YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → The Phil Jusino Podcast- guest Jeffrey Deskovic of the the Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice

The Phil Jusino Podcast- guest Jeffrey Deskovic of the the Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice — Transcript

by The Phil Jusino Show Official* · 10,979 words · 1,481 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00guilty now when you were arrested Were
0:02You released on bail or were you I was
0:05no I was I was released on a $50,000
0:07bail I was fortunate so at the time my
0:10my mother was had a was in a long-term
0:13relationship with a local businessman
0:15who was uh Jackie aian and so he was
0:18somewhat of a father figure in certain
0:19respects and that's how we I was able to
0:22get bailed out I mean we certainly
0:24didn't have the means for me to get
0:25bailed out absent that but you had a a a
0:29legal aid attorney I did public defender
0:31I both yes yes I had the legal a turn
0:33that was the public defender yes right
0:35okay now at some point uh did they try
0:39to work out a plea deal or did you say I
0:41didn't do it so you I'll have to go to
0:43trial then I said I said I said I didn't
0:45do it it was only at the end a after the
0:48uh summations had been completed and the
0:51jury got the case and before they came
0:53up with the verdict the the prosecutor
0:56uh made an offer you know he he offered
0:58me 5 to 15 not before that not before
1:00that no no not before that no I was
1:03adamant that I was innocent and also
1:05remember that you know the DNA didn't
1:07match me right so that was the That was
1:10supposed to be the center piece of of of
1:12the defense did you feel pretty good
1:14going into jury deliberations I did I
1:17did feel really good about about it
1:20sure and then Verda comes in and uh
1:23you're you're standing there next to
1:25your attorney you get weak in the knees
1:27when you hear guilty more than once they
1:29they allowed me remain seated rather
1:31than the typical standing up that having
1:33been said um so the jury is coming out
1:36and I remember this jail house saying
1:37that people had told me they said well
1:39look when you when they reach a verdict
1:41try to make eye contact with the jur
1:42looking at you it's not they're looking
1:45right looking at you smiling it's not
1:47but if they look away in the Stone Face
1:49they've convicted you so I'm looking at
1:51them and they're looking away and you
1:53know but then I'm thinking but no they
1:55can't be I think that that's saying they
1:56don't know what they're talking about
1:57because I'm inoc I'm going to be found
1:59not guilty and you know and they they
2:02read off the first three charges you
2:04know not uh not not guilty and uh then
2:07all a suddenly I hear guilty you know
2:09guilty into a false sense of security
2:12yeah yes I am and when I heard guilty I
2:14think well wait a minute did I did I
2:16just hear that right did I miss the word
2:18not on the front end your mother was in
2:22the courtroom she was so she she wrot so
2:25she kind of like U when she heard the
2:27the not guilty that the three not she
2:29like kind of like jumped up in court
2:31with the arms out almost like you might
2:33do at at a sporting event sure and
2:35suddenly they hear guilty guilty guilty
2:38you know the murder rape and yeah did
2:42you have a chance to see did they let
2:45you turn around because some courts
2:46they're like don't turn around don't
2:47look at the the gallery did you get a
2:49chance after the guilty verdict was read
2:51for you to see your mom's face I did I
2:54did that I never got that question
2:57before it she had like a like a sunken
3:02Ashen uh disbelief on her face like none
3:07of us saw that coming and I bet you just
3:10wanted to hug her at that moment and you
3:11couldn't I I I did in fact I I even I
3:15even foolishly asked the court officer
3:17you know could I sit with my you know
3:19mother and my aunt and you know
3:20obviously that that wasn't allowed they
3:22pulled the jury right they did pull the
3:24jury said consistent with their the
3:27ultimate verdict they yes they all said
3:29guilty guilty guilty 12 what was in fact
3:32this was not even on my question list
3:33but what was your first night because
3:36you had been out I had out what was your
3:38first night in jail as a convicted
3:43individual yeah it it felt like it was
3:46not quite real it felt very uh it felt
3:49very it felt surreal it felt it felt
3:51scary as well like I didn't know really
3:54what was going to happen to me next and
3:56then remember I'm I'm incarcerated for
3:58for a sex effect off and there's a
4:00vigilante mentality to which people have
4:02been convicted of sex offenses so and
4:04I'm in an adult County jail and I'm 17
4:07years old years old and you know I I'll
4:09be candid with you I I I was frightened
4:11could imagine any you know anybody I
4:13don't care if it was a big biker you're
4:15in jail you you're away from your family
4:18you don't know if there's going to be
4:19protection you know to protect you and
4:21and it's just uh I can't imagine I've
4:23had this discussion with Marty tankle
4:25I'm very similar you're Fred you don't
4:28know what to expect did you erney come
4:30back there right away after the verdict
4:32no he no he did not no I didn't I didn't
4:35see him for several weeks after that he
4:37came to discuss uh
4:40sentencing so when you were convicted
4:44you got you had to anticipate the
4:45sentence was going to be a rather
4:47lengthy one yes murder and rape of a
4:48young girl of course so you know you had
4:51no preconceived notions going in and
4:53what was the sentence the sentence was
4:5515 to life so I could have been 25 to
4:57Life Could Have Been 25 to could even
4:59have been 30 had the judge been so
5:00inclined but yeah but 15 was a minimum
5:03and that's that's what I okay now how
5:05long after that you get sentenced that
5:08an appeal obviously you were you were
5:10thinking about that once you were
5:11convicted of course of course that's the
5:12first thing have to be an attorney to
5:14think that one of the first things that
5:15goes through your mind of course now
5:17when did that take hold let's say where
5:20somebody was representing you in an
5:25appeal I want to say maybe like a couple
5:27of months I mean you know you you I've
5:29as as soon as I got back to the jail
5:31after the sentencing I uh you mailed the
5:34form you know as for the appeal so I
5:36mean I got that thing going the deadline
5:38yeah yeah I got yeah I got that thing
5:40going as soon as I as I as I could um
5:42but you know at that point um you know
5:45there was like a backlog in the courts
5:46and then more money was needed to be
5:48appointed you know legislature the
5:50governor and the end result of it all
5:53was while while I was sentenced on
5:55January of 1991 my appeal was not
5:58decided until 1994 four so that was
6:01really a rather lengthy uh time period
6:04okay so obviously you lost the first
6:05appeal and you lost the many a number of
6:07I did I wound up losing seven appeals
6:09yes so you lose the first appeal that
6:12did your attorney say look if we lose
6:14you know we're going to go to another
6:15court or were you prepared to lose that
6:18appeal or did you were you confident I
6:20was
6:21confident okay and why were you
6:23confident because the da didn't ma the
6:25DNA rather didn't match that was part of
6:28it but beyond that the my my lawyer had
6:30sent me the copy of uh the brief and so
6:33I went up to the law library and started
6:35looking up all the authorities and case
6:37law that was cited in in in the brief
6:40and far as I could tell I mean all the a
6:43strong case had a strong case
6:45yeah now how many appeals did you lose
6:49seven and how how spread out were they
6:52so you lost the first one when was the
6:54next bad news you got the next bad news
