#517 Jason Flom and John Grisham with Jamie Snow

Joy is essential and it's also elusive, but now there's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence. Joy 101, it's a new podcast hosted by me, Hota Kotby. If you're craving inspiration to maximize your joy, tune into these candid uplifting and moving on air chats. Open your free iHeartRadio app search, Joy 101 and listen now. Joy 101 with Hota Kotby is presented by CVS. Happy Pride from the Outspoken Podcast Network? All month long and all year round, we're celebrating being loud, proud and always original. It's me, Brandon Calgudman. Host of the podcast, tell me something messy. Check out my show for unfiltered takes on dating, relationships and adulting. Listen to High Key for the best pop culture takes and there are no girls on the internet for all your tech news. For your favorite celebrity key keys, check out Outlaws with T.S. Madison. Learn to love yourself unapologetically with BFF, Black Fat Fem, and start your day with intention with waking up with Ryan coming in July. Celebrate Pride with the Outspoken Network. Open your free iHeartRadio app search, Pride and listen now. If you live in LA, you already spend about 89% of your life in a car. So we turned it into a podcast. On Do You Need a Ride, we pick up our comedian friends, driver on Los Angeles, and discuss what's happening in the world around us. Cars are very rude to bicyclists, but in this case it's a bicyclist, going out of his way to get in the way of traffic. All you did was roll your window down. He almost hit that. It's like a talk show, but going 30 miles an hour. New episodes every Monday on the Exactly Right Network. Listen to Do You Need a Ride on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. It was 8 p.m. on Easter Sunday, 1991. When a Bloomington Illinois gas station was held up, and the 18 year old attendant Bill Little was fatally shot. The police made a composite sketch and questioned men in town with criminal records, including 25-year-old Jamie Snow. But neither the physical evidence nor the composite sketch were a match. Anyway, they approached Jamie again two years later and he was cleared by a polygraph. Then, five years after that, almost eight years after the crime had taken place, two new detectives developed the theory involving Jamie Snow's then pregnant sister-in-law driving a getaway car. Rather than take a sweetheart deal to trade false testimony for freedom, she instead took a Sophie's choice and opted to give birth to her baby in jail. And rolled a dice on a trial that could have resulted in her spending the rest of her life in prison. All of this instead of agreeing to lie on the stand. Luckily, her attorney was able to expose the state's case for what it was, and she was acquitted while Jamie was not as fortunate. This is wrongful conviction. You're listening to wrongful conviction. You can listen to this in all the lava for good podcasts one week early and add free by subscribing to lava for good plus on Apple Podcasts. Welcome back to wrongful conviction where we've got a case out of Illinois that features numerous jailhouse niches and incentivized witnesses who are either coerced or threatened. Whose testimonies have all either since been recanted or been proven to be false. We've got police testimony that refutes the state's star witness. There was a ton of physical evidence in this case, but none of it matched the suspect. Jamie Snow, our guest today who's calling in from an Illinois correction institution where he's been for almost a quarter of a century. Welcome to wrongful conviction. I appreciate you guys giving me a voice. And joining him, one of his appellate attorneys from the Exoneration Project, Carl Leonard, welcome back. Thanks for having me. And to help us tell this story today, we have my friend, a legend in the Innocence community, sorry if I embarrass you, John. A guy who's written a few books in his life, including the most recent one, his second non-fiction book, Framed, number one on the bestseller list, which profiles numerous cases of people who were framed and who were actually innocent. John is on the board of Centering Ministries as well as the Innocence Project and without further ado, John Grishon, welcome to wrongful conviction. Happy to be a judge in this case. You've got terrible police misconduct and took them eight years to make an arrest. You've got misconduct by the prosecutors, judges who are asleep, you've got jurors who are easily convinced you've got a very innocent man who's now spent 24 years in prison. And you've got a murder that will never be solved because the cop screwed up the case. But let's go back to before this case began to Jamie's childhood in Bloomington, Illinois. Yeah, I grew up in Bloomington. I had a pretty decent childhood. Went to a Christian school, to about seventh grade. My mom and dad were divorced. They had a really good step to that. I never gave him the credit he deserved until I had already grown up and had kids of my own and then I recognized the sacrifice he had been making for me and my sister. My mom developed cancer and died by the time I was 17 and that curing me off into a dark path. I guess you know, I was acting out doing a lot of dumb shit. Teddy, Daps and stuff like that. You know, I started running around with the wrong people. I mean, I never had any vivals in my history, but I was the juvenile of the Lincoln. Despite that path, Jamie soon turned his energies toward fatherhood and had six kids with his wife, Tammy. My dad also died by the time I was 21, so I feel like I was clunked and holding holes in my heart with my kids. I had to go to rest and when I did, I'd probably had a baseball team. And speaking of a rest, Jamie nearly got dragged into a different case just before this one of February 1991, our robbery that his friend had committed while they were out together with a larger group. Everybody that was in the car the night that he did it. Nobody knew what he was doing. It was my wife's birthday, February 18, 1991. The next day I got the newspaper and I went over and I asked him, "Tell me that this wasn't you." And he was like, "Yeah, don't worry about it, you know, which you don't know won't hurt you." Obviously it didn't, it didn't hurt you. But the guy led guilty to it and testified to the grand jury that he didn't give you the money up with anyone. And this guy was also an alternate suspect for what had happened on Easter Sunday, March 31, 1991, a little after 8pm, when an 18-year-old gas station attendant named Bill Little tried to stop an arm robbery and was fatally shot. Mr. Little was killed while he was at work. It's a relatively small area behind the counter of that store. The stool that he would sit on was knocked over. There was a fair amount of blood. By all accounts, there was some sort of a scuffle here. The scene reflects that Mr. Little had previously said if someone tries to rob the store, he will fight them. And there