February 15, 2024 • 40 mins
January 18, 2006, 3-year-old Trustin Blue tumbled down his basement stairs in Cincinnati, OH, became unresponsive, and later brain dead. Trustin had been under the supervision of his mother’s boyfriend, Lamont Hunter, at the time of the incident. When Trustin was declared dead, the police began suspecting that Trustin had been raped and abused by Lamont, and had not actually fallen down the stairs as Lamont claimed. The case against Lamont was centered around allegations of prior abuse against Trustin and the manner of Trustin’s injuries. Lamont was convicted and sentenced to death for the incident.
To learn more and get involved, visit:
https://www.gofundme.com/f/3k5jem-free-after-wrongful-incarceration-on-death-row
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/172-wrongful-conviction-junk-science-shaken-baby-syndrome/
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/373-jason-flom-with-elwood-jones/
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/379-jason-flom-with-keith-lamar-pt-1/
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):
In two thousand and six, Lamont Hunter lived with his
girlfriend los Milda, along with their blended family in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Luismilda's three year old son, Trustin, had been previously hospitalized
for what was believed to be injuries resulting from child abuse. However,
no charges ever materialized. Then, on January nineteenth, two thousand
(00:26):
and six, Trustin was in Lamont's care when paramedics were
called to take Trustin again to the hospital, where he
passed away. Lamont told police that Trustin took a tumble
down the stairs, but the state's experts believed that the
medical evidence told a different story, that Trustin's injuries could
not have resulted from a fall down the stairs, but
(00:48):
rather from violent shaking coupled with forceful impact, in addition,
that the three year old boy may have been sexually assaulted.
With evidence like this, didn't take long for a three
judge panel to sentence Lamont Hunter to death. But this
is wrongful conviction. Welcome back to wrongful conviction. Today we
(01:21):
have a story of a crime that never happened, that
resulted in a death sentence for a man who should
have been given time to grieve. Laman Hunter a sentenced
to death in the state of Ohio for a crime
that never happened, and here to help him tell his story.
I'm going to introduce I actually asked how she would
(01:42):
like to be introduced, and Lamon jumped right in and said,
just call her the amazing Aaron Barnhardt. But for context,
she is assistant public Defender at the Southern Ohio Federal
Public Defender Capital Habeas Unit. So, Aarin, thank you for
being here, thank you for having me, and here to
tell his own story with this assist from Aaron and
myself is the man himself who survived this incredible ordeal,
(02:06):
the Mont Hunter, the Mont I'm so happy you're here.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
I'm happy to be here. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
It's kind of a miracle that you're here, and you know,
and Aaron, you are a big part of that miracle.
So let's go back to your upbringing. The place that
you were born and where you lived has a lot
to do with your wrongful conviction. But did you actually
grow up there in Hamilton County.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Ohio, Cincinnati. Yes, I did Hamilton County.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
I was born in the late sixties, so I grew
up through the seventies and eighties, and nineties. My mother,
my father, hit my heroes work their fingers to the
bone to provide a good life for me and my siblings.
My childhood was amazing. Like I always say, I was
fortunate to be born in a family that I was
born in school. I mean cousins, aunts, uncles. We are
(02:53):
all very close knit family.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
You know, I understand eventually you became a father as well.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Absolutely.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
I got four biological children and two children that I raised,
and I have an honorary daughter, Aisha.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
What are the kids' names, Ashley.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Mariah Lamont Junior, Velita, Eric, Aish and Trinity. I've been
instrumental in very hands on and raising all my children,
all six of them.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
To support his family, Lamont worked as a roofer, but
also he had a side hustle sending drugs through Federal Express,
which landed him in federal prison. Now, drug trafficking is
in no way related to how Lamont ended up on
Ohio's death row, but his prior conviction comes up later
in the story. So after his stint in prison, he
went back to roofing and met a woman named les Milde,
(03:38):
and together they had Lamont's youngest child, Trinity, Los Milda
also had three boys from a previous relationship, Tyree, Tyrell,
and Trustin.
Speaker 4 (03:48):
So Lamont actually didn't spend much time with trust In.
The little boy who died in this case, Trustan, was
Louis Milda's son, and because of complications with her health
when he was born, he was basically raised by other
people family friends and relatives.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Right Wilma Forte and Amber White.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Yes, after she delivered Trusting, she had kidney stalls, so
she had immediately go back in for kidney surgery and
she couldn't care for Trusting. So they were loving enough
to take Trusting And for some reason I don't agree
with Luz Milde on this, she just chose to let
him stay there. That's where Trustin lived.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Now Loismilda Lamont rarely took care of Trusting, and prior
to the two thousand and sixth incident that resulted in
Trustin's death, there had been some suspected abuse back in
two thousand and four.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
In January of two thousand and four, Lamont had been
carrying trust In up a flight of stairs and tripped
and fell on trust In and ended up breaking his
leg bone his tibia. At the time, his two older
half siblings were there, saw what happened. It was obviously
an accident. No one even suspected it wasn't an accident.
He was treated and let go. Then in June of
(05:00):
or Trustin had sort of a constellation of injuries, some swelling, scratches, rashes,
some other abrasions like by his lips and his ears.
When luiz Milda goes to change trust In's diaper, she
sees that it's really raw and red and irritated, luiz
Milda wondered if his genital swelling was a bug bite
or diaper rash, so she takes him to a local
(05:22):
urgent care. When they see these conditions, they end up
sending them to the hospital and it's treated as a
case of abuse. Now. I don't think we'll ever know
what happened to Trustan. I think it's probably a combination
of things we found in medical records that Trustin had
a lot of skin conditions exzema, other sort of conditions
where his hair was falling out, environmental stressors and things
(05:46):
like that, and then he was playing with two older,
rambunctious kids. And I think probably what happened was there
was some combination of maybe a little rough housing, maybe
some irritation that trusted himself else could have scratched or
irritated that resulted in these conditions. No matter what happened,
everyone agrees Lamont wasn't involved, but these circumstances were treated
(06:09):
as abuse, and at the hospital when they did a
skeletal survey an X ray, they discovered that Trustin had
a number of older healing fractures in his hands and feet. Now,
Trustin was hardly ever taken care of by his mother
and therefore Lamont so at the time that these injuries
would have been dated when he sustained them. Trustin was
(06:30):
not around either Lamont or his mother. He was in
the care of other people, so he had lived with
them right, So even if these older injuries were the
result of abuse, it was not from Lamont or his mother.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
No one was charged in this two thousand and four incident,
but child protective services were made aware and even though
Lamont was never even considered a suspect in two thousand
and four, the Hamilton County prosecutors raised the specter of
ongoing abuse while seeking the death penalty for Lamont. In
two thousand and six.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
The death penalty information Center has a report called the
two Percent Report. If you look statistically, Hamilton County and
Kyga County in Ohio, Cleveland and Cincinnati are part of
the two percent of counties in the entire nation that
account for more than half of people on death row
and more than half of people who've been executed in
this country.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
We've covered a lot of Ohio wrongful convictions, too many
to list, but we're going to link Elwood Jones and
Keith Lamar, both death penalty cases handled by Hamilton County
prosecutors in which they hid or ignored exculpatory evidence at trial,
and Lamont's story is no different. So let's get to that.
On January nineteenth, two thousand and six, tragedy struck when
(07:43):
Trustin was staying with Liz, Milda and Lamont.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Lois Milton.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Well, she get up and go to work, and about
a hour or two later, I get the boys up
to get ready for school themselves. So I get Jordan
and Tiree out the door on their way to school.
Now I got trust In in Trinity, and I get
trust In situ waited for breakfast in our living room
that I made him French toes, sticks and little sausage links.
He wanted to watch the new Jurassic Park movie, so
(08:08):
set him in a chair, put it on for him,
and decided to start my daily chores. I grabbed Trinity,
my nine month old, and I went downstairs in the
basement to finish doing the laundry. That's when I first
heard him running across the floor above me. Next thing,
I hear, he's coming tumbling down the stairs and hit
his head. So I immediately run over. His head was back
(08:28):
and his eyes were fluttering, and I'm scared. I just
scooped him up and run up the stairs. So I
figured I throw some water on his face to try
to jug him awake, and his eyes were still fluttering.
So I seeing that he was struggling to take a breath.
I don't know how to do CPR, but I attempted it,
so I had to open his mouth. I noticed a
piece of sausage lodged in the back of his mouth,
(08:50):
blocking his airway, so I got that out on my finger.