6:57I got was uh approximately two or three
7:00months later yeah well it was a
7:02reargument motion I see which was denied
7:05and then uh more bad
7:08news approximately uh maybe like three
7:11months after that which was leave to the
7:13court of appeals was denied highest
7:15court in the state right and uh denied
7:19that was that was uh denied yes now the
7:21next appeal you did yeah the next what
7:23changed how was it different than let's
7:25say the first one or two yeah so so
7:30there there was a about two about two
7:32years of legal inactivity and then I the
7:35next proceeding was was U actually
7:37technically not in an appeal it was a
7:39hius corpus petition the body yeah right
7:42of course but just but just for our for
7:44our viewers the difference between that
7:45and an appeal is that state law issues
7:47are Irrelevant in a habus corpus
7:49proceeding it's all about whether you
7:50can demonstrate a constitutional
7:52violation when 440 motions made there
7:55there were no 440 motions made no okay
7:57that's what got Marty cleared yes it was
7:59because yeah because the 440 is post
8:02conviction motion is the correct vehicle
8:03when you have some new evidence but at
8:05this point I don't have new evidence no
8:07new evidence so I have to continue to
8:08argue the issues that are already on the
8:10record but you were cleared because of
8:13new evidence weren't you because I was
8:15so there we still no 440 there was at
8:18the end but we're not we're not there
8:19yet let let us walk through this since
8:21you mentioned uh so uh I lost the habus
8:25Corpus petition that's in 1997 but I
8:28lost
8:29because the court clerk told my lawyer
8:32the wrong information pertaining to the
8:34filing procedure and as a result of that
8:36my petition arve four days too late okay
8:39which and and the da at the time was
8:41Janine proo yes and her office took the
8:43position that those four days were
8:45prejudicial to the people and therefore
8:47the court should simply rule that I was
8:50leate like I said if I was the da you
8:52want you want the truth because if
8:55you're not the guy who did it and the
8:56guy who did it is out there look what
8:58happened exactly when was that when did
9:00he kill again he killed uh 3 and A2
9:03years
9:04later so we lost the hus Corpus petition
9:07at 97 now we're up to four legal
9:09proceedings that that were that have
9:11been lost uh that that decision was then
9:14appealed to the federal court of appeals
9:16where the two judges hearing The
9:18Challenge on the procedural issue just
9:20of the lakeness we mentioned right was
9:22uh judge rosary puler and future US
9:24Supreme Court Justice son sod mayor okay
9:27uh so my lawyer argued that this was not
9:30a delay caused by me or my attorney but
9:32by the misinformation by the court clerk
9:35uh that that upholding that that ruling
9:37would cause a miscarriage of Justice to
9:38continue and that reversing the ruling
9:40would open the door to more
9:41sophisticated DNA testing so once again
9:44pio's just Administration opposed the
9:48appeal and the Court ruled with with da
9:51uh there was a reargument motion with
9:53the request for uh onbn or all the
9:56judges on the circuit to to hear it and
9:58and make a decision and the that was
10:00denied also by those same uh two judges
10:02what was the rationale for the ruling
10:04against
10:05you by the court by the well because uh
10:08Eda had been passed the aedpa ACT uh
10:11anti-terrorism effective death penalty
10:13act had been passed which stated that
10:15all state prisoners would have one year
10:16to file in federal court after being
10:18denied by their state's highest court
10:20and the theory of the legislation though
10:24misguided was well that you know we need
10:27these cases to be streamlined we needed
10:29to be more timely you know we need to
10:31put a limitation on them and so you know
10:35and that was all inspired of course by
10:36the Oklahoma City B bombing with uh
10:38Timothy McVey right okay but that had
10:41the Fallout of affecting cases
10:42throughout the country even mine
10:45something like that affect would affect
10:46you yeah who would who would have
10:48thought that and the other thing I want
10:49to quickly mention about Eda aside from
10:51putting like the one-year deadline uh on
10:54and by the way they don't appoint a
10:56lawyer there's no right to an attorney
10:57in habus Corpus petition the court can
10:59discretionarily appoint one but that's
11:01only after the petition itself and the
11:04memorandum of law have been fired filed
11:06so now you're asking someone who's not a
11:08lawyer poorly educated to do it uh but
11:11then on top of that um it's uh it's Eda
11:15has a a layer of of deference built into
11:17it so it's not enough to Simply that the
11:19state court was wrong but their decision
11:21has to have been unreasonable High bar
11:25very high bar see so I lost at the
11:27federal court of appeals only thing left
11:29is to seek C from the US Supreme Court
11:31and of course they uh declined to grant
11:34me c so now all my legal remedies are
11:37out I'm 11 I'm 11 years in prison by now
11:39we're in like 2001 2002 uh so at that
11:43point the only vehicle left for me is
11:45the 440 but I have to have a basis for
11:48that and I start this letter writing
11:51campaign because we didn't have any
11:52money to hire an investigator or an
11:54attorney to try to dig for new evidence
11:56and certainly I wasn't going to find any
11:58new evidence behind behind bars behind
12:00not behind bars right so uh we wrote
12:03letters I wrote letters for four years
12:04and eventually um one of the letters
12:06found its way in the hands of an
12:08investigator and uh she convinced the
12:11Innocence Project to take my case they
12:13did and they did and here's what they
12:15did here's the difference okay because
12:16at in Innocence Project they took the
12:18crime scene DNA evidence and by now P
12:20had left office by the way okay and she
12:23was actually in the middle of her
12:24attorney general run and as I understand
12:27it the back story is so the the her
12:30successor um Wester former Westchester D
12:33Fury uh they didn't like each other and
12:36so she was hoping that I would be
12:37exonerated to to impact her attorney
12:40general you'll take it I'll take it I'll
12:42take it yes yeah so they took the crime
12:44scene so P so getting the Innocence
12:46Project representation was the first key
12:48second key is p left office third key is
12:51the crime scene DNA evidence um which
12:53already didn't match me it was put in
12:55the data bank and it matched the actual
12:56perpetrator whose DNA was there because
12:58as we mentioned he killed a second
13:00victim 3 and A2 years later so it
13:02matched him and confronted with that
13:04evidence he admitted that he committed
13:05the crime and he also admitted to a
13:08reporter on video camera so to be clear
13:10no false confession there now while this
13:13process is going on did there come a
13:16time and I know you had to have
13:18obviously your down moments that you
13:20gave up where you figured I'm never
13:22getting out of here not not within that
13:23uh you still served an awful long time
13:26but did you think you were going to be
13:27there for a long long time
13:29along the way I did not I thought I just
13:31had to hold on for a year or two until
13:34the next proceeding I kind of lived from
13:35appeal to appeal which I was sure I was
13:37going to win the next one because I was
13:38innocent and I believed in the system I
13:40really struggled with not giving up in
13:42my last year because I had lost the the
13:46I had lost the you know the seven
13:47challenges I got turned I got wrote
13:49letters for four years rarely got
13:51responses other than the occasional no I
13:53went to the parole board they slammed
