Tag: wrongful convictions

Ontario Court grants TDF Amish client leave to appeal Quarantine Act convictions

The Democracy Fund (TDF) is pleased with the Ontario Court of Justice’s decision granting leave to appeal in a Quarantine Act ticket case.

The client, a member of the Amish community from southern Ontario, allegedly failed to complete the ArriveCan app or PCR testing when crossing the border. He received a $6,500 ticket but never received notice of a trial date or conviction. When the ticket went unpaid, the municipality sent it to collections, complicating his ability to get loans for the farming equipment he uses to farm his land and feed his family. TDF sought to have the ticket reopened, but the court refused – an outcome inconsistent with TDF’s other Amish ticket reopening cases.

TDF’s legal defence of the Amish challenges convictions totalling over $300,000 dollars issued under the Quarantine Act for alleged non-compliance with ArriveCAN app and PCR testing requirements during Canada’s COVID-19 border measures.

The Amish have a religious prohibition on any modern technology, including smartphones, computers, and software applications. This makes interacting with the modern world difficult. TDF’s Amish clients were convicted in absentia; they received no meaningful notice of the tickets or court dates.

TDF Director of Litigation Adam Blake-Gallipeau, who has represented multiple Amish families throughout these proceedings, stated:

“We are cautiously optimistic that once the Ontario Court of Justice reviews this decision, it will reverse the lower court’s ruling. Canadian courts should understand the Amish community’s traditional way of life within the broader context of religious freedom. The Amish live simply according to their Biblical principles, provide for their families through subsistence farming, and lack the means to pay the massive fines that threaten the existence of their communities. We intend to impress upon the Court the serious issues at stake, including inadequate notice and the inconsistent treatment of nearly identical reopening applications. We’re hopeful that these convictions will be overturned on appeal.”

Keep reading

Conviction of Jackson Co. man tied to Whitmer kidnap plot gets vacated

The Michigan Court of Appeals on Tuesday vacated the conviction of a Jackson County man alleged to have provided aid to a 2020 plot to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

Joseph Morrison was convicted in 2022 of gang membership felonies, felony firearm and providing material support for terrorist acts in relation to his alleged role in support of a kidnapping plot of the Democratic governor that prosecutors said was led by Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. during the COVID-19 pandemic. Morrison was sentenced to four to 20 years in prison on the gang and terrorism support convictions and two years on felony firearm.

But the three-judge appellate panel on Tuesday ruled that kidnapping, under the letter of Michigan law, is not considered a “violent felony” and therefore cannot be presented to a jury to establish a terrorism-related charge.

The panel ― made up of Judges Thomas Cameron, Mark Boonstra and Brock Swartzle ― vacated Morrison’s conviction and remanded the case back to Jackson County Circuit Court for a new trial. All three judges are appointees of Republican former Gov. Rick Snyder.

“Given that the trial court specifically instructed the jury to consider kidnapping as a violent felony and that the jury heard considerable testimony about the plot to kidnap Gov. Whitmer, the likelihood that defendant was actually convicted, at least in part, on an invalid basis tainted the jury’s verdict,” according to the unanimous decision.

Michael Faraone, an appellate attorney for Morrison, said he was happy with the decisions and added, “It’s always a great day when a court delivers justice.”

“In over 30 years of practicing law, I have never reviewed a trial more violative of due process than this one,” Faraone said.

Keep reading

‘Refuses to enforce its own precedents’: Sotomayor torches SCOTUS for inaction on ‘significant’ buried evidence in slaying of teen pizza delivery driver

Justice Sonia Sotomayor registered a sharp dissent Monday as the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up the case of a man sentenced to life in the 1998 slaying of a teenage pizza delivery driver in Louisiana, accusing her colleagues of refusing to “enforce its own precedents.”

Joined only by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sotomayor argued that it made little sense for the Supreme Court to effectively free James Skinner’s co-defendant from death row with a decision a decade earlier but to leave Skinner in prison for the rest of his days without parole, when both men were incarcerated for the murder of 16-year-old Eric Walber based on “similar sets of evidence, which centered on the same two eyewitness accounts.”

“Equal justice under law, the phrase engraved on the front of this Court’s building, requires that two codefendants, convicted of the same crime, who raised essentially the same constitutional claims, receive the same answer from the courts,” Sotomayor said. “Here, because the Louisiana courts refused to apply this Court’s Brady precedents, including a decision by this Court involving the very same evidence, Skinner risks spending the rest of his life in prison while [Michael] Wearry walks free,” Sotomayor said. “Because the Court refuses to enforce its own precedents, I respectfully dissent from the denial of certiorari.”

