Here’s yet another case — we’re up to almost 300 now — where an innocent man was convicted of a crime he didn’t commit. What makes this case fairly unique is that the prosecutors didn’t fight to prevent the DNA testing that proved him innocent after 18 years in prison.
Robert Dewey, imprisoned for nearly 18 years for a crime he did not commit, has been ordered released, cleared by DNA evidence that points the finger at a new suspect in the rape and murder of a Palisade woman in 1994.
“I find that Mr. Dewey is factually innocent of the crimes of which he was accused of in this case,” the judge said, noting Dewey had spent more the 6,000 days behind bars. “Mr. Dewey is now again a free man.”
The state and the defense attorneys actually worked together on this one:
Attorneys involved in Dewey’s case are reluctant to discuss details ahead of the Monday motions hearing, but his case has been taken up by a team at the state Attorney General’s Office that reviews old convictions where DNA is involved.
“We were approached by the defense attorney in this case. It’s one that we forwarded to our Justice Review Project for DNA testing,” said AG spokesman Michael Saccone. “We look to see whether someone is wrongfully incarcerated.”
Unfortunately, Colorado has no law providing any financial support to those who are exonerated. The Innocence Project is helping out some, but rebuilding his life is going to be incredibly difficult.
11 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
jamessweet
May 7, 2012 at 10:06 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hey, he may be innocent of that crime, but that doesn’t mean he’s innocent of all crimes. Shouldn’t we keep him locked up just in case?
eric
May 7, 2012 at 10:21 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
My initial, cynical, response was ‘the DA has no problem with it because, after 18 years, the prosecutors have already gotten all the career benefit they’re going to get from that conviction.’
In the narrow set of cases where the prosecutors did nothing wrong (didn’t withhold evidence, etc…) and it really is just a case of new DNA techniques becoming available, I think its worthwhile experimenting with disconnecting overturned prosecutions from prosecutorial career benefit. Not that I really think prosecutors need more rewards, but it may be worth doing if it removes official state opposition to revisiting old cases with new DNA techniques.
mudskipper
May 7, 2012 at 10:26 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Before I clicked the link leading to the article in the Denver Post, I thought to myself, “I bet he is white.” And he is. The cynic in me thinks that the prosecutors wouldn’t have been so happy to cooperate if that hadn’t been the case.
unbound
May 7, 2012 at 11:02 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
A question in my mind is whether there is any effort to reexamine the process by which we convict people. I’m certain 300 is not a large number in the greater scheme of things, but there are certainly a lot more than the 300 that are innocent but locked behind bars and, in some cases, sitting on death row. Are there tactics being used that are incriminating people that we should rethink? Are eye-witnesses even worse than we thought at being reliable sources?
In some cases, the evidence was supposedly so damning that innocent people are put on death row…yet clearly that evidence was wrong. What do we do to get better?
michaelcrichton
May 7, 2012 at 11:10 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
jamessweet: You’re being sarcastic, but there are plenty of idiots in that article’s comment thread who seriously believe that.
slc1
May 7, 2012 at 11:17 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re jamessweet @ #1
That was essentially the argument of the late and unlamented Dominic Dunne who, after going through drug rehab for coke addition, became a commentator on high profile trials for Vanity Fair and the cable news programs. Of course, the defendants were always guilty according to Mr. Dunne and he was not at all shy about saying so. In fairness, it should be noted that it was the murder of his daughter and the light sentence given the perpetrator that motivated him.
Stevarious
May 7, 2012 at 11:21 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
After all, a just god would never let a truly innocent man spend 18 years in jail. If it happened, he MUST have deserved it!
Marcus Ranum
May 7, 2012 at 11:35 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Hey, he may be innocent of that crime, but that doesn’t mean he’s innocent of all crimes. Shouldn’t we keep him locked up just in case?
Isn’t that basically the USG’s argument for why they can’t let prisoners from Gitmo free: “Well, if they weren’t terrorists before, they’re pissed off enough to be terrorists now!”
laurentweppe
May 7, 2012 at 11:51 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
When the innocence project was at 250 exonerated people, 85% of them were blacks and latinos… Which actually shows who have to bear the brunt of justice miscarriages.
wscott
May 7, 2012 at 12:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@ mudskipper: Actually Dewey is Native American.
harold
May 7, 2012 at 12:47 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Cynically, I can’t help thinking that this may be part of why they didn’t fight it.
I see the comment above that he is Native Americans.
I do think, however, that the general setting in a largely white mountain west state, where prison populations are somewhat less dominated by ethnic minorities, may also have influenced official and public reaction.
Lastly, I think, one has to give some credit to the bizarre political characteristics of Colorado, also found in New Mexico (in differing proportion), where far right wing ideas admix with relatively progressive ideas, and where exactly what they will do next is hard to predict.