I held his nose and I blew in his mouth
like I see people do on TV. I don't know,
I don't know how to do it. I'm not certified nothing,
so I probably blew too much in his mouth because
his stomach was getting bloated. I got scared, so I
called his mother and she immediately came home. They made
a big deal of this, by the way, at my
(09:11):
trial that I didn't immediately call the paramedics instead of
calling his mother. They thought it was something the farious,
but it wasn't. It was just I panicked, and so
paramedics got there very quick and started tending to him.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
I was just a mess.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
The dog is running around parking.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
Absolutely, I could never prove this, but I know my dog,
when I left the room, tried to take his food
from him while he was sitting in that chair. I
believe that's what prompted Trusting to run across that.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
Floor, and that might explain why he ended up with
a piece of food lodge in his throat.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Absolutely, the sausage, and I know my dog was harassing
for it. But they get Trusting in the ambulance and
Lamilda gets in the ambulance with him, and me and
Trinity we followed them to the emergency room at Children's.
That's how my day started. January nineteenth, two thousand and.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
Six, Trustin had head injuries that were fatal. He had
blood trapped between the layers of his brain, which they
call subdural hematoma. And then his brain also swelled, which
(10:24):
is what happens anytime there's any sort of injury or
trauma to the brain, they call it cerebral edema. And
anytime your brain swells, that also puts pressure on your
optic nerve and results in rental hemorrhages, so bleeding on
the back of your eye.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
And by now our listeners are familiar with these findings
as what are commonly associated with the grotesque junk science
prosecution theory known as shaken baby syndrome. We're going to
have our shaken baby syndrome episode of wraeful conviction junk
science length as well. For years, the theory was widely
accepted across the medical establishment that the presentation of these
(10:59):
three things could mean only one thing, that the infant
or toddler had been shaken to death by their most
recent caretaker, denying any other potential or even probable causes.
But over time this theory has gradually fallen apart.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
And this field has been very nimble because anytime someone shows, well,
guess what this person, we know it was an accident,
and they show these injuries, and then they say like, oh, okay, well,
first of all, we're not going to call it shaking baby,
because they did experiments. They had big beefy football players
shake a crash test dummy baby, and they could not
(11:39):
generate the type of force needed to cause the brain
injuries without breaking the child's neck. And so they said, okay,
so maybe shaking alone can't cause it. So shaking with impact,
that's what we'll say, shaking with impact, So we won't
call it shaken baby, will call it abusive head trauma.
And they just keep morphing and adapting to whatever fits.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
No matter what has been revealed through biomechanical studies and
a confluence of medical histories that proved that in addition
to accidental causes like a fall down the stairs, there
are eighty one pre existing medical conditions and counting that
can cause the presentation of those findings. And yet there
are still proponents of this theory that refused to admit
(12:20):
that limiting the cause to shaking alone is an unscientific
leap in logic. And so, in two thousand and six,
even though some of the medical establishment had begun to
realize the problem with this theory, including the neuroscientists who
had developed it. The state's witnesses attributed Trustin's triad of
findings to shaking and any other injuries, including a sheared
(12:41):
vertebrae and what appeared to be an impact injury to
further violence. Lamount was arrested on January twenty second, two
thousand and six, three days after Trusten's death, and he
has taken a trial in June two thousand and seven.
Speaker 4 (12:54):
The prosecutor, through their child abuse pedatrician witnesses, said these
kinds of injuries could not have come from a fall
down the stairs. It had to have been abuse.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
You know.
Speaker 4 (13:03):
We only see these kinds of injuries from forces like
in a car accident or maybe LaMotte swung trusting around
like a base ball bag. You know, that's what have
caused it, but not from falling down the stairs. And
then in addition, Trusten had some injuries in his anal
rectal era. He had three puncture wounds in his rectal mucosa,
(13:24):
so kind of up in his rectum. There were three
wounds I think they were about two millimeters in diameter,
and then kind of on the outside lip of his anus.
It's not entirely clear if it's a tear or a cut.
It wasn't that accurately described, and so those injuries were
used to support a charge of rape.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
As we'll explain later, there was a completely innocent explanation
for those anal and rectal injuries, Yet the child abuse
pediatrician painted a completely different picture.
Speaker 4 (13:52):
The child abuse pediatrician did say that the injuries were
consistent with an adult penis. Now that's the magic word, right, consistent,
which I think a lot of fact finders here and
think that means a match, but it doesn't at all.
It just means we can't exclude it as the cause.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
I mean, what adult penis is two millimeters in diameter.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
So macrof is only talking about the external injury, kind
of along the edge of the anus. She never saw
the internal injuries, the puncture wounds.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
So the child abuse pediatrician did not have a full
understanding of the injuries, which may explain why the coroner,
doctor Gretel Stevens, true different conclusions.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
What the coroner said was that it looked like the
interior wounds were like poked with something sharp, like maybe
a pencil, and the prosecutors argued at trial that this
wasn't penile rape, but this was rape with some sort
of object.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
While that explanation is still incorrect, at least doctor Stevens's
assumptions were more grounded in reality. However, the investigation failed
to find any such object or any efforts to cover
up that kind of crime. Doctor Stevens also acknowledged the
evolving science on shaking baby syndrome, saying that a rotational
fall would be consistent with the shearing of the neck
(15:09):
that trust And experienced, and that stairfalls are responsible for
the kinds of findings that were present in trust And situation.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
And that's the thing, like doctor Stevens pretty much was
a straight shooter at trial, and it was just the
fact that she hadn't seen the photographs of the actual
staircase to know that there was a ledge abutting one
side of the stairs that kind of mashed up with
some injuries that she saw. There was also a throw
rug if he had slipped on, that may have contributed.
(15:38):
She didn't know that Lamont had reported hearing Trusted running.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
In addition, the coroner was unaware of the innocent explanation
for these anal and rectal injuries. So since neither one
of the state's experts had a full picture of the incident, this,
along with Lamont's ineffective council, allowed the state's erroneous narrative
to take hold.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
Lamont's child counsel, Clyde Bennett is the attorney's is not
a bad criminal defense attorney. He's actually pretty well known
as a good criminal defense attorney. But there are a
couple things that just weren't going to work in Lamont's case.
Number One, a death penalty case is different, A dead
kid is different, and you can't just kind of rely
(16:20):
on your old tricks and techniques in this kind of case.
Number two, this is a case where the evidence is
all based on medical expert testimony. The evidence is the
state expert coming in and saying you can only get
these injuries from abuse, period. And his trial council did
(16:41):
not hire an expert, not only not to testify or
just even to consult with an expert to explain the
medical records to him, to explain the flaws in the
state experts testimony and reasoning. He said he thought that
he could just rely on cross examination and his theory
was that this chadabe'see pediatrician. She's not qualified to be
(17:04):
talking about retinal hemorrhages. She's not an ophthalmologist, she's not
qualified to be talking about the mechanism of injury. She
doesn't have a degree in biomechanics or anything. Now, this
is all true. The problem was when he made that objection,
the court overruled it, and he had no plan B.
So when that didn't work, he was left to just
(17:26):
kind of on his own try to cross examine. And
he knew enough to be dangerous, and so he's asking
questions about stuff that's not relevant, Like he's trying to say,
isn't it true that you could have a delayed onset
of injury? And that is true sometimes except for that's
not what happened in Tresten's case. We know what happened.
He fell down the stairs and was immediately unresponsive, so
(17:49):
that line of questioning was completely irrelevant. Also, he didn't
hire an expert to look through the medical records, and
he didn't look through the records himself.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
I mean, Lamont would have been better off with his
original court appointed attorney, not I mean much better off,
because it turns out that mister Bennett was more than
a little bit distracted at the time.
Speaker 4 (18:09):
That's true, he was a little distracted with his own
legal troubles. Mister Bennett himself was being investigated for some
pretty serious federal crimes, and in fact, shortly after Lamont
was sentenced to death, he signed his own plea agreement
and turned himself into federal custody and went away to
(18:31):
federal prison. He pled to structured deposits, so depositing money
just under the reporting limit.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
Unbeknownst to Lamont, Clyde Bennett was connected to a major
drug dealer out of Dayton, Ohio, both of whom were
subjects of a federal investigation that ended in cooperation and
a plea deal for Clyde. Meanwhile, in Lamont's trial, Clyde
neglected to prepare the vital medical expert testimony, as well
as advised Lamont to take a bench trial in front
of a three judge panel, reasoning that a jury might
(19:00):
be susceptible to the emotion surrounding a dead child.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
Turns out, so are three Dutch panels.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
Exactly, especially when we know for sure that this judge
who's now passed on Norbert Natl told Clyde Bennett and
his chambers it wouldn't be wise for him to bring
me in front of him on a bench trial because
I lose, and he still advised me not to have
a jury.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Now, the advantage of not having a jury is that
you can save a lot of time because you don't
have to go through vaidir and get a death qualified jury.
So you know, Clyde took a flat fee from Lamont's family,
so it's just economical to make the trial go as
fast as possible, and so great way to cut down
on time is to wave jury.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
It sounds to me like the judge actually was telling him,
if you do this, you're going to lose, and he
was like great. I mean, I'm glad you're laughing a lot,
because you know, sometimes I feel like I'm laughing from crying.