Under Brady v. Maryland, prosecutors must hand over “Brady material,” evidence that is exculpatory or tends to be favorable to the defense. The “withholding of evidence that is material to the determination of either guilt or punishment of a criminal defendant violates the defendant’s constitutional right to due process,” the Supreme Court held in 1963.

The evidence of Brady violations in the case of Michael Wearry was egregious to the point that the Supreme Court ruled his conviction and death sentence had to be set aside in 2016, and a new trial was “required.” Of particular concern was what the state hid from the defense about its star witness, a “jailhouse snitch” named Sam Scott who two years after the slaying claimed a lesser level of responsibility in Walber’s death while pointing to Wearry, Skinner, and three others.

That story not only changed, but was also wrong about basic facts. For instance, the witness claimed Walber was shot to death — but the evidence showed that on that April 1998 day, the Albany High School football player was filling in for someone who didn’t show up for work at Pizza Express and was beaten and run over by his own car, local CBS affiliate WAFB reported. Skinner was allegedly behind the wheel.

Further explaining why the Supreme Court found Scott’s account “dubious,” one of his versions of the crime said Randy Hutchinson — who had “undergone knee surgery to repair a ruptured patellar tendon” nine days earlier — ran after the pizza delivery driver.

Worse yet, Scott had made statements behind bars that he wanted to “‘make sure [Wearry] gets the needle cause he jacked over me,'” an inmate reported. Neither the defense nor the jury were aware of this evidence.

Keep reading

OneTaste Founder Nicole Daedone Gets 9-Year Prison Sentence

Nine years in prison for preaching unpopular ideas about sexuality? That’s the sentence that a judge imposed today on Nicole Daedone of OneTaste, a company built on orgasmic meditation (OM) and other unconventional wellness practices. Daedone has also been ordered to forfeit $12 million—which is how much she got for selling the company in 2017—and to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in restitution.

The government will say that this is about human trafficking. But that’s just a sign of how “human trafficking” has become a catchall term for sex-tinged antics that prosecutors want to punish.

In this case, no one has accused Daedone and her colleague/co-defendant Rachel Cherwitz of violence. No one has accused them of confining victims, or of withholding identity documents or other items that employees might have needed to get away.

The alleged victims in this case could come and go as they pleased. They were adult women. They had college degrees, outside professional opportunities, and sometimes even independent wealth. They testified in court that they remained affiliated with OneTaste—some as employees, some as volunteers, some simply as people who took classes from the company or lived in group houses that it maintained—because they believed in its mission, believed in Daedone and Cherwitz, or wanted to maintain social status within the OneTaste community.

The government’s assertions about how Daedone and Cherwitz employed “coercion” in this case are a huge affront to freedom of speech and freedom of conscience. Prosecutors suggested that the ideas Daedone and Cherwitz spread served as a form of brainwashing. These supposedly dangerous ideas include such things as being open to new sexual experiences and the notion that engaging in daily OM—a 15-minute, partnered, clitoral stroking session—could focus the mind and help empower practitioners, especially women. Daedone and Cherwitz appear to sincerely believe these ideas, which they saw as rooted in both Buddhism and feminism.

The government’s case was also a huge affront to the idea that women are fully agentic people capable of consent, sexual and otherwise. Prosecutors suggested that anxiety about being shunned by the OneTaste community was a harm so powerful that grown women were effectively “trafficked” by it. They argued that these women’s consent—to OM, to participate in sexual fantasy scenes, to enter into and out of relationships, to engage in sex acts with OneTaste members or donors, or to pay for OneTaste classes—was rendered null by the force of fear of social exclusion and/or fear that stopping OM and other OneTaste practices would have a negative impact on their lives.

Ultimately, the case portends a dangerous new standard for what counts as forced labor and what counts as harm under federal trafficking statutes.

Sentencing for Daedone started this morning, following a June 2025 conviction on one count of conspiracy to commit human trafficking. Cherwitz, convicted of the same, is scheduled to be sentenced this afternoon.

The government sought 20 years in prison for Daedone and more than 15 for Cherwitz—basing calculations in part on alleged conduct for which they were not even charged, let alone convicted. Judge Diane Gujarati denied the government’s request for a sexual abuse enhancement based on untried conduct.

