April 3, 2025 • 42 mins
On March 24, 2001, the burned body of Howard Rose was found in a pick up truck in Pennsylvania. Rose had been shot in the back of the head in Cleveland, OH the night before. Investigators centered on four suspects, including Arketa Willis and Marcus Blalock. As a result of a deal with the prosecution, Willis testified against Blalock, blaming him for the murder. No physical evidence defended this claim. Her testimony was the sole basis for his conviction of murder and sentence of twenty years to life.
To learn more and get involved, visit:
https://www.buycadmusbooks.com/pages/marcus-blalock
https://www.kimlawcrimlaw.com/
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/191-jason-flom-with-ru-el-sailor/
https://lavaforgood.com/podcast/326-jason-flom-with-octavius-williams/
Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava For Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co. No1.
We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported in this show are accurate. The views and opinions expressed by the individuals featured in this show are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of Lava for Good.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
On March twenty fourth, two thousand and one, the body
of Howard Rose was discovered inside a burnt out pickup
truck on Interstate ninety in Pennsylvania. The night before, police
had responded to suspicious activity outside the Ohio home of
Arquita Willis. Two men sped off and were apprehended, both
(00:23):
of whom gave statements that Willis had killed Rose and
asked them to help dispose of his body. Soon after,
Willis was arrested, threatened with a death penalty, and she
told police that her former fling, a guy named Marcus Blaylock,
was the shooter and that he had disposed of the
body on I ninety alone. Despite obvious falsehoods and multiple
(00:45):
changes to her story, not even nineteen alibi witnesses could
save Marcus. This is wrongful conviction. You're listening to wrongful conviction.
You can listen to this and all the Lava for
Good podcasts one week early and ad free by subscribing
(01:08):
to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. Welcome back
to Wrangful Conviction, where today we have another case out
of Kuyahoga County. I mean, they just keep on coming,
and this is one of the capitals, if not the
(01:31):
wrongful conviction capital of this country. And joining us is
one of our favorite attorneys who's very active in this space.
Kim Coral, welcome.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Back, Thank you, thanks for having.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Me and joining us from an Ohio correctional facility where
he never belonged, but he's been there for over twenty
four long years. The man himself, Marcus Blaylock, Marcus, thank
you for joining us.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Sure, I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
And Marcus was originally Bordingland, but soon moved out to
a nearby suburb called Maple Heights, or really a sub
section of that suburb.
Speaker 3 (02:06):
We moved out to Maple Heights seventy five seventy six
at the time. It's a predominantly white area and the
area that I grew up in was called President's Road.
The railroad tracks run behind it, so those houses are cheaper,
so they put the blacks in that area. So the
blacks in that area, they kind of stuck together. So
I had a good childhood. I played sports, football, wrestle,
(02:30):
ran track, and then at the age of fourteen, I
got a job working at the local hardware store, and
the community stuck together in that area. I appreciated that.
But what I didn't appreciate was the police, because the
police were very prejudiced. Not even a brown person, not
a black person, not an Asian person, nothing, just all
(02:53):
white police force. Just say, if a white kid across
Broadway get their bike stolen, the first place they're coming
to look for that bike is in President's role. And
then it seems like I was being singled out. And
it was one main cop who ended up turning into
a detective. Why was he always asking me about this
and about that? But I come to find out that
(03:13):
he was also working at Sears. My mother retired from Sears,
so he knew my mom. And the other cop who
ended up being the detective all Henderson went to high
school with my oldest sister. So I got these cops
asking me questions this periodically and if somebody's having a
house party and a fight breakout. Seems like I was
(03:36):
always being targeted, like hey, Mark, who was doing all
the fighting or who was doing this? And who? I
don't know. As I got older, I'm not saying I
was an angel. I got into mischief stuff, like my
last year of high school. Even though I worked, I
had a little hustle, I got caught with some marijuana
and some other drugs. I ended up getting probation or
(03:56):
whatever for that, so Dad kept the police on me,
even when years later when I stopped.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Now, we've seen a lot of cases where a connection
to drugs made our guests the target of a frame job.
But by two thousand and one, Mark was thirty two
years old and he had built a successful landscaping company.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
That landscaping company ended up being very profitable for me.
I ended up having a lot of contracts with the county,
so I'm with the city and helped me with money
to put down to buy a house for my family
that was off Libby.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
And while Marcus had moved into the white part of town,
it was some of his old acquaintances from President's Row,
Dion Johnson, Ernest McCauley, and Arkeda Willis who dragged him
into this case.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Arqita growing up, she just wasn't my type at the time,
but years later I ended up having a friends with
benefits or so you want to say, relationship with her
that turned into something else. And then when I cut
it off, it wasn't tooken in a great way. It
was like she hated me after that. But Dion was
a friend and cuts hair. He's a barber, so used
(05:02):
to cut our hair and whatnot. And honest, he was
a friend of mine. And when he was released from
a federal prison after doing five years, I got this business,
I got this home. I gave him a job.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
He also gave him a cell phone that was registered
to Marx Landscaping Business, which was about to score a
major contract.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
And this contract was to service the children's playgrounds and
the top lots in the city. But this contract was
not publicized. The same Italian company, we're getting this contract
for the last five years. So at the time, Maple
Heights had just elected their first black councilman. So he
(05:41):
came to my mom and told my mom, Hey, have
Marcus call me. It's like they got this contract coming up.
They haven't even publicized it. They keep giving it to
the same company. We're going to back you and make
sure that you get this contract.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
And even though he had the lowest bid, the contract
went to the incumbent company. The council member encouraged Marcus
to contest that decision at the upcoming meeting.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
Now, mind you, at this council meeting. You have the
chief of police, the mayor, seven council people, the fire chief.
You have one of the two detectives that frame me
for this crime. I haven't had any run ins with
Maple Heist police or the police period. In over five years.
Everything is going smooth for me. My business is going great.
So I'm kind of leary to go to this council meeting.
(06:26):
So when they get to the awarding of the contracts
and did anybody have anything to say, I stand up
and say yes I do. My name is Mark on
Mark's Landscaping. I had a lord bid, but I didn't
get the contract. Papers is shuffling. They shut the mics off.
They're looking up there whispering to each other. They cut
the mic back on and was like, oh, it seems
(06:47):
to be had been a mistake. The contract has already
been awarded. But Mark will make sure that your company
will get work in the future. Let me tell you something.
Two months later, I'm arrested for this case.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
So that brings us to the end of March two
thousand and one, when Marcus was growing his business and
supporting his family in their newly purchased home in the
White part of town. He had also been fortunate enough
to be able to help send his cousin to the
University of Cincinnati, so his cousin invited Marcus to an
alumni event over the weekend of Friday, March twenty third
into Saturday, the twenty fourth of two thousand and one.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
They're having their first annual Black student reunion, hosting it
in Cleveland. He lived in Cincinnati, so he's coming to clean.
This is my cousin. I supported him all while he
went through college. I know most of his fraternity friends,
people that he went to college with, so normally when
they have things, I'm always in attendance.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Dean Johnson had even given Marcus a haircut during the
day on March twenty third, but after they parted ways,
according to Johnson's police statement, he and Ernest McCauley were
contacted by Archida Willis. She had been entertaining a known
drug deal named Howard Rose, who had been fatally shot,
and Willis needed help with disposing of his body.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
So around eleven thirty, the next door neighbor and great
ann of Arkida Willis, Dorothy Evans, makes a call to
police concerning suspicious activity. She states that she heard noises
like someone moving furniture outside her bedroom window near Arkida
Willis's home, and then looked to see if Willis's car
was in the driveway, but it wasn't. She saw a
dark vehicle she didn't recognize in the driveway and she
(08:27):
calls the police, and while on the phone with the
nine one one dispatcher, she saw two individuals dressed in
black exitding the home next door. A little while later,
Willis arrives at the front door of Evan's home. Willis
asked Evans if Evans had called the police, and when
Evans asked Willis what was going on, Willis responded saying
that someone was helping her do something and that's all
(08:50):
she said. When the police officers arrive, they observe a
car fleeing the scene and after a short chase, they
apprehend two individuals, Ernest mc collie and Dion Johnson.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Johnson and McCauley were arrested for trespassing. While the police
did a safety check of Arkida's home and they saw
a puddle of blood on her driveway.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
They returned to Willis's house and they're like, what is
this puddle of blood in the driveway, they went to
the backyard, they find a back window unlocked. They go
to the bathroom and find lick candles around the bathtub,
a warm bathwater with Sophie residue and drying blood, and
a pager with blood on it, and this blood later
is tested and found to be the blood of Howard Rose.
(09:33):
Now the police leave the bathroom move to the bedroom
where they see a box spring without a mattress and
no bed linens visible.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
As of now, there was no body and according to
later statements from Marquita, at this time, Rose's body was
in his truck parked on a side street while she
went to work, where the police eventually tracked her down
and they asked her to come to the station so
they could ride to the house together, and she explained
that Johnson and McAuley were not intruders.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
First she said she had some friends over there moving
some furniture. Then when they asked about the blood they
found in the driveway, where did it come from? She said, what,
a blood came from a dogfight. She was hosting a
dog fight at her house.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Oh, obviously, dog fighting.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
It's as ridiculous as it is sinister.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
It's not what I would have gone with, but that's
what our Keida Willis goes with. When they go to
her house, she's accompanied then with like a thin black
mail with a Jamaican accent, by the name of Omar.