Where you lived through this.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
I say, what I'm doing I've been doing in society.
Oh my god, I've been laughing to keep from crying. Man,
it's just so much trauma on this journey, man, It's
just a lot of trauma.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
So this bench troul played out exactly as this judge
told Lamont's attorney, it would.
Speaker 4 (20:18):
It was pretty easy for them to convict because all
of the state's expert testimony was entirely unrebutted. So they
have these experts from the state saying this had to
be abuse, There is no way this could have come
from a fall down the stairs. And then on top
of that, they had the state saying and look at
(20:39):
all this other suspicious stuff, injuries in his anal rectal era,
these injuries in the past when Lamont was around trust In.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
After conviction, Clyde Bennett pops up in the jail on
a Sunday, and I'm pissed at this point, I'm like,
what are you doing here? And he just said, man,
you know, I just wanted to come and ask you
how our federal prisons, how are they ran, what it's
like in federal prison. I'm looking at him, like, what
does that have to do with my case? He said, well,
(21:07):
he's well, I know you've been in federal prison before,
and I'm going there. I'm fighting for my own life, Lamont,
So I just wanted to know how these federal prisons.
I walked off on him and went back to my sale. Man,
I was done with him at the time. So all
hope was lost at that point. I was convicted and
then mitigation where you have to get the most closest
loving person in your life. They had to literally beg
(21:31):
the courts to save my life. It was humiliating for
me and my family, and it didn't work, so they
were dug in. So I still got sentenced to death.
And my father, who I have a lot of love
and respect for, he's actually my hero. I after getting
on a standing testifying and asking the course to save
my life and telling the story that he did about
(21:53):
me and growing up with my siblings, he had a
heart attack right there in the courtroom.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
He had a heart attack right there in the courtroom.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Right in the courtroom. Ambulance was called.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
They saved his life there, but he had a heart
attack right in the courtroom. They never got talked about
in the media or nothing like that. They was too
busy calling me a monster and a child rapist. And
my father he's no longer with us. He died in
twenty and eighteen before I got home, But from that
day his health just declined.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Since to death.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Isolated away from general population, there's no programming set up
for us back there. It's just mundane and waking up
every day knowing that your name is on a list
to be executed. The State of Ohio intents on executing you.
And that's like having a gorilla constantly on your shoulders,
weighing you down. And this is it from far as
(23:04):
you can see, is it every day? It's like the
same day. The first year I was there, I was
still in the haze. I didn't know what to expect
as far as the courts. I've never appealed the sentence before,
so I was, of course jaden and kind of paranoid
of my attorneys after coming through the whrror show of
the trial that I went through and being served of
(23:25):
by my trial attorney, like, well, what's going to happen
at this phase.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
Although Lamont had pretty capable post conviction attorneys from the
Ohio Public Defender's Office, unfortunately they couldn't get any traction
in state court, which is not uncommon. But their claims
that they raised were not that different than what we
raised in our federal habeas petition. The problem is they
didn't have access to the evidence they needed. They asked
(23:52):
for discovery to get the medical records to depose the
coroner just like we did, and it was all denied.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
As we've mentioned a trial, both states experts Macaroff and
Stevens have been operating with incomplete understandings of the incident. Additionally,
Makarov had ignored the evolving science on sbs, which continued
through post conviction, even as the science continued to evolve
further and further away from her position.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
Doctor Macaroff, she's doubling down on everything as everyone in
her sort of little industry has to do. This is
what makes this field so dangerous and unscientific, is the
feedback loop that exists. During our deposition, doctor Macroff cited
an article about stairfalls, saying, look, we know stairfalls aren't
(24:40):
fatal because we draw all this data from different hospitals.
All these kids come in after falling down the stairs
and they didn't die. And I said, okay, I said,
would trust In's case be included in that data set?
And she said, well, what do you mean? I said, well,
is his case classified as a stairfall because you guys
don't believe mister Hunter that he fell down the stairs, right,
And she was like, oh, that's a good point. They're
(25:02):
self selecting the data they're using to draw the conclusions
that they used to exclude the data that they don't want.
And then they say that, you know, these are so rare,
and I agree. You know, most kids who tumble down
the stairs don't die from it. But that doesn't mean
that it's impossible, which is what they say to put
people on death row. And just because something is rare
(25:25):
doesn't mean that they know which is the rare case
and which isn't. So there's all this bad science that
goes into it. The thing that actually is scientific about
this would be biomechanics, right force Chawdabez. Pediatricians don't think
biomechanics have any place in their world. And when doctor Macroff,
she says, I didn't say lamont abuse trust in. I
(25:48):
just said that his report does not match the mechanism
of injury. And I said, well, when you're talking about
the mechanism of injury, that kind of sounds like force.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Right.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
Oh, no, I'm not a physicist. Biomechanics doesn't fit there
or whatever. I don't know how, right, I don't know
how you can talk about a mechanism without using biomechanics. Anyway,
we did hire a biold mechanical engineer, and we went
to the site and he took measurements of the stairs
and the elasticity of the surface, and he used a
(26:19):
computer program and he put in the height that Trusten
was and his weight and the average that a child
his age could run, and you know, ran through all
these different scenarios of how he could have fallen and
showed that, like the forces generated were well within the
range that have been shown to be enough to generate
the kind of injuries that he had. So absolutely stair
(26:41):
falls can cause this. And also now with cell phones
and security cameras, like, people have started capturing injuries that
otherwise would have been indicted as abuse if we didn't
have proof that it was actually accidental. And doctor Macarov
claims it even that could be doctors, even that could
be doctored. She maybe would have to see it with
(27:03):
her own eyes to be convinced, and so you know,
there's just no pleasing the child abuse pediatricians.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
However, the defense was able to please the coroner, doctor Stevens,
when they provided a fuller picture of the incident, including
photographs of the staircase, a biomechanical expert and Finally, the
innocent explanation for the anal and rectal injuries that were
available to prosecutors, the state's experts, and even la Mons,
attorney at the trial. Had he even bothered to look.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
He would have found, like our investigator Pam Swanson did
when we took over the case, notations in the medical
records that staff at the hospital in the pic you
had attempted to take Trusten's temperature three times with a
rectal thermometer had been unsuccessful, and immediately after that had
noted blood in his rectum, which of course perfectly matches
(27:55):
up with the three puncture wounds that the coroner identified
and said could have been caused by something sharp like
a pencil. And in fact, and in another piece of
undisclosed evidence, the coroner even told detectives that she couldn't
rule out a temperature probe as the cause of this. Now,
nobody turned that over to Lamont at trial, and the
(28:16):
prosecutor didn't ask the coroner that question, but he did
ask the child abuse pediatrician at trial if Trustan's injuries
could have been caused by a thermometer, and she said no.
When we deposed the coroner and showed her these records,
she immediately changed her opinion on the cause of those injuries.
She still said it was non accidental, but it was
inflicted medically, not as an assault. For me, I saw
(28:39):
that and felt like I was just shouting into the void.
For years after that, nobody seemed to care about it
until the coroner did. But I was like, people, this
is it, Like this explains.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Everything, because that was a huge void in my defense.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Yeah, it was a huge gap because nobody could explain.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
I never could explain the rape to the time we
found that in the record, I couldn't not explain the rape.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
I didn't rape me.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
So these idiots couldn't even figure out the three pokes
with the thermometer were what caused what otherwise sounded like
an awful thing that was done to this child, right.
Speaker 4 (29:14):
Well, yeah, that's the really troubling thing is that I
think nobody looked at these records, including doctor Stevens. You know,
at the time, had she she would have learned things
about the scene that would have explained the mechanism of injury,
plus the findings about the anal and rectal injuries, and
(29:34):
so then, like she did her deposition, when we showed
them to her, she would have changed her opinion not
only about the injuries that supported the rape, but also
about the cause of death, that it was not a
homicide and his trial attorney is just as much to blame.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
So in addition to the Brady violations, this was also
a clear case of ineffective assistance of counsel as well.
Speaker 4 (29:59):
When we went back to our judge in federal court judgment,
Michael Watson, with the deposition testimony from Clyde, he kind of,
in his opinion, went through all the things he didn't do,
you know, didn't hire experts, didn't talk to witnesses, didn't
look at the records, blah blah blah. And then the
way he put it was he appeared to settle on
his strategy of not using an expert, not as a
result of a strategic investigation, but rather in lieu of one,
(30:24):
which is kind of the classic definition of being an
effective lawyer. You know, like all these people participate in
a process that could result in a man's execution, and
that there's so little you know, I mean plenty of time.
I think there's outright misconduct and malicious intent, and I
think there's some of that here with the Brady evidence,
(30:46):
the withheld evidence that we saw, but a lot of
other is I think just in competence, a lack of thoroughness.
