was a victim of a brutal assault.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
They actually to peak me out in court why she
was on a stand.
Speaker 5 (19:26):
The problem with eyewitness identification is it's unreliable, but it's
incredibly powerful in court. You have a now seventy five
year old woman who is so traumatized the er didn't
even want to do an examination of her. Get on
the stand and say that's the man that did that
(19:48):
to me. You know, the jury at that point is
done right if there's a few little things that they
can put together, like oh, that hair might be the
same or oh when he had a cut too, that
was enough.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
I mean, how do you combat that? Even pointing out
that she wore glasses, that it was dark in there.
It's debatable whether that helps or hurts your client. When
you have an emotionally charged moment like that, how are
you going to try to contradict her the victim?
Speaker 5 (20:17):
Right?
Speaker 4 (20:17):
John?
Speaker 1 (20:17):
At that point, did you have any hope that the
jury might actually still get this right?
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You know, me knowing that I didn't do it, I
didn't have no doubt in my mind that I was
going on. I was that young and I was so
inexperienced that I thought I was going home.
Speaker 1 (20:32):
Can you take us back to that awful moment when
they read the verdict.
Speaker 3 (20:36):
That it broke down and started crying.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
You know, I will convicted of rape, robbery, aggravated the
salt and two council burgery.
Speaker 3 (20:47):
And they asked.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
Me did I have anything to say? I just said
I didn't do it. When they took me back to
the hole and say, well, I know, I broke down
and started crying. I was corresponding with a cousin.
Speaker 3 (21:12):
Of my mind. You know.
Speaker 2 (21:13):
He told me, you know, you know, God got his
reasons for everything, you know what I'm saying. And he
said it was a reason behind it, you know for me,
you know, it was a reason behind and I thought,
I just thought that reason behind it, you know, I
just accepted it at God's will, and I moved forward.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
I couldn't go through that their time, all that time that.
Speaker 2 (21:34):
They gave me feeling some type of way, and I
just had to learn how to how to survive inside
the contention. I found what they call it jail house attorney,
and we tried, you know, by buying Ahabor Corpus against
my lawyer that he didn't represent me right. We had requested,
you know, from a transcript and all that everything that
(21:56):
pertained into my trial. But they, you know, the time
of mayor, wealla didn't send me anything but a transfer.
They said they didn't have nothing else to send me.
And we buy ourselves an assistant accounseling and they denied that.
So I pretty much lay down on it from that
point on.
Speaker 1 (22:11):
So at that time, it was much easier to be
granted parole even with a sentence like yours.
Speaker 4 (22:15):
Which was life plus sixty years.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
And usually, let's face it, they're not going to grant
you parole without an admission of guilt and a show
of remorse, even if you didn't commit the crime. That
that's that's a detail gets washed away. But it appears
that they may have actually believed in your innocence.
Speaker 2 (22:34):
Yeah, after I want to say, eleven years, I came
up a parole. They told me, in order to make
parole that I would have to do some type of
sex offlinal program. And I told the lady that, you know,
I didn't do it. They muster white. Unless you'd get
in some sex offlinal program, you ain't gonna get out
of jail. So they sent me to Metro up here
(22:56):
in Atlanta, George, where they had the programs there.
Speaker 3 (22:59):
And my mamma came.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
Up and she says, go on, get in this program
if it gonna help you get out, even you had
to tell a lie. And they told me to cry
till you for getting in the safe Defending program, which
you had to describe what to play during the crime.
And so I told him, Man, you know I can't
do that. I say, I can't imagine what took play
doing this stair crime. You know, I couldn't make that
lie up. So I basically had just just gave it
(23:22):
up again, you know. And uh So one day I
came in from work and the warden called me to
his office at me. He aad me why I was
at his institution, and I told him that they had
something he there participate in the safe shpical program and
that I couldn't you know, participate in because I couldn't
describe the crime. So he's something on back to the
dormator and some strange things occurred there, told me to
(23:43):
pack my stuff up, that I was going to Hospital
lie and Augusta, Georgia for a year proud I had opposcopic.
Speaker 3 (23:49):
Survey then on my knee.
Speaker 2 (23:51):
So one of the inmates that was coming in from
work helping to notice a piece of paper that had
all the transfers on and everything, and he told me
that said, John, you weren't going to Augusta Medical Hospital,
say you going to constantly on Haldway House. And it
totally shocked me that they're all finna get out of Parrison.
Speaker 1 (24:13):
That the par board cut you a brake or was
it the warden points of strings? I don't know, And
no one told you.
Speaker 3 (24:20):
Nobody told them.
