The transcript blends promotional content for the 2026 Toyota Camry with a deep investigative report on the 1997 murder of Deputy Bill Hardy. The narrative centers on the controversial prosecution of DeForest Johnson, who was tried multiple times under different theories, each time relying heavily on the unverified testimony of Violet Ellison. Despite no physical evidence and contradictory alibis, Johnson was convicted and sentenced to death. The investigation reveals a pattern of prosecutorial inconsistency—shifting theories across trials, using hearsay, and selectively dismissing key witnesses—highlighting systemic flaws in the justice system. DeForest’s family and the defense team argue that the prosecution exploited weak, uncorroborated evidence and ignored critical facts, such as the lack of jail phone recordings and the firearms expert’s conclusion that only one shooter fired the fatal shots. The case underscores how disparity in resources, prosecutorial overreach, and the use of unreliable testimony can lead to wrongful convictions. Meanwhile, promotional segments for the Toyota Camry and other brands, such as DeGiorno pizza and Delta business cards, are interwoven, suggesting a multi-genre content structure. The overarching message is one of justice failure: a system that fails to deliver truth, especially when the accused is vulnerable and the evidence is fragile.
You know that moment when everything lines up when life gives you the green light and you just go
That's the 2026 Toyota Camry no hesitation no friction just a car that's right there with you ready responsive
In control the whole way through because when it's your moment, you shouldn't have to think twice the
2026 Toyota Camry go like you mean it test drive at your local Toyota dealer or visit Toyota dot com today
Toyota let's go places see packages and options at Toyota dot com for future availability
I'm Melissa Jeltsin host of the what happened to her podcast we're kicking off the season with the Sandra Birchmore story a case
The police rode off as a suicide in a snowstorm her family never bought it and the man they suspected wore a badge
You never know who that devil is because he's wearing disguise
Sometimes it's a police uniform and you can get access to all episodes a hundred percent ad-free with an iHeart true crime plus subscription
exclusively on Apple podcasts available only to iHeart true crime plus subscribers
So don't wait head to Apple podcasts search for iHeart true crime plus and subscribe today
Lisa tell them a better new show we have a new podcast. It's called don't lie to me
I'm Lexi you want to wear two best friends 22 years apart, but so close at heart and I'm Lisa de Julio the old one
Which means we have wildly different references occasionally different opinions and at this point in my 50s
I've lived it all now in my 30s being the founder of new shoes good taste is my business
Listen on the iHeart radio app that will podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts
Last time on ear witness
You are in a position now to be one of two things. Okay, you can either be a witness or you can be a defendant
Our draggus was in his wheelchair sitting there and he looked at me and he said listen
I'm not gonna lie for anybody
I would
Happy to give to far us up in a heartbeat
Except it would be a lie and I'm not gonna lie
I said all right. Well, they're gonna wheel you to jail and they're gonna charge you with capital murder
Which is definitely a fence and he goes I wasn't there tell him to take me to jail and they did
Charged with capital murder of a law enforcement officer our 22-year-old torthoris to Johnson
21-year-old our draggus forward 23-year-old Oman Bery and 21-year-old Quintez Wilson. They are held without bond
evidence wise
Well, we had personally no evidence
We had the word of a 15-year-old
who told
Lies a lot of lies
We had this table
Empty wasn't nothing on it and we were still trying to try that case and we were like man what we gonna do how are you gonna win this?
You
It's 1997 two years after deputy bill hardy was killed
To forest Johnson and our draggus forward are headed to trial for the murder and
So far the only evidence the state has presented connecting them to the crime is the changing story of Yolanda
Chambers
But there was something else
Something detectives had known about for two years
Something they kept quiet
Until now
This is Sergeant Tom Salter Jackson County Sheriff's Department
President of the room or Sergeant Tony Richardson and
Mrs. Violet Ellison and
Her daughter Katrina Ellison
Violet Ellison a 53-year-old black woman and her 16-year-old daughter Katrina
Met with detectives Tony Richardson and Tom Salter at the sheriff's office
Violet Ellison who knew deputy hardy came forward a few weeks after hardy's murder
She called investigators seven days after the governor announced an additional
$10,000 for information
Bringing the total reward offered in the case to $20,000
Her recorded interview with detectives is less than seven minutes long
This Ellison would you tell us about the information that you have for us?