13:54the door shut as well by denying me and
13:57I thought that at that point I I really
14:00struggled in that last year I thought I
14:01was gonna die I thought I was going to
14:03die in prison now we had talked a little
14:06bit before the show started about a
14:08Brady
14:09violation which is a Brady Brady VI
14:11Brady is the DA has a legal obligation
14:14to turn over anything that could be
14:16considered exculpatory in other words
14:18tending to clear the defendant or could
14:20be used for impeachment uh for
14:23cross-examination purposes and often
14:26it's very common that there are
14:27violations of this BR material in your
14:30case how did that affect you I learned
14:33about the Brady violations in the in the
14:36course of pursuing compensation so I
14:38learned for example that the uh medical
14:41examiner had been complained of in
14:44neighboring counties by law enforcement
14:46he was Moonlighting as a defense expert
14:47so he was working on helping people get
14:50away with crimes still a conflict of
14:52interest there a little here you think
14:54yeah but could you could you imagine
14:55giving false testimony getting
14:57complaints about it but then not turning
14:59that over so that certainly was a was a
15:02huge uh was a huge issue but we never
15:03learned that until uh Discovery in the
15:06lawsuits ironically and this ties into
15:08one of the legislative reforms myself
15:10and my colleagues we helped to pass uh
15:13group that could happen to you state
15:14white Coalition was Discovery reform so
15:17my argument was that I had more
15:20Discovery rights as a plaintiff pursuing
15:22a lawsuit than I did as a as a defendant
15:25defending myself against the false
15:27charges we use that argument
15:28rhetorically to to help Usher in um
15:31Discovery reform well my old co-host
15:33fact Frank was on a few weeks ago that
15:35happened now his he didn't you know
15:37wasn't there for murder or anything like
15:39that as serious as yours but we didn't
15:41get a lot of information he and then me
15:44until the civil case because then the
15:47criminal case is over they're not is
15:49guarded like I said some clerk is making
15:51a copy of the file gets it to you and
15:54then your attorney wait a minute we
15:55never saw this the first time around but
15:58when you were were exonerated was
15:59because they had the database that
16:01didn't exist in 1990 were that no it did
16:04not no the the DN technology at that
16:06point was rflp and that allowed law
16:10enforcement to compare DNA from a crime
16:12scene to a particular suspect knowing no
16:15no database that's no yeah that's the
16:16yeah the yeah exactly there was no
16:18database and the database was filled of
16:20DNA profiles of people had previously
16:22been convicted of violent crimes and who
16:24currently were convicted of violent
16:26crimes now along the away when did you
16:31think about when did you toy with the
16:33idea of becoming an attorney yeah so
16:35first you're just saving you're trying
16:36to save your butt right exactly when did
16:38you think about if I get out of here I
16:39want to be a lawyer that was in my that
16:42was in my uh 14th year of uh of
16:44imprisonment and I was I remember just
16:46sitting there right in front of my cell
16:48bars and just um feeling very frustrated
16:51about everything and I you I just kind
16:53of wistfully said to myself you know if
16:56I if I get out of here you know I'm
16:58going to going to become a defense
16:59attorney and I'm going to help exonerate
17:00other people in the same position as me
17:03but honestly it was kind of a whistful
17:04thinking it was almost kind of like uh
17:06if you metaphorically are walking in a
17:10graveyard at midnight and you start
17:12whistling right whistling that type of
17:14uh that it was that type of thing didn't
17:16seem it was that uh realistic at that
17:18point but yeah that's a great thought
17:20Jee it's never going to happen you know
17:21you very well may never get out of you
17:23the way this but it's something to keep
17:24you going it is and and something to
17:26strive for because again you know you're
17:28an innocent guy yes so you got to
17:30believe at some point look there's a God
17:32up there I didn't do it somehow someway
17:36it's going to be shown and I'm getting
17:38out of here you always hold on to that
17:40hope yes that was and I want to share
17:42that um at some point after about five
17:44years after I was exonerated I was um uh
17:47financially compensated I wanted to take
17:49the individual advocacy work that I had
17:51done uh speaking writing right uh
17:55meeting with elected officials uh uh
17:57doing me media interviews doing all that
18:00for about 5 years as a as an individual
18:02Advocate but when I was finally
18:03compensated I used some of the funds to
18:05start Jeffrey desic foundation for
18:07justice and we got the results that you
18:09mentioned but I what I the point where
18:10I'm going is that at some point I became
18:16tired of sitting in the front row of the
18:18courtroom right I wanted to be able to
18:20sit at the defense table and represent
18:23some of the clients make some of the
18:24arguments so uh had my first success
18:27overturning a conviction as a lawyer uh
18:30this past December serving as uh
18:31co-counsel to fellow long Islander uh
18:34Oscar Michelin um who's Advisory Board
18:36member of the foundation we overturned
18:38uh Andre Brown's uh wrongful conviction
18:41who had been in for 23 years and couple
18:44of weeks before Christmas so he was able
18:46to spend that with his uh with his wife
18:48and his kids now how was your foundation
18:51obviously you were successful but why
18:55wasn't that individual successful in his
18:58effort efforts prior to your entity
19:00getting involved what did you do that
19:02made the difference your
19:04entity well we so first of all Oscar had
19:07been with Andre for four years before
19:10before before we entered so we entered
19:11the case in the last year and a half of
19:13its um pendency during um efforts to to
19:17over because so Oscar so Oscar spent
19:19like five and a half years with Andre um
19:21four of which were without me and the
19:23last year and a half with me so I I
19:25think the difference is that well we
19:27will was as far as what we added uh so I
19:30was able to draft some legal documents
19:32uh so uh I remember once when Oscar had
19:34a timing conflict and he couldn't file a
19:37response at the same time as he had
19:38another obligation on a different case
19:40so I said listen let me let me draft
19:42this and you you look at it and then you
19:44know 8 about 85% of what I wrote made
19:46the cut of what he ultimately submitted
19:50uh to the court but I also assisted in
19:52the in the evidentiary hearing we got
19:54that and uh certainly the uh uh media
19:58aspect of it we we did we did some press
20:00conferences and some media we we we
20:02packed the court and the documents that
20:04I didn't draft that that he drafted uh
20:06you know he really didn't have an ego
20:07and this is like a man that's like
20:09exonerated like nine people you could
20:10you you know he could have an ego look
20:12just sit back and learn but instead he
20:14allowed me to review everything he was
20:16doing and I made a bunch of suggestions
20:18for improvements which which most of
20:21which he another set of eyes and uh
20:24certainly bringing you know stuff from
20:25the Innocence policy World in as as well
20:28and a lot of that uh improved the
20:30improved the uh briefness now in that
20:32particular case what made the I know we
20:35were talking a little bit about you guys
20:36brought to the table but what piece of
20:39evidence or or pieces of evidence
20:41cleared that man yeah it was several
20:44pieces of evidence so first of all uh we
20:47found we found the alternative suspect