Speaker 1 (24:21):
Okay, that's weird. So you got paroled, I guess. And
now you were starting out on a tough road to
reacclimate into society. There are a lot of obstacles to
employment and getting IDs and things like that, and those
are some of the many reasons why recidivism rates can
be as high as they are in some places. Not
to mention that you turned to burglary in the past,
(24:43):
and so where and how did you start that journey?
Speaker 2 (24:46):
When I first got out, I was up in Atlanta
in the halfway house. I parode out of there to
room and house. I got tired of the room and house,
and I moved to moved to manchouse.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
Did you move back in with your mom? Your grandma?
Speaker 4 (25:01):
My mom?
Speaker 3 (25:01):
My grandma had passed while I was incarcerated.
Speaker 1 (25:05):
Sorry to hear that, But luckily you still had some family,
right Were your sisters around now?
Speaker 2 (25:10):
Most of them had, they had married, they moved on.
It was most of just me and my mom and
my dad was still living at the time, and my niece.
Speaker 5 (25:19):
You know, John got the opportunity to come out on parole,
but he came out as a sex offender, right, who
hires a sex offender? You know, it was a struggle
when he was out on parole.
Speaker 1 (25:30):
So what did you do for work? And I understand
you eventually went back to prison.
Speaker 2 (25:34):
When I was dying back down here, I was doing
odds and then work. And one day I was at
McDonald's and seeing this guy and he pulled his wallet
out and he had a lot of money in it,
and me and another guy follow him and Robin, the
other guy got caught up some kind of way, and
(25:54):
he told you know what that appened. And I turned
myself in again and I revoked my parole and saw
me back.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
I talked with the DA.
Speaker 2 (26:05):
He gave me ten years ran into what I already had,
and that he wouldn't have no kind of negative recommendation
towards if I was to come up with a role again.
Speaker 1 (26:14):
Well, I can't say a lot of people are going
to have a ton of sympathy for you on that situation.
But it's like you said earlier about how you made
peace with your wrongful conviction, you kind of felt deserving
of it because of the wrong that you had done.
And I want to point out that in nabbing the
wrong guy for that ultra violent rape and robber all
those years ago, this did a really terrible disservice the
(26:36):
entire community, not least of which to the victim, because
the real perpetrator was still free. So now it's nineteen
ninety seven year back to serve out this new sentence
and your old one. And it's not until about four
years later when the amazing Amy Maxwell became the founding
executive director of the Georgia Innisces Project. Can you run
through how you all came upon John's case?
Speaker 5 (26:57):
The Georgia nisis Project started in two thousand one. Obviously
we got cases coming to us fairly quickly. But as
we were working on the cases, I started thinking, well,
what about all those people who don't know that we
could look at the cases. What about those people who've
not heard that we exist? So in two thousand and four,
(27:19):
first of all, we tried to go through the prison
hierarchy and try to get notices posted in prison, and
they wouldn't do that. So what we did is we
went through the Department of Corrections website and found everybody
who was in prison for rape and sent them a letter.
We sent about twelve hundred letters and we got about
(27:41):
one hundred and twenty, so we got about ten percent
return on our letter. And John was actually one of them.
Speaker 2 (27:48):
I didn't I really didn't even know what to write,
but I wrote it won a week or so late today, Aim,
and I'm gonna responding.
Speaker 5 (27:53):
We looked at his evidence and the hair evidence. They
only really talked about one hair that they compared, and
so we were under the impression from the crime lab
report and from the testimony that there was only the
one hair. But most importantly, we were trying to find
that piece of flesh. In fact, we called it the
piece of flesh case, right, because it was such an
(28:13):
unusual piece of evidence. You know, this was a straight
up If we could find this evidence, we would know
who the perpetrator was. So I had an intern that
went down to Meriwether County looking for that piece of flesh.
Speaker 1 (28:26):
Right.
Speaker 5 (28:26):
We just could not find it. We couldn't find it
at the GBI, we couldn't find it anywhere, and so
we just just kept on. It's hard people tell you
that the evidence doesn't exist.
Speaker 1 (28:37):
Or they just haven't looked at all because either they
didn't care or they were instructed to ignore such requestions.
Speaker 5 (28:42):
Well, there might be that. So finally we went in
person to the clerk's office, and what they ended up
finding was not the piece of flesh, but there were
several of their hairs from the crime scene. Now, let
me just say that hair are they're good evidence.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
If they're good evidence, right, if the hairs are pulled
out from the root, then a DNA profile can be developed, right,
if they.