I don't know that might even be worse, because you know,
you care so little about being careful in.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
Case it was such magnitude as a person's life.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Right with proceeding so fraught with constitutional violations and convincing
evidence of innocence. The Hamilton County Prosecutor's office joined Lamont's
motion for a new trial in April twenty twenty three,
but this didn't mean that they were finally seeking justice
for Lamont.
Speaker 4 (31:19):
After Lamont had a new trial and we are trying
to get him out on bond, the prosecutor's office ran
to the coroner's office and got the other pathologists in
the office to issue this addendum to the original autopsy
report that basically just says, like, we think the coroner
was wrong to change her opinion under oath and the deposition.
(31:39):
We do think that this should still be a homicide
and still be a rape with zero explanation. And then
those pathologists refused to talk to us without the prosecutors
being present. It just became so obvious to us that
I believe the Hamilton County Coroner's Office, there's supposed to
be neutral experts guided by science, considers itself an arm
(32:03):
of the prosecutor's office.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So while Lamont was still trying to get out on
bond and the lead up to his new trial, the
prosecutor's office began to apply pressure.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
And here comes to please offer.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
Basically, Lamont had this pressure of stay here in jail
for at least another year, or take a plea and
get out time served. Lamont could walk out the door. Well,
we decided to fight it and ask for bond, and
the prosecutors fought dirty. Basically had to go through a
little mini trial where they are allowed to summarize their
case by presenting evidence, including evidence that wasn't even presented
(32:36):
at trial the first time, so stuff that isn't tested
in any way, but just allegations. We were able to
beat them there. The judge ruled that they hadn't met
their burden to keep him locked up. But then the
bond was five hundred thousand dollars, which he would have
needed to get fifty thousand dollars together cash to meet.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
It would have been very hard which we couldn't do.
Speaker 4 (32:57):
I mean, so that was one problem. And then the
other problem was the prosecutor convinced the judge to order
no contact for Lamont with anyone under eighteen, so that
meant all of his nine grandchildren eight at the time.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
And went on the way.
Speaker 4 (33:11):
Yeah, okay, he wouldn't be able to meet them.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
My children was in the courtroom when they asked for that,
and just seeing them cry, man, and they want me
to meet their kids so bad, and I want to
meet my grandchildren so bad.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
They're right there.
Speaker 3 (33:24):
That's when you know the decision was firmly made that
I'm taking his plea agreement.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
It sounds like the prosecutor, Seth Tiger, was just trying
to have it both ways.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
You're saying that he's so dangerous and such a monster
that you don't think you should be led at at all.
But you've offered him a plea, and if he agrees
to that, he walks out of the door today with
no conditions at all, no conditions, which is what he
ended up doing.
Speaker 1 (33:49):
Lamont took the plea for time served, which also meant
that he's not eligible for state compensation regardless. He was
finally free after sixteen long years in fifteenth twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Three, one of the best days of my life, mind too,
on Aaron's birthday, by the way, and ironically I was
convicted on her birthday as well, sixteen years earlier. Aaron
had already told me it's a bank of cameras and
reporters out there, so be prepared when you walk through
the door. One of the questions was how are you
feeling getting your freedom back? And my answer then and
(34:25):
today is still the same. Imagine feeling all of the
emotions anger, stress, joy and relief, frustration, all of those
emotions at the same time. I'm still going through it,
trying to figure it out.
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Man.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
It's been amazing though, and I actually got a good
start on everything too. Got my driver's license, my cousin
gave me a vehicle. I got a job rather quickly.
It took a little longer for me to get in
an apartment. I have to go in for a full
knee replacement surgery because O the writer is on set
in on it, bone on bone, so I haven't been
(34:58):
able to work. That is frustrating. So I'm just trying
to figure things out. Aaron set up a GoFundMe page
that's been helping a little bit.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
Well, we're hoping our audience can help out a whole
bunch more, and who knows how long it's going to
be till Lemon is on his feet again. So if
you have a few bucks, a few thousand bucks, a
few million bucks laid around, whatever you can spare, and
you want to help this man who has already been
through so much, we're going to have the GoFundMe linked
in the episode description along with Lamon's LinkedIn page. He's
(35:31):
begun public speaking and he's a great speaker, so if
anyone's interested, I'm sure he'd be very happy to have
work that's not as physically demanding as the job he
was able to find before the surgery. And with that,
we're going to go to closing arguments, where first of all,
I want to thank Aaron and Lamont, both of you
so much for joining us today. And now I'm just
going to do what I do best. I'm going to
(35:52):
kick back in my chair, turn off my microphone, leave
my headphones on, close my eyes, and just listen to
anything you feel is left to be said. So let's
start with you Erin, and then just tan the mic
off to Lamont and Lamont, you take us out into
the sunset.
Speaker 4 (36:08):
Nothing like this happens without the help of a village,
and that's certainly true in Lamont's case. In our office,
attorneys Tiasiplesio and Justin Thompson, we're also on Lamont's team.
I mentioned Pam Swanson. She's retired now, but she's the
investigator that kick things off. And then our paralegal, extraordinary
(36:28):
Shannon Flammer, Oh my god, yes, who runs the office
and is really the backbone of everything. Was absolutely wonderful.
But I honestly don't know if there's a single person
in the Capitol havieous unit who didn't help in some
way with Lamont's case. And that includes a lot of
our law student externs who helped us with research and writing,
people helped with site checking, just brainstorming figuring out how
(36:52):
to approach this crazy developments in the case, especially when
the Supreme Court is changing the law on what we're
allowed to present in the state court and federal court,
you know, as it's going on, you know. And then
he had post conviction attorneys Melissa Jackson and Kim Rigby
at the Ohio Public Defender's Office, who fought valiantly and
kept hitting a brick wall, but stayed supportive of Lamont.
(37:16):
And then we are just so grateful for al Gerhartstein,
who's been so supportive and brought on some amazing attorneys
to help us in state court, Sarah Jelsonino and Elizabeth
Bonham and Marcus Siddodi. They really made an awesome team.
And then Kate Jutson, who's the executive director at the
Center for Integrity of Forensic Sciences, helped with in particular
(37:38):
her expertise in shaking baby science and abusive head trauma. Finally,
I think a big part of Lamont's success has been
his family. As he's mentioned, I think he has maybe
one of the most supportive families that I've ever seen.
It's been a real privilege to have Lamont and his
family trust me with his life and with his case,
because it's pretty scary, especially it's so complicated and technical
(38:02):
and you don't know what's going on, and they let
me into their home to explain things, and we're patient
as I explained why we need to be patient and
why it takes so long, and that kind of thing.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
So one of the things I talk about, especially when
talking to the law students, is about, you know, how
to try your best to meet your client where they are,
you know, intellectually, emotionally if you could. Because I just
had an attorney asked me, you know, after doing the
talk up there, She said, what could I do better?
I have a kind of a guarded client. You know
(38:35):
what I'm saying that I can't seem to get through too,
you know, and he don't trust me. I said, well,
my recommendation, this is what worked for me and my family.
It might not work for everybody. If you could pinpoint
somebody in his family or trusted a friend or something
who he listens to and try to get through to
that person and let that person be the liaison or whatever,
(38:56):
maybe you can, you know, get a better working relationship
with your client. You know, Aaron took the time, Aaron
justin to you. They took the time to explain the
process going forward when Aaron first came on my case,
when we first met each other, and it was very effective.
I don't know what other attorneys do with their clients,
but Aaron took the necessary time literally explain what to
(39:18):
expect going forward and to relate the same information to
my family through a liaison which we chose to be
my sister Debbie, who has been amazing in this process
as well as keeping me straight when I give Aaron
problems and have phone.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
Calls and stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:38):
So it's a whole village, like Aaron just mentioned, on
both sides, it's just it takes a village, man.
Speaker 1 (39:50):
Thank you for listening to Wrong for Conviction. You can
listen to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts
one week early by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus
on Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our production team
Connor Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as my fellow
executive producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff Clyburn. The
music in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR
(40:10):
nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us across
all social media platforms at Lava for Good and at
Wrongful Conviction. You can also follow me on Instagram at
It's Jason Vlahm. Wrongful Conviction is the production of Lava
for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number one
In two thousand and six, Lamont Hunter lived with his
girlfriend los Milda, along with their blended family in Cincinnati, Ohio.
Luismilda's three year old son, Trustin, had been previously hospitalized
for what was believed to be injuries resulting from child abuse. However,
no charges ever materialized. Then, on January nineteenth, two thousand
(00:26):
and six, Trustin was in Lamont's care when paramedics were
called to take Trustin again to the hospital, where he
passed away. Lamont told police that Trustin took a tumble
down the stairs, but the state's experts believed that the
medical evidence told a different story, that Trustin's injuries could
not have resulted from a fall down the stairs, but
(00:48):
rather from violent shaking coupled with forceful impact, in addition,
that the three year old boy may have been sexually assaulted.