The government’s star witness was to be a woman named Ayries Blanck, whose journals were a big part of the prosecutors’ case (and, also, of a Netflix documentary). Prosecutors would eventually disclose that Blanck had fabricated evidence, producing journals she said she had handwritten in 2015 but had actually composed much later. After heavily featuring Blanck and her journals in their arguments leading up to the trial, prosecutors declined to call Blanck as a trial witness and said they no longer believed in the authenticity of portions of her journals. The case nevertheless proceeded, and now a woman is heading to prison for nearly a decade.

Keep reading

Lucy Letby is victim of greatest miscarriage of justice in decades, says cop who caught ‘Angel of Death’ Beverley Allitt

THE cop who caught serial baby-killer ­Beverley Allitt has told of his belief that jailed nurse Lucy Letby is innocent of the crime.

Retired Det Supt Stuart Clifton has been reviewing the evidence against the 36-year-old — serving 15 whole-life sentences for murdering seven babies and attempting to kill seven others at Countess of Chester hospital.

And Stuart, who nailed Angel of Death Allitt in 1991, said: “This is likely the greatest miscarriage of justice this century .”

The development comes after police last week confirmed Letby faces no further charges — offering her hope that the Criminal Cases Review Commission will sanction a new appeal.

And a hearing yesterday laid the groundwork to reopen inquests into Letby’s victims.

Keep reading

Exonerated Missouri woman sues police for conspiracy and coverup that put her in prison for 43 years

Sandra Hemme’s federal lawsuit accuses St. Joseph Police of suppressing and destroying evidence that pointed to a fellow officer who was guilty of the 1980 murder. Before being freed last year, Hemme served the longest sentence of any wrongly convicted woman in American history.

Sandra Hemme, the Missouri woman who spent 43 years in prison for a murder she did not commit, has sued the city of St. Joseph and eight police officers in a 10-count federal lawsuit alleging malicious prosecution, a coerced confession and conspiracy.

“There was never any objective evidence tying Plaintiff (Hemme) to the crime,” the lawsuit alleges.

The lawsuit also points the finger at a former police officer, Michael Holman, as the killer of librarian Patricia Jeschke in 1980.

“To protect Holman, the Defendants concealed evidence of his guilt and chose not to follow the evidence leading to Holman,” according to the lawsuit. Holman died in 2015.

Hemme served the longest sentence of any wrongly convicted woman in American history, her lawyers have said. She was finally exonerated and freed last year after a lengthy legal battle that saw the Missouri Attorney General fighting to overturn her innocence ruling.

A year ago, in July 2024, Livingston County Circuit Court Judge Ryan Horsman overturned Hemme’s conviction — writing that she was “the victim of a manifest injustice.”

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey battled all the way to the state Supreme Court to keep Hemme in prison. She won her final freedom after the Missouri Court of Appeals rejected all of Bailey’s arguments, and in March the Buchanan County prosecutor declined to refile charges.

Keep reading

Court Overturns Douglass Mackey Meme Conviction

A federal appeals court has overturned the conviction of Douglass Mackey, the man prosecuted for posting satirical memes ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on July 9 that the government failed to prove Mackey knowingly participated in a conspiracy, a requirement under the statute used to charge him.

We obtained a copy of the ruling for you here.

Mackey had been found guilty in 2023 of violating 18 U.S.C. § 241, a law dating back to Reconstruction that punishes conspiracies to deprive individuals of their constitutional rights. Prosecutors claimed that Mackey’s memes, which joked that Hillary Clinton supporters could vote via text, were part of a coordinated scheme to suppress votes.

That case has now unraveled.

“The mere fact that Mackey posted the memes, even assuming that he did so with the intent to injure other citizens in the exercise of their right to vote, is not enough, standing alone, to prove a violation of Section 241,” wrote Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston in the court’s opinion. Because Section 241 applies only to conspiracies involving “two or more persons,” the government had to prove that Mackey entered into an agreement with others, a threshold it did not meet.

Prosecutors attempted to tie Mackey to private Twitter message groups such as “War Room” and “Madman #2,” where users discussed political memes.

The court found no evidence that Mackey saw, let alone participated in, any of the conversations that allegedly formed the conspiracy. “This the government failed to do,” the panel wrote, noting that “Mackey did not send any messages in the War Room in the two weeks before he tweeted the text-to-vote memes.”

Keep reading

Trump Vows To Probe Ashli Babbitt Homicide, Consider Comp Fund For Pardoned J6ers

President Trump on Tuesday vowed that he would bring new scrutiny to the Department of Justice’s handling of the killing of Ashli Babbitt by a Capitol police officer during the Jan 6, 2021 riot, and to explore the possibility of a compensation fund for the 1,500 Capitol riot defendants he pardoned.   