were fingerprints that were recovered. Some of the fingerprints are Bill Little's, which one would expect. And there are unknown fingerprints that have never been identified at all. None of the fingerprints have ever been matched to Jamie. There was never any physical evidence tying Jamie to this. And with DNA testing in a more primitive state, they didn't test for multiple contributors to the crime scene blood, or DNA on the bullet casings, or Bill Little's clothes. Now, the first officers on the scene, Paul Williams and Jeff Pilo, were responding to a silent alarm. And they saw a young man in Danny Martinez filling up his tires on the east side of the gas station lot. Martinez later claimed that when he finished with his tires, he walked toward the office and saw someone backing out of the door. Then he heard two pops and turned back to his car, thinking that it backfired. And when he turned back around, he claimed that he found himself face to face with the assailant. A Bloomington police officer responded to the scene was observing the goings on at the store before entering saw Danny Martinez and saw Danny Martinez leaf and is absolutely certain that Danny Martinez never encountered anybody leaving the store. While this officer Jeff Pilo and his partner Paul Williams said as much in the tape recorded interview, more attention was paid to Martinez' statement in which he described someone wearing a zipped up wasteland coat and a ball cap, standing five foot seven. Now remember, Jamie's six won. And was also wearing a cast on his arm at the time. And none of the eyewitnesses mentioned a cast. Including a 14 year old neighbor, Carlos Luna, who lived about 200 feet down the street to the east, who had claimed to have seen the assailant leaving the scene, but strangely, he didn't see the cops or Danny Martinez. If you look at the layout of the station and where the air pump was, Carlos Luna would have to look straight through the Martinez car. Danny Martinez described seeing somebody come out of the store with his coat zipped all the way up backing out of the store like he was leaning into the door with his hands in his pocket. And Carlos Luna described someone coming out safe forward, opening the door with his left hand wearing a coat all the way down to his ankles. Just the way this person exited the building tells you that they did not see the same person. So Luna must have been looking out of his window at a different time. And then there's an alleged third eyewitness Gerardo Gutierrez who claimed that he had put three dollars worth of gas in his car. Now remember, this was 1991. He's the person who says that he had gone into the store and paid for his gas and that there was the attendant, the little and somebody else who looked shifty or something. a one inch scar on his chin. That was so fresh, you could still see the holes from the stitches. And he had a earring in his ear. And I don't have a scar on my chin or earring in my ear. Gutierrez added that the man was six foot two with shoulder length blonde or brown hair, wore a motorcycle jacket and lit up a cigarette in the office. Again, it was 1991. And he said that after paying, he went home and returned when he heard about the shooting. So it appears that all three witnesses made differing observations at what had to have been different times. Either way, they were brought into make statements. A police department sketch artist met with the three witnesses. The sketch artist said that he spoke to Luna and that there just wasn't enough information there to even make a sketch. The composite sketch was based on descriptions provided by Martinez and Gutierrez who described different heights, different coats, neither of them mentioned a cast. Martinez said there was a ball cap. Gutierrez said long hair, a fresh scar and an earring. And likely since the first responders didn't see who Martinez allegedly saw, they chose the Gutierrez composite to publicize along with a reward. And we know how that can go. Meanwhile, both were shown books of mug shots. On the night of the crime, Martinez picked out two guys. And there were people that he knew. One of them was the same guy as the Gutierrez had picked out. And what we didn't know, and we just found out when they turned over these thousands and thousands of pages of documents that they would held from us for 20 years, was that the dude that they had picked out was a suspect in an earlier robbery a month earlier at the same gas station. That was Charles Renfrow. The other guy was Steve Van Note and who knows why they were cleared. Or if either of these witnesses had seen the actual assailant. Meanwhile, a kid named Randy Howard was seeking the reward money related to the February 18th arm robbery. And he named Jamie, who was then arrested. When they came to pick me up, one of the detectors walked up and he looked at my chin, looked at my ears, or see if I had a scar, my chin or earring in my ear. Which he did not. And while Jamie was questioned about this February 18th robbery that he also had nothing to do with, they began asking about March 31st, 1991. The night that had happened, it was Easter Sunday. He spent the day with her family when the crime happened though. At 8 o'clock at night, we were sitting in the house. Worst of the same in the world you can ever be is in the safety and security of your own home if someone wants to try to put a case on you. So they asked him to appear in a lineup. Originally, they had agreed to stand in the lineup. And my attorney at the time came to me and was like, "The prisons are full of guys that have been wrongfully identified." And he said, "My advice, you don't do it." And I wish I would have just did it because the fact that I didn't want to do it was something that they used against me when I went to trial. Meanwhile, in addition to the publicized reward, there's the unspoken one among those facing their own charges. And one of the first fall statements may have stemmed from an encounter between Jamie and a guy named Ed Palumbo. "I knew that him and the other guy had been out doing our robbery and he had passed me on the street. You know, I was just being smart about it. You know, I just like, you know, I read about him the paper to what happened. You just hit, wouldn't give you the money. And he gave me a really weird look, he drove off." At this point, Ed's girlfriend, Shannon, was in the passenger seat and initially came forward at the end of April 1991. Perhaps to cash in on the reward while helping out Ed with some unrelated arm robbery charges. Together, they flipped the narrative of this drive by encounter with Jamie. "Ed had said that he had passed me on the street and that I had told him, did you read about me in the paper? The gun went off or something and he had died for a whole long of life. But I think that he was trying to get out of the trouble that he was in. He was able to get the total charges dismissed." Ed had also named Jamie in four