Everything free it. I'm not sure of his last name call my daughter
Katrina Ellison
Violet Ellison says some guys in the jail were asking Katrina to make three-way calls for them
So they'd only have to pay for the original call to Katrina
They didn't want to keep feeding quarters into the pay phone
One of those guys was named Fred
And he asked my daughter
To use her three-way to call for his home board and he named his fellow's name is Tom Barr's Johnson
Violet Ellison says her daughter dialed the number of a girl named Daisy to create a three-way call
In the jail Fred handed the phone to to forest so that he could talk to Daisy
Back in the Ellison house once Katrina heard the three-way call go through
She put the phone down and walked away
But her mom Violet Ellison picked it up and listened in
The incident
Violet Ellison tells detectives that she heard to forest Johnson telling Daisy what happened the night of Deputy Bill Hardee's murder
I've listened to this recording over a dozen times and it's not easy to follow, but in summary
Violet says that to forest described following a man they planned to rob
A man and they had been following this man this man had a girl with him and the girl had a gun a shot was fired
And Deputy Hardee heard the commotion and came out to investigate and that's when
To forest Johnson shot one time and he named another guy which was
Quintets Quintets both on the shot
She says she overheard to forest Johnson say that he and Quintets Wilson each fired one shot at Deputy Hardee
At this point Quintets Wilson was also in jail charged with Hardee's murder
The story Violet Ellison tells police is disjointed
There are a lot of details that are similar to the facts about the case that were reported in the news
But others that don't fit the evidence at the crime scene
And after less than seven minutes detective say they have no further questions for Violet Ellison and her daughter
You
Two years after Violet Ellison first comes to police the state is preparing to put our dragis forward and to forest Johnson on trial
But Yolanda Chambers is falling apart. She's recanted her testimony under oath and she doesn't always show up to court when she supposed to be there
It's then in their time of need
Two years later that detectives suddenly remember Violet Ellison's statements
Violet Ellison walking that door and stand up on this table and say what she said
We got a full table now
We got all evidence we need
But not that we need we'd like to have a lot more but we got we got evidence
Violet Ellison would become the state's star witness in the trial against de forest Johnson
And her ear witness testimony would be the key evidence linking him to deputy Hardee's murder
But there wouldn't be just one trial for the murder of deputy Hardee or two or even three
The state will pursue four capital murder trials
And at each of these four trials the state will present separate mutually exclusive theories
About who pulled the trigger and fired the fatal shots
I'm Beth Schelburn
This is ear witness
Chapter five
Anybody will do
(upbeat music)
If Tony Richardson was initially enthusiastic about Violet Ellison's revelations, I can't
tell by the investigative file.
He wrote a report about the meeting he had with her.
It's just seven sentences long, concluding, "The conversation concerned the crime."
Detectives and prosecutors do not publicly mention Violet Ellison or her claims for the
next two years.
It's like they just forgot about her.
The most glaring example of this.
Detective Richardson testifies at a grand jury hearing five months after his conversation
with Violet Ellison.
He says under oath that all four men charged with capital murder were in the back parking
lot of the crown sterling suites when Hardy was killed, but he says Omar Barry and
Rodriguez Ford were the shooters.
This story is based on one of his conversations with Yolanda Chambers.
Detective Richardson tells the grand jury, "There is no doubt that Yolanda Chambers is telling
us the truth."
There is no mention of Violet Ellison until to forest is on trial.
The steak puts Rodriguez Ford on trial first.
Rodriguez's cousin, Nicole Blunt Kirksy, comes to my house to talk to me about the case.
She's wearing a patterned dress and cowboy boots.
Her hair is pulled back into a high bun.
For many years, she grew up in the same house as Rodriguez.
Their mothers are sisters.
It was a lot of money for a poor family.
It really was.
A lot of my grandmother had a lot of money to save back then even poor people.
She didn't spend everything she had.
She always put money back.
She worked for a union envelope, which was like a factory over in press city for years,
and then she used to watch clothes and clean houses for people.
She just took a lot of that money.
She just took it away and she exhausted just about everything to try to get him the representation
that he needed for that trial.
Other than my grandmother's money, I mean we have barbecues and just things to raise money
so that we could pay the attorney.
Rodriguez's mom Joyce tells me the same thing.
So you had to raise some of the money?
Some of it.
Yeah.
Do you remember how much you ended up paying?
It looked like, I don't know, it might have been over $40,000 or something more.
It's a lot of money.
It was.
Rodriguez's family hires Richard Jaffy, a renowned defense attorney who had represented
dozens of people facing the death penalty.
To Forrest Johnson's cousin Antonio Greene, remembers trying to figure out what his family
could do to get to Forrest the best legal defense available.
One of the prominent attorneys during that time in my uncle when he talked to him about
taking this case for the fires during that time.
When he told us, right, that's in his office, he said, bring him a $10,000 retina and he'll
bring our loved one home.
Of course, $10,000, he might have said $10,000,000 at that time of mean, you know, and we just
didn't have it.
Couldn't do it.
Everybody scratching to make it and feed the family.
We all understood that because I'm thinking, OK, I got to get along and I got to do, you
know, something.
And that was, well, it was amazing, too bad.
To Forrest, he understood that because I don't worry about that, I'm going to be all right,
I didn't do this.
You know, that was his old thing.
They're not going to lock me up because I didn't do this.
Judge Alfred Behackle appoints two attorneys to represent To Forrest, a sharply dressed
32-year-old black man named Darryl Binder and Erskine Mathis, a white, middle-aged, former
police officer with a thick mustache.
In 1997, Alabama paid appointed defense attorneys just $20 an hour for work outside the courtroom
with a cap of $1,000.
Most appointed lawyers can't afford to work for free, so this very low cap limited how
well they could prepare for trial.
Our drag is Ford is first to go to trial in November of 1997.
There's a photo of him in the newspaper.
He's sitting in his wheelchair in court wearing a starched collared shirt and dark blazer.
The junior prosecutor on the case is a 34-year-old black man named Theo Lawson.
Jeff Wallace is the lead prosecutor.
He's tall, white, a commanding figure in the courtroom, 43 years old, 12 years into his
career.
I think my reputation was of being a tough prosecutor, meaning if I had the case, I pushed
it to his limits, and I think my reputation might be that I was maybe a little too tough
sometimes.
I hope that's not true, but I'm afraid it might be true.
Jeff Wallace was assigned to major cases and aggressively sought to police his boss,
D.A. David Barber, who was a tough on crime leader, focused on getting convictions.