20:49okay who was a spitting image of Andre
20:51that person was so there was ID
20:53identification in that case what's that
20:55there was ID identific it was
20:56identification yes it was yes it was an
20:58identification very unreliable very
21:00unreliable so here's the rundown we
21:03found an alternative suspect who was a
21:04spitting image of Andre uh second of all
21:07um that individual was ided by two other
21:10people whose names already appeared in
21:12the record so they didn't surface at the
21:1411th Hour their names were in the record
21:16before but the trial attorney had not
21:19been able to find them then that was
21:21corroborated by ballistics evidence and
21:23here's the kicker Phil is that uh
21:26Andre's trial attorney never presented
21:29uh me crucial medical evidence Andre had
21:32been shot in a year before in an
21:35unrelated incident and it had surgery so
21:38he was unable to run so the actual
21:41perpetrator descended was brought out it
21:43was not brought out a trial but it was
21:45mentioned in the record so Andre had
21:47started out with one attorney and that
21:48attorney alerted the court that that was
21:50going to be what the defense was and yet
21:53this other lawyer never presented in
21:55fact it was the it was the only uh uh uh
21:58Thomas uh Thomas Lee is his name the the
22:00defense lawyer was the only lawyer as
22:03far as we know in US history to have
22:05entered the witness protection program
22:07as a result of being in-house uh counsil
22:10for the bonano crime family so he had
22:12his own legal difficulties at that point
22:14uh so every one of those things was was
22:17the was the was the part of the evidence
22:19that our 440 motion uh was based on but
22:23despite the conviction being overturned
22:25and Andre being released on Ro the uh
22:28Bronx DA's office is still appealing
22:30that decision yeah I mean look if you
22:33can't run we not only found medical the
22:35medical evidence but we got we located
22:37uh the actual surgeon who did The Who
22:40did who did the procedure and he said he
22:42he had drop foot there's no way he could
22:45have pushed off to run so the actual
22:47perpetrator descended a bronx Subway ran
22:50about about four blocks faster than the
22:53the two victims a double attempted
22:55murder caught up to one shot one turned
22:58and ran down another approximately four
23:00or five blocks and shot a second person
23:03why you know it it's unfathomable to me
23:06that the the attorney and what you're
23:08saying is so obvious that he couldn't
23:10have done it correct was it incompetence
23:14what caused the attorney not to
23:16introduce that evidence I I think he was
23:19just distracted by his his own legal
23:22problems which you know which obviously
23:24hadn't been disclosed by but even so and
23:27and by the way one of the uh one of the
23:29I want to mention the IDS we talked
23:31about that so there was two people
23:33misidentified Andre so one person uh
23:36claimed to have saw uh the victim and
23:40Andre Pass Run by while she was in the
23:43car but the problem with her story is
23:45that the street that she said it
23:47happened on is not the street where the
23:48crime happened on she claimed to have
23:50been City SED us behind a red light in
23:54her car and there actually is no light
23:56there there's a stop sign but no light
23:59uh and then and it's like a brief couple
24:01of seconds so that's the problem with
24:02the first ID and the other ID is the
24:05second victim claims that as he's
24:07running and he got shot which um that
24:11had the impact of severing his spinal
24:13cord so he claims that as he got shot as
24:15he's falling he was able to turn his
24:17head and glance back for a couple
24:19seconds and that that's the one guy was
24:22killed one guy was injured no there was
24:24no neither one was killed oh okay there
24:26was two attemp severely injured dou
24:28attempted murder attempted
24:30murders now when you you said 13 people
24:33were exonerated because of your 13
24:35people that were freed but let me get
24:36into the numbers so four four of them
24:38are exonerations the other one the fifth
24:41one um Andre we don't count as an
24:43exoneration because the appeal is still
24:44pending pending okay now the other
24:46people um so if any of our clients um
24:49come up for parole in the once we there
24:52once we're working on their case we try
24:53to get them out on parole so they can be
24:55uh free I'll be it on the supervision
24:58while we're working on exonerating them
25:00uh so uh uh four but we were able to get
25:03uh five people on parole we sent a
25:05letter to the parole board outlining our
25:07primary and secondary reasons why we
25:09believe they're innocent um another
25:11another person uh was going to an
25:14evidentiary hearing the hearing had been
25:17awarded and uh the Pennsylvanian
25:19attorney general said look you could
25:20fight this out if you want uh maybe
25:22you'll win you know but we won once but
25:25or you can go home you can go home a
25:27couple days now do you want to but you
25:28got to take an out uh an Alfred play
25:31excuse me noo Contender not an Alfred no
25:33cont you don't have in New York which we
25:35don't have right California has it this
25:37is a PA yeah this is a PA case so that's
25:39another person got home that way so we
25:41were one of the five entities that could
25:43collaborate on that case and lastly um
25:46the last person um we we were uh
25:49actually working on the uh we were
25:51trying to get DNA testing um actually
25:54here was a long long island case but uh
25:56he had been determined to be terminally
25:58ill and so the fact that we were working
26:00on the case reinvestigating it we
26:02incorporated that into the compassionate
26:05release application and so that resulted
26:07in him being released a question did noo
26:09Contender plea in Pennsylvania yes did
26:13that prevent him from suing of course
26:16that's what I'm that's what I figured
26:18yes so that's their way of protecting
26:20the the taxpayers in a sense because he
26:22can't he yeah I'm getting out right and
26:25it's not even like he's he's in a sense
26:27convicted of anything anything because
26:28it's well well well he is still
26:29convicted of something because because
26:31uh the conviction remains intact you
26:33have a criminal record and just to
26:35quickly mention I mean that was a Brady
26:37violation that was being litigated so
26:39first of all uh and by the way the
26:40defendant's name in that case was uh
26:42Lorenzo Johnson um so the newly newly
26:46discovered of the Brady violations and
26:47newly discovered evidence uh in that
26:49case um was that the
26:52sole ear witness not to be confused with
26:55an
26:56eyewitness um was an alternative suspect
27:00and that had never been disclosed the
27:02motive witness clearly clearly the mod
27:06of witness had a quasi familial
27:09relationship with the uh lead
27:11detective's uh mother that had been
27:13never been disclosed and then there was
27:16um uh several hundred uh pages of
27:20documents that were supposed to have uh
27:21been turned over so we feel like he
27:24would have won won that we would have
27:26won side time was not on his side it was
27:29a five-way collaboration we were on the
27:31invest primarily the um Public Relation
27:33but we did some investigative work but
27:35the other entities the doing the
27:37lawyering of it were located in
27:40Pennsylvania and we we told him to keep
27:42going and clear your name and everyone
27:45else told him take the deal and you know
27:47he wanted to also get back home to his
27:50elderly mother who wound up passing away
27:53not you know not not that long after
27:55that so he did get to spend some time
27:58uh with her that he that you know that
27:59he might not have gotten but the other
28:00detail I wanted to mention which went