other robberies, including the one to which Ed had confessed. And maybe to try to corroborate this highly motivated witness, Jamie was again asked to stand for a live lineup. And he finally agreed in May 1991. Strangely though, they called in Carlos Luna, who couldn't even describe the assailant to the sketch artist. When Luna viewed the lineup, he said that he tried to imagine each of these people doing it and that he tried to find the person who looked closest to it and that there were a few who might have been the person that he says he saw. He's later given an affidavit saying that he assumed that the police had the guy and put him in the lineup. And so he believed his job was to pick out the person from the menu of options, who best fit what he remembered. Which he based on what he said was the shape of Jamie's face and the shape of his hair. And they knew from the distance to Luna's house, from the gas station that this was not a reliable ID. They needed Gutierrez or Martinez, both of whom had already passed over Jamie in photo arrays and the live lineup. "After I just line up and my lawyer came in there and said, okay, man, you're good. I thought that was it. I turned the page on it, man, and I forgot all about it. My in-laws were moving to Florida. They had friends that lived down there. So that was in '91 when we first moved down there." As the investigation plotted on, witnesses with ulterior motives continuously came forward, like a guy named Steve Sheill who in 1991 was looking for a reward money. He said that Jamie had confessed to a woman named Molly Feaster and then Sheill was arrested on unrelated charges and said Jamie had confessed to him while at a party at Molly Feaster's house, who they tracked down in 1993. She originally said, "I haven't seen Jamie in five to six or seven years or something like that. And this was in '93. So it would have put away before '91." And she's like, "I don't even know if I'd recognize him if I saw him again." So that thereby discredited Sheill for now. Meanwhile, Gutierrez had always said that he bought three dollars worth of gas around 8 p.m. But the only $3 purchase in the register was at 6.55 p.m. But when confronted, Gutierrez changed his story. He said that after seeing the person and paying for gas at 6.55 p.m. he met with a friend and then stopped in again when he saw the cop cars at the gas station on his way home. So two years into this, Saga, his composite was scrapped. And they switched to the Martinez composite with the ball cap, which described in a statement that the first responders should have seen but simply did not. And he had said something like, as I was pulling in the lot, I saw somebody coming out. That would have flew. But for him to say that while he was down putting air in his tires, he saw someone coming out of the gas station, that doesn't fly because at that point, you've got Paul Williams watching the door and you've got Jeff Peele watching Danny Martinez. That couldn't have happened. So in 1993, this new fraudulent composite was floating around and Jamie came back to Illinois from Florida when he was approached again by lead detective Charlie Crowe. I had a traffic ticket one day and I came out of the law and justice center, one of them. And Charlie Crowe was standing there waiting for me. And he's like, me and can we go and sit down and talk and me and him sat at a picnic table for a good hour. He's like, well, why would people say that you know you do this or that you know who did it or whatever? And I'm like, where are they at? And they can jail and he said, yeah, you know, some mother and jail. I said, that answers the question right there. And he was just like, you don't you take this polygraph so we can rule you in or rule you out. Now we know how polygraphs can be unreliable and misused, but Jamie was desperate to prove his innocence. Well, when I passed the polygraph, I said, now do you believe me? He said, I've never thought that you did it. I just think you might know who did. And I said, man, if I knew who did it, I promise you I would tell you. And I would. I wouldn't be doing life for somebody else. I can promise you that. Joy is essential and it's also elusive. You can't order it. You can't borrow it or simply hope it into life. But now there's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence. Joy 101. It's a new podcast hosted by me, how to copy. Together, guys, we'll have meaningful conversations with the world's most fascinating people. Entertainment Legends, Sports, Icons, Wellness Experts and everyday people will share how they find, allow and experience joy. And I'll offer some of my own tips and takes on seeking a more balanced and harmonious life. If you're craving inspiration, support and useful tools to maximize your joy, tune into these candid uplifting and moving on air chats. Joy, after a break up, Joy is an empty nester. Joy, after a loss. Joy as a caretaker. This new podcast will speak to you. Listen to Joy 101 on the I Heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. You can hear it true, but now see it. Crime stories now available with video episodes free in the I Heart app. Watch all your favorite podcasts, full episodes, start to finish, gavvl to gavvl, soup to nuts, all in the free I Heart app. You can also watch all your other favorite podcasts like, "Hey, Jonas! Luskulturist does. Post-run high and so many more. Here are the voices you know. Now see them and see the moments you've missed. Open the I Heart Radio app, search video podcasts and crime stories. And then just tap. Watch. I'll see you on video, friend. Things are getting eerie this week on snafu with Ed Helms. My favorite murder hosts Karen Kilgarif and Georgia Hard Stark join me for the unsolved kidnapping of William Morgan. It's a great true crime story filled with secret society intrigue and murder. For Mason files. Karen, you just birthed a conspiracy and I'm here for it. Yay. Listen to snafu on the iHeart Radio app Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Then 94 we ended up moving back the Florida and I was doing tree work. I had a plan and I was gonna build the best tree service in Canola County. I was living my best wife ever down there. I couldn't believe that I could make so much money as I was making. Life was really good. It really was. And that's how it went for three long years with Charlie Crow at the helm, but his underlings Dan Katzenrick Barcus were out trying to save Gutierrez as a willing eyewitness and they found a man facing his fourth or fifth DUI named Bruce Roland who had never met Jamie, but said the Jamie had confessed to him. Saying that he had been at the gas station twice that night. The first time just before 7 p.m. on his way to a party hosted by a guy named Brian Whitmer. Bruce originally went there to get some cigarettes, but that I didn't have any money. So I left and went down to the Whitmer house to a party and then I went back to get some cigarettes. I guess