And this case was personal for Jeff Wallace.
He knew the victim.
Every prosecutor who is diligent works closely with the police, and when something happens
to one of them, you're not one of the boys in blue, as they say, but they're your friends.
So when this happened at Deputy Hardy, you got my attention.
The trial against Rodriguez Ford starts at 1.50 pm on November 5.
In a short opening statement, the prosecution summarizes the crime for the jury, arguing
that Rodriguez Ford is guilty of capital murder.
They don't mention a motive.
Afterwards, Jeff Wallace calls the county's chief medical examiner to the stand.
He explains that Hardy's wounds were at an upward angle through his head.
Jeff Wallace argues this would be consistent with Rodriguez firing the shots from his wheel
chair.
Prosecutors also call Yolanda Chambers as a witness, even though she recanted her story
in court a year ago.
Since then, she's gone back to saying that she was there when Hardy was killed.
She now says she saw Rodriguez Ford fire at least one shot.
Richard Jaffee, our Dregist's lawyer, argues that if the hotel witnesses had seen our
Dregist Ford commit the crime, they would have seen this.
Our Dregist Ford wheeling up about 30 feet of an incline in his wheelchair, somehow finding
an ability to shoot two shots into Deputy Hardy, then be wheeled down by someone all the
way back to their car.
The wheel chair would have had to have been put in there.
Our Dregist would have had to have been physically put into the driver's seat.
DeFarris would have had to have gotten back into the passenger seat, and then they would
have driven off, and that would have taken at least a minute or two, minimum.
Of course, no one at the hotel saw anything like that.
The only thing they had on our Dregist Ford was Yolanda Chambers.
Jaffee calls witnesses to the stand, who saw our Dregist at T's place, at the same time
that Deputy Hardy was shot.
We didn't call any witnesses other than alibi witnesses.
The key decision the jury has to make.
Do they believe Yolanda Chambers' testimony that our Dregist killed Deputy Hardy behind
the crown sterling suites?
Or do they believe the three alibi witnesses, who say he was at T's place at the same time
that Deputy Hardy was murdered?
The jury votes 10-2 to acquit our Dregist Ford, but that's not enough.
Murder trials require a unanimous verdict.
This decision was split.
Judge Bayhack
declares a mistrile, but our Dregus Ford is not set free.
The state plans to try him a second time.
Two weeks later, the first trial against DeForest Johnson begins.
Here's to Forrest Cousin and Tony O'Green.
I remember, me personally, myself, I was very optimistic.
I was very optimistic, but simply because I knew what they had, which was nothing.
As far as evidence goes, I'm like, okay, well, this is just a part of the process.
They're here, the evidence, or like they're, uh, and we'll be going home.
You know, this is all over, but as the days went on, from the first couple of days of the trial,
you can see a really different environment in the courtroom.
The only video from the trial I've seen is a short TV news clip.
It's filmed through a window on the courtroom door, and DeForest looks so young, much younger than 24.
He's clean shaven, baby-faced, dressed for court in a striped button-down shirt and tie with a gray blazer.
He looks around the courtroom.
Maybe he's nervous, but then he lights up with a huge smile when he sees a family member who comes over to speak with him.
The state's lead prosecutor, Jeff Wallace, gets up in front of the jury.
Just two weeks earlier, he argued that our drag is Ford shot Deputy Hardy.
But now, he tells a completely different story.
He says that DeForest Johnson shot Hardy.
The theory that the shooter was seated in a wheelchair is never mentioned.
And Yolanda Chambers never sets foot in the courtroom.
Instead, the prosecution tells the jury in opening statements that they will hear evidence that will convince them beyond a reasonable doubt that DeForest shot and killed Deputy Hardy.
Then, Jeff Wallace introduces the state's new star witness, Violet Ellison.
She tells the jury she eavesdropped on several three-way calls because she was concerned about her daughter talking to people at the jail and because she's naturally nosy.
She says she contacted detectives six days after she listened in on the first call because she couldn't sleep after hearing information about the murder of Deputy Bill Hardy.
On the stand, Violet Ellison tells the jury that she overheard DeForest say these words.
"I shot the fucker in the head and I saw his head go back and he fell.
And he shouldn't have got in my business messing up my shit."
There was no mention of "I shot the fucker in the head" or anything like that and Violet Ellison's original recorded statement to police.
She did write the statement down in notes on the back of an envelope that she submitted to police but she gave them these notes six weeks after her first recorded statement.
On the stand, she says she jotted down the notes while she listened in on the call between DeForest and Daisy and then copied the notes onto a sheet of paper.
But it's hard for me to believe that these notes were written during the phone call she claims she overheard.
For example, Violet Ellison is adamant in her testimony that she heard DeForest only use his first name but her notes refer to him as Johnson.
If she was just writing down what she heard while she heard it, why wouldn't she have written DeForest? How would she have known his last name?
DeForest's attorneys also say that what Violet Ellison heard was just one side of a conversation.
They say DeForest was telling Daisy what he was accused of doing, not what he did.
He was responding to her question, "Why are you in jail?"
But when Darryl Binder questions Violet Ellison, she tells him she's positive that Daisy never asked DeForest why he was in jail. But then she also says that she didn't pay any attention to Daisy's side of the conversation because she was only interested in what DeForest had to say.