He was present while police questioned Willis outside her home.
Willis refused to allow the officers to do a second
search of her home, and in the police reports they
(10:43):
report that Willis is evasive and uncooperative and.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Then they left. They appear to have lost all interest
in Omar, and it's believed that at this point the
body was disposed of near Exit six on the Interstate
ninety in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
In the early morning hours of March two, twenty fourth,
Pennsylvania police are called to the scene of a fire
on I ninety. A pickup truck with Ohio plates is
engulfed in flames. Howard Rose is inside. He's identified through
an autopsy and it's determined that the cause of death
is a single gunshot wound to the head. The investigation
produced information that Willis was with Howard Rose on the
(11:21):
day he was killed, and they determined that the death
they were investigating had initially taken place in Maple Heights,
and so reshifting our focus back to Ohio, Ernest McCully
and Dean Johnson, who had been arrested on the twenty third,
were released from Maple Heightst. Jail and for some reason
their property is all returned to them, including the bloody
clothing that they were wearing.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Who knows why, perhaps since they had been so forthcoming
with whose blood it was, as well as that it
was Arkda who hads built.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
It, they all pointed the finger on herd as she
was the one that did it. She was the one
that called them to help remove the body, clean up
the whole nine.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I guess cooperation can buy you a lot. Case in point,
Arquita was soon arrested, pressed again about her ridiculous dogfight explanation,
threatened with the death penalty, and somehow was still able
to come out of this with a plea deal for
obstruction and evidence tampering, receiving only four years.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Willis is initially charged with aggravated murder, burglary, and kidnapping.
Those charges are dropped in exchange for her testimony against Playlock.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
All she had to do was write a statement, put
the gun in my hand and sand that I killed
this guy over a drug deal gone bad, which was
all alive because I never was at her house doing
a drug deal before or after he was killed. It
was her and a Jamaican guy that accompanied her to
PA and New York when she disposed of the body.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
However, at this point, according to Arqida, Marcus had driven
the body out to Pennsylvania alone. But how does one
return to Maple Heights when the burnt out pickup truck
was still out on I ninety. Well that would require
another adjustment in her story, but for now. Upon this
dubious statement, Marcus was arrested.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
It was April six, two thousand and one. I'm riding
with my contractor. We just come back from home depot
from picking up some materials. It looked at like one
hundred toy soldiers. They ran out of my house, my garage,
my neighbor's house with black on with masks on, telling
me to get out the truck, get out the truck.
I get off the truck, and when a guy lift
this mask up. This guy's been messing with me for years,
(13:33):
he said, I finally got you. I wanted you to
make one false mode so I could have killed you.
I'm looking at this stew like, are you serious. I
get to the police station, they tell me what I'm
being arrested for. I said, are you see? I said,
I didn't have nothing to do with that. Let me
write a statement, did detective? And say, I'm not letting
you write a statement. When I get done with you,
(13:54):
you're gonna be guilty. And that was the last conversation
I had with that guy, Oh besides him telling me
who did I think I was to buy a house
and made likes.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
On April ninth, Arkita Willis said that Marcus had taken
her car to Pennsylvania, so they searched for car for
many physical ties to Marcus, and yeah, you guessed that
they found nothing. But this still begs the question who
actually drove the pickup then, which was answered in another
narrative change at the preliminary hearing.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Willis, at this point, according to the third version of
her story, now claims that she and a person by
the name of Omar, followed the truck containing Howard Rose's
body driven by Blaylock, who she claims as a person
who set the truck on fire. Claimed that after Blaylock's
hat the truck on fire, he got in the backseat
of her car, and the three of them proceeded to
(15:06):
New York City and stayed at Omar relative's home in
the Bronx.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Curiously, this Omar character was never pursued.
Speaker 3 (15:16):
They never arrested this guy, but he's in my paperwork
with the prosecution. They sealed the investigative file before I
even went to trial. My lawyers asked several times for discovery.
We never received the discovery before trial or at trial.
They have been withholding evidence since I was arrested in
two thousand and one to this date, twenty twenty five,
(15:39):
they're still fighting my attorney from getting post discovery, pre
trial discovery and during trial discovery.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
So who knows what else they have and why they
need to hide it and why did they completely let
this Omar guy off the hook. In addition to that,
there's the grand jury, where evidence of probable cause is
supposed to be presented to obtain the indict the transcripts
of which are typically not made available to defendants, but
Marcus's attorney had reason to fight to have it unsealed
(16:07):
both before and after the trial.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Somebody told my trial attorneys that they need to get
the grand jury transcripts if you want those charges thrown out.
So they fought to get it. That judge said that
she was doing an in camera inspection and if she
finds anything that will warrant the defense council to have
it and she would turn it over to us. Well,
she denied us having it.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
And who knows what the judge's motivations were, because what
they discovered in post conviction is wild.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
What we see is that there's no probable cause for
him to have ever been indicted in the first place.
At the time they went to the grand jury, the
police only had three statements about the death of Howard Rose.
Both McCully and Johnson's statements claimed that Willis told them
that she, and not Marcus Blaylock, shot Howard Rose in
the back of the head, and only Willis's statement implicated Blaylock.
(16:58):
Both McCully and Johnson's tasably entirely on Willis, and the
only other evidence is Detective Joseph aerbar So, despite admitting
at the preliminary hearing that he has no idea who
shot Howard Rose, he tells the grand jury, based on
nothing that's documented nowhere, that there were two lacerations on
(17:18):
Rose's body and opined in an inflammatory way that those
lacerations were the result of pre mortem torture. Now it's
later learned and trial that they were the result of
the autopsy. But this misrepresentation was super prejudicial because you've
got a detective saying without basis that it's Blaylock who
did it, and that he tortured him before he died.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
And it appears that this wasn't the only misrepresentation.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
They liedd a grand jury and said that they talked
to me and I gave him a statement or I
admitted that I was there or whatever. I never talked
to you like that. I never admitted. But Danny cleaned
it up. This is detective Airbar, that's who testified. He
came right back and said, well, we never heard from Blaylock. Now,
which one is that I told you that I was there?
(18:02):
Or is it that you didn't hear from Blaylock. It's
the second one. You didn't hear from me because I
never made any statements or anything. When I told you
that I will make a statement giving you my alibi,
you told me you didn't want to hear it. The
only thing you want to hear is if I'm guilty.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
In addition, the grand jury questioned how Marcus became a
suspect at all, as Arkda is the only witness to
mention Marcus, while the other two named only Arqda.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
They said they had other cooperating evidence besides Alkeda Willard's statement. Well,
they didn't have anything else besides her statement. They didn't
have any coroborating evidence. I was indicted on the presumption
that there will be other coroborating evidence to go along
with Alqda's statement.
Speaker 1 (18:42):
Perhaps the judge was also fooled into thinking that they'd
have corroborating evidence by the time of Marcus's trial. Maybe
even the prosecuting attorney, Richard Bomback, had fooled himself by now.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
They already tried to use cell phones and say my
telephones was a cell phone that was contacting the girl
Arqda all that day. I haven't talked to her in
almost two years. It's Ernest's phone, my friend who was
just released from prison, who I went and purchased a
cell phone for, was contacted her. You know, years ago,
you couldn't just go get a cell phone. You had
(19:13):
to have credit. His credit was messed up. I had
a business account with all tail. I said, I'll just
put you on my account. You're about to be working
for Marx Landscaping anyway. His family testify that yes, it
is in Marx's landscape, but it's not Mark's phone, it's
Earnest's phone.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
So all they ever had was Arquida.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Well, she came in a courtroom. She get on the
stand and they asked her, you know, did she see
the accused or whatever? And she points at me. She's
fake crying on the witness stand. Not a teardrop fell
from her eye. Everybody in the courtroom witnessed. It seemed
like the judge played right along into her because she
handed her a box of clean next. So she's blowing
and wiping her nose and there's nothing coming out. I'm
(19:54):
listening to her and looking at her like this is crazy.
She can't really recall exactly what she's saying, so the
prosecution grabbs her statements and he said, well, maybe I
can give you this, and this can job your memory.
He said, we all know that you lied. It came
out that you lied in your previous statements or whatever,
and you implicated Marcus Playlock. Later on why don't you
(20:15):
read your statement to the jury and to the court
and point out where you told the truth that and
where you lie.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
At While under oath, she admits to telling a different
version of her story to the police, to actually driving
the truck that contained Howard Rose's body, going to Pennsylvania
to dispose of Howard Rose's body, lying to the police
and feinding ignorance about what happened to Rose, lying during
the March twenty third interview, lying during the April sixth interview,
lying during the April ninth interview, line during the June
(20:42):
sixth interview, and lying in written statements. And she admits
to lying because Willis did not want the crime to
be found out. And she admits that she intended to
lie to the police at each of those times. Super credible.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
It's very difficult to co sign a witness's credibility if
anything they've said is false, but that's what they did.