that's when I committed the crime and he said that I told him I got a couple cards of cigarettes and there were no cigarettes missing, but you know the whole Bruce Roland thing had they have done their due diligence before they tried to get Bruce Roland to create this story to cooperate Gutierrez. They would realize that Brian Whitmer was in jail that night. So there was no party down the street. Not to mention that Jamie and Brian had a falling out in 1988 and then to add doubt to an already dubious statement. Roland created a getaway driver out of thin air. Remember no one had ever mentioned a getaway driver before. And this alleged getaway driver was none other than Jamie's friend Mark McGowan, who by the way denied it as did his girlfriend Karen and get this. Mark didn't even have a car. Bruce the first one to put Mark's name into it and then other people start putting his name into it. It's just like this rumor was going around town for six, seven, eight, nine years man and it morphed into what it was. But Charlie Crowe never bought it. So when he retired in June, 1997, Marcus and cats went back to the Roland narrative. But since Mark McGowan wouldn't flip, they replaced him with Jamie's sister in law Susan Claycomb. At the time my wife when she told me that they had pulled my code, offended over in Tennessee and had given her a subpoena to the grand jury because they think she was the one that was driving the car. You know, we both laughed because I don't think anybody would allow her to drive him somewhere unless it was like a kid and they have no choice. But if you were an adult, you are not about Susan driving anywhere. But they found a friend of hers named Julie Knight, who had a substance abuse issue and had lost custody of her kids and she had agreed to cooperate in a number of cases, including this one to get them back. And John to add more insult to injury Susan was pregnant at the time. It smells to me like it's a very awkward, misguided effort by the police to find some other way to put pressure on Jamie. And we'll put pressure on her. She's expecting a child. All these factors go into it. And if it works, he's dead. He's nailed, okay. At this point, Susan and Jamie were arrested and Susan Claycomb's defense investigator, Martin Foster, visited the witnesses, including Danny Martinez, who told him that he'd seen Jamie's picture in the paper and that he was not the assailant. So the prosecutor's office went to meet with this defense witness, as well as to offer Susan a deal, which she courageously refused. They offered her probation. They told her that the charges against her. I mean, they pressured her for a year and a half. To try to get her to testify against me. I wish you could talk to her man. I wish you could have met her. She's probably the strongest person I've ever known. She's a bona fide hero. She gave birth in jail while facing her own trial. Incredible woman. All of this to stand up for the truth and may she rest in peace. I think once they realized that Susan was not going to play ball with them, that's when Danny Martinez all sudden had his miraculous epiphany. And now eight years later, when Jamie is arrested and he sees Jamie's picture in the paper, now his memory is crystal clear that it was Jamie. And now he will never forget those eyes, even though right after the fact he was not able to identify Jamie. I know they had little mom calling him on the phone and stuff like that before he ever made an identification before Susan's trial, her investigator Martin Foster revisited Martinez to ask why he completely switched his story. And Martinez said it's my understanding that they have a lot of evidence against this guy. So he must be the right guy. So Martinez was called to the stand at Susan's trial. So Danny Martinez says that he was at the station filling his tires and that he heard two bangs and then came face to face with somebody exiting the store that it was Jamie snow who did it. He testified that Susan's trial, they about 85% sure that the guy. Susan's attorney put on Martin Foster and some of Danny Martinez's co-workers who said that Danny had told them that Jamie snow was not the assailant. They also raised how he identified other people along the way and then Bruce Rowland trotted out the theory that added the getaway driver and made Gutierrez into a viable witness, but Gutierrez was shredded by the defense over the time discrepancy. And then Julie Knight who testified at the grand jury and got her kids back. Well, she didn't testify a trial. So Susan was not ID as the getaway driver and none of the other witnesses even supported the existence of one. Pilo did not see a getaway driver. Martinez did not testify about a getaway driver or ever say that he saw getaway driver Luna did not see a getaway driver. So the story that they've concocted from these really incentivized individuals. None of the story matches the actual evidence or the evidence that the state's own witnesses put forward as to what they saw happen at the scene. So Susan was acquitted giving Jamie's attorney Frank Pessel at least a partial blueprint for success a trial in 2001. But there was a far longer list of jailhouse niches and other incentivized witnesses that the detectives had accumulated over 10 years which. John it seems like leaning on these witnesses these vulnerable witnesses had to be the state strategy. When there's no physical evidence linking the defendant to the crime no video nothing nothing no physical evidence no fingerprints no footprints no DNA no blood stains no nothing that's a huge red flag. And that's for the prosecutor should stop right here at the very beginning say wait a minute we don't have any evidence and that's where really good criminal defense lawyer would tear up the prosecution's case. You got snitches on the witness stand lying and they're also fun to attack when you're on cross examination. But not so much fun when there's oh damn many of them there's Ed Palumbo Ed Hammond Ronnie Wright Steve Sheel Kevin Shaw Jody Winkler Bill Moffett Bruce Rowland Bill Gattis and Bridget logsden all of. Moom claimed that they were receiving nothing for their testimony and needed to be investigated and impeached. I think Jamie had a difficult opportunity to defend himself at trial for a couple of reasons one he had a lawyer who just did not do what a defense lawyer is supposed to do did not engage in the investigation that he could have engaged in and did not represent Jamie the way that he should have. But also whose hands were in some ways tied by the fact that the state withheld a ton of evidence from him so you had an ineffective lawyer with an insufficient amount of evidence that should have been disclosed to him. And we'll start with a witness who had available impeachment evidence Randy Howard who initially stated that a few days after the crime that he had called Jamie for a ride and Jamie confessed. Now one Jamie didn't have a car or a phone at the