If this feels confusing to you, welcome. I've been trying to make this make sense for two years. How can Violet Ellison insist that she knows what Daisy did or did not say while also admitting that she only listened to one side of the conversation?
Antonio Greene, DeForest Cousin, remembers watching Violet Ellison on the stand.
The only evidence supposedly they had against this ear witness who had never heard him speak before, who had no idea who he was.
But to sit in there and see how the system from the judge, the prosecutors and all that pushed that case towards him. I mean constantly it was.
He did it. We got the right one. He did it. Forget the evidence. Don't worry about that. We just telling you he did it. It's pretty much it's all they had.
When Violet Ellison finishes testifying, Daisy Williams takes the stand. She says DeForest did not admit to the murder on that phone call and she never heard him say the things Violet Ellison claimed to overhear.
So Violet Ellison, a friend of the victim, says she heard one thing. Daisy Williams, a friend of the accused, says she heard another.
The case comes down to who the jury will believe.
After five days of testimony, DeForest's supporters nervously wait as the jury begins to deliberate. And once again, the jury cannot reach a unanimous decision.
Nine jurors vote to convict, but three others are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge declares a mistrial.
They deliberated and they couldn't come to a verdict. So they took him back to kept him locked up and he immediately pretty much scheduled another date for a second trial.
So there wasn't really any time to celebrate?
No, no, no, no. It wasn't any of that. And then even then, I didn't think I didn't look at it as any type of victory because an innocent man should be found innocent.
You know that moment when everything lines up, when life gives you the green light and you just go, that's the 2026 Toyota Camry.
No hesitation, no friction, just a car that's right there with you. Ready, responsive, in control the whole way through.
Because when it's your moment, you shouldn't have to think twice. The 2026 Toyota Camry, go like you mean it.
Test out your local Toyota dealer or visit Toyota.com today. Toyota, let's go places. See packages and options at Toyota.com for future availability.
I'm Melissa Jeltsin, host of The What Happened to Her Podcast. We're kicking off the season with the Sandra Birchmore story, a case the police wrote off as a suicide in a snow storm. Her family never bought it and the man they suspected wore a badge.
You never know who that devil is because he's wearing disguise. Sometimes it's a police uniform.
And you can get access to all episodes 100% ad-free with an I Heart True Crime Plus subscription exclusively on Apple Podcasts, available only to I Heart True Crime Plus subscribers.
So don't wait, head to Apple Podcasts, search for I Heart True Crime Plus and subscribe today.
Lisa, we should tell them about our new show.
Oh my god, Lexi, we have a new podcast. It's called Don't Lie To Me. I'm Lexi Wanyu, we're two best friends, 22 years apart, but so close at heart.
And I'm Lisa Julio, the old one, which means we have wildly different references, occasionally different opinions. And at this point in my 50s, I've lived it all.
I'm not getting any worse than fighting. That is wild. I learned that about you today.
Now in my 30s, being the founder of new shoes, good taste is my business. And I've always got something to say.
If the man were just honest about this, there would be so much more peace in the world.
world. We're gonna talk about dating, relationships, beauty, getting older, and a little wiser. We're best
friends, but we don't always agree. Because you told us how accommodating you are.
Obviously, I would do what I think I could do to fight the fight, but there's only so much
fight I can fight. Don't lie to me. Don't lie to me. Don't lie to me. Don't lie to me. Don't lie to me.
Don't lie to me. Lie. Listen on the iHeartRadio app, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your
podcasts. I don't really care.
Nice to see you, Jeff. I'm Jeff Schelbert. You can call me Beth. Can I call you Jeff?
Jeff Wallace prosecuted both to forest and Ardregus. When I emailed him to set up an interview,
he asked me to meet him at the large Methodist church he attends and a Birmingham suburb.
He's now retired, but spent 25 years as a prosecutor in Jefferson County.
We record the interview in the church's empty sanctuary. He tells me he prefers to do
interview standing up because of all of his courtroom experience. So we're standing in this
sanctuary at the altar facing each other, having this conversation in front of a giant pipe organ.
The way we're set up, it feels like we're either here to debate or get married.
Anyway, this is why the recording sounds a little echoey.
We had a week case. It's placed on the testimony of one witness.
Jeff Wallace remembers that the case against to forest Johnson hinged on the testimony of Violet Ellison.
That is extremely strong evidence if it's believed. Of course, the question becomes,
do you believe that evidence? Well, to believe that evidence, you have to believe Miss Ellison.
To believe Miss Ellison, you have to look at the facts, how she said it happened.
To forest's second trial begins eight months after the first one ends in a mistrial.
Again, he calls Violet Ellison to the stand,
where she testifies that she overheard to forest admit to Hardy's murder on a three-way phone call.
Jeff Wallace says Violet Ellison listened in on the calls because she was concerned about her
daughter. And once again, to forest's attorneys call Daisy Williams, who maintains that to forest
never confessed to the murder. To forest lawyer, Darryl Bender asks Daisy.
Did he describe to you the series of events that he said had occurred?
Daisy, no. Bender, did he tell you where this happened?
Again, Daisy, no. Bender, did he tell you that he had killed somebody? Daisy, no sir.
Jeff Wallace tries to cast doubt on Daisy's testimony. He says, maybe Daisy is
testifying about a different call, or maybe she's just the wrong Daisy. Yet again, it's one
witness's word against another. Right before Jeff Wallace addresses the jury for closing statements,
he picks up a piece of evidence. Deputy Hardy's hat, the one that he would always wear on duty,
the one he was wearing when he was shot. It has a bullet hole through the brim.