28:02into Lorenzo's decision is he originally
28:06did 16 and a half years before a habus
28:09corpus petition was granted right on
28:11legally insufficient evidence grounds
28:14which is can amount to a not guilty
28:16verdict um but but that that was from
28:18the third the third circuit court of
28:20appeals but the Pennsylvania Attorney
28:22General's office appealed that decision
28:25to the US Supreme Court and they
28:27reinstated ated the conviction after
28:28four months the US Supreme Court did yes
28:31they granted certain and reinstated the
28:33conviction all all at once I mean
28:35they'll never do that for a defendant
28:36give a rever but anyway that resulted in
28:39him having to return back to prison to
28:42resume a life without per sentence
28:44because that's what it is uh there and
28:46he stayed there for five years I mean
28:48now we had a great investigative plan we
28:50collaboratively all put together and we
28:52just started hitting wall after wall
28:54after wall after wall it looked really
28:55Grim at one point but But ultimately um
28:58the end of five years he W up coming
29:00coming home other evidence was found we
29:01were going to the hearing and uh then
29:04you know sure now when your foundation
29:07gets a case do you find that you usually
29:09team up with an attorney that's been
29:11with the guy for or the woman depending
29:12on been with the person for a
29:16while not usually usually the team up is
29:19with a new attorney that a new attorney
29:21a new attorney yes not the trial
29:23attorney definitely not the trial
29:24attorney and not the not typically not
29:27the pellet attorney either their
29:28appointments only last for the uh for
29:30the state appeals the direct appeal and
29:32the and the leave app to the court of
29:34appeals and litigating the court of
29:35appeals if you get in uh but it uh we
29:38either we usually team up with either a
29:40lawyer that's with someone already not
29:42not for the appeals but who came aboard
29:45uh so either then but the more or the
29:47other uh way it could happen and this
29:49happens a little bit more frequently is
29:51uh we reach out and we partner with
29:54lawyers also right okay now now how does
29:58a case come to your foundation we get a
30:00letter someone writes you yes s snail
30:03mail although occasionally someone in
30:06jail or a family member uh well if
30:08someone in prison writes the letter uh
30:10but occasionally we do get uh an email
30:12or even an inquiry through social media
30:14and that's done by um family members or
30:17uh friends or Advocates that are on the
30:19outside and then what is the process
30:22that you because obviously not everybody
30:24is innocent correct so how do you assess
30:26you don't waste your time right when you
30:29have limited resources correct so what
30:30do you do we we vet and Screen the case
30:33I'll walk you through the process really
30:34quickly so uh I guess at the bottom line
30:37of it is we ask ourselves two questions
30:39do we believe the Innocence claim and is
30:41that based on something objective and
30:43that involves us taking into account
30:45what was used as evidence to convict um
30:48we know what the uh a lot of the red
30:49flags are based on DNA exoneration so we
30:52know what red flags are that an ID might
30:54be mistaken a confession false informant
30:57line so do we believe the Innocence
30:58claim do we see a potential route to
31:00exoneration you know the legal standard
31:02is you know would this new evidence
31:04probably have resulted in a different
31:07outcome so that's what you do that's
31:09what we do and some cases you tell the
31:11person sorry we can't help you yes yeah
31:14we we we we reject far more than we
31:17accept so then you accept then what do
31:19you do all right so we said meets the
31:21standard now what actual work on the
31:24case is going to begin so in the the
31:27assessment process as I mentioned is the
31:29viability of exoneration so now we're
31:31actually going to hit the field so uh we
31:33look for things like alternative
31:35suspects look for similar crimes in
31:37nearby areas file a foil request that
31:39might there might be document but
31:41another thing also is any other new
31:43witnesses that have bubbled to the
31:44surface not previously available do we
31:46rein Witnesses who we think were not
31:49truthful the first time around and also
31:52if uh if the presence of a character
31:55whose uh misconduct has bubbled to the
31:56surface surface in an unrelated case so
31:58those are all we start playing those
32:00investigative lines and you start
32:02pulling on the yarn you see what else
32:04happens and that's all in a non DNA case
32:06sure but in a DNA case it's more it's
32:08much more straightforward you know is
32:10there something that could be subjected
32:12to DNA testing is there hair spit saliva
32:15blood uh is there a clothing item that
32:17has been sweated into and then we would
32:20just at that point it's just get the get
32:22the item uh tested okay and who is on
32:26your staff
32:27yes so we have a I have a part-time
32:30office administrator she's like doing
32:32the back end back end of it so she
32:34supervises our our interns and our
32:37volunteers another long Islander
32:38actually uh Charlene gett uh so she
32:41deals with the correspondent sending the
32:43application out and then also her and
32:45the interns they're collecting the
32:47documents so that there is something to
32:49analyze that's then sent out we have
32:51three volunteer case an lists that are
32:54that are off site so the completed file
32:56is sent out they read the underlying
32:57materials they fill out uh forms which
33:01allows which I then read for me to wrap
33:03my head around the case without having
33:04to read the original underlying material
33:07and then we then we uh once and then I
33:09suggest different inquiries I've read
33:11several hundred cases that have ended in
33:13exoneration so I know the routes that
33:14people have taken so I say well what
33:16common themes common themes so I run the
33:18common themes out to the case analy and
33:22they let me know does that applicable to
33:23that case as something to look into or
33:25not and after doing that to three times
33:27eventually we've turned over all the
33:28rocks and now we know all we can and now
33:31we make a critical discussion do we
33:33going to approve the case or are we not
33:34and we decide things by consensus so if
33:37we're going to close we have to cons we
33:39have to be in consensus we're going to
33:41approve has to be in in uh consensus so
33:44that's my way of guarding against us
33:46accepting a case that where someone is
33:48not innocent and or there's no way to
33:50win like a jury unanimous yes yeah there
33:53we go absolutely you got it now where do
33:55you get the volunteers they law students
33:57college students what are they uh the
33:59the interns are college students so some
34:02are law students but more often they're
34:03uh they're in undergrad uh the uh the
34:06case analysts are volunteers so two of
34:08them uh came from Centurion Ministries
34:11so that's the country's oldest innocence
34:13entity so they were doing case analysis
34:15then another person was a uh book author
34:18was and is a book author was several
34:20books on wrongful convictions and print
34:22one of them was called framed by Google
34:23Maps uh and once it's approved that then
34:26uh of my board members is an
34:28investigator um so he does some
34:30investigative work but we also uh
34:31partner with outside uh outside
34:33attorneys they're all looking for a uh a
34:35good case meaning uh where someone's
34:37innocent there's a way to win and
34:39there's a possibility of civil
34:40litigation after the fact and that's
34:42where they would make the the financial
34:44part of that do you find that it's