With evidence like this, didn't take long for a three
judge panel to sentence Lamont Hunter to death. But this
is wrongful conviction. Welcome back to wrongful conviction. Today we
(01:21):
have a story of a crime that never happened, that
resulted in a death sentence for a man who should
have been given time to grieve. Laman Hunter a sentenced
to death in the state of Ohio for a crime
that never happened, and here to help him tell his story.
I'm going to introduce I actually asked how she would
(01:42):
like to be introduced, and Lamon jumped right in and said,
just call her the amazing Aaron Barnhardt. But for context,
she is assistant public Defender at the Southern Ohio Federal
Public Defender Capital Habeas Unit. So, Aarin, thank you for
being here, thank you for having me, and here to
tell his own story with this assist from Aaron and
myself is the man himself who survived this incredible ordeal,
(02:06):
the Mont Hunter, the Mont I'm so happy you're here.
Speaker 2 (02:09):
I'm happy to be here. Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
It's kind of a miracle that you're here, and you know,
and Aaron, you are a big part of that miracle.
So let's go back to your upbringing. The place that
you were born and where you lived has a lot
to do with your wrongful conviction. But did you actually
grow up there in Hamilton County.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
Ohio, Cincinnati. Yes, I did Hamilton County.
Speaker 3 (02:30):
I was born in the late sixties, so I grew
up through the seventies and eighties, and nineties. My mother,
my father, hit my heroes work their fingers to the
bone to provide a good life for me and my siblings.
My childhood was amazing. Like I always say, I was
fortunate to be born in a family that I was
born in school. I mean cousins, aunts, uncles. We are
(02:53):
all very close knit family.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
You know, I understand eventually you became a father as well.
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Absolutely.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
I got four biological children and two children that I raised,
and I have an honorary daughter, Aisha.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
What are the kids' names, Ashley.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Mariah Lamont Junior, Velita, Eric, Aish and Trinity. I've been
instrumental in very hands on and raising all my children,
all six of them.
Speaker 1 (03:16):
To support his family, Lamont worked as a roofer, but
also he had a side hustle sending drugs through Federal Express,
which landed him in federal prison. Now, drug trafficking is
in no way related to how Lamont ended up on
Ohio's death row, but his prior conviction comes up later
in the story. So after his stint in prison, he
went back to roofing and met a woman named les Milde,
(03:38):
and together they had Lamont's youngest child, Trinity, Los Milda
also had three boys from a previous relationship, Tyree, Tyrell,
and Trustin.
Speaker 4 (03:48):
So Lamont actually didn't spend much time with trust In.
The little boy who died in this case, Trustan, was
Louis Milda's son, and because of complications with her health
when he was born, he was basically raised by other
people family friends and relatives.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
Right Wilma Forte and Amber White.
Speaker 3 (04:08):
Yes, after she delivered Trusting, she had kidney stalls, so
she had immediately go back in for kidney surgery and
she couldn't care for Trusting. So they were loving enough
to take Trusting And for some reason I don't agree
with Luz Milde on this, she just chose to let
him stay there. That's where Trustin lived.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
Now Loismilda Lamont rarely took care of Trusting, and prior
to the two thousand and sixth incident that resulted in
Trustin's death, there had been some suspected abuse back in
two thousand and four.
Speaker 4 (04:37):
In January of two thousand and four, Lamont had been
carrying trust In up a flight of stairs and tripped
and fell on trust In and ended up breaking his
leg bone his tibia. At the time, his two older
half siblings were there, saw what happened. It was obviously
an accident. No one even suspected it wasn't an accident.
He was treated and let go. Then in June of
(05:00):
or Trustin had sort of a constellation of injuries, some swelling, scratches, rashes,
some other abrasions like by his lips and his ears.
When luiz Milda goes to change trust In's diaper, she
sees that it's really raw and red and irritated, luiz
Milda wondered if his genital swelling was a bug bite
or diaper rash, so she takes him to a local
(05:22):
urgent care. When they see these conditions, they end up
sending them to the hospital and it's treated as a
case of abuse. Now. I don't think we'll ever know
what happened to Trustan. I think it's probably a combination
of things we found in medical records that Trustin had
a lot of skin conditions exzema, other sort of conditions
where his hair was falling out, environmental stressors and things
(05:46):
like that, and then he was playing with two older,
rambunctious kids. And I think probably what happened was there
was some combination of maybe a little rough housing, maybe
some irritation that trusted himself else could have scratched or
irritated that resulted in these conditions. No matter what happened,
everyone agrees Lamont wasn't involved, but these circumstances were treated
(06:09):
as abuse, and at the hospital when they did a
skeletal survey an X ray, they discovered that Trustin had
a number of older healing fractures in his hands and feet. Now,
Trustin was hardly ever taken care of by his mother
and therefore Lamont so at the time that these injuries
would have been dated when he sustained them. Trustin was
(06:30):
not around either Lamont or his mother. He was in
the care of other people, so he had lived with
them right, So even if these older injuries were the
result of abuse, it was not from Lamont or his mother.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
No one was charged in this two thousand and four incident,
but child protective services were made aware and even though
Lamont was never even considered a suspect in two thousand
and four, the Hamilton County prosecutors raised the specter of
ongoing abuse while seeking the death penalty for Lamont. In
two thousand and six.
Speaker 4 (07:00):
The death penalty information Center has a report called the
two Percent Report. If you look statistically, Hamilton County and
Kyga County in Ohio, Cleveland and Cincinnati are part of
the two percent of counties in the entire nation that
account for more than half of people on death row
and more than half of people who've been executed in
this country.
Speaker 1 (07:20):
We've covered a lot of Ohio wrongful convictions, too many
to list, but we're going to link Elwood Jones and
Keith Lamar, both death penalty cases handled by Hamilton County
prosecutors in which they hid or ignored exculpatory evidence at trial,
and Lamont's story is no different. So let's get to that.
On January nineteenth, two thousand and six, tragedy struck when
(07:43):
Trustin was staying with Liz, Milda and Lamont.
Speaker 2 (07:46):
Lois Milton.
Speaker 3 (07:46):
Well, she get up and go to work, and about
a hour or two later, I get the boys up
to get ready for school themselves. So I get Jordan
and Tiree out the door on their way to school.
Now I got trust In in Trinity, and I get
trust In situ waited for breakfast in our living room
that I made him French toes, sticks and little sausage links.
He wanted to watch the new Jurassic Park movie, so
(08:08):
set him in a chair, put it on for him,
and decided to start my daily chores. I grabbed Trinity,
my nine month old, and I went downstairs in the
basement to finish doing the laundry. That's when I first
heard him running across the floor above me. Next thing,
I hear, he's coming tumbling down the stairs and hit
his head. So I immediately run over. His head was back
(08:28):
and his eyes were fluttering, and I'm scared. I just
scooped him up and run up the stairs. So I
figured I throw some water on his face to try
to jug him awake, and his eyes were still fluttering.
So I seeing that he was struggling to take a breath.
I don't know how to do CPR, but I attempted it,
so I had to open his mouth. I noticed a
piece of sausage lodged in the back of his mouth,
(08:50):
blocking his airway, so I got that out on my finger.
I held his nose and I blew in his mouth
like I see people do on TV. I don't know,
I don't know how to do it. I'm not certified nothing,
so I probably blew too much in his mouth because
his stomach was getting bloated. I got scared, so I
called his mother and she immediately came home. They made
a big deal of this, by the way, at my
(09:11):
trial that I didn't immediately call the paramedics instead of
calling his mother. They thought it was something the farious,
but it wasn't. It was just I panicked, and so
paramedics got there very quick and started tending to him.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
I was just a mess.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
The dog is running around parking.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
Absolutely, I could never prove this, but I know my dog,
when I left the room, tried to take his food
from him while he was sitting in that chair. I
believe that's what prompted Trusting to run across that.
Speaker 1 (09:39):
Floor, and that might explain why he ended up with
a piece of food lodge in his throat.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
Absolutely, the sausage, and I know my dog was harassing
for it. But they get Trusting in the ambulance and
Lamilda gets in the ambulance with him, and me and
Trinity we followed them to the emergency room at Children's.
That's how my day started. January nineteenth, two thousand and.