Jeff Wallace argues that Violet Ellison heard to forest Johnson bragging about what he did.
Wallace turns to the jury and says, let me read you the words, his words, not mine.
I shot the fucker in the head. I saw his head go back and he fell. He should never have got
in my business, messing up my shit. He says these words to the jury, like this is an on-the-record
statement directly from to forest Johnson when it's really Violet Ellison's testimony of what she
says she overheard. However, it occurred, Wallace continues, he's proud of his role in it and don't
forget that. No matter how many shots were fired, he's proud of the one he put into Deputy Hardy's
head. Here's his respect for Bill Hardy. Wallace throws Hardy's hat onto the courtroom floor.
He's as guilty as they come.
Judge Bayhackle gives the jury instructions to carefully consider all of the evidence.
They begin deliberations at 4.25 p.m. on a Friday afternoon to forest family waits for the verdict.
He's a defendant, but he's innocent until proven guilty. That didn't seem to be the case in
the courtroom during that time. It was like you have to go above and be young to prove you're innocent
because that's right now you're guilty. That was a dark feeling in there. You couldn't get around it.
Two and a half hours later at 7.10 p.m., the jurors file back into the courtroom with their decision.
To forest Johnson is found guilty of capital murder. Judge Bayhackle schedules the penalty phase for
the following Monday. This is when the jury will decide to forest fate. Should he be sent to prison
for life without parole or put to death for Hardy's murder? The penalty phase of a capital murder case
represents the highest stakes in our criminal justice system. Defense attorneys often call
lots of witnesses and sometimes spend weeks presenting evidence to try to convince the jury to spare
their client's life. The penalty phase hearing for to forest Johnson lasts only 80 minutes.
To forests attorneys call three members of his family to testify. When Erskine Mathes asks to
forest grandmother, "You know what we're here for today?" She answers, "Well, yeah, I guess,
not really though." It's clear Mathes and Bender didn't adequately prepare her for the hearing.
On the stand to forest's mother Donna cries so hard she can barely hold her head up.
At one point Mathes says to her, "Listen to me. Can you raise your head up and look at me?"
Donna Johnson tells the jury through her tears, "Just don't give my baby no electric chair."
The final witness is to forests cousin Antonio Greene.
"I'm 52 years old and until the day that's probably one of the hardest things I've ever had to do
was get on that stand and beg for his life."
The jury deliberates to forests fate for over five hours.
In the decision about whether or not to forest should live or die,
all of the jurors don't have to agree. A unanimous vote is needed for guilt or innocence,
but a jury in Alabama can sentence a person to death with a majority vote of 10 to 2.
And just after 5 p.m., they reach a decision with the minimum number of votes needed 10 to 2.
The jury recommends the death penalty.
Judge Alfred Bayhackel affirms the recommendation that to forest,
Johnson be executed for the murder of deputy Bill Hardy.
One newspaper reports that to forest sat motionless as the jury's recommendation was read,
appearing to be stunned. To forest's mother Donna screamed, "No, no, no."
To forests's oldest daughter, Shanei, was in the courtroom that day. She was six years old at the time.
And I just kept kind of trying to get his attention and blurred now how nice he looked in his suit.
And so finally, the judge kind of had me escorted out of the courtroom,
but there is a little small window. And my cousin had me on his shoulders. He escorted me out.
He had me on his shoulders. So I could just peek through and see my dad through that little small
courtroom window. And I runically stole that was my last memory of him in the free world.
No hesitation.
no friction, just a car that's right there with you.
Test her at your local Toyota dealer or visit Toyota.com today.
We're kicking off the season with the Sandra Birchmore story.
A case the police wrote off as a suicide in a snowstorm.
And you can get access to all episodes 100% ad free with an iHeart True Crime Plus subscription
exclusively on Apple Podcasts, available only to iHeart True Crime Plus subscribers.
So don't wait, head to Apple Podcasts, search for iHeart True Crime Plus, and subscribe
today.
Oh my god, Lexi, we have a new podcast, it's called Don't Lie to Me.
I'm Lexi Iwanyu, we're two best friends, 22 years apart, but so close at heart.
And I'm Lisa Jelio, the old one, which means we have wildly different references, occasionally
different opinions.
I'm not gonna get any of your fighting.
That is wild.
If men were just honest about this, there would be so much more peace in the world.
We're going to talk about dating, relationships, beauty, getting older, and a little wiser.
We're best friends, but we don't always agree, because you told us how accommodating you
are.
Yeah, I would do what I think I could do to fight the fight, but there's only so much
fight I can fight.
Don't lie to me.
Don't lie to me.
Don't lie to me.
Don't lie to me.
Lier.
I don't really care.
So my thing is this, why didn't Dare Abender reach out to me for to Forrest?
Felonique Sanders, aka Quisey, still wonders why To Forrest's attorneys didn't call her
or Mama Cat to testify at his second trial, like they did in the first one.
That makes me feel like we failed them, because we saw them, and we wasn't the only one,
so it's like what we said didn't even matter, like they didn't take it into consideration.
Mama Cat and Quisey were important alibi witnesses at his first trial, who saw him at
T's place the night Hardy was murdered, and their testimony may have created enough reasonable
doubt to prevent a guilty verdict.