Speaker 5 (29:07):
Can give us information. But there's also I mean, there
could be other reasons hairs were there. There was another
Georgia case that involved hairs, and the theory was that
she did her wash at the laundromat and she might
have picked up some random hairs there, which, of course,
these are pubic hairs, right, Why are you picking up
(29:28):
pubic hairs at the laundry. So anyway, but we were
we were concerned, you know, if these hairs didn't match John,
that helped us, but it might not walk him out
of prison. So we you know, had to tell John
we've got these hairs we're going to test on. But
so we sent those hairs for DNA testing, and we
(29:49):
find out that the hairs don't match John, and we
all pile in the car to staff members and our intern,
Cliff Williams. Cliff had been working on the case almost
from the beginning. I can't where were you, John, I
can't even remember where you were Macon State Prison. So
it's like two hours away. We get there and we're
getting all we're putting all of our stuff in the
(30:11):
trunk because you know, you can't take anything into the
prison with you. And I get a call from the
GBI and they tell me that there's been a CODIS match.
And I'm standing in the parking lot going, oh my gosh.
We were just going down to tell him we got
the DNA but to hold on. And I thought, oh
my god, we're going to get to go in and
tell him he's coming home. And I said, who didn't match?
(30:35):
He goes, oh, it matched a man named James Parum.
And at that point my intern goes, James Parham, I
think he was a suspect in this case. So he
pulls out the box, you know, because we of course
carry John's White's box all the way to the prison
with us, you know, his file, and he's going through
(30:57):
the file and he pulls out the photo of the
live lineup, turns it over and James Parum is actually
in the lineup where she picks John White instead of
James Parum. So we don't even know what to do
with all this, right, So we get to go in
(31:17):
and tell John all of this information. And I'm like John,
and don't know how quickly you're coming home, but you're
coming home.
Speaker 1 (31:24):
Yeah, I'm looking at the photo right now and we're
gonna link to it from the bio. I mean, oh
my god, Like John is in the number three spot
of course because he was the target. And James Parham
sure enough, is right there in number five right.
Speaker 2 (31:40):
Oh, actually you know Edie institution now was there? Me
and it were roommates that I am a a one.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
What Yeah, Oh my god, I'm rarely at a loss
for words, but that's insane.
Speaker 3 (31:56):
It was a strange thing.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
He helped through it at my whole a journey because
he was in the same room up with me, and
I ended up with his Bible. When I got out,
it had the name on it. I gave it back
to it sister to get him. But yeah, Amy came
down and told me about I was getting out. And
when they did come to get me out, they came back.
They rushed back there because they didn't want no media
(32:19):
down at the institution. They rushed me in, wanted to
know it was anybody come get me. And they went
downtown and bought me some clothes and made sure I
was dressed. And when my mom and them came to
get me, and they they shook me on the way
as quick as they can get me away from there.
Speaker 1 (32:35):
So, Amy, what were the machinations that you had to
go through to finish the job and get him home?
Speaker 5 (32:41):
Well, it was so quick. So you know, we get
all the information, but so does the district attorney. And
so of course when the district's attorney, and at that
time it was Pete Scandalacus, who is now the head
of the Prosecuting Attorney's Council here in Georgia, and he
saw what we saw. And of course I'm on the
phone with him on the way back from the and
I'm like, Pete, they got a codus match. What are
(33:02):
you gonna do? And he contacted the prison and honestly,
John John's family got the notice to come pick him up.
But literally four days later his folks are on the
way down to Oglethorpe, Georgia to pick him up.
Speaker 1 (33:17):
So John was hum So John, what was your first meal?
Where did you go? What did you what did you do?
Speaker 3 (33:24):
It was like a blur. It was like a blur.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
I can't remember too much of the only thing I
can remember looking back, when we passed the Prills and
going out, I think I went to sleep. I think
I went to sleep because somebody were happening. We went
by some my sister house, and then we went straight
to Atlanta for press conferences and sayings of that nature.
(33:48):
And I had me some fride grade tomatoes, had some
some ochre. I've had been warnings. And I remember that
night that I got up and I walked. I walked
up to a restaurant and this guy a chance just
(34:09):
look up at the sky, you know, and look at
the stalls and things, and just it's well, I could
just see beyond that, you know, I could get a
chance to see the sky, you know, in the stall
and in the moon. Some of you didn't very often,
you didn't get to see too much of why you
was any pen attention.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
So James Parham played guilty who since to twenty years
in prison on this rape. Right, and then in two
thousand and nine, the Georgia legislature authorized the payment of
five hundred thousand dollars in compensation to you. Now, no
amount of money would ever be enough, and that's not
even I mean, that's that number is tiny compared to
what it should be.