Speaker 4 (10:00):
Six, Trustin had head injuries that were fatal. He had
blood trapped between the layers of his brain, which they
call subdural hematoma. And then his brain also swelled, which
(10:24):
is what happens anytime there's any sort of injury or
trauma to the brain, they call it cerebral edema. And
anytime your brain swells, that also puts pressure on your
optic nerve and results in rental hemorrhages, so bleeding on
the back of your eye.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
And by now our listeners are familiar with these findings
as what are commonly associated with the grotesque junk science
prosecution theory known as shaken baby syndrome. We're going to
have our shaken baby syndrome episode of wraeful conviction junk
science length as well. For years, the theory was widely
accepted across the medical establishment that the presentation of these
(10:59):
three things could mean only one thing, that the infant
or toddler had been shaken to death by their most
recent caretaker, denying any other potential or even probable causes.
But over time this theory has gradually fallen apart.
Speaker 4 (11:15):
And this field has been very nimble because anytime someone shows, well,
guess what this person, we know it was an accident,
and they show these injuries, and then they say like, oh, okay, well,
first of all, we're not going to call it shaking baby,
because they did experiments. They had big beefy football players
shake a crash test dummy baby, and they could not
(11:39):
generate the type of force needed to cause the brain
injuries without breaking the child's neck. And so they said, okay,
so maybe shaking alone can't cause it. So shaking with impact,
that's what we'll say, shaking with impact, So we won't
call it shaken baby, will call it abusive head trauma.
And they just keep morphing and adapting to whatever fits.
Speaker 1 (11:58):
No matter what has been revealed through biomechanical studies and
a confluence of medical histories that proved that in addition
to accidental causes like a fall down the stairs, there
are eighty one pre existing medical conditions and counting that
can cause the presentation of those findings. And yet there
are still proponents of this theory that refused to admit
(12:20):
that limiting the cause to shaking alone is an unscientific
leap in logic. And so, in two thousand and six,
even though some of the medical establishment had begun to
realize the problem with this theory, including the neuroscientists who
had developed it. The state's witnesses attributed Trustin's triad of
findings to shaking and any other injuries, including a sheared
(12:41):
vertebrae and what appeared to be an impact injury to
further violence. Lamount was arrested on January twenty second, two
thousand and six, three days after Trusten's death, and he
has taken a trial in June two thousand and seven.
Speaker 4 (12:54):
The prosecutor, through their child abuse pedatrician witnesses, said these
kinds of injuries could not have come from a fall
down the stairs. It had to have been abuse.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
You know.
Speaker 4 (13:03):
We only see these kinds of injuries from forces like
in a car accident or maybe LaMotte swung trusting around
like a base ball bag. You know, that's what have
caused it, but not from falling down the stairs. And
then in addition, Trusten had some injuries in his anal
rectal era. He had three puncture wounds in his rectal mucosa,
(13:24):
so kind of up in his rectum. There were three
wounds I think they were about two millimeters in diameter,
and then kind of on the outside lip of his anus.
It's not entirely clear if it's a tear or a cut.
It wasn't that accurately described, and so those injuries were
used to support a charge of rape.
Speaker 1 (13:42):
As we'll explain later, there was a completely innocent explanation
for those anal and rectal injuries, Yet the child abuse
pediatrician painted a completely different picture.
Speaker 4 (13:52):
The child abuse pediatrician did say that the injuries were
consistent with an adult penis. Now that's the magic word, right, consistent,
which I think a lot of fact finders here and
think that means a match, but it doesn't at all.
It just means we can't exclude it as the cause.
Speaker 1 (14:09):
I mean, what adult penis is two millimeters in diameter.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
So macrof is only talking about the external injury, kind
of along the edge of the anus. She never saw
the internal injuries, the puncture wounds.
Speaker 2 (14:24):
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1 (14:26):
So the child abuse pediatrician did not have a full
understanding of the injuries, which may explain why the coroner,
doctor Gretel Stevens, true different conclusions.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
What the coroner said was that it looked like the
interior wounds were like poked with something sharp, like maybe
a pencil, and the prosecutors argued at trial that this
wasn't penile rape, but this was rape with some sort
of object.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
While that explanation is still incorrect, at least doctor Stevens's
assumptions were more grounded in reality. However, the investigation failed
to find any such object or any efforts to cover
up that kind of crime. Doctor Stevens also acknowledged the
evolving science on shaking baby syndrome, saying that a rotational
fall would be consistent with the shearing of the neck
(15:09):
that trust And experienced, and that stairfalls are responsible for
the kinds of findings that were present in trust And situation.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
And that's the thing, like doctor Stevens pretty much was
a straight shooter at trial, and it was just the
fact that she hadn't seen the photographs of the actual
staircase to know that there was a ledge abutting one
side of the stairs that kind of mashed up with
some injuries that she saw. There was also a throw
rug if he had slipped on, that may have contributed.
(15:38):
She didn't know that Lamont had reported hearing Trusted running.
Speaker 1 (15:41):
In addition, the coroner was unaware of the innocent explanation
for these anal and rectal injuries. So since neither one
of the state's experts had a full picture of the incident, this,
along with Lamont's ineffective council, allowed the state's erroneous narrative
to take hold.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
Lamont's child counsel, Clyde Bennett is the attorney's is not
a bad criminal defense attorney. He's actually pretty well known
as a good criminal defense attorney. But there are a
couple things that just weren't going to work in Lamont's case.
Number One, a death penalty case is different, A dead
kid is different, and you can't just kind of rely
(16:20):
on your old tricks and techniques in this kind of case.
Number two, this is a case where the evidence is
all based on medical expert testimony. The evidence is the
state expert coming in and saying you can only get
these injuries from abuse, period. And his trial council did
(16:41):
not hire an expert, not only not to testify or
just even to consult with an expert to explain the
medical records to him, to explain the flaws in the
state experts testimony and reasoning. He said he thought that
he could just rely on cross examination and his theory
was that this chadabe'see pediatrician. She's not qualified to be
(17:04):
talking about retinal hemorrhages. She's not an ophthalmologist, she's not
qualified to be talking about the mechanism of injury. She
doesn't have a degree in biomechanics or anything. Now, this
is all true. The problem was when he made that objection,
the court overruled it, and he had no plan B.
So when that didn't work, he was left to just
(17:26):
kind of on his own try to cross examine. And
he knew enough to be dangerous, and so he's asking
questions about stuff that's not relevant, Like he's trying to say,
isn't it true that you could have a delayed onset
of injury? And that is true sometimes except for that's
not what happened in Tresten's case. We know what happened.
He fell down the stairs and was immediately unresponsive, so
(17:49):
that line of questioning was completely irrelevant. Also, he didn't
hire an expert to look through the medical records, and
he didn't look through the records himself.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
I mean, Lamont would have been better off with his
original court appointed attorney, not I mean much better off,
because it turns out that mister Bennett was more than
a little bit distracted at the time.
Speaker 4 (18:09):
That's true, he was a little distracted with his own
legal troubles. Mister Bennett himself was being investigated for some
pretty serious federal crimes, and in fact, shortly after Lamont
was sentenced to death, he signed his own plea agreement
and turned himself into federal custody and went away to
(18:31):
federal prison. He pled to structured deposits, so depositing money
just under the reporting limit.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
Unbeknownst to Lamont, Clyde Bennett was connected to a major
drug dealer out of Dayton, Ohio, both of whom were
subjects of a federal investigation that ended in cooperation and
a plea deal for Clyde. Meanwhile, in Lamont's trial, Clyde
neglected to prepare the vital medical expert testimony, as well
as advised Lamont to take a bench trial in front
of a three judge panel, reasoning that a jury might
(19:00):
be susceptible to the emotion surrounding a dead child.
Speaker 4 (19:03):
Turns out, so are three Dutch panels.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
Exactly, especially when we know for sure that this judge
who's now passed on Norbert Natl told Clyde Bennett and
his chambers it wouldn't be wise for him to bring
me in front of him on a bench trial because
I lose, and he still advised me not to have
a jury.
Speaker 4 (19:25):
Now, the advantage of not having a jury is that
you can save a lot of time because you don't
have to go through vaidir and get a death qualified jury.
So you know, Clyde took a flat fee from Lamont's family,
so it's just economical to make the trial go as
fast as possible, and so great way to cut down
on time is to wave jury.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
It sounds to me like the judge actually was telling him,
if you do this, you're going to lose, and he
was like great. I mean, I'm glad you're laughing a lot,
because you know, sometimes I feel like I'm laughing from crying.
Where you lived through this.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
I say, what I'm doing I've been doing in society.
Oh my god, I've been laughing to keep from crying. Man,
it's just so much trauma on this journey, man, It's
just a lot of trauma.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
So this bench troul played out exactly as this judge
told Lamont's attorney, it would.