Instead, To Forrest's attorneys called two other witnesses from T's, but these witnesses
didn't seem well prepared and were flustered on the stand.
I wondered the same about Marshall Kelly Cummings, the Kebler cookie guy.
Why didn't they call him as a witness in the second trial?
What he saw out the window, one person slowly driving away in a copper-colored car, that
contradicted the state's story, but the jury that sentenced To Forrest to death never heard
from him.
The third difference between To Forrest's first and second trials involves Latanya Henderson,
the friend of Yolanda Chambers who was in the car with To Forrest and Ardregus after
they left T's place.
Remember, Latanya was facing a charge of hindering prosecution.
She went to jail for five months because she refused to go along with Yolanda Chambers
story.
At the time of To Forrest's second trial, Latanya was still facing this charge when prosecutor
Jeff Wallace called her as a witness.
Right before the jurors were brought into the courtroom, Jeff Wallace told the judge,
the state wants to secure her testimony and in that regard, we are dismissing her hindering
prosecution case.
For years, Latanya said that she didn't know anything about Deputy Hardy's murder, and
it was only just before she took the stand for the prosecution that the state dropped
the felony charge against her.
Poof, like magic.
When she took the stand, Latanya stuck to her story that she wasn't there when Hardy
was murdered, that no one in Ardregus's car talked about killing anyone.
But she did say that she had a gun that night, and so did To Forrest.
On the stand, she said she hid her gun on the tire of another car and that Ardregus Yolanda
and To Forrest hid the other gun under the dashboard.
Police searched Ardregus' car after they impounded it.
They never found a gun, but Latanya's testimony put a gun into Forrest's hand on the night
of the murder and this likely stuck with the jury.
And finally, To Forrest's lawyers called an unexpected witness.
The thing that happened to me that is the most stunning is putting Yolanda Chambers on
the stand in the defense case.
Derek Drennen was a young lawyer working with Jaffee on Ardregus' case.
At the time, both attorneys were paying close attention to To Forrest's trials.
When I first read the trial transcript, I wondered why would the defense call Yolanda
Chambers to the stand and Derek had the same question as he watched it unfold.
Why would you call the only person on the planet who will testify under oath that your client
was there, you know, and they're lying about it?
Yolanda testified that she was at the scene of the crime with To Forrest, Latanya and
Ardregus. She said it was Ardregus, not To Forrest, who killed Deputy Hardy.
But still, her testimony directly contradicted To Forrest's alibi that he was at T's place.
They're asking the jury to believe her when she says, you know, Johnson didn't shoot him
forward to it.
I don't know how that could that could be justified.
There's nobody on the planet that's going to put your client on that parking lot that
night except for you a lot of Chambers.
Nobody will.
And to put her up there to say that their client was innocent, because Ford did it just
beyond me, you know.
Not to me, it's just really inexplicable.
Prosecutor Jeff Wallace ceased on this at trial.
In his closing statement, he told the jury, if you go back in the jury room and decide
that Yolanda Chambers ought not to have been allowed to testify because she's a liar
or whatever you might decide about her, that's okay.
He didn't call her, the defense did.
I want you to remember that.
I called both of To Forrest's original trial lawyers to ask about the decisions they made
and defending To Forrest.
But neither would sit down with me for an interview.
He forgets sometimes that there was a third person on that phone who told him the discredits
what this lady said she heard.
You know what I mean?
And now how close, how much closer can you get than that?
You're the third party in that three-way conversation and you say, "No, that's not what
it was."
I needed to find the person on the other end of the phone call that Violet Ellison overheard.
The person who actually talked to To Forrest, Daisy Williams, Daisy was 19 when she testified
it to Forrest's second trial.
She's now in her mid-40s and has never spoken publicly about the case.
But she agrees to come to my house to talk.
I'm a mechanic.
How did you get into being a mechanic and to working on cars?
I was a humbler growing up.
I love cars. I have a 71-4 at home now that I'm trying to restore.
I love working on them.
I love going to the car races and everything.
We settle in on the couch and talk for over an hour.
To Forrest is a real good person.
He got a real good heart.
Daisy tells me To Forrest was friends with her two brothers, Charles and Eugene.
They used to hang out and play basketball when they were growing up in Pratt City.
her story.
The story about what happened on that phone call is consistent.
What she tells me more than 25 years later doesn't vary from what she said on the stand.
My cousin actually called me because he was in the county jail at the time.
And who was that?
Was that Fred Carter?
Fred Carter.
Okay, yeah.
So when that initial call came to you, I guess Fred had called Katrina, Violet Ellison's
daughter.
And then she made the three-way call to connect him to you.
And then he put DeForest on.
Is that how it went?
Yes.
He actually, like I said, he told me, he was like, "Guess who up here with me?"
And he knew we all grew up in Presiden together.
And he was like, too far.
It's not like for real.
He gave his first phone and let me talk to him.
So I'm talking to him.
Like, man, what's going on?
And he told me, I've been accused of killing somebody.
And I was like, man, you got a lawyer.
And he was like, "Yo, we left it at that.
We didn't go no further with that conversation about DeForest that share."
He said he was accused.
And that's all he said to me.
Why did the jury believe this woman who eavesdrop on the call over you, who actually
happened?
On the call?
I don't understand.
I never understood it.
You know, they went on hearsay.
They went on with, she said she over her.
They didn't actually listen to me.