The testimony that was truthful, according to this admitted liar,
was that before going to work, she arranged for Marcus
to buy drugs from Rose at her house. When she
didn't hear from Rose, she called Marcus, who eventually told
(21:16):
her to come home from work, where she said that
she saw Rose's body on her bed and Marcus admitted
to shooting him. That McCauley and Johnson helped move the
body to the truck, and that she parked the truck
on a side street before calling her friend Omar to
drive her back to work, and at some point her
next door neighbor, a great aunt, deb saw men in
(21:36):
the driveway and called the cops.
Speaker 3 (21:39):
Her aunt justified that she would know me a mile away.
I know what Mark drives, I know how Mark looks.
I've been knowing him since he was a little boy. No,
Mark was not one of the persons that I've seen
that night.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
Her kid's testimony continued that after she'd gotten off work,
met with the police, told them to lie about the dogfight,
and they left. That she, Omar, and Marcus got a
gas can and then they followed Marcus out to Exit
six on nine ninety, where he lit the truck on fire,
and the three sped off to New York City, returning
on Sunday, March twenty fifth, around eight am. But none
(22:11):
of this was true, or at least the part about
Marcus's involvement is.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
No way impossible That I could have been traveling to
PA or New York. I'm not David Copperfield. I can't
be in two places at one time. I'm in Cleveland.
My cell phone shows that I'm in Cleveland. Back in
the day, you had roaming charges when you go out
of your call area. None of my phones were roaming.
That's because I never loved Cleveland. But her phone is
Roman in another state. That's because that's where she went
(22:38):
and disposed of the body. So when they knew that fact,
she said, yeah, I drove a body out of town,
but Marcus was with me. How was I with you?
I was in Cleveland. I got witnesses to prool where
I'm at, and my cell phone records proof that I'm
in Cleveland.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Which was the site for the University of Cincinnati's first
annual Black Students Reunion, for which he attended events on
both Friday and Saturday nights. It was even photographic proof
for Saturday, the twenty fourth.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
I was on a picture that night. However, the prosecutor
took it and twisted it and said, there's no date
on the picture, but behind it is a banner. This
is the first annual reunion, So there was no other one.
This is where I was on this particular night.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
And they brought in nineteen alibi witnesses to corroborate his
alibi for both nights.
Speaker 3 (23:23):
People that were at the party, people who were wh
meed that weekend, some of them I didn't even know
my brother. I took my niece shopping that weekend. I
had all those people testifying it on my behalf, but
it made no difference. I could have put on one
hundred witnesses. It didn't make a difference.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
The police and the prosecutors unethically and impermissively rely on
testimony which they know to be false, and the jury
just gets it.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Dead wrong, even though the prosecutor and the witness herself
admitted that her testimony was full of lives, and so
Marcus was convicted.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
After I get found guilty, I'm distraught, family's distraw. My
mother's screaming like she just witnessed me getting killed. While
they hauling me off, you can hear her screams echoing
throughout the courts corridor. They sent me back to the
holding sale of wherever I was at my lawyer's coming.
You know, tell me, hey, we're gonna untill it you
(24:17):
got a case here. This isn't right. Appeals court, they're
gonna overturn this right away. I don't see how the
jury found you guilty. There was no evidence presented. The
girl even lied on the witness stand. I'm hearing them,
but at the time I'm not hearing them. All i'm
hearing is the judge saying guilty on all charges and
(24:42):
my mother's cries. At the time, I have a daughter
that's eighteen months old, and I have a nine year
(25:05):
old son going on ten, and I'm everything to him.
I am everything to both of my kids. My son
I didn't know until later. I asked him years later,
like how does this affect you? He was a teenager
at the time when I asked him this, but I
wanted to know, like, how does me being incarcerated affect you?
And he said, I feel like I lost my best friend.
(25:27):
Son is in the military now, he's in this fourteenth
year in the United States Navy. He's a chief in
the Navy. Not only do I have those kids, my
two kids, now, I have grandkids who I don't want
them to see me like this. They don't even know
that I'm incarcerated. They never met me. They've seen pictures
of me, but they don't know me, and I just
want that opportunity to be there. My mother's now and
(25:50):
med eighties. Her health is failing. There's so many people
that died in my family. My father has passed. My
older brother we were tight. He's nine years old me.
He was basically like a father to me. He passed
away in twenty seventeen. He had a heart attack. So like,
this doesn't just affect me, this affects my whole entire family.
(26:13):
If it wasn't for my faith in God, I wouldn't
be here talking to you now on this podcast. I'm
doing things in here to try to keep me busy.
I'm a mentor, a spiritual mentor, and even my heart,
I still have hope that things would one day turn around.
I don't know when, but I have faith that it's
(26:34):
going to happen.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
And it's been an uphill battle despite many positive developments
along the way, the first of which was getting one
of the slew of charges an obstruction of justice conviction,
overturned way back in two thousand and three, and at
the same time, Marcus's attorney discovered all the lies and
manipulation and the grand jury which he tried to raise
(26:57):
in the obstruction proceedings.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
And I received those grand jury transcripts, but my lawyer
sent me a one page letter like this is everything.
We get in front of the judge when they're dismissing
the obstruction charges, and my lawyer says, you'r honor, we
have the grand jury transcripts right here. There was no
probable cost. My clients shouldn't have never been indicted. She says,
she didn't want to hear about it. We're not there
(27:22):
to discuss the grand jury transcripts. She hit the gavel
and it was over with and I was out the.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Courtroom at this point. His sentence was reduced to twenty
eight years to life, while his co defendants received very
lenient deals for actually being involved. Rakida Willis was charged
only with obstruction of justice and evidence tampering, even though
according to Dion and Ernest, she was the actual shooter.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
She ended up doing four years. Dion did two years,
Ernest at nine. I think he ended up doing seven
and a half.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
So almost immediately after Arkita does her four years, she
calls up Ernest mccaullay and in the conversation, she admits
that she falsely implicates Blaylock. In this case, Willis admits
to killing Howard Rose. McCauley asked, well is when she
decided to shift the blame to Blaylock, and Willis told
McCauley that she didn't care about mister Blaylock. McCully says, listen,
you took a soul, She says, right, and McCully says,
(28:15):
which would be Howard And she says, uh huh. You
could save two souls, which would be me and mister
She says, uh huh. The conversation shows she's admitting that she,
and not Blaylock, killed Howard Rose. She states, although she
had changed her stories to fit the date she said,
detectives did not investigate. Willis said this showed that the
detective's vindictiveness toward Blaylock.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
She said she even told the detectives in front of
her attorneys that she drove the body away and they
fell out their cheer, laughing because they couldn't believe it.
But they say, well, it doesn't make a difference. Just
pay to ten percent bond. Whatever obstruction of justice and
tempering what evidence bond was to get out.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
When McCauley asks Willis what her largest reservation about admitting
that she killed Rose would be, Willis responds because she
wants to be home too. She then discusses a fictional
in air quotes book she wants to write about the murder,
entitled Murder One was the case they gave me, And
then they talk about the contents in her book, where
she admits that she hates Blaylock. She tells McCauley that
(29:14):
she feels badly because of all the people in prison
who didn't actually do the crime. She says it was
easy to frame Marcus because she hated him. When McCauley
tells Willis about lying being problematic because it necessitates moral lies,
Willis says, it isn't that hard. You get a story,
you stick with it, and that's that, and that's a quote. Moreover,
Willis admits that she lied to her own attorneys about
(29:34):
what transpired, and she admits that she couldn't believe that
a jury convicted Marcus based solely on her testimony, giving
how many times her story shifted.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Prison phone conversations are recorded, so McCauley reached out to
Marcus's lawyer and they retrieved and transcribed the recording, adding
it to his federal havias where you need to show
that your constitutional rights were violing, and they bolstered the
filing with this evidence of innocence.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
It's two three hours worth of conversation that my lawyer
ended up getting and submitted it into evidence in my
federal hay and it changed the direction that my hat
was going at that time. And I told my lawyer
to file a stay and take that evidence back to
the trial courts so you can exhaust it. If the
federal courts hear it before the trial court, then I'll
(30:23):
be forever barred from bringing it back up. So what
happened was he didn't listen to me. He said, no,
I'm going to file at both places. Whoever answers first,
we're good. We got a confession from the actual murderer.
So when it got included in the record, the magister
judge said that the conversation proves that the state of
(30:45):
Ohio convicted the wrong person when they found Playlock guilty
of the murderer. Roles those exact words.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
However, the court ruled that an innocence claim absent the
constitutional violation was insufficient so the recordings, having not been
added to the record and exhausted in trial court, were
now procedurally barred. But then Arkeita kept right on communicating
with Ernest McCauley.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
She admits her guilt on multiple occasions. In letters she's
drafted to Ernest McCully, Willis admits to killing Howard Rose
and that mister Blainlogg was not involved, and like the
phone call, McCully often refers to a soul that was
lost or stolen because of Willis's lies. She wrote, I
guess when you take a life, you have to live
with it. You really don't have a choice but to
look at it different. She discusses her gratitudes towards McCully
(31:31):
for his assistance and helping to remove Rose's body from
her house. She describes her fear that mccullay Harbor's resentment
towards her because he remains incarcerated for the crime she committed.