Speaker 4 (20:18):
It was pretty easy for them to convict because all
of the state's expert testimony was entirely unrebutted. So they
have these experts from the state saying this had to
be abuse, There is no way this could have come
from a fall down the stairs. And then on top
of that, they had the state saying and look at
(20:39):
all this other suspicious stuff, injuries in his anal rectal era,
these injuries in the past when Lamont was around trust In.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
After conviction, Clyde Bennett pops up in the jail on
a Sunday, and I'm pissed at this point, I'm like,
what are you doing here? And he just said, man,
you know, I just wanted to come and ask you
how our federal prisons, how are they ran, what it's
like in federal prison. I'm looking at him, like, what
does that have to do with my case? He said, well,
(21:07):
he's well, I know you've been in federal prison before,
and I'm going there. I'm fighting for my own life, Lamont,
So I just wanted to know how these federal prisons.
I walked off on him and went back to my sale. Man,
I was done with him at the time. So all
hope was lost at that point. I was convicted and
then mitigation where you have to get the most closest
loving person in your life. They had to literally beg
(21:31):
the courts to save my life. It was humiliating for
me and my family, and it didn't work, so they
were dug in. So I still got sentenced to death.
And my father, who I have a lot of love
and respect for, he's actually my hero. I after getting
on a standing testifying and asking the course to save
my life and telling the story that he did about
(21:53):
me and growing up with my siblings, he had a
heart attack right there in the courtroom.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
He had a heart attack right there in the courtroom.
Speaker 2 (22:02):
Right in the courtroom. Ambulance was called.
Speaker 3 (22:04):
They saved his life there, but he had a heart
attack right in the courtroom. They never got talked about
in the media or nothing like that. They was too
busy calling me a monster and a child rapist. And
my father he's no longer with us. He died in
twenty and eighteen before I got home, But from that
day his health just declined.
Speaker 2 (22:41):
Since to death.
Speaker 3 (22:42):
Isolated away from general population, there's no programming set up
for us back there. It's just mundane and waking up
every day knowing that your name is on a list
to be executed. The State of Ohio intents on executing you.
And that's like having a gorilla constantly on your shoulders,
weighing you down. And this is it from far as
(23:04):
you can see, is it every day? It's like the
same day. The first year I was there, I was
still in the haze. I didn't know what to expect
as far as the courts. I've never appealed the sentence before,
so I was, of course jaden and kind of paranoid
of my attorneys after coming through the whrror show of
the trial that I went through and being served of
(23:25):
by my trial attorney, like, well, what's going to happen
at this phase.
Speaker 4 (23:29):
Although Lamont had pretty capable post conviction attorneys from the
Ohio Public Defender's Office, unfortunately they couldn't get any traction
in state court, which is not uncommon. But their claims
that they raised were not that different than what we
raised in our federal habeas petition. The problem is they
didn't have access to the evidence they needed. They asked
(23:52):
for discovery to get the medical records to depose the
coroner just like we did, and it was all denied.
Speaker 1 (23:58):
As we've mentioned a trial, both states experts Macaroff and
Stevens have been operating with incomplete understandings of the incident. Additionally,
Makarov had ignored the evolving science on sbs, which continued
through post conviction, even as the science continued to evolve
further and further away from her position.
Speaker 4 (24:17):
Doctor Macaroff, she's doubling down on everything as everyone in
her sort of little industry has to do. This is
what makes this field so dangerous and unscientific, is the
feedback loop that exists. During our deposition, doctor Macroff cited
an article about stairfalls, saying, look, we know stairfalls aren't
(24:40):
fatal because we draw all this data from different hospitals.
All these kids come in after falling down the stairs
and they didn't die. And I said, okay, I said,
would trust In's case be included in that data set?
And she said, well, what do you mean? I said, well,
is his case classified as a stairfall because you guys
don't believe mister Hunter that he fell down the stairs, right,
And she was like, oh, that's a good point. They're
(25:02):
self selecting the data they're using to draw the conclusions
that they used to exclude the data that they don't want.
And then they say that, you know, these are so rare,
and I agree. You know, most kids who tumble down
the stairs don't die from it. But that doesn't mean
that it's impossible, which is what they say to put
people on death row. And just because something is rare
(25:25):
doesn't mean that they know which is the rare case
and which isn't. So there's all this bad science that
goes into it. The thing that actually is scientific about
this would be biomechanics, right force Chawdabez. Pediatricians don't think
biomechanics have any place in their world. And when doctor Macroff,
she says, I didn't say lamont abuse trust in. I
(25:48):
just said that his report does not match the mechanism
of injury. And I said, well, when you're talking about
the mechanism of injury, that kind of sounds like force.
Speaker 2 (25:57):
Right.
Speaker 4 (25:57):
Oh, no, I'm not a physicist. Biomechanics doesn't fit there
or whatever. I don't know how, right, I don't know
how you can talk about a mechanism without using biomechanics. Anyway,
we did hire a biold mechanical engineer, and we went
to the site and he took measurements of the stairs
and the elasticity of the surface, and he used a
(26:19):
computer program and he put in the height that Trusten
was and his weight and the average that a child
his age could run, and you know, ran through all
these different scenarios of how he could have fallen and
showed that, like the forces generated were well within the
range that have been shown to be enough to generate
the kind of injuries that he had. So absolutely stair
(26:41):
falls can cause this. And also now with cell phones
and security cameras, like, people have started capturing injuries that
otherwise would have been indicted as abuse if we didn't
have proof that it was actually accidental. And doctor Macarov
claims it even that could be doctors, even that could
be doctored. She maybe would have to see it with
(27:03):
her own eyes to be convinced, and so you know,
there's just no pleasing the child abuse pediatricians.
Speaker 1 (27:10):
However, the defense was able to please the coroner, doctor Stevens,
when they provided a fuller picture of the incident, including
photographs of the staircase, a biomechanical expert and Finally, the
innocent explanation for the anal and rectal injuries that were
available to prosecutors, the state's experts, and even la Mons,
attorney at the trial. Had he even bothered to look.
Speaker 4 (27:32):
He would have found, like our investigator Pam Swanson did
when we took over the case, notations in the medical
records that staff at the hospital in the pic you
had attempted to take Trusten's temperature three times with a
rectal thermometer had been unsuccessful, and immediately after that had
noted blood in his rectum, which of course perfectly matches
(27:55):
up with the three puncture wounds that the coroner identified
and said could have been caused by something sharp like
a pencil. And in fact, and in another piece of
undisclosed evidence, the coroner even told detectives that she couldn't
rule out a temperature probe as the cause of this. Now,
nobody turned that over to Lamont at trial, and the
(28:16):
prosecutor didn't ask the coroner that question, but he did
ask the child abuse pediatrician at trial if Trustan's injuries
could have been caused by a thermometer, and she said no.
When we deposed the coroner and showed her these records,
she immediately changed her opinion on the cause of those injuries.
She still said it was non accidental, but it was
inflicted medically, not as an assault. For me, I saw
(28:39):
that and felt like I was just shouting into the void.
For years after that, nobody seemed to care about it
until the coroner did. But I was like, people, this
is it, Like this explains.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
Everything, because that was a huge void in my defense.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Yeah, it was a huge gap because nobody could explain.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
I never could explain the rape to the time we
found that in the record, I couldn't not explain the rape.
Speaker 2 (29:02):
I didn't rape me.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
So these idiots couldn't even figure out the three pokes
with the thermometer were what caused what otherwise sounded like
an awful thing that was done to this child, right.
Speaker 4 (29:14):
Well, yeah, that's the really troubling thing is that I
think nobody looked at these records, including doctor Stevens. You know,
at the time, had she she would have learned things
about the scene that would have explained the mechanism of injury,
plus the findings about the anal and rectal injuries, and
(29:34):
so then, like she did her deposition, when we showed
them to her, she would have changed her opinion not
only about the injuries that supported the rape, but also
about the cause of death, that it was not a
homicide and his trial attorney is just as much to blame.
Speaker 1 (29:52):
So in addition to the Brady violations, this was also
a clear case of ineffective assistance of counsel as well.
Speaker 4 (29:59):
When we went back to our judge in federal court judgment,
Michael Watson, with the deposition testimony from Clyde, he kind of,
in his opinion, went through all the things he didn't do,
you know, didn't hire experts, didn't talk to witnesses, didn't
look at the records, blah blah blah. And then the
way he put it was he appeared to settle on
his strategy of not using an expert, not as a
result of a strategic investigation, but rather in lieu of one,
(30:24):
which is kind of the classic definition of being an
effective lawyer. You know, like all these people participate in
a process that could result in a man's execution, and
that there's so little you know, I mean plenty of time.
I think there's outright misconduct and malicious intent, and I
think there's some of that here with the Brady evidence,
(30:46):
the withheld evidence that we saw, but a lot of
other is I think just in competence, a lack of thoroughness.
I don't know that might even be worse, because you know,
you care so little about being careful in.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
Case it was such magnitude as a person's life.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Right with proceeding so fraught with constitutional violations and convincing
evidence of innocence. The Hamilton County Prosecutor's office joined Lamont's
motion for a new trial in April twenty twenty three,
but this didn't mean that they were finally seeking justice
for Lamont.