time and two Randy was a habitual reward seeking tipster who for $500 a week after this alleged confession misidentified Jamie in the February 18th robbery yet failed to cash in on what he allegedly knew about the March 31st robbery. It's highly unlikely Howard also threw in a tidbit that Jamie would tuck his hair under a ball cap to disguise himself. Which you know fit the composite drawing you know the guy was wearing a ball cap but when presented with his statement on the stand Howard wouldn't commit to it so even though his impeachment evidence was available it wasn't raised next at Palombo as we mentioned back in 91 he and his girlfriend Shannon twisted a real encounter with Jamie into the alleged confession and Ed got some charges of his own dismissed well. As trial approach the girlfriend recanted and they revisited Ed who was locked up for something else and those old charges resurfaced. He would end prison I think it was basically like look man you gave this statement we're gonna call you if you see thing other than what you said in the statement we're gonna charge you. Ed Palombo has also since recanted. and then there's Ed Hammond, who claimed to have done time with Palombo and Jamie. Not true, by the way, and had also initially identified some guy named Troy Mays. But then as trial approached, he named Jamie, who was later revealed that he'd gotten a deal on an arm robbery in exchange for his testimony. Next up, Steve Scheele, as we mentioned, he'd initially said in '91 that Jamie had confessed to Molly Feaster. And then when faced with his own charges in '93, he changed it. He said Jamie confessed to him, not Molly, at a party at Molly Feaster's house. What we know now is Scheele had taken a polygraph and told the polygraph examiner that Jamie never confessed to him, never said he did it. This also wasn't disclosed. At trial, of course, he testified that Jamie did confess to him. And then came Molly Feaster, who had originally said in '93 that she hadn't seen Jamie since before the crime happened. But she changed her tune on the stand in 2001. They put her on the stand to cooperate, Steve Scheele. Her whole thing was just that, you know, I was at the party. We've talked to her husband since, and he said there were never no parties and that he would have never let Steve Scheele in the house anyway. Steve Scheele also later recanted, saying that he'd made this statement for leniency in '93. But then, as trial approached, he was threatened with solitary confinement if he didn't testify accordingly. Ronnie Wright was another witness who we can't did, saying that he'd made a statement against Jamie over a jailhouse gambling dispute. But that wasn't known to trial either. And then there was two guys who knew Jamie and Florida, Kevin Shaw and Jodie Winkler, who had initially said that Jamie never discussed the crime with them. But later, when faced with their own charges, they agreed to testify for leniency. Similarly, there was Bill Moffitt, who'd made a statement in '95 when facing aggravated battery, and then again in '98 when facing three counts of rape. Only those deals were never disclosed. And we've already mentioned Bruce Rowland, who was facing his fourth or fifth DUI, and alleged that Jamie had told him about this timeline that in turn saved Gutierrez as a witness, involving a 655 PM cigarette run, followed by Brian Whitmer's supposed party and the 8PM return to the gas station with a getaway driver. Rowland had taken a polygraph about his story, and the conclusion was that he was lying. Nevertheless, he went on to stand. That wasn't disclosed to the defense. Chris Rowland couldn't even identify me and call him. The state attorney asked him, "Do you see Mr. Schoell courtroom?" And he's looking to say when he's like, "Yeah, I don't see him." And she went over there and stood right next to the table. She said, "Right here at this table, he seems in here and he's looking like, I don't recognize him. Yeah, this is some dude that I've known all my life and we confess a murder to him." As a repeat DUI offender, instead of a heftier sentence, Bruce Rowland received an even lighter sentence that ran concurrent with the time he was already serving, and to rebut Rowland, the defense called Brian Whitmer. He just testified, number one, he would have never had me to his house for a party because we weren't friends. And the night that the crime happened, Brian was in jail. Additionally, before the state had swapped in Susan Claycomb as the getaway driver, Bruce had previously named Jamie's friend Mark Gowen. So years earlier, they approached Mark's girlfriend, Karen Strong, before she married another guy. In her first statement, she said, "You know, Mark didn't have a car, so if him and Jamie wanted to hang out, they took off walk and because they didn't have a ride." And then she said that sometime in 1991, I came to her house looking for a place to stay. And then when she came to trial, she changed that up to, she remembered it was on the night of the crime. It was between the hours of 10 in midnight and I saw the front of the car and he had on a ball cap and that her boyfriend, Mark, had told her, "Yeah, he was involved in that murder at the gas station, but we called him as a witness. He denied it never happened. And she's married to some dude named Strong. I know that he had some charges pending. The day that she testified, they dropped all the charges against her husband." And Karen Strong wouldn't have even been involved if not for Bruce Rowland's lives about the getaway driver and Rowland originally said that his information came from another inmate, Bill Gattis, who couldn't pick Jamie out of a photo array. But was called to the stand anyway to talk about the time he'd walked into a room full of men, including Jamie, who had all been crying over Jamie's involvement in Bill Little's death. But none of those men in this alleged group corroborated this made up and hard to believe story. Today in Illinois, the state would have to prove at a pre-trial hearing that these witnesses were reliable and that was not required back then. There's a good reason that we do these extra steps with jailhouse informants because they are notoriously unreliable. They have every incentive to lie. And that's what happened here. A point that was corroborated a trial in part by a correctional officer named Mary Jane Burns, who had told Jamie in jail that she was being pressured to find informants for his trial and became a defense witness. But then all of a sudden made a statement that she and three inmates overheard Jamie say that he knew who did it. But then, despite threats and deals, when none of these three corroborated her statement Burns recanted on the stand. Then the defense called Jamie's wife to testify about his alibi, and in rebuttal, the state called another incentivized informant, Bridget Logsden, who said that she'd overheard Jamie's wife talking about Jamie's guilt in a bar. The deal Logsden