She says, all of which we've been through, I still
wonder if you hate me. I wonder if one day
you'll break my neck because of what you're going through
because of me. She goes on rape I just feel
like crying all the time. Then I start questioning myself
all those lies I told. I never would have guessed
(31:53):
they'd believe my statement. I just thought I'd get a
plea bargain and they would find everyone not guilty because
of all of the dishonesty in all of my written statements.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
This time, his attorney took it to the trial court.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
A judge decided that to these letters and recordings you
couldn't prove they were her. She would not testify taking
responsibility for them, and so those subsequent post conviction petitions
were denied. They went back and forth through the Court
of Appeals.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
At this point, it appears that the state offered Ernest
a deal for early release, which he told Marcus about
in a letter two days after he made the deal
and later testified to in twenty fourteen. This is what
he said about the offer.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
Ernest said that he ended up writing a statement later
for the prosecution to get out of prison early. He
told him that whatever he writes is this against me
is going to be a lie because I'm innocent. But
they said they don't care if he lie. They just
needed to stop my post conviction and it did.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
A statement was drafted allegedly from Ernest that the phone
conversations were just a setup and that Marcus was the
actual shooter, And despite presenting a letter from Ernest admitting
that the statement was just a means to get his
on early release, Marcus didn't get any traction again on
the now procedurally barred confession materials until a twenty thirteen
(33:10):
affid David for one of the Cauley's cellmates, Shannon Drake.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
He gets throwed in the mix because Ernest let him
listen to Archidah on the phones and wrote affidavit from
my lawyer Sam. He heard her saying how she set
me up. In twenty fourteen, I'm back in the courtroom
on our everdentary of hearing it. Ernest came in there
and got on the stand and Danny said that he
ended up writing a statement, and a statement is really
no good until you testify to it. So now he's
(33:36):
testifying that statement is false. The prosecution told him what
to say, and as a matter of fact, that's not
even my signatures. Blaylock is innocence. The judge doesn't make
a ruling on her for two years, and then when
she comes back two years later in twenty sixteen, she denies,
saying that evidence was not new.
Speaker 1 (33:51):
Which goes back to the original sin that this phone
conversation was presented in federal court but was never exhausted
in trial court, so it was used up where it
couldn't be effective on its own, and then they can
say that this related evidence is not new. But there
was a new hope in Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's office, the
(34:12):
creation had long last of a conviction Integrity Unit.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
Well, I found an application to them for my role
for conviction in twenty eighteen. I didn't hear nothing from
him for two years. In twenty twenty, during the pandemic,
I had someone reach out to the head of that
unit at the time. He said, oh, it's ironic that
you're calling me about the Blacklock case because something new
has came up and I'm going to ask the head
prosecutor for special permission to re review his case.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
So at this time Marcus reached out to Kim, who
agreed to represent him with the CiU.
Speaker 2 (34:44):
So I talked to the then head of the Conviction
Integrity Unit, who says he won't confirm that they've found
something new, but he doesn't deny that he's had this
conversation with this contact person, mister Blaylock. But the whole
time we're going through this and get a response from
them one way or the other, like about what's going on,
what the investigation is. However, McCully is telling us, Yeah,
(35:07):
they interviewed me. We send our investigator out to talk
to Willis, who says, those prosecutors took me out to
dinner and I told them the truth. I'm not going
to say anything more. And then she slams the door
in his face words to that effect. So we know
they have some investigation which is favorable. And you would
think if their answer was we don't have anything favorable
(35:27):
to overturn, that would have been said years ago. In
the course of this they had represented at some point
that it moved on to the investigation phase and the
voting phase.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
Now, this CiU was assigned an independent review board made
up of judges and community members, whose purpose was to
review the findings of these reinvestigations and vote on recommendations
for the head prosecutor.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
I talked to the members of the board who said, no,
we've never heard about this case. We haven't met for
over two years, and As a result, November of twenty
twenty two, all community members of the Higer County Prosecutor's
Conviction Integrity Unit resigned, citing the units inactivity perceived lack
of impact, with a letter noting that the office had
not even referred a case for review since prior to
(36:10):
the pandemic. As far as I'm concerned, Ural Sailor's the
only case of exoneration by the Conviction Integrity Unit. Now
there's Octavius Williams, where he was voted to be exonerated,
but instead they just gave him a judicial release, which
really compromises the idea that the purpose was ever without
conviction integrity.
Speaker 1 (36:30):
And you can hear about both of those cases. We're
going to have our coverage linked in the episode description.
So Kim filed motions to compel the CiU to release
anything they'd found, because, after all, when Marcus filed with
the CiU, they'd signed an agreement to share materials, not
to mention other obligations to do so.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
As a result of the court sort of order that, well,
if your beef is with the Conviction Integrity Unit, the
whole board resigns. So we're not sure that they are
a thing anymore, and therefore we can't compel them. These
obligations exist out of ongoing Brady obligations, concepts of justice,
out of the prosecutor's ethical duty to pursue justice. And
there's an AVIA requirement that if they find subsequent evidence,
(37:12):
they're required to turn it over. None of that seems
to matter. The agreement doesn't seem to matter, and here
we are two and a half years into litigation just
about whether they have to turn over the materials from
this investigation because we need to establish that it was
Willis who said this, and Willis is not presently cooperative.
Marcus Blaylock's conviction should have never occurred, but it should
(37:35):
have ended the first time Willis made it admission that
she had framed him. And it's now been twenty years
since that admission, and the justice system is playing games
about whether or not he should have access to this
state's investigation of his innocence. That shouldn't even be a question.
I mean, my public records requests have been denied, my
(37:58):
court filings have been denied. Now we're at a man
in the Court of Appeals, and it's just every step
of the way we're hit with obstacles about just having
access to information, and information should be free to everybody.
So the path forward is we are not going to
stop until we get this investigation because we know that
what's contained in it is the basis to move forward.
(38:19):
And the reason we know that is nobody would work
so hard to protect nonsense.
Speaker 1 (38:22):
Is there anything that our audience can do to help?
Speaker 2 (38:26):
Yeah, I mean I think public outcry, call the prosecutors,
demand that they released information. Why are they protecting it?
Speaker 1 (38:33):
What is the purpose?
Speaker 2 (38:33):
What are they hiding?
Speaker 1 (38:34):
And if anyone wants to learn more about Marcus and
his case, he's written a book.
Speaker 3 (38:39):
My book is out, My Long Journey through Faith at
New Beginning by Marcus Blaylock. I appreciate to somebody that
knows about this case, that heard about this case, that
maybe the witness has talked to in the past, please
come forward, Feel free to talk to my attorney. I
have a website to free Mark M A R. C.
Blaylock B L A L O C K dot com.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
Okay, so we're going to link the book his website
as well as ways that you can contact Kim if
you have any information about this case, And with that
we're going to go to closing arguments, where first of all,
I think each of you for being here, and now
I'm going to kick back in my chair and close
my eyes and just listen to anything else you have
(39:19):
to say. Kim, as always, let's start with you, and
then you can just hand the microphone off to Marcus
and he'll take us off into the sunset.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
This case is so obvious. How it got indicted is
the original question. How there was probable cause to move
forward with an arrest, with an indictment, with a trial,
and how a conviction is sustained. We're questions that weren't
answered until after trial, unfortunately, but we've known the answer
for now more than twenty years. And the fact that
(39:49):
we haven't been able to extend justice or procedure to
Marcus Blaylock to give him access to tell the truth
of his story is one of the greatest injustices i've seen.
The fact that the prosecutor's office, in acknowledgement that it
had information favorable to mister Blaylock, did an investigation and
won't turn that over, have spent thousands of hours and
(40:10):
dollars just keeping this information secret is proof positive that
the system is protecting what it knows to be a
wrongful conviction.
Speaker 3 (40:21):
Something is hidden and you're not showing it. You're not
showing your hand. But yet and still she shows her hand.
I mean, it's not right, it's not right. You have
me wrongfully convicted now going on twenty four years support
crime I didn't commit, and you use the self admitted statement,
a percase statement at that to convict me. I need prayers.
(40:44):
I need prayers, support phone calls for this to go through.
My lawyer is amazing, but I need a miracle right now.
That's what I need. I need God to create a
miracle for me so I can be exonerated from this
wrongful conviction.
Speaker 1 (41:05):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
week early and ad free 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 Kleiber.
The music in this production was supplied by three time
(41:26):
OSCAR 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 Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is a production of
Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number One.
We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported
in this show are accurate.
Speaker 3 (41:45):
The views and opinions expressed by the individuals featured in
this show are their own and do not necessarily reflect
those of Lava for Good.