Speaker 2 (34:51):
Yeah, well, you know, Georgia don't have a compensation law.
And I got five hundred thousand dollars a conversation with
prescriptions that I gotta maintain some type of employment. I
got submit to drug tests and every so often I
can't catch another fella there though, I'll lose my conversation.
(35:12):
I believe they put those stipulations in it because they
don't want to get it, they don't want to give
me the money, and that it was done for me
to fail. You know, we asked for a million and something,
they got it down to seven and fifty thousand. It
passed one body of our legislature, then it went to
the other body of our legislation and they rejected it.
(35:32):
They revised it, and they agreed to all these stipulations.
Speaker 1 (35:35):
Yeah, you know, it's just crazy to me that anybody
could look at someone in your shoes and not have
an instinct to immediately want to help, but rather their
first instinct is I'm gonna fight this. I'm gonna fight
to not write this wrong, to keep this wrong as
wrong as it could be. Is there anything our audience
can do for you.
Speaker 3 (35:54):
You know, right now?
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Give them this opportunity to say what I'm about to say,
I never you know, go vote. You know what I'm saying,
Get these unsimpensated people that that's a part of our
legislators wave up there so we can't get some of
the bill pass that would that a and us getting
you know, the support we need not only me, but
(36:16):
other people that's in then you know, the similar situations yea,
you know, I you know, I'm gonna look out for me,
but that's what we need. We need voters, We need
those people that's in office that that's that's voting against this.
Speaker 3 (36:35):
It change to be removed.
Speaker 1 (36:37):
I hope our audience really takes those words to heart.
And what about you, amy, any call to action for
our audience?
Speaker 5 (36:43):
Well, I think folks can obviously follow the Georgia Innocence Project,
particularly about the legislation, but there is also an Exignery Fund,
So if folks wanted to donate to the Georgia Edocence Project,
they could donate and specify that it's for the Exignery
fun That would be great.
Speaker 1 (37:01):
Okay, So we'll have those action steps linked in the bio,
which brings us to my favorite part of the show.
It's called, of course, closing arguments. And this is the
part of the show where I thank you both for
being here and just sharing this unbelievable, horrible story. And
with that, I'm going to kick back in my chair,
turn my microphone off, leave my headphones on, and close
(37:25):
my eyes and just listen for anything else you want
to share with me and our amazing audience.
Speaker 5 (37:32):
I would highly recommend people google the live lineup photo
in John's case. When you get a chance to look
at the live lineup, you're going to see how different
James Parham looked from everybody else in that lineup. And
it just goes to show how incredibly difficult it is
(37:55):
to deal with eyewitness identification. I mean, the actual perpetrator
was there live in front of her and she still
picked the wrong man. So I think that we all
need to be very cautious because as we said earlier.
When the eyewindness takes the standard trial and says that's
the person, it is incredibly powerful, but we need to
(38:16):
be very careful. The other thing is how really hard
it is to come out of prison. You know, even
though he comes out of prison an innocent man, prison
does a number on you. Prison physically changes you, you
and mentally for sure changes you. And there's really no
support other than the people who rally around him. So,
(38:38):
you know, we've got to got to do better because
people are going to come out of prison and we
want them to be able to succeed or they're going
to What's going to happen is their struggle and they
end up committing a crime because they're struggling.
Speaker 3 (38:53):
I'm there, I'm thankful. I'm thank buy, you know.
Speaker 2 (38:56):
I love and her determination to start to answer the project.
My experience being incost rated, it's like PGSD soldiers. I
don't have too much trust for nobody. I'm pretty much
a loner. I don't you know.
Speaker 3 (39:13):
I don't deal with a whole lot of people. It's hard.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
It's hard, and I just want the government to step
up to the plate and establish our social security benefits,
our medical benefits and make these things are possible so
we can you know, at least live, you know, when
we do get sick or something like that, that we
can go see a doctor. We constantly being denied either
(39:39):
easier benefit because we were wrongly convicted. We weren't given
an opportunity to build up to you know, to have
no kind of social security in our benefits built up,
it would take them from us, so it still be
given back to us.
Speaker 3 (39:52):
That's what I want.
Speaker 1 (40:00):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. I'd like to
thank our production team Connor Hall, Jeff Cleibern, and Kevin Wardis,
with research by Lyla Robinson. 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
(40:21):
wrong Conviction, as well as at Lava for Good.
Speaker 4 (40:24):
On all three platforms.
Speaker 1 (40:26):
You can also follow me on both TikTok and Instagram
at it's Jason Flam. Wrongful Conviction is the 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
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!