Trump’s promises came in a Roosevelt Room interview with Newsmax’s Greg Kelly. When Kelly asked Trump about the DOJ continuing to mount a defense against a $30 million wrongful death claim filed by Babbitt’s husband, Trump said he wasn’t aware of it but would look into the matter: 

“Well, I’ll look into that. I mean, you’re just telling me that for the first time, I haven’t heard that. I’m a big fan of Ashli Babbitt. And Ashli Babbitt was a really good person who was a big MAGA fan, Trump fan. And she was innocently standing there; they even say trying to sort of hold back the crowd. And a man did something to her that was unthinkable when he shot her. And I think it’s a disgrace. I’m going to look into that. I did not know that.”

Babbitt was shot and killed by US Capitol Police (USCP) Lieutenant Michael Byrd as she attempted to climb through a broken window that was part of an interior doorway close to the House chamber. Though the unarmed, 5’2″, 115-pound Babbitt posed no imminent threat of inflicting death or serious injury as she awkwardly navigated the narrow space — with a furniture barricade still ahead of her —  Boyd opted against using any type of nonlethal force, and instead shot her from an ambush position, killing her with a bullet that perforated her trachea and lung. 

Keep reading

Virginia Prosecutors Fight to Uphold Life Sentence for Man Found Not Guilty

In 1998, someone shot and killed police officer Allen Gibson in the woods behind an apartment complex in the small town of Waverly, Virginia. Police arrested Terence Richardson and Ferrone Claiborne for Gibson’s murder days later—despite a lack of physical evidence linking them to the crime and the presence of another possible suspect. 

In 2001, a jury found them not guilty of murder. A judge sentenced them to life in prison anyway. 

Richardson and Claiborne have been fighting to prove their innocence ever since.

In February, the Virginia Supreme Court gave Richardson a chance to make his case by ordering a new hearing to examine potentially exculpatory evidence. Richardson’s legal team says this material was never shared with his original defense attorneys—a violation of a U.S. Supreme Court decision known as Brady v. Maryland. (Richardson’s case is following a separate procedure than Claiborne’s.)

The innocence claim centers around three pieces of evidence: an anonymous call to a police tip line identifying someone other than Richardson as a suspect, a photo lineup administered to a 9-year-old witness, in which she identified a suspect other than Richardson, and a statement made by her on the day of Gibson’s death in 1998 describing someone whose hairstyle did not match Richardson’s.

At the hearing in Sussex County Circuit Court this May, Richardson’s legal team set out to prove that this evidence could have changed the outcome of the case. But they were derailed by what Richardson’s attorneys have characterized as a deliberate effort by state prosecutors and federal law enforcement officials to undermine Richardson’s innocence claim.

“Terence and Ferrone are innocent,” Jarrett Adams, an attorney for both Richardson and Claiborne, told The Appeal. “They are not innocent by accident.”

For Richardson and Claiborne, the hearing was perhaps their best chance to bolster their innocence claims with recently unearthed evidence. But ultimately, the judge allowed only one item to be admitted as evidence before the Virginia Court of Appeals—the same court that had previously dismissed his case.  With Richardson’s case now once again set to go before the potentially unfriendly Appeals court, his legal team fears he faces an uphill battle to prove his innocence.

“We’re up against the impossible,” Adams said.

Keep reading

Jamal Trulove Tells How He Was Framed with Murder and Kamala Harris Sat in Back of the Courtroom and Laughed

Jamal Trulove framed by police and convicted of murder in 2010. He was then sentenced to prison for 50 years and served six years before his conviction was overturned in 2014.

Recently, a video made the rounds of Jamal telling how Kamala Harris sat in the courtroom and laughed after he was sentenced to prison for 50 years. Jamal did not think it was funny.

Jamal Trulove: In 2008, I was framed for murder and wrongfully convicted by the office of Kamala Harris, sentenced 50 to life in prison. It took me five and a half years to ultimately get back into trial due to prosecutorial misconduct. And it took me another year to go to my second trial, to which I was vindicated by a jury of my peers. When I got convicted, Kamala Harris was in the courtroom when I got sentenced 50 to life in prison. Kamala Harris courtroom when I look back and I seen her, she was smiling, and she did that stupid ass laugh that she do right now. This sh*t ain’t funny.

Keep reading