Speaker 4 (31:19):
After Lamont had a new trial and we are trying
to get him out on bond, the prosecutor's office ran
to the coroner's office and got the other pathologists in
the office to issue this addendum to the original autopsy
report that basically just says, like, we think the coroner
was wrong to change her opinion under oath and the deposition.
(31:39):
We do think that this should still be a homicide
and still be a rape with zero explanation. And then
those pathologists refused to talk to us without the prosecutors
being present. It just became so obvious to us that
I believe the Hamilton County Coroner's Office, there's supposed to
be neutral experts guided by science, considers itself an arm
(32:03):
of the prosecutor's office.
Speaker 1 (32:05):
So while Lamont was still trying to get out on
bond and the lead up to his new trial, the
prosecutor's office began to apply pressure.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
And here comes to please offer.
Speaker 4 (32:14):
Basically, Lamont had this pressure of stay here in jail
for at least another year, or take a plea and
get out time served. Lamont could walk out the door. Well,
we decided to fight it and ask for bond, and
the prosecutors fought dirty. Basically had to go through a
little mini trial where they are allowed to summarize their
case by presenting evidence, including evidence that wasn't even presented
(32:36):
at trial the first time, so stuff that isn't tested
in any way, but just allegations. We were able to
beat them there. The judge ruled that they hadn't met
their burden to keep him locked up. But then the
bond was five hundred thousand dollars, which he would have
needed to get fifty thousand dollars together cash to meet.
Speaker 2 (32:55):
It would have been very hard which we couldn't do.
Speaker 4 (32:57):
I mean, so that was one problem. And then the
other problem was the prosecutor convinced the judge to order
no contact for Lamont with anyone under eighteen, so that
meant all of his nine grandchildren eight at the time.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
And went on the way.
Speaker 4 (33:11):
Yeah, okay, he wouldn't be able to meet them.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
My children was in the courtroom when they asked for that,
and just seeing them cry, man, and they want me
to meet their kids so bad, and I want to
meet my grandchildren so bad.
Speaker 2 (33:23):
They're right there.
Speaker 3 (33:24):
That's when you know the decision was firmly made that
I'm taking his plea agreement.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
It sounds like the prosecutor, Seth Tiger, was just trying
to have it both ways.
Speaker 4 (33:33):
You're saying that he's so dangerous and such a monster
that you don't think you should be led at at all.
But you've offered him a plea, and if he agrees
to that, he walks out of the door today with
no conditions at all, no conditions, which is what he
ended up doing.
Speaker 1 (33:49):
Lamont took the plea for time served, which also meant
that he's not eligible for state compensation regardless. He was
finally free after sixteen long years in fifteenth twenty twenty.
Speaker 3 (34:01):
Three, one of the best days of my life, mind too,
on Aaron's birthday, by the way, and ironically I was
convicted on her birthday as well, sixteen years earlier. Aaron
had already told me it's a bank of cameras and
reporters out there, so be prepared when you walk through
the door. One of the questions was how are you
feeling getting your freedom back? And my answer then and
(34:25):
today is still the same. Imagine feeling all of the
emotions anger, stress, joy and relief, frustration, all of those
emotions at the same time. I'm still going through it,
trying to figure it out.
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Man.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
It's been amazing though, and I actually got a good
start on everything too. Got my driver's license, my cousin
gave me a vehicle. I got a job rather quickly.
It took a little longer for me to get in
an apartment. I have to go in for a full
knee replacement surgery because O the writer is on set
in on it, bone on bone, so I haven't been
(34:58):
able to work. That is frustrating. So I'm just trying
to figure things out. Aaron set up a GoFundMe page
that's been helping a little bit.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
Well, we're hoping our audience can help out a whole
bunch more, and who knows how long it's going to
be till Lemon is on his feet again. So if
you have a few bucks, a few thousand bucks, a
few million bucks laid around, whatever you can spare, and
you want to help this man who has already been
through so much, we're going to have the GoFundMe linked
in the episode description along with Lamon's LinkedIn page. He's
(35:31):
begun public speaking and he's a great speaker, so if
anyone's interested, I'm sure he'd be very happy to have
work that's not as physically demanding as the job he
was able to find before the surgery. And with that,
we're going to go to closing arguments, where first of all,
I want to thank Aaron and Lamont, both of you
so much for joining us today. And now I'm just
going to do what I do best. I'm going to
(35:52):
kick back in my chair, turn off my microphone, leave
my headphones on, close my eyes, and just listen to
anything you feel is left to be said. So let's
start with you Erin, and then just tan the mic
off to Lamont and Lamont, you take us out into
the sunset.
Speaker 4 (36:08):
Nothing like this happens without the help of a village,
and that's certainly true in Lamont's case. In our office,
attorneys Tiasiplesio and Justin Thompson, we're also on Lamont's team.
I mentioned Pam Swanson. She's retired now, but she's the
investigator that kick things off. And then our paralegal, extraordinary
(36:28):
Shannon Flammer, Oh my god, yes, who runs the office
and is really the backbone of everything. Was absolutely wonderful.
But I honestly don't know if there's a single person
in the Capitol havieous unit who didn't help in some
way with Lamont's case. And that includes a lot of
our law student externs who helped us with research and writing,
people helped with site checking, just brainstorming figuring out how
(36:52):
to approach this crazy developments in the case, especially when
the Supreme Court is changing the law on what we're
allowed to present in the state court and federal court,
you know, as it's going on, you know. And then
he had post conviction attorneys Melissa Jackson and Kim Rigby
at the Ohio Public Defender's Office, who fought valiantly and
kept hitting a brick wall, but stayed supportive of Lamont.
(37:16):
And then we are just so grateful for al Gerhartstein,
who's been so supportive and brought on some amazing attorneys
to help us in state court, Sarah Jelsonino and Elizabeth
Bonham and Marcus Siddodi. They really made an awesome team.
And then Kate Jutson, who's the executive director at the
Center for Integrity of Forensic Sciences, helped with in particular
(37:38):
her expertise in shaking baby science and abusive head trauma. Finally,
I think a big part of Lamont's success has been
his family. As he's mentioned, I think he has maybe
one of the most supportive families that I've ever seen.
It's been a real privilege to have Lamont and his
family trust me with his life and with his case,
because it's pretty scary, especially it's so complicated and technical
(38:02):
and you don't know what's going on, and they let
me into their home to explain things, and we're patient
as I explained why we need to be patient and
why it takes so long, and that kind of thing.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
So one of the things I talk about, especially when
talking to the law students, is about, you know, how
to try your best to meet your client where they are,
you know, intellectually, emotionally if you could. Because I just
had an attorney asked me, you know, after doing the
talk up there, She said, what could I do better?
I have a kind of a guarded client. You know
(38:35):
what I'm saying that I can't seem to get through too,
you know, and he don't trust me. I said, well,
my recommendation, this is what worked for me and my family.
It might not work for everybody. If you could pinpoint
somebody in his family or trusted a friend or something
who he listens to and try to get through to
that person and let that person be the liaison or whatever,
(38:56):
maybe you can, you know, get a better working relationship
with your client. You know, Aaron took the time, Aaron
justin to you. They took the time to explain the
process going forward when Aaron first came on my case,
when we first met each other, and it was very effective.
I don't know what other attorneys do with their clients,
but Aaron took the necessary time literally explain what to
(39:18):
expect going forward and to relate the same information to
my family through a liaison which we chose to be
my sister Debbie, who has been amazing in this process
as well as keeping me straight when I give Aaron
problems and have phone.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
Calls and stuff.
Speaker 3 (39:38):
So it's a whole village, like Aaron just mentioned, on
both sides, it's just it takes a village, man.
Speaker 1 (39:50):
Thank you for listening to Wrong for Conviction. You can
listen to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts
one week early by subscribing to Lava for Good Plus
on Apple Podcasts. I want to thank our production team
Connor Hall and Kathleen Fink, as well as my fellow
executive producers Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wartis, and Jeff Clyburn. The
music in this production was supplied by three time OSCAR
(40:10):
nominated composer Jay Ralph. Be sure to follow us across
all social media platforms at Lava for Good and at
Wrongful Conviction. You can also follow me on Instagram at
It's Jason Vlahm. 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
Boysober
Have you ever wondered what life might be like if you stopped worrying about being wanted, and focused on understanding what you actually want? That was the question Hope Woodard asked herself after a string of situationships inspired her to take a break from sex and dating. She went "boysober," a personal concept that sparked a global movement among women looking to prioritize themselves over men. Now, Hope is looking to expand the ways we explore our relationship to relationships. Taking a bold, unfiltered look into modern love, romance, and self-discovery, Boysober will dive into messy stories about dating, sex, love, friendship, and breaking generational patterns—all with humor, vulnerability, and a fresh perspective.
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!
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