had made for her own charges. It wasn't disclosed either. And once again, Jamie's attorney had not found the impeachment witnesses in time to refute Logsden's lie. Since then, anyone who Logsden said was there has said that this never happened. So without all of this really important context, the jury heard from the alleged eyewitnesses starting with Carlos Luna and Gerardo Gutierrez. Gutierrez testified about seeing the attendant and somebody else in the store, the attendant appeared nervous and so did the other person. And the situation felt very suspicious to him. Mr. Gutierrez never made any identification of Jamie in court or previous to court or at any time. And the details from the composite were also raised because now the composite didn't contain a fresh scar on the chin like Gutierrez had described. The state's attorney was trying to characterize it as a just a scratch. This guy just had like a scratch, but when you read the police reports, it was more than just a scratch. Then came Carlos Luna. Carlos Luna testified about having looked out his window and seen somebody walking from the store possibly with the cash register tray insert where the money would be. Luna didn't make an in court identification either. And years later, he also recanted his 1991 live line up ID, but the most consequential eyewitness was yet to come Danny Martinez, who claimed to have seen the assailant from one to three feet away. At it Susan's trial, he said, you know, I'm about 85% sure of that guy, but then he changed it to 100% sure. Danny Martinez testified that he would never forget Jamie's nose eyes. That's what he remembered most clearly that the eyes of the person that he encountered walking out of the store were Jamie's nose eyes. I mean, Frank Pitzel, he did ask Danny, well, these eyes you'll never forget what color were they. And he's like, I don't know. So this is where Jamie's attorney Frank Pitzel could have called Danny Martinez as co-workers or Susan Clay comes investigate a Martin Foster, but he just fucking didn't, which John has a former defense attorney. That's that's an unforgivable sin, right? This is a pretty extreme case because the lawyer, they later went to prison for cheating an old lady out of her money. He was a heavy drinker. He was the head mental problems. He was under tremendous stress and his performance at trial was pathetic. I read these trial transcripts often and I'm just shaking my head. You look at it and you see some of the lawyering here is really, really bad. With the failure to investigate these witnesses and the lack of information shared by the state, as well as the failure to even present the witnesses from Susan's trial, Jamie's fate was sealed. Yeah, courtroom was full and it seemed like all of a sudden all the life got like a million times brighter. I could feel my heart beating and I could hear it beating in my ear, you know. When the judge read the verdict, it was like I didn't fully comprehend what it was that he said and I leaned over to Frank and I said, what did he say? And Frank said, I'm sorry. You can't order it, you can't borrow it or simply hope it into life, but now there's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence. Joy 101. It's a new podcast hosted by me, Hota Kotby. Together, guys, we'll have meaningful conversations with the world's most fascinating people, entertainment legends, sports icons, wellness experts and everyday people will share how they find, allow and experience joy and I'll offer some of my own tips and takes on seeking a more balanced and harmonious life. Joy after a breakup, Joy is an empty master, Joy after a loss, Joy as a caretaker. Listen to Joy 101 on the iHeartRadio. Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. Things are getting eerie this week on Snap-O with Ed Helms. For your Mason files. Karen you just birthed a conspiracy and I'm here for it. Yay! A Foo on the iHeart Radio app Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. You can hear it true but now see it. Crime stories now available with video episodes free in the iHeart app. Watch all your favorite podcasts. Full episodes start to finish. Gaville to Gaville. Soup to Nuts. All in the free iHeart app. You can also watch all your other favorite podcasts like Hey Jonas, Las Cultoristas, Post Run High and so many more. Hear the voices you know. Open the iHeart Radio app. Search video podcasts and crime stories. And then just tap watch. I'll see you on video friend. After I've been convicted, detective cats caught me in the hallway in the county jail one day and told me that if I would give them this other guy that they believed was involved in the case, if I would give them him that the state's attorney would agree to 40 years which at 50 percent I would have done 20 years in the now. And what I told him was but basically you want me to do to him what you just did to me. You want me to make the shit up for you. He's like no we don't want you to make none of them. And I said why I don't know who did it man. I didn't do it. And the detective said well think about it. It's crazy because I just told him I didn't know anything about it when he's like what does think about it. Jamie refused and was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. I knew that I was going to go to one of the worst prisons in the state of Illinois. State bill. That lucky they put me in a so it was a good guy. Key kind of helped me get on my feet I guess I couldn't buy so toothpaste or nothing. And this guy really kind of took me under his wing I guess and helped me navigate all of the land mines that were around. That is a good guy. He always claimed that he was innocent. He had locked up I mean he made my time a lot easier than it was so I got lucky. But he was not so lucky on his direct appeal and as he moved on to post conviction motions it appears that his cellmate also knew his way around the law library. He helped me get my original post conviction, pro say post conviction together and he had a life sentence too and sure enough man he didn't get exonerated but he had a choice. You can go home now take time served or you can keep on fighting and he probably would have been exonerated but he'd been locked up for so long he just wanted to go home and he took a I don't blame him. He had a son that had gotten murdered and he had another son that was out on the streets and he just wanted to get home to his family. He struggled with it. Tomorrow's not guaranteed to anybody but that is a good guy. Does this good guy have a name? Car Williams. Our audience might remember Carl we're going to link his interview in the episode description so please check it out in which our guest host of previous guest on the show is a dear friend of Carl's one of his fellow legal eagles Patrick Persley. I don't Patrick Patrick helped me put my post conviction together as well. Very smart. I mean I stood on Patrick Persley's door for hours talking about my case and he never