On March twenty fourth, two thousand and one, the body
of Howard Rose was discovered inside a burnt out pickup
truck on Interstate ninety in Pennsylvania. The night before, police
had responded to suspicious activity outside the Ohio home of
Arquita Willis. Two men sped off and were apprehended, both
(00:23):
of whom gave statements that Willis had killed Rose and
asked them to help dispose of his body. Soon after,
Willis was arrested, threatened with a death penalty, and she
told police that her former fling, a guy named Marcus Blaylock,
was the shooter and that he had disposed of the
body on I ninety alone. Despite obvious falsehoods and multiple
(00:45):
changes to her story, not even nineteen alibi witnesses could
save Marcus. This is wrongful conviction. You're listening to wrongful conviction.
You can listen to this and all the Lava for
Good podcasts one week early and ad free by subscribing
(01:08):
to Lava for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. Welcome back
to Wrangful Conviction, where today we have another case out
of Kuyahoga County. I mean, they just keep on coming,
and this is one of the capitals, if not the
(01:31):
wrongful conviction capital of this country. And joining us is
one of our favorite attorneys who's very active in this space.
Kim Coral, welcome.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
Back, Thank you, thanks for having.
Speaker 1 (01:43):
Me and joining us from an Ohio correctional facility where
he never belonged, but he's been there for over twenty
four long years. The man himself, Marcus Blaylock, Marcus, thank
you for joining us.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Sure, I appreciate it.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
And Marcus was originally Bordingland, but soon moved out to
a nearby suburb called Maple Heights, or really a sub
section of that suburb.
Speaker 3 (02:06):
We moved out to Maple Heights seventy five seventy six
at the time. It's a predominantly white area and the
area that I grew up in was called President's Road.
The railroad tracks run behind it, so those houses are cheaper,
so they put the blacks in that area. So the
blacks in that area, they kind of stuck together. So
I had a good childhood. I played sports, football, wrestle,
(02:30):
ran track, and then at the age of fourteen, I
got a job working at the local hardware store, and
the community stuck together in that area. I appreciated that.
But what I didn't appreciate was the police, because the
police were very prejudiced. Not even a brown person, not
a black person, not an Asian person, nothing, just all
(02:53):
white police force. Just say, if a white kid across
Broadway get their bike stolen, the first place they're coming
to look for that bike is in President's role. And
then it seems like I was being singled out. And
it was one main cop who ended up turning into
a detective. Why was he always asking me about this
and about that? But I come to find out that
(03:13):
he was also working at Sears. My mother retired from Sears,
so he knew my mom. And the other cop who
ended up being the detective all Henderson went to high
school with my oldest sister. So I got these cops
asking me questions this periodically and if somebody's having a
house party and a fight breakout. Seems like I was
(03:36):
always being targeted, like hey, Mark, who was doing all
the fighting or who was doing this? And who? I
don't know. As I got older, I'm not saying I
was an angel. I got into mischief stuff, like my
last year of high school. Even though I worked, I
had a little hustle, I got caught with some marijuana
and some other drugs. I ended up getting probation or
(03:56):
whatever for that, so Dad kept the police on me,
even when years later when I stopped.
Speaker 1 (04:02):
Now, we've seen a lot of cases where a connection
to drugs made our guests the target of a frame job.
But by two thousand and one, Mark was thirty two
years old and he had built a successful landscaping company.
Speaker 3 (04:16):
That landscaping company ended up being very profitable for me.
I ended up having a lot of contracts with the county,
so I'm with the city and helped me with money
to put down to buy a house for my family
that was off Libby.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
And while Marcus had moved into the white part of town,
it was some of his old acquaintances from President's Row,
Dion Johnson, Ernest McCauley, and Arkeda Willis who dragged him
into this case.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
Arqita growing up, she just wasn't my type at the time,
but years later I ended up having a friends with
benefits or so you want to say, relationship with her
that turned into something else. And then when I cut
it off, it wasn't tooken in a great way. It
was like she hated me after that. But Dion was
a friend and cuts hair. He's a barber, so used
(05:02):
to cut our hair and whatnot. And honest, he was
a friend of mine. And when he was released from
a federal prison after doing five years, I got this business,
I got this home. I gave him a job.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
He also gave him a cell phone that was registered
to Marx Landscaping Business, which was about to score a
major contract.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
And this contract was to service the children's playgrounds and
the top lots in the city. But this contract was
not publicized. The same Italian company, we're getting this contract
for the last five years. So at the time, Maple
Heights had just elected their first black councilman. So he
(05:41):
came to my mom and told my mom, Hey, have
Marcus call me. It's like they got this contract coming up.
They haven't even publicized it. They keep giving it to
the same company. We're going to back you and make
sure that you get this contract.
Speaker 1 (05:55):
And even though he had the lowest bid, the contract
went to the incumbent company. The council member encouraged Marcus
to contest that decision at the upcoming meeting.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
Now, mind you, at this council meeting. You have the
chief of police, the mayor, seven council people, the fire chief.
You have one of the two detectives that frame me
for this crime. I haven't had any run ins with
Maple Heist police or the police period. In over five years.
Everything is going smooth for me. My business is going great.
So I'm kind of leary to go to this council meeting.
(06:26):
So when they get to the awarding of the contracts
and did anybody have anything to say, I stand up
and say yes I do. My name is Mark on
Mark's Landscaping. I had a lord bid, but I didn't
get the contract. Papers is shuffling. They shut the mics off.
They're looking up there whispering to each other. They cut
the mic back on and was like, oh, it seems
(06:47):
to be had been a mistake. The contract has already
been awarded. But Mark will make sure that your company
will get work in the future. Let me tell you something.
Two months later, I'm arrested for this case.
Speaker 1 (07:03):
So that brings us to the end of March two
thousand and one, when Marcus was growing his business and
supporting his family in their newly purchased home in the
White part of town. He had also been fortunate enough
to be able to help send his cousin to the
University of Cincinnati, so his cousin invited Marcus to an
alumni event over the weekend of Friday, March twenty third
into Saturday, the twenty fourth of two thousand and one.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
They're having their first annual Black student reunion, hosting it
in Cleveland. He lived in Cincinnati, so he's coming to clean.
This is my cousin. I supported him all while he
went through college. I know most of his fraternity friends,
people that he went to college with, so normally when
they have things, I'm always in attendance.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
Dean Johnson had even given Marcus a haircut during the
day on March twenty third, but after they parted ways,
according to Johnson's police statement, he and Ernest McCauley were
contacted by Archida Willis. She had been entertaining a known
drug deal named Howard Rose, who had been fatally shot,
and Willis needed help with disposing of his body.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
So around eleven thirty, the next door neighbor and great
ann of Arkida Willis, Dorothy Evans, makes a call to
police concerning suspicious activity. She states that she heard noises
like someone moving furniture outside her bedroom window near Arkida
Willis's home, and then looked to see if Willis's car
was in the driveway, but it wasn't. She saw a
dark vehicle she didn't recognize in the driveway and she
(08:27):
calls the police, and while on the phone with the
nine one one dispatcher, she saw two individuals dressed in
black exitding the home next door. A little while later,
Willis arrives at the front door of Evan's home. Willis
asked Evans if Evans had called the police, and when
Evans asked Willis what was going on, Willis responded saying
that someone was helping her do something and that's all
(08:50):
she said. When the police officers arrive, they observe a
car fleeing the scene and after a short chase, they
apprehend two individuals, Ernest mc collie and Dion Johnson.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
Johnson and McCauley were arrested for trespassing. While the police
did a safety check of Arkida's home and they saw
a puddle of blood on her driveway.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
They returned to Willis's house and they're like, what is
this puddle of blood in the driveway, they went to
the backyard, they find a back window unlocked. They go
to the bathroom and find lick candles around the bathtub,
a warm bathwater with Sophie residue and drying blood, and
a pager with blood on it, and this blood later
is tested and found to be the blood of Howard Rose.
(09:33):
Now the police leave the bathroom move to the bedroom
where they see a box spring without a mattress and
no bed linens visible.
Speaker 1 (09:41):
As of now, there was no body and according to
later statements from Marquita, at this time, Rose's body was
in his truck parked on a side street while she
went to work, where the police eventually tracked her down
and they asked her to come to the station so
they could ride to the house together, and she explained
that Johnson and McAuley were not intruders.
Speaker 3 (10:03):
First she said she had some friends over there moving
some furniture. Then when they asked about the blood they
found in the driveway, where did it come from? She said, what,
a blood came from a dogfight. She was hosting a
dog fight at her house.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Oh, obviously, dog fighting.
Speaker 1 (10:18):
It's as ridiculous as it is sinister.
Speaker 2 (10:21):
It's not what I would have gone with, but that's
what our Keida Willis goes with. When they go to
her house, she's accompanied then with like a thin black
mail with a Jamaican accent, by the name of Omar.
He was present while police questioned Willis outside her home.
Willis refused to allow the officers to do a second
search of her home, and in the police reports they
(10:43):
report that Willis is evasive and uncooperative and.