34:45easier with a high-profile case where
34:49people have heard about it than in a
34:51case that's not high-profile yes I find
34:54people come out of the Woodworks you
34:55might get a like like with the o J case
34:57those attorneys so much fell into their
34:58lap yeah that's true that's true yeah I
35:01do find that it's uh I do find it's a
35:03little bit better that it is better with
35:04a high-profile case uh you know we were
35:08talking uh um offline uh earlier uh we
35:12talked about Long Island's Marty
35:13tankleff case and you on my show as well
35:16yeah sure but uh the uh setting up of
35:18the tip line the publicity that Lonnie
35:20Sor from Sor Communications the pr firm
35:22was able to do and that led to a lot of
35:24tips coming in which were UL ran down by
35:27the by Marty's uh investigator and that
35:29is actually what formed the body of
35:31evidence that went into Marty's 440 so
35:33that's an example of how read that 440
35:36motion very interesting now what about
35:39the media what role we were talking
35:40about high-profile obviously mean the
35:42media but how how has your relationship
35:45been with the media on these kinds of
35:49cases it's been it's been good uh so
35:51firstly the media crucified me when I
35:54was a defendant okay it was lot of
35:56prejudicial pre
35:57trial uh publicly with virtually all the
36:00Articles a from a guilt presumptive
36:03oriented perspective uh but the media
36:05has been great to meet since then and
36:08look at my my my name and look having a
36:11having a master's degree and with my
36:13thesis on wrongful conviction cause and
36:14reform being a lawyer being you know
36:16having had the successes you know both
36:19uh I have a reputation I have
36:21credibility you know and so I think that
36:24that comes into play when I seek out uh
36:26media attention but I also have plenty
36:27of facts on the case I mean you know in
36:29terms of even forming my own opinion I
36:31don't do that lightly I have a ton of
36:33primary and secondary things that I go
36:35into so I I'm able to Marshal and be
36:38really concise in laying things out and
36:40that's all part of the pitch to to the
36:43media now these men is it any females
36:48yeah there is there is one female um so
36:50I have a high-profile client you might
36:52have heard of before uh Carolyn wmas oh
36:55yes from yes from the So-Cal called FAL
36:57attraction case in Westchester so we you
36:59know in the process of finishing up DNA
37:01testing a diet doctor was that the uh no
37:04no no no the scars diet that's py Jee
37:06Harris okay yeah yeah so that yeah this
37:09was a a different case but that also
37:10high-profile in Wester yeah so she's a
37:13she's a client and you know we uh were
37:15able to secure DNA uh test that was a
37:17case where my entering the case got her
37:19the testing because uh her prior
37:22attorney um another long Islander this
37:25Long Island Thief continuing uh Dennis
37:27Kelly who the foundation brought into
37:29the C we screened the case and then we
37:30pitched it to him and he he took he took
37:32the case and then when I got my law
37:34license he reached back around and said
37:35look we'd like you to reenter this case
37:38but as an attorney so the they had uh
37:41the Wester Westchester County DA's
37:43office had opposed DNA testing and that
37:46was the subject of an appeal and um uh
37:49the why they what were they
37:51opposing yeah I their opposition really
37:54didn't make any sense but they were they
37:56were opposing it and so the uh it was
38:00the night before the case was going to
38:02be orally argued in in the morning by
38:03Denis at at the Appel Division and we
38:06you know we we got word but I had
38:07reached out to the DA you know because I
38:09had supported her as as a candidate and
38:12you know she ran on a Justice Reform run
38:14for conviction prevention and correction
38:16plank you know which had an item in it
38:18that you were going to not fight the na
38:20testing you you know so and I reached
38:23out to her and then you know the the
38:24night before the appeal really really
38:26late at night she sent word that they
38:28were dropping the opposition they were
38:29consenting to that but I don't but I'm
38:31giving that as an example I I think if I
38:33was not in that case that that would not
38:35have happened I see they would have
38:37continued so there's an example of the
38:39high profile do you find that again
38:43you're on the defense side obviously
38:45that it almost seems like the
38:47prosecutor no matter what you want you
38:49say up they say down you say left they
38:51say right is it their job or do you find
38:55that no matter what you're trying to do
38:57you're trying to find to exonerate this
38:59person do you find that their positions
39:03sometimes fly in the face of either
39:05logic or getting at the truth yeah
39:08sometimes well certainly in the Andre
39:10Brown case like I referenced before that
39:12made no sense that we had to litigate
39:14that case it makes no sense that there
39:16an appeal going on considering that
39:17wealth of evidence that I that I
39:19referenced uh so that there has been
39:21some there has been some of that yeah
39:22but at the same time though um my
39:25Foundation we
39:27we like to try to we if a if a district
39:29attorney's office has a conviction
39:31review unit which is uh supposed to be
39:34an independent unit within the DA's
39:35office right so we like we like to try
39:38to reinvestigate cases with the District
39:41Attorney's office so we fill out an
39:42application and we outline why we
39:44believe the client's innocent and they
39:46want to and of course they want to know
39:48what what how can we how can we uh
39:50verify this innocence claim what are the
39:52lines of Investigation you know so we
39:55like to go that route and and and so
39:57with those uh with those units we we
39:59found that there I found so far for them
40:02to be to be to be openmed I mean I have
40:05I have about uh six cases right now in
40:07different jurisdictions where I'm
40:09co-counsel where we're proactively
40:11investigating the the case with the
40:13District Attorney's office but I don't I
40:15I know at some point in in you know I'm
40:18it's just a matter of time before uh one
40:21officer or another you know just refuses
40:23to reinvestigate or they start with
40:25something that doesn't really make any
40:27sense logically I know at some point
40:29it'll happen I haven't haven't had that
40:30happen yet again I think that I think
40:33that my having the body of work and
40:35being high-profile and having been
40:37exonerated I think that you're right
40:39they don't but I think that that's an X
40:41Factor that works for my but they know
40:43I'm not going to represent some I'm not
40:46I'm not a defense I am but I'm there for
40:49innocence I I'm not there to cause
40:53reasonable I'm not a Hired Gun I'm not
40:55uh there to create Reasonable Doubt I'm
40:58there because I think the guy the Lady
41:00or the guy is innocent and I'm trying to
41:02prove that I think that's a big
41:04difference between myself and just and
41:06and these offices these DA's officers
41:09are aware of your vetting process
41:12they're aware of it's not just somebody
41:13I got paid a lot of money and I'm going
41:15to bring this case right no they're
41:17they're aware of the vetting process and
41:19and they know who I am I'm a very vocal
41:21uh Advocate we talked about the policy
41:23stuff before so you know I do media all
41:25the time and I've you know I'm involved
41:27in working policy changes I mean the
41:29from U videotaping interrogations
41:31identification reform DNA database
41:33expansion uh Commission on prosecuted
41:36conduct Discovery reform I was very the
41:38found my Foundation through through my
41:40work uh partnered with many other
41:43organizations and Advocates you I've