tried to run me off. He never said he was busy. He would sit there and he would listen to me and he would give me all the advice that he could possibly and you know he was fighting his own thing but he yeah he's a good dude man. He really is. There's very few people man that I've met since I've been in here that I will absolutely get out and go look up if I ever get a chance and Carl and Patrick are definitely two of them. And we hope that reunion can one day become a reality and maybe it will be as a result of some of the work that they did together in stateville while writing Jamie's first post conviction motion for which in 2004 they ordered the evidence that was available to his trial council and found police reports with corresponding tape recorded interviews of the two officers on the scene Paul Williams and Jeff Pilo and it seems that the police reports didn't reflect an important reality. In addition that Jamie's attorney must have never listened to the tapes but simply read the reports because these two officers described watching Danny Martinez fill up his tires turned to walk into the station turned back to his car then back to the station and this is the moment that Martinez alleged that he nearly bumped into the assailant. So if that's true why didn't they swoop in? This cop will stand in across the street watching him the whole time and there was never anybody there. Yeah there's actually an affidavit from officer Pilo saying from the time I arrived across the street to the time I entered the gas station my gaze was never off the front of the station for more than a few seconds and he goes on to say that he's absolutely positive that from the time I arrived to the time that I eventually entered the gas station no one other than Bill Little was either in the gas station or entered or exited the gas station. I had a clear unobstructed view of the gas station door and was focusing on the station. There's no way that somebody could have came out of that gas station and came face to face with Danny Martinez in the parking lot and Jeff Pilo and Paul Williams the other police officer on the scene not see the guy come out of the gas station. It's impossible. It couldn't have happened and the state knew it man. Not only did they know it from the officers but also a FOIA request revealed that Martinez hadn't just passed over Jamie in those early lineups. Back then the defense team knew about the non identification at the lineup but the fact that Martinez when he viewed the lineup he affirmatively said it was not Jamie Snow. That was never disclosed. That's the thing that just is so disgusting about what they did man is they know that they put that dude on the stands of making identification when it could not have happened. Jamie subsequently files several pro say post conviction petitions all of which are tonight and eventually the exoneration project gets involved around 2008. A men's one of his post conviction petitions and continues to try to litigate it. And that amended petition and subsequent petitions included Jeff Pilos affidavit as well as recantations from jailhouse niches like Steve Sheel and Ed Palumbo who had been threatened with more or worse time in prison to stick with their original statements. Ed Palumbo added that the prosecutor Charles Raynard told him that they knew someone else had done it but quote since they couldn't get that other person Jamie would have to do. End quote which is corroborated by the way by the offer Jamie got from cats before sentencing. And Ronnie Wright also recanted. Ronnie Wright freaks out the hunt and was like look I feel bad about what I did and it's really meant to my conscience and I just want to do right thing we didn't even reach out to him. I mean we've been looking for him but he actually reached out to us. Wright said that he had testified against Jamie because of some jailhouse disagreement. Pablo Stunna has also recanted his live lineup ID but in addition. What we found through FOIA request was that there was a memo a sergeant in the Bloomington Police Department saying she nervous saying that this isn't an identification. This kid couldn't make an identification if he wanted to. He said I was there that night. I was looking out that window and I seen people who were running around in the parking lot and I couldn't identify them and they were people that I knew. So that's four recantations plus Palumbo's girlfriend Shannon before trial and Mary Jane Burns and Randy Howard understand well that makes a total of seven. We don't have recantations for all of them but we have either that or we have like Bill Moth that was one of the informants and we got an affidavit from somebody that was in prison with him that said they knocked 10 years off of his sentence for testifying. And for those who couldn't be similarly discredited there were FOIA requests which unearthed much of what was hidden from Frank Pistle. My friend Ray Wilson who's a retired chief of police had been filing these FOIA requests for years hundreds of them. And we come to find out that they had actually withheld 8,000 pages of documents from Frank. So he didn't know of dozens of alternative suspects in police reports and statements that could impeach the witnesses. And that included two failed pre-trial polygraphs for Steve Scheele and Bruce Roland. Both of whom had also hidden their motivations for testifying. Bruce Roland claimed that he wasn't doing it for any detail but we find these letters that were going back to force between him and the state attorney. And that's not what was going on. He was definitely looking to try to get a deal. And as we mentioned he got one and the FOIA requests revealed that he wasn't alone. At Pulumbo Steve Scheele, at Hammond, Kevin Shaw, Jody Winkler, Bridget Logston, Julie Knight, they all received deals. Who's left? Bill Gattis. With the story. about the fucking crying? That guy? And in addition to running all this down over the years, the Exoneration Project has also been trying to get the crime scene evidence tested. One of the pieces of testing that we're looking for now is to run those fingerprints through the much more advanced system that exists today. And even the FBI, which maintains the database, suggests on their website that fingerprints that were run in the past should be rerun using the new technology. And we know that there were other suspects in this case. And we also are looking to have testing done on some of the other evidence from the scene. There were bullets recovered. We have a lab who can test those bullets for DNA to see if the DNA from the person who loaded the gun is present there. And that's been done in other cases successfully. We've also sought to have testing done on Mr. Little's clothing. There's every reason to believe that there was a physical struggle. And if that's the case, the offenders DNA would likely have been left behind on Mr. Little's clothing. And the blood that was recovered at the scene, which