Speaker 1 (10:46):
Then they left. They appear to have lost all interest
in Omar, and it's believed that at this point the
body was disposed of near Exit six on the Interstate
ninety in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 2 (10:58):
In the early morning hours of March two, twenty fourth,
Pennsylvania police are called to the scene of a fire
on I ninety. A pickup truck with Ohio plates is
engulfed in flames. Howard Rose is inside. He's identified through
an autopsy and it's determined that the cause of death
is a single gunshot wound to the head. The investigation
produced information that Willis was with Howard Rose on the
(11:21):
day he was killed, and they determined that the death
they were investigating had initially taken place in Maple Heights,
and so reshifting our focus back to Ohio, Ernest McCully
and Dean Johnson, who had been arrested on the twenty third,
were released from Maple Heightst. Jail and for some reason
their property is all returned to them, including the bloody
clothing that they were wearing.
Speaker 1 (11:42):
Who knows why, perhaps since they had been so forthcoming
with whose blood it was, as well as that it
was Arkda who hads built.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
It, they all pointed the finger on herd as she
was the one that did it. She was the one
that called them to help remove the body, clean up
the whole nine.
Speaker 1 (11:57):
I guess cooperation can buy you a lot. Case in point,
Arquita was soon arrested, pressed again about her ridiculous dogfight explanation,
threatened with the death penalty, and somehow was still able
to come out of this with a plea deal for
obstruction and evidence tampering, receiving only four years.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
Willis is initially charged with aggravated murder, burglary, and kidnapping.
Those charges are dropped in exchange for her testimony against Playlock.
Speaker 3 (12:27):
All she had to do was write a statement, put
the gun in my hand and sand that I killed
this guy over a drug deal gone bad, which was
all alive because I never was at her house doing
a drug deal before or after he was killed. It
was her and a Jamaican guy that accompanied her to
PA and New York when she disposed of the body.
Speaker 1 (12:48):
However, at this point, according to Arqida, Marcus had driven
the body out to Pennsylvania alone. But how does one
return to Maple Heights when the burnt out pickup truck
was still out on I ninety. Well that would require
another adjustment in her story, but for now. Upon this
dubious statement, Marcus was arrested.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
It was April six, two thousand and one. I'm riding
with my contractor. We just come back from home depot
from picking up some materials. It looked at like one
hundred toy soldiers. They ran out of my house, my garage,
my neighbor's house with black on with masks on, telling
me to get out the truck, get out the truck.
I get off the truck, and when a guy lift
this mask up. This guy's been messing with me for years,
(13:33):
he said, I finally got you. I wanted you to
make one false mode so I could have killed you.
I'm looking at this stew like, are you serious. I
get to the police station, they tell me what I'm
being arrested for. I said, are you see? I said,
I didn't have nothing to do with that. Let me
write a statement, did detective? And say, I'm not letting
you write a statement. When I get done with you,
(13:54):
you're gonna be guilty. And that was the last conversation
I had with that guy, Oh besides him telling me
who did I think I was to buy a house
and made likes.
Speaker 1 (14:22):
On April ninth, Arkita Willis said that Marcus had taken
her car to Pennsylvania, so they searched for car for
many physical ties to Marcus, and yeah, you guessed that
they found nothing. But this still begs the question who
actually drove the pickup then, which was answered in another
narrative change at the preliminary hearing.
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Willis, at this point, according to the third version of
her story, now claims that she and a person by
the name of Omar, followed the truck containing Howard Rose's
body driven by Blaylock, who she claims as a person
who set the truck on fire. Claimed that after Blaylock's
hat the truck on fire, he got in the backseat
of her car, and the three of them proceeded to
(15:06):
New York City and stayed at Omar relative's home in
the Bronx.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Curiously, this Omar character was never pursued.
Speaker 3 (15:16):
They never arrested this guy, but he's in my paperwork
with the prosecution. They sealed the investigative file before I
even went to trial. My lawyers asked several times for discovery.
We never received the discovery before trial or at trial.
They have been withholding evidence since I was arrested in
two thousand and one to this date, twenty twenty five,
(15:39):
they're still fighting my attorney from getting post discovery, pre
trial discovery and during trial discovery.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
So who knows what else they have and why they
need to hide it and why did they completely let
this Omar guy off the hook. In addition to that,
there's the grand jury, where evidence of probable cause is
supposed to be presented to obtain the indict the transcripts
of which are typically not made available to defendants, but
Marcus's attorney had reason to fight to have it unsealed
(16:07):
both before and after the trial.
Speaker 3 (16:10):
Somebody told my trial attorneys that they need to get
the grand jury transcripts if you want those charges thrown out.
So they fought to get it. That judge said that
she was doing an in camera inspection and if she
finds anything that will warrant the defense council to have
it and she would turn it over to us. Well,
she denied us having it.
Speaker 1 (16:30):
And who knows what the judge's motivations were, because what
they discovered in post conviction is wild.
Speaker 2 (16:37):
What we see is that there's no probable cause for
him to have ever been indicted in the first place.
At the time they went to the grand jury, the
police only had three statements about the death of Howard Rose.
Both McCully and Johnson's statements claimed that Willis told them
that she, and not Marcus Blaylock, shot Howard Rose in
the back of the head, and only Willis's statement implicated Blaylock.
(16:58):
Both McCully and Johnson's tasably entirely on Willis, and the
only other evidence is Detective Joseph aerbar So, despite admitting
at the preliminary hearing that he has no idea who
shot Howard Rose, he tells the grand jury, based on
nothing that's documented nowhere, that there were two lacerations on
(17:18):
Rose's body and opined in an inflammatory way that those
lacerations were the result of pre mortem torture. Now it's
later learned and trial that they were the result of
the autopsy. But this misrepresentation was super prejudicial because you've
got a detective saying without basis that it's Blaylock who
did it, and that he tortured him before he died.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
And it appears that this wasn't the only misrepresentation.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
They liedd a grand jury and said that they talked
to me and I gave him a statement or I
admitted that I was there or whatever. I never talked
to you like that. I never admitted. But Danny cleaned
it up. This is detective Airbar, that's who testified. He
came right back and said, well, we never heard from Blaylock. Now,
which one is that I told you that I was there?
(18:02):
Or is it that you didn't hear from Blaylock. It's
the second one. You didn't hear from me because I
never made any statements or anything. When I told you
that I will make a statement giving you my alibi,
you told me you didn't want to hear it. The
only thing you want to hear is if I'm guilty.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
In addition, the grand jury questioned how Marcus became a
suspect at all, as Arkda is the only witness to
mention Marcus, while the other two named only Arqda.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
They said they had other cooperating evidence besides Alkeda Willard's statement. Well,
they didn't have anything else besides her statement. They didn't
have any coroborating evidence. I was indicted on the presumption
that there will be other coroborating evidence to go along
with Alqda's statement.
Speaker 1 (18:42):
Perhaps the judge was also fooled into thinking that they'd
have corroborating evidence by the time of Marcus's trial. Maybe
even the prosecuting attorney, Richard Bomback, had fooled himself by now.
Speaker 3 (18:52):
They already tried to use cell phones and say my
telephones was a cell phone that was contacting the girl
Arqda all that day. I haven't talked to her in
almost two years. It's Ernest's phone, my friend who was
just released from prison, who I went and purchased a
cell phone for, was contacted her. You know, years ago,
you couldn't just go get a cell phone. You had
(19:13):
to have credit. His credit was messed up. I had
a business account with all tail. I said, I'll just
put you on my account. You're about to be working
for Marx Landscaping anyway. His family testify that yes, it
is in Marx's landscape, but it's not Mark's phone, it's
Earnest's phone.
Speaker 1 (19:29):
So all they ever had was Arquida.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
Well, she came in a courtroom. She get on the
stand and they asked her, you know, did she see
the accused or whatever? And she points at me. She's
fake crying on the witness stand. Not a teardrop fell
from her eye. Everybody in the courtroom witnessed. It seemed
like the judge played right along into her because she
handed her a box of clean next. So she's blowing
and wiping her nose and there's nothing coming out. I'm
(19:54):
listening to her and looking at her like this is crazy.
She can't really recall exactly what she's saying, so the
prosecution grabbs her statements and he said, well, maybe I
can give you this, and this can job your memory.
He said, we all know that you lied. It came
out that you lied in your previous statements or whatever,
and you implicated Marcus Playlock. Later on why don't you
(20:15):
read your statement to the jury and to the court
and point out where you told the truth that and
where you lie.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
At While under oath, she admits to telling a different
version of her story to the police, to actually driving
the truck that contained Howard Rose's body, going to Pennsylvania
to dispose of Howard Rose's body, lying to the police
and feinding ignorance about what happened to Rose, lying during
the March twenty third interview, lying during the April sixth interview,
lying during the April ninth interview, line during the June
(20:42):
sixth interview, and lying in written statements. And she admits
to lying because Willis did not want the crime to
be found out. And she admits that she intended to
lie to the police at each of those times. Super credible.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
It's very difficult to co sign a witness's credibility if
anything they've said is false, but that's what they did.
The testimony that was truthful, according to this admitted liar,
was that before going to work, she arranged for Marcus
to buy drugs from Rose at her house. When she
didn't hear from Rose, she called Marcus, who eventually told
(21:16):
her to come home from work, where she said that
she saw Rose's body on her bed and Marcus admitted
to shooting him. That McCauley and Johnson helped move the
body to the truck, and that she parked the truck
on a side street before calling her friend Omar to
drive her back to work, and at some point her
next door neighbor, a great aunt, deb saw men in
(21:36):
the driveway and called the cops.