I was young.
So I feel like by me being young, they didn't actually listen to me.
Well, she just, you know, somebody, you know, she probably just saying something.
And that's how I feel.
There are two recurring questions that come up when DeForest's family and friends talk
with me about the case.
The first, why isn't Violet Ellison's testimony hearsay?
Maybe something that someone overheard is considered hearsay and not admissible as evidence
in court.
DeForest lawyers tried to argue that Violet Ellison's testimony was hearsay to get it thrown
out.
But the judge overruled them.
It turns out there is an exception to the hearsay rule when someone claims to overhear
the defendant admitting to the crime.
The second, isn't the jail supposed to record phone calls?
According to testimony from a jail supervisor, the phones in the Jefferson County jail weren't
equipped with the ability to record in 1995.
One of the hardest things to comprehend about this case is what happens 10 months after
DeForest Johnson was convicted in sentence to death.
In June of 1999, the state once again tries to convict our drages forward.
Jeff Wallace prosecutes the hardy case for the fourth time.
In the state's star witness, Yolanda Chambers, Violet Ellison is never even mentioned.
And Wallace presents yet another theory of the crime, a fifth theory.
At the grand jury hearing, the state argued that our drages and Omar Berry killed Deputy
Hardy.
Then, at our drages' first trial, Jeff Wallace said our drages was the only person who
killed Deputy Hardy.
Then at DeForest first trial a month later, he argued that DeForest was the only shooter.
A year later, when DeForest was tried a second time, the state said DeForest fired a shot
and so did Quintez Wilson.
But they said Wilson was not being tried because of a lack of evidence.
And finally, after DeForest Johnson was sentenced to death, and after Jeff Wallace characterized
Yolanda Chambers as a liar, he turns around and uses Yolanda as his own star witness against
our drages forward.
The jury in our drages' second trial deliberates for less than an hour and declares him not guilty.
Our drages is acquitted.
I talked to his cousin Nicole about that moment.
I wonder how that made you feel, I mean, did it make you feel like the system worked that
our drages was acquitted?
It didn't make me feel like the system worked.
It showed me that Richard Jeffy did a wonderful job defending him.
Our drages and DeForest had the same alibi.
Nobody denies that they were together the night Hardy was killed.
But there was a major difference between their cases.
Our drages' family was able to pay for a renowned attorney and DeForest's family wasn't.
Meanwhile, prosecutors had a powerful tool at their disposal, the ability to use multiple
theories to get the outcome they were seeking, someone to go down for Hardy's murder.
No prosecutors should be allowed to, in any case, much less a death penalty case to try
two different defendants for the same crime using a different theory and different sets
of witnesses as if they're staging two Broadway plays of the same scenario.
Richard Jeffy, our drages' lawyer.
This case is all about alternative worlds that are in conflict with each other and in
conflict with truth and in conflict with what our justice system stands for.
Arguing inconsistent theories isn't technically illegal.
But I mean, come on, five different theories.
There is no way all five of these theories can be true.
These theories are mutually exclusive in conflict with each other.
I asked Jeff Wallace to explain how could he argue these mutually exclusive theories against
two different people for the same crime?
It's a valid question, but it's not the right question.
The right question is whether or not we argued something that was supported by the evidence
in that trial.
It helped me understand how, as a prosecutor, you can argue that one person is the gunman
in the killing of a deputy.
He's convicted and sentenced to death.
And then at a subsequent trial, argue that another person was the shooter.
Well, it would not be, if I can be hyper-technical, it would not be the shooter of the sign, will
it?
Jeff Wallace gives me a long-winded explanation about how two people could be guilty of
the same crime, if, for example, one person shoots a victim and another fires a shot, but
the bullet flies off into space.
But that's not what Jeff Wallace argued at trial.
You don't have to decide which one fired the shot, they're both guilty.
But the evidence showed that there was only one gun and one gunman, right?
Well, I don't know if you could say that.
I think that's what the firearms expert testified to.
He did.
A firearms examiner looked at the two shell casings, found at the murder scene, and determined
they had been fired from the same 9-millimeter pistol, indicating there was only one shooter.
I keep pressing him. I want Jeff Wallace to tell me how he squared in his own mind these
contradictory theories about who fired the fatal shots.
Jeff and I go round and round.
In theory, prosecutors are employed to seek the truth.
They don't have a mandate to obtain convictions, but the law allowed him to do what he did.
And Jeff Wallace told me himself.
He was known to push a case to its limits.
I'm afraid that my reputation was that I was fairly mean.
I tried to follow all the routes, try to do exactly what the boss wanted done, and so I tried
to follow all the orders.
And now we should have been a little more yielding sometimes.
We should have seen a little more glory, but I was fairly black and white, and I'm afraid
I was fairly mean, and I'm not necessarily proud of that.
As to Forrest's family watched their worst nightmare unfold, it was clear that he wasn't
the only one failed by these trials.
They also thought about Deputy Bill Hardy and his family.
You know, the victim's family deserve to know what happened to their loved one.
But they get no justice, no peace out of a wrongful conviction.
You know, and this is simply a case of just anybody to do.
And looking at it from the inside, it seems like the whole thing was just put together
like a puzzle.
And all this is going on in a court of law that's supposed to be the most honest place in
our country.
[MUSIC]
After he sentenced to death, correctional officers put to forest in a van and drive him 200
miles south of Birmingham.