41:45been rather vocal on all of these uh
41:47different so I do a lot of media and I
41:49do a lot of New Media you know and you
41:52know so they know they know who I am and
41:53they know that I'm you know they know
41:55I'm an advocate I'm not just an Exon you
41:57know I'm that's my backstory that's what
42:00motivates meet but yeah there we go they
42:03put in the vacular put it in the vacular
42:05but what off like it's great if an
42:08office has a bureau that let's say looks
42:10at those kinds of things because you
42:12think it would make more sense for you
42:13to deal with that Bureau than any than
42:16any other entity within that office yeah
42:18of course but what offices let's say
42:20don't have that in the tri-state area or
42:24do they all have it now no they all no
42:25they all don't have it now so so no so
42:28we have the you know the five burrows
42:30have it um uh West Chester County has it
42:33uh Nassau and suff do but as you start
42:35to go P like puam County doesn't new
42:37creature in suff County they didn't have
42:38that years ago right yeah well well I
42:41mean the da was uh corrupt and went to
42:43pres Ray TIY started it da TIY but
42:47that's a that's a good thing to have
42:48because again you want to get at the
42:50truth M and if the wrong guy is in jail
42:53I remember when I had Marty on my show
42:55he said said something I still remember
42:57to this day he said you know when you
42:59you read the paper and it says we
43:02arrested soand so for the murder of this
43:05and people oh thank God he says no you
43:07got to ask yourself the next question
43:08did they get the right guy they made an
43:11arrest but if it's not the right guy
43:15it's worse than if they didn't make the
43:16arrest at all of course because now they
43:18stop looking because now they start
43:20looking and just to finish off by uh
43:22answer a question too A lot of the
43:24counties Upstate you know from from
43:26putam and and going forward a lot of the
43:29a lot of them they don't don't a lot of
43:30them don't have a unit no okay and
43:33another thing too just really quickly um
43:35some telltale signs that a unit is real
43:38rather than because sham unit across the
43:39country sham units ex sure I could
43:41imagine okay so Telltale side so first
43:43of all it's supposed to be led by from
43:45someone by someone from the defense
43:47World okay it's supposed to be
43:49independent walled off from the rest of
43:50the unit the uh the head of the
43:53conviction review unit is supposed to
43:54have direct access to the to the to the
43:56DA without uh bureaucracy in between and
43:59it's supposed to have known employees
44:02you know with a budget it's supposed to
44:04be staffed and with a but not not this
44:06well we in reinvestigate as needed and
44:08it should be transparency it should be
44:10transparency right but also that is your
44:12job you're not juggling you're not
44:14you're not managing sex crimes or
44:16Prosecuting homicides or doing yeah
44:18doing on the side so those are all
44:20telltale signs of of of a fulltime
44:22responsibility to look at those right
44:24those cases sure and of course you know
44:26we the you know how they deal with
44:28well-known innocence claims the evidence
44:31of which is wellknown looking at how
44:33they deal with those cases also is a
44:35sign of uh sance for example when the
44:38Manhattan da had a sham unit you know
44:40which you know rejected many claims that
44:42you know ultimately were one in court
44:45was like providing cover yeah we got
44:46that Bureau but has it improved yeah it
44:50has yes it has so uh da uh brag recent
44:54his office exonerated um Step Lopez a uh
44:57a six Central Park 5 defendant and and
45:00uh I we have a the foundation has a case
45:02that we're proactively reviewing with
45:04that unit now we're about to start
45:06hitting uh start about to start doing
45:09Street in supp we're ready to start
45:12doing field
45:13interviews I think one of those young
45:15men is running for office now well he
45:18got elected that would be that would be
45:20youf yeah that would be Yousef Salam so
45:22just recently just recently he had the
45:24election yes um won he he he won it's uh
45:27it's incredible I mean he can't say
45:29enough about Yousef to to bounce back
45:31from from that happen he did five years
45:33uh in prisons but to bounce back from
45:35that being 15 and wrongfully convicted
45:38of such a heinous crime and to go from
45:41that to now uh you know being a New York
45:43city councilman elect uh broke that
45:46ceiling for the first person nationally
45:48to do that uh come from being being an
45:51Exon and I I was at his election night
45:54party and so and he uh uh came in the
45:57the the venue about a half hour before
45:59you know the official
46:01word CA came in so he speaks for about
46:04five minutes and he then stops I mean
46:08it's his moment he you know but he
46:10stopped he recognized me there verbally
46:14called me up handed the microphone it
46:17was such a gracious unselfish wonderful
46:21thing and you know I'm really excited
46:24because now we have Ally within the New
46:26York City Council and you know he has a
46:29commitment to fighting wrongful
46:31conviction I mean certainly as a council
46:33person you can introduce resolutions
46:35calling on the legislature to pass
46:37various measures um aimed at preventing
46:39wrongful conviction and you know he's
46:41vowed to walk the halls of Albany with
46:43us at certain key moments uh and he's
46:45got street cred because he's got Street
46:47what he went through yes yes he did and
46:50you know I and I want to make a
46:51political statement right now um you
46:53know I want to again
46:56call on Governor hokel to sign the
47:00challenging wrongful convictions act it
47:02was passed
47:03legislatively and uh she has not as yet
47:06signed it there's been total radio
47:08silence on her part so in in brief uh
47:11Phil what that critical piece of
47:13legislation uh would do it would provide
47:17um Council for Indigent defendants imp
47:20postc conviction motions currently there
47:22is no right to that like I shouldn't
47:24have had to write letters for four years
47:26trying to find an attorney to take my
47:28case pro bono okay uh so the council and
47:32the second thing is under bad case law
47:36uh under uh people versus tiger if a
47:38defendant has say if you're um you plead
47:41guilty right you have terrible public
47:44defender or terrible lawyer in general
47:45whether public or not they they don't do
47:47any investigation you know that you know
47:50you can see which way this thing is
47:51going they're telling you to plead
47:53guilty and and you and you take the pl
47:55you do and then subsequent to that you
47:57get a good attorney and you get uh get
48:00get an investigator and they find some
48:02evidence of Innocence uh by that
48:04decision in people versus tiger the
48:06court will not consider that evidence
48:08you're barred from arguing actual
48:10innocence you are barred you cannot
48:11argue uh newly discovered evidence your
48:14lawyer would be relegated uh to Simply
48:17arguing that that evidence demonstrates
48:20inadequate pre-trial investigation and
48:22therefore it's a basis for in you made
48:26right as opposed to being found guilty
48:28after trial correct but this law all
48:31we're saying is that the court should
48:33consider the evidence okay and that that
48:36the third thing and then I I we move on
48:37to another uh question the third thing
48:39is that anybody who's been convicted of
48:42of a crime that subsequently uh becomes
48:45legal like the you know goes from
48:47illegal so a gravity knife right okay
48:50you would be allowed to go back to court
48:52and remove that from your record so the
48:53collateral effects of that conviction
48:55and there's some post conviction