Speaker 3 (21:39):
Her aunt justified that she would know me a mile away.
I know what Mark drives, I know how Mark looks.
I've been knowing him since he was a little boy. No,
Mark was not one of the persons that I've seen
that night.
Speaker 1 (21:50):
Her kid's testimony continued that after she'd gotten off work,
met with the police, told them to lie about the dogfight,
and they left. That she, Omar, and Marcus got a
gas can and then they followed Marcus out to Exit
six on nine ninety, where he lit the truck on fire,
and the three sped off to New York City, returning
on Sunday, March twenty fifth, around eight am. But none
(22:11):
of this was true, or at least the part about
Marcus's involvement is.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
No way impossible That I could have been traveling to
PA or New York. I'm not David Copperfield. I can't
be in two places at one time. I'm in Cleveland.
My cell phone shows that I'm in Cleveland. Back in
the day, you had roaming charges when you go out
of your call area. None of my phones were roaming.
That's because I never loved Cleveland. But her phone is
Roman in another state. That's because that's where she went
(22:38):
and disposed of the body. So when they knew that fact,
she said, yeah, I drove a body out of town,
but Marcus was with me. How was I with you?
I was in Cleveland. I got witnesses to prool where
I'm at, and my cell phone records proof that I'm
in Cleveland.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
Which was the site for the University of Cincinnati's first
annual Black Students Reunion, for which he attended events on
both Friday and Saturday nights. It was even photographic proof
for Saturday, the twenty fourth.
Speaker 3 (23:03):
I was on a picture that night. However, the prosecutor
took it and twisted it and said, there's no date
on the picture, but behind it is a banner. This
is the first annual reunion, So there was no other one.
This is where I was on this particular night.
Speaker 1 (23:18):
And they brought in nineteen alibi witnesses to corroborate his
alibi for both nights.
Speaker 3 (23:23):
People that were at the party, people who were wh
meed that weekend, some of them I didn't even know
my brother. I took my niece shopping that weekend. I
had all those people testifying it on my behalf, but
it made no difference. I could have put on one
hundred witnesses. It didn't make a difference.
Speaker 2 (23:39):
The police and the prosecutors unethically and impermissively rely on
testimony which they know to be false, and the jury
just gets it.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
Dead wrong, even though the prosecutor and the witness herself
admitted that her testimony was full of lives, and so
Marcus was convicted.
Speaker 3 (23:57):
After I get found guilty, I'm distraught, family's distraw. My
mother's screaming like she just witnessed me getting killed. While
they hauling me off, you can hear her screams echoing
throughout the courts corridor. They sent me back to the
holding sale of wherever I was at my lawyer's coming.
You know, tell me, hey, we're gonna untill it you
(24:17):
got a case here. This isn't right. Appeals court, they're
gonna overturn this right away. I don't see how the
jury found you guilty. There was no evidence presented. The
girl even lied on the witness stand. I'm hearing them,
but at the time I'm not hearing them. All i'm
hearing is the judge saying guilty on all charges and
(24:42):
my mother's cries. At the time, I have a daughter
that's eighteen months old, and I have a nine year
(25:05):
old son going on ten, and I'm everything to him.
I am everything to both of my kids. My son
I didn't know until later. I asked him years later,
like how does this affect you? He was a teenager
at the time when I asked him this, but I
wanted to know, like, how does me being incarcerated affect you?
And he said, I feel like I lost my best friend.
(25:27):
Son is in the military now, he's in this fourteenth
year in the United States Navy. He's a chief in
the Navy. Not only do I have those kids, my
two kids, now, I have grandkids who I don't want
them to see me like this. They don't even know
that I'm incarcerated. They never met me. They've seen pictures
of me, but they don't know me, and I just
want that opportunity to be there. My mother's now and
(25:50):
med eighties. Her health is failing. There's so many people
that died in my family. My father has passed. My
older brother we were tight. He's nine years old me.
He was basically like a father to me. He passed
away in twenty seventeen. He had a heart attack. So like,
this doesn't just affect me, this affects my whole entire family.
(26:13):
If it wasn't for my faith in God, I wouldn't
be here talking to you now on this podcast. I'm
doing things in here to try to keep me busy.
I'm a mentor, a spiritual mentor, and even my heart,
I still have hope that things would one day turn around.
I don't know when, but I have faith that it's
(26:34):
going to happen.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
And it's been an uphill battle despite many positive developments
along the way, the first of which was getting one
of the slew of charges an obstruction of justice conviction,
overturned way back in two thousand and three, and at
the same time, Marcus's attorney discovered all the lies and
manipulation and the grand jury which he tried to raise
(26:57):
in the obstruction proceedings.
Speaker 3 (27:00):
And I received those grand jury transcripts, but my lawyer
sent me a one page letter like this is everything.
We get in front of the judge when they're dismissing
the obstruction charges, and my lawyer says, you'r honor, we
have the grand jury transcripts right here. There was no
probable cost. My clients shouldn't have never been indicted. She says,
she didn't want to hear about it. We're not there
(27:22):
to discuss the grand jury transcripts. She hit the gavel
and it was over with and I was out the.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Courtroom at this point. His sentence was reduced to twenty
eight years to life, while his co defendants received very
lenient deals for actually being involved. Rakida Willis was charged
only with obstruction of justice and evidence tampering, even though
according to Dion and Ernest, she was the actual shooter.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
She ended up doing four years. Dion did two years,
Ernest at nine. I think he ended up doing seven
and a half.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
So almost immediately after Arkita does her four years, she
calls up Ernest mccaullay and in the conversation, she admits
that she falsely implicates Blaylock. In this case, Willis admits
to killing Howard Rose. McCauley asked, well is when she
decided to shift the blame to Blaylock, and Willis told
McCauley that she didn't care about mister Blaylock. McCully says, listen,
you took a soul, She says, right, and McCully says,
(28:15):
which would be Howard And she says, uh huh. You
could save two souls, which would be me and mister
She says, uh huh. The conversation shows she's admitting that she,
and not Blaylock, killed Howard Rose. She states, although she
had changed her stories to fit the date she said,
detectives did not investigate. Willis said this showed that the
detective's vindictiveness toward Blaylock.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
She said she even told the detectives in front of
her attorneys that she drove the body away and they
fell out their cheer, laughing because they couldn't believe it.
But they say, well, it doesn't make a difference. Just
pay to ten percent bond. Whatever obstruction of justice and
tempering what evidence bond was to get out.
Speaker 2 (28:51):
When McCauley asks Willis what her largest reservation about admitting
that she killed Rose would be, Willis responds because she
wants to be home too. She then discusses a fictional
in air quotes book she wants to write about the murder,
entitled Murder One was the case they gave me, And
then they talk about the contents in her book, where
she admits that she hates Blaylock. She tells McCauley that
(29:14):
she feels badly because of all the people in prison
who didn't actually do the crime. She says it was
easy to frame Marcus because she hated him. When McCauley
tells Willis about lying being problematic because it necessitates moral lies,
Willis says, it isn't that hard. You get a story,
you stick with it, and that's that, and that's a quote. Moreover,
Willis admits that she lied to her own attorneys about
(29:34):
what transpired, and she admits that she couldn't believe that
a jury convicted Marcus based solely on her testimony, giving
how many times her story shifted.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Prison phone conversations are recorded, so McCauley reached out to
Marcus's lawyer and they retrieved and transcribed the recording, adding
it to his federal havias where you need to show
that your constitutional rights were violing, and they bolstered the
filing with this evidence of innocence.
Speaker 3 (30:00):
It's two three hours worth of conversation that my lawyer
ended up getting and submitted it into evidence in my
federal hay and it changed the direction that my hat
was going at that time. And I told my lawyer
to file a stay and take that evidence back to
the trial courts so you can exhaust it. If the
federal courts hear it before the trial court, then I'll
(30:23):
be forever barred from bringing it back up. So what
happened was he didn't listen to me. He said, no,
I'm going to file at both places. Whoever answers first,
we're good. We got a confession from the actual murderer.
So when it got included in the record, the magister
judge said that the conversation proves that the state of
(30:45):
Ohio convicted the wrong person when they found Playlock guilty
of the murderer. Roles those exact words.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
However, the court ruled that an innocence claim absent the
constitutional violation was insufficient so the recordings, having not been
added to the record and exhausted in trial court, were
now procedurally barred. But then Arkeita kept right on communicating
with Ernest McCauley.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
She admits her guilt on multiple occasions. In letters she's
drafted to Ernest McCully, Willis admits to killing Howard Rose
and that mister Blainlogg was not involved, and like the
phone call, McCully often refers to a soul that was
lost or stolen because of Willis's lies. She wrote, I
guess when you take a life, you have to live
with it. You really don't have a choice but to
look at it different. She discusses her gratitudes towards McCully
(31:31):
for his assistance and helping to remove Rose's body from
her house. She describes her fear that mccullay Harbor's resentment
towards her because he remains incarcerated for the crime she committed.