no doubt Mr. Little's blood is there. But it could also be a mixture of the assailant's blood and his blood. And we'd like to have that tested to determine whether it's a mixture. At a hearing that we did recently, a DNA expert testified about how the testing is available to do, how they would do it, how they've done it successfully in the past. And it's testing that Mr. Snow's defense team would be paying for this. There's no cost to the state. So, nevertheless, they've opposed it. We had a hearing where we put on witnesses and the judge denied the testing. So the current status is that we're on appeal from the denial of that post-conviction forensic testing. Everything that we're asking to test forensically is exactly what they would do right now. They didn't have me already in prison serve and time for the crime. In this case, it just happened today. Everything that we're asking to do they would do. And it's only going to do one of three things. It's either going to do nothing. It's going to include me, which it won't. Or it's going to exclude me. And it's going to point the finger at the person who was in the gas station that night. So, if the wind went in the situation for the prosecutors, no matter what happens, it doesn't make any sense to why they're fighting so hard not to do the testing. Well, I know myself and John Grisham are pulling for Jamie. I'm sure Carl Williams and Patrick Persley are as well. And I hope our audience will join us. They can go to freesitingmesnow.com. They can go to snowfiles.net. That's our podcast. That's where we pretty much just lay it all out. They can find the truth about the case. We got a petition on there you can sign. Go to the website, bring yourself up to speed. And then I'd learn to the governor. Talk to your friends. Get your friends to write letters. These guys are politicians. And when the mail starts getting pretty heavy, somebody's going to notice it. Jamie Snow has been in prison now for decades for something he didn't do. There's never been justice done in this case. I think somebody knows something about who really did it. And any information that people have could potentially be helpful. And we would definitely appreciate hearing from you. Our website is exonerationproject.org. And you can get in touch with us through that. And if you got a few bucks and I tell you my big gifts, unless you get a lot of money, make a donation. There's never enough money. And there's a very direct correlation between the amount of money you have to spend for exoneration cases. And the number of people you can free. There are thousands of innocent people in prison. Well said. And we're going to have the website and action steps linked in the episode description. And with that, we're going to closing arguments. Where first, I'm going to thank John Grisham, the one and only for his support. And both of you, Jamie and Carl for joining us here today. And now I'm just going to kick back in my chair, close my eyes with my headphones on and listen to anything you feel is left to be said. Let's start with John, then Carl, and then Jamie, you take us off into the sunset. I can't really think of anything that's been left unseeable. There's a whole lot we could talk about these cases forever. That's why I wrote the book, Jason. These cases are so incredible. I wrote the "Innocent Man" published in 2006. Sort of jumped into that case and researched it. And the more I've learned the worst of God, I could not believe what happened. And so I wrote this book. And that really took me into the world of wrongful convictions. And I'm still there right now. And over the years, with you in New York, at Banquets and things like that, you meet some of these exoneries. And they're remarkable people, a man who have survived nightmares that the rest of us cannot begin to imagine. And they come out stealing one piece, most of them, they have their dignity, they have their pride, their toughness, nails, they survived. And they don't want to talk about it. They want to do something good with their remaining time. But I just, you fall in love with these exoneries. That's why I'm still trying to help people like Jamie and still believe in the cause of exoneroating innocent people. But even more importantly, is to pass laws and change procedures that will eliminate virtually all wrongful convictions. It can be done if we would just do it. I think Jamie's case is a uniquely tragic one, but also all too common. And I definitely thank you and your listeners for your interest in this type of injustice and all the support in trying to remedy it. I really am appreciative and all of us are. And I know Jamie is for the attention that you've paid to his case and to so many other cases where people have been wrongfully convicted. I know that it's been very hard for Jamie and obviously very hard on his family, but he is a very strong person. I admire him a great deal. And I look forward to one day seeing him on the outside. There's a long road, I think, and an uphill battle. But with support from people like you and your listeners, I think we'll get there for him hopefully sooner than later. Yeah, man. I appreciate you, John Grisham. I appreciate all giving me a voice. And I hope that this creates some pressure on someone who's got the power to make a difference. Here's it and does something. Somebody sent me a quote long time ago from Martin Luther King Jr. In justice, anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. That's the truth, man. It really is. Thank you for listening to Ronful Conviction. I want to thank our production team Connor Hall and Kathleen Fink as well as my fellow executive producers, Jeff Campler, Kevin Wardis, and Jeff Clyburn. The music in this production was supplied by three time Oscar nominated composer J. Rouse. Be sure to follow us across all social media platforms at Lava for Good and at Ronful Conviction. You can also follow me on Instagram at its Jason Flamm. Ronful 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. 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. Joy is essential and it's also elusive but now. There's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence. Joy 101. If you're craving inspiration to maximize your joy, tune into these candid, uplifting, and moving on air chats. All month long and all year round we're celebrating being loud, proud, and always original. It's me, Brandon Kyle Goodman. Check out my show for unfiltered takes on dating, relationships, and adulting. Madison. Learn to love yourself unapologetically with BFF Black Fat Fem, and start your day with intention with waking up with Ryan coming in July. Open your free iHeartRadio app search, Pride, and listen now. Cars are very rude to bicyclists, but in this case it's a bicycleist going out of his way to get in the way of traffic. It's like a talk show but going 30 miles an hour. Listen to Do You Need a Ride on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.