48:57Discovery built in marijana had a lot of
48:59those yeah exactly so that would be
49:01another example so we want the governor
49:03to sign this bill why do you think she's
49:06reluctant to sign because there's been a
49:09lot of push back on on Discovery and on
49:12bail um a lot of that a lot of that is
49:14from the law enforcement Community I
49:17think that a lot of it is fearmongering
49:18so New Jersey for example just uh cross
49:21Hudson River um they have uh they have
49:23open they have they have automatic
49:25Discovery and bodies aren't floating up
49:27and down the Hudson River you know so I
49:30think that the the the fear-mongering is
49:33not an accurate thing but she's got a
49:34lot of blowback from from those things
49:37and I think that that's what's causing
49:39her to hesitate to sign this piece it's
49:42interesting because two Democrat
49:43legislator Democrat controlled
49:45legislative bodies passed it they did
49:48and she's a Democrat yes she is so You'
49:50think that she would uh see
49:53it it's worth and sign off
49:56uh you you certainly would think that
49:57but you know but one key point also you
49:59know and and and I've said this publicly
50:01a number of times and I want I'd like to
50:02repeat here now you know um wrongful
50:06conviction is a is is a human rights
50:08issue okay it's not it's not a
50:09democratic issue uh although a lot of
50:12Democrats are for measures it's not a
50:14republican issue it's a human rights
50:16issue and and uh all political
50:18differences in ideologies I think you
50:21know could be put aside and we should
50:23all be able to agree no matter what your
50:24political out look is he even
50:26independent not even one of the two
50:28parties we should all agree that uh
50:31innocent people being arrested
50:33wrongfully convicted and then remaining
50:35wrongfully in prison is a horrible thing
50:37we should all be United against that
50:39absolutely we should all want to have
50:42measures passed to make the system more
50:44accurate to prevent and correct those
50:46Injustice right now you were saying
50:47about politics I I'm a conservative guy
50:51I'm a former prosecutor sure uh now a
50:54defense attorney and it shouldn't be
50:57like you said a Republican or a Democrat
50:59or independent issue you should want the
51:02truth yes and I would not want innocent
51:06person sitting in a jail cell because
51:10it's bad for that person it's also bad
51:12for society because it could happen to
51:14anybody yes it could happen to you right
51:16you weren't some bad guy running around
51:18the streets you were just some young kid
51:2116 years old who got caught up in it and
51:24it profoundly now I bet those 13 13
51:27people are probably you know kind of
51:30happy that uh you know you took that
51:32path because had you not right they
51:35probably would still still be in jail
51:38that is true I do think about the irony
51:40of that but I do make sense of my life
51:42heavy burden for you it is a heavy it is
51:44a heavy burden I mean I do feel a big
51:47responsibility to them and you know you
51:50have your limitations as well in terms
51:52of you know we're at we're at our level
51:54now we're at our our Peak like we we've
51:56got 13 Active cases we're working on now
51:58we have another five that are uh
52:00approved but waiting so it's it's hard
52:03to like wait on the you know have a
52:06waiting list but if you don't have the
52:08resources and you know and myself and my
52:10team were at our the limit you don't
52:12have it so that is that is uh difficult
52:14it's funny I remember remember the
52:16Menendez trial yeah years I do actually
52:18Leslie Abrams that uh lady with the the
52:21big hair yeah she had that uh the blonde
52:23blonde and she was asked a question
52:25question it's funny because I I wasn't
52:26an attorney back then if I if I'm not
52:29mistaken but I remember her being asked
52:31this question they said isn't it tough
52:34to represent a guilty person that was
52:37the question and she said no it's
52:40representing an innocent person that's
52:43terrifying and I as a defense attorney
52:45that's true if I have a guilty client
52:47let's say I work at the best deal
52:49possible I work out a plea bargain I do
52:51what I have to do when you have an
52:52innocent person I was telling you about
52:54that fow that was was charged with
52:56assault stabbing somebody was a
52:58self-defense case I thought about it
53:00every night because if that guy went to
53:03trial and lost he was looking at a long
53:05jail sentence and I knew he had a valid
53:09self-defense claim so when you have it's
53:12the innocent ones that's why maybe you
53:15lose sleep some nights because you know
53:16this guy's in jail and you see it up we
53:19read about things in Newsday you're
53:21dealing with it on the street level
53:24you're seeing it yes it does it does it
53:26does keep me it does keep me up at night
53:28and just the fact that these cases take
53:30so long and there's a lot of hurry up
53:32and wait as well you do what you can on
53:34your level and file now you wait so that
53:36definitely um definitely keeps me up I
53:39think that the hardest thing for me in
53:41doing this work is there's a lot of
53:45cases
53:46where you know I'm making it's all an
53:49educated guest not a hard science okay I
53:51I believe the client is innocent there's
53:54nowhere to go with the case there is
53:55there there's nothing to do I have to
53:57say no because there's no viability of
54:00exoneration those are the most difficult
54:02even if you believe he's innocent even
54:03if you believe he's innocent there has
54:05there has to be an endgame Jeff I really
54:07want to thank you for coming on the show
54:10tonight some of these shows that I have
54:13like when I I have a comedian on or I
54:15have even a politician but this these
54:18kinds of
54:19issues I find fascinating but it's real
54:22life it's real because it affects
54:24somebody profoundly it's not just them
54:27it's their mother or it's their child
54:30right or it's one of their their
54:32relatives and people like you you just
54:35doing amazing work and um I can't I
54:39can't thank you enough for coming on the
54:40show I I wish you could go a little bit
54:42longer but we're running out of time and
54:43very quickly how can they help you
54:45bottom line is that it's unfortunately
54:47expensive to work on Fring people so if
54:50you have the means or if you're work for
54:52a corporation that does corporate
54:54philanthropy if if you uh have a podcast
54:56if you're a journalist if you you if you
54:58um uh have can Network me my biggest
55:01challenge is I need to meet some people
55:03that have capacity this issue speaks to
55:05so introductions all of that uh makes a
55:08difference thank you very much Jeff you
55:10have a good night thank
55:13you look at that we did
55:16it that
55:24was
55:25justu
55:28uh okay that's fine that's
55:41fine look at all this into play oh wow
55:45yeah Michael lebit Michael lebit gave me
55:48this he's a an attorney he was my intern
55:50when I was in the DA's office he's an
55:52attorney wow good attorney nice Richard
55:55dinino Richard dinino Michael levit what
55:57did he
56:11say
56:15uhne the
56:19episode
56:2220 I'm attorney Phil just Ino and this
56:25is the Phil jino Show tonight's episode
56:27is brought to you by Big Belly's
56:29barbecue and my special guest tonight is
56:32Jeffrey desic and tonight's topic is the
56:35wrongfully
56:36convicted welcome
56:40aboard okay I didn't see all of this

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of The Phil Jusino Podcast- guest Jeffrey Deskovic of the the Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice by The Phil Jusino Show Official*, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 10,979 words across 1,481 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.