She says, all of which we've been through, I still
wonder if you hate me. I wonder if one day
you'll break my neck because of what you're going through
because of me. She goes on rape I just feel
like crying all the time. Then I start questioning myself
all those lies I told. I never would have guessed
(31:53):
they'd believe my statement. I just thought I'd get a
plea bargain and they would find everyone not guilty because
of all of the dishonesty in all of my written statements.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
This time, his attorney took it to the trial court.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
A judge decided that to these letters and recordings you
couldn't prove they were her. She would not testify taking
responsibility for them, and so those subsequent post conviction petitions
were denied. They went back and forth through the Court
of Appeals.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
At this point, it appears that the state offered Ernest
a deal for early release, which he told Marcus about
in a letter two days after he made the deal
and later testified to in twenty fourteen. This is what
he said about the offer.
Speaker 3 (32:32):
Ernest said that he ended up writing a statement later
for the prosecution to get out of prison early. He
told him that whatever he writes is this against me
is going to be a lie because I'm innocent. But
they said they don't care if he lie. They just
needed to stop my post conviction and it did.
Speaker 1 (32:49):
A statement was drafted allegedly from Ernest that the phone
conversations were just a setup and that Marcus was the
actual shooter, And despite presenting a letter from Ernest admitting
that the statement was just a means to get his
on early release, Marcus didn't get any traction again on
the now procedurally barred confession materials until a twenty thirteen
(33:10):
affid David for one of the Cauley's cellmates, Shannon Drake.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
He gets throwed in the mix because Ernest let him
listen to Archidah on the phones and wrote affidavit from
my lawyer Sam. He heard her saying how she set
me up. In twenty fourteen, I'm back in the courtroom
on our everdentary of hearing it. Ernest came in there
and got on the stand and Danny said that he
ended up writing a statement, and a statement is really
no good until you testify to it. So now he's
(33:36):
testifying that statement is false. The prosecution told him what
to say, and as a matter of fact, that's not
even my signatures. Blaylock is innocence. The judge doesn't make
a ruling on her for two years, and then when
she comes back two years later in twenty sixteen, she denies,
saying that evidence was not new.
Speaker 1 (33:51):
Which goes back to the original sin that this phone
conversation was presented in federal court but was never exhausted
in trial court, so it was used up where it
couldn't be effective on its own, and then they can
say that this related evidence is not new. But there
was a new hope in Cuyahoga County Prosecutor's office, the
(34:12):
creation had long last of a conviction Integrity Unit.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
Well, I found an application to them for my role
for conviction in twenty eighteen. I didn't hear nothing from
him for two years. In twenty twenty, during the pandemic,
I had someone reach out to the head of that
unit at the time. He said, oh, it's ironic that
you're calling me about the Blacklock case because something new
has came up and I'm going to ask the head
prosecutor for special permission to re review his case.
Speaker 1 (34:39):
So at this time Marcus reached out to Kim, who
agreed to represent him with the CiU.
Speaker 2 (34:44):
So I talked to the then head of the Conviction
Integrity Unit, who says he won't confirm that they've found
something new, but he doesn't deny that he's had this
conversation with this contact person, mister Blaylock. But the whole
time we're going through this and get a response from
them one way or the other, like about what's going on,
what the investigation is. However, McCully is telling us, Yeah,
(35:07):
they interviewed me. We send our investigator out to talk
to Willis, who says, those prosecutors took me out to
dinner and I told them the truth. I'm not going
to say anything more. And then she slams the door
in his face words to that effect. So we know
they have some investigation which is favorable. And you would
think if their answer was we don't have anything favorable
(35:27):
to overturn, that would have been said years ago. In
the course of this they had represented at some point
that it moved on to the investigation phase and the
voting phase.
Speaker 1 (35:36):
Now, this CiU was assigned an independent review board made
up of judges and community members, whose purpose was to
review the findings of these reinvestigations and vote on recommendations
for the head prosecutor.
Speaker 2 (35:49):
I talked to the members of the board who said, no,
we've never heard about this case. We haven't met for
over two years, and As a result, November of twenty
twenty two, all community members of the Higer County Prosecutor's
Conviction Integrity Unit resigned, citing the units inactivity perceived lack
of impact, with a letter noting that the office had
not even referred a case for review since prior to
(36:10):
the pandemic. As far as I'm concerned, Ural Sailor's the
only case of exoneration by the Conviction Integrity Unit. Now
there's Octavius Williams, where he was voted to be exonerated,
but instead they just gave him a judicial release, which
really compromises the idea that the purpose was ever without
conviction integrity.
Speaker 1 (36:30):
And you can hear about both of those cases. We're
going to have our coverage linked in the episode description.
So Kim filed motions to compel the CiU to release
anything they'd found, because, after all, when Marcus filed with
the CiU, they'd signed an agreement to share materials, not
to mention other obligations to do so.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
As a result of the court sort of order that, well,
if your beef is with the Conviction Integrity Unit, the
whole board resigns. So we're not sure that they are
a thing anymore, and therefore we can't compel them. These
obligations exist out of ongoing Brady obligations, concepts of justice,
out of the prosecutor's ethical duty to pursue justice. And
there's an AVIA requirement that if they find subsequent evidence,
(37:12):
they're required to turn it over. None of that seems
to matter. The agreement doesn't seem to matter, and here
we are two and a half years into litigation just
about whether they have to turn over the materials from
this investigation because we need to establish that it was
Willis who said this, and Willis is not presently cooperative.
Marcus Blaylock's conviction should have never occurred, but it should
(37:35):
have ended the first time Willis made it admission that
she had framed him. And it's now been twenty years
since that admission, and the justice system is playing games
about whether or not he should have access to this
state's investigation of his innocence. That shouldn't even be a question.
I mean, my public records requests have been denied, my
(37:58):
court filings have been denied. Now we're at a man
in the Court of Appeals, and it's just every step
of the way we're hit with obstacles about just having
access to information, and information should be free to everybody.
So the path forward is we are not going to
stop until we get this investigation because we know that
what's contained in it is the basis to move forward.
(38:19):
And the reason we know that is nobody would work
so hard to protect nonsense.
Speaker 1 (38:22):
Is there anything that our audience can do to help?
Speaker 2 (38:26):
Yeah, I mean I think public outcry, call the prosecutors,
demand that they released information. Why are they protecting it?
Speaker 1 (38:33):
What is the purpose?
Speaker 2 (38:33):
What are they hiding?
Speaker 1 (38:34):
And if anyone wants to learn more about Marcus and
his case, he's written a book.
Speaker 3 (38:39):
My book is out, My Long Journey through Faith at
New Beginning by Marcus Blaylock. I appreciate to somebody that
knows about this case, that heard about this case, that
maybe the witness has talked to in the past, please
come forward, Feel free to talk to my attorney. I
have a website to free Mark M A R. C.
Blaylock B L A L O C K dot com.
Speaker 1 (38:59):
Okay, so we're going to link the book his website
as well as ways that you can contact Kim if
you have any information about this case, And with that
we're going to go to closing arguments, where first of all,
I think each of you for being here, and now
I'm going to kick back in my chair and close
my eyes and just listen to anything else you have
(39:19):
to say. Kim, as always, let's start with you, and
then you can just hand the microphone off to Marcus
and he'll take us off into the sunset.
Speaker 2 (39:28):
This case is so obvious. How it got indicted is
the original question. How there was probable cause to move
forward with an arrest, with an indictment, with a trial,
and how a conviction is sustained. We're questions that weren't
answered until after trial, unfortunately, but we've known the answer
for now more than twenty years. And the fact that
(39:49):
we haven't been able to extend justice or procedure to
Marcus Blaylock to give him access to tell the truth
of his story is one of the greatest injustices i've seen.
The fact that the prosecutor's office, in acknowledgement that it
had information favorable to mister Blaylock, did an investigation and
won't turn that over, have spent thousands of hours and
(40:10):
dollars just keeping this information secret is proof positive that
the system is protecting what it knows to be a
wrongful conviction.
Speaker 3 (40:21):
Something is hidden and you're not showing it. You're not
showing your hand. But yet and still she shows her hand.
I mean, it's not right, it's not right. You have
me wrongfully convicted now going on twenty four years support
crime I didn't commit, and you use the self admitted statement,
a percase statement at that to convict me. I need prayers.
(40:44):
I need prayers, support phone calls for this to go through.
My lawyer is amazing, but I need a miracle right now.
That's what I need. I need God to create a
miracle for me so I can be exonerated from this
wrongful conviction.
Speaker 1 (41:05):
Thank you for listening to Wrongful Conviction. You can listen
to this and all the Lava for Good podcasts one
week early and ad free 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 Kleiber.
The music in this production was supplied by three time
(41:26):
OSCAR 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 Flamm. Wrongful Conviction is a production of
Lava for Good Podcasts and association with Signal Company Number One.
We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported
in this show are accurate.
Speaker 3 (41:45):
The views and opinions expressed by the individuals featured in
this show are their own and do not necessarily reflect
those of Lava for Good.
Hosts And Creators
Lauren Bright Pacheco
Maggie Freleng
Jason Flom
Popular Podcasts
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!
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