He arrives at Holman Prison and is assigned a five by eight cell on death row where he'll
spend 23 hours a day.
Roaches crawl everywhere and there's no air conditioning in this sweltering Alabama
heat.
As months go by, to forest learns to survive in this agonizing space.
But he also sees prison guards take men from their cells and walk them around the corner
to the death chamber.
And he wonders when they are coming for him.
Is he next?
He just started crying and I asked him what was wrong and he said that he had just assumed
that they could come any minute and take him to be executed.
That's next time.
[MUSIC]
Ear Witness is a production of Lava for Good Podcasts in association with Signal Company
number one.
Executive producers are Jason Flom, Jeff Kempler, Kevin Wardis, and me, Beth Schalburn.
The investigative reporting for this series was done by me and Mara McNamara.
Producers are Mara McNamara, Hannah Beale, and Jackie Polly.
Kara Cornhaber is our senior producer.
Britt Spangler is our sound designer.
Additional story editing from Marie Sutton.
Select Check Help from Catherine Newhand.
And special thanks to Toforest Johnson's Legal Defense team.
You can follow the show on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and Twitter at Lava for Good.
To see behind the scenes content from our investigation, visit LavaForGood.com/EarWitness.
[MUSIC]
>> You know that moment when everything lines up.
When life gives you the green light and you just go, that's the 2026 Toyota Camry.
>> Monday night brings one more big matchup to settle into.
And when every play matters, the last thing you want to do is step away to figure out dinner.
That's where DeGiorno comes in.
Get a DeGiorno pizza ready before kickoff.
Then enjoy restaurant quality taste fresh from your own oven while you stay locked into every play.
Stock up on DeGiorno over the weekend so when Monday night rolls around,
the only thing you sweat is the game.
Shop now at the link in the episode description.
It's not delivery, it's DeGiorno.
>> If you're a business owner, you need a card that can keep up.
With the Delta Sky Miles Reserve Business American Express Card,
everyday purchases transform into miles you can use towards future travel.
So businesses usually can lead to a well-deserved getaway.
And for a limited time, card members can earn 200,000 bonus miles.
The highest miles offered this year.
Whether you're traveling for business or planning your next adventure.
Now's a great time to make every purchase go further.
Apply today at www.delta.com/podcast.
Offer ends November 4th minimum spending requirements in terms of apply.
Podcast Summary
Key Points:
The 2026 Toyota Camry is promoted as a responsive, no-friction vehicle that perfectly aligns with the user’s moment of decision, emphasizing ease and readiness in performance.
A major criminal case involving the 1997 murder of Deputy Bill Hardy is detailed, where multiple trials are conducted using conflicting theories and testimonies, highlighting systemic flaws in justice.
Violet Ellison’s testimony, claiming to overhear DeForest Johnson confessing to the murder, becomes a central piece of evidence, though it is inconsistent and lacks corroboration.
Prosecutors shift theories across trials—first targeting Rodriguez Ford, then DeForest Johnson, then multiple defendants—without evidence, raising concerns about prosecutorial misconduct and lack of factual consistency.
Key witnesses, including Daisy Williams and Latanya Henderson, contradict each other and are selectively used or dismissed, undermining the credibility of the prosecution.
DeForest Johnson is convicted and sentenced to death despite no physical evidence linking him to the crime, and his family believes he was innocent due to lack of credible proof.
The case exposes disparities in legal resources, as DeForest’s family could not afford a strong defense, while prosecutors exploit multiple narratives to secure convictions.
A central theme is the danger of hearsay evidence and the failure of the justice system to protect the innocent, especially when testimonies are unverified and emotionally charged.
Summary:
The transcript blends promotional content for the 2026 Toyota Camry with a deep investigative report on the 1997 murder of Deputy Bill Hardy. The narrative centers on the controversial prosecution of DeForest Johnson, who was tried multiple times under different theories, each time relying heavily on the unverified testimony of Violet Ellison. Despite no physical evidence and contradictory alibis, Johnson was convicted and sentenced to death.
The investigation reveals a pattern of prosecutorial inconsistency—shifting theories across trials, using hearsay, and selectively dismissing key witnesses—highlighting systemic flaws in the justice system. DeForest’s family and the defense team argue that the prosecution exploited weak, uncorroborated evidence and ignored critical facts, such as the lack of jail phone recordings and the firearms expert’s conclusion that only one shooter fired the fatal shots. The case underscores how disparity in resources, prosecutorial overreach, and the use of unreliable testimony can lead to wrongful convictions.
Meanwhile, promotional segments for the Toyota Camry and other brands, such as DeGiorno pizza and Delta business cards, are interwoven, suggesting a multi-genre content structure. The overarching message is one of justice failure: a system that fails to deliver truth, especially when the accused is vulnerable and the evidence is fragile.
FAQs
The 2026 Toyota Camry is described as a car that offers no hesitation or friction, being responsive, ready, and in control, perfect for when life gives you the green light.
People can test drive the 2026 Toyota Camry at their local Toyota dealer or visit Toyota.com to learn more and see available packages and options.
Melissa Jeltsin hosts the 'What Happened to Her' podcast, which premiered with the Sandra Birchmore story, a case initially ruled a suicide by police.
The podcast 'Don't Lie to Me' features two best friends, Lexi and Lisa, discussing topics like dating, relationships, beauty, and aging, with a focus on honesty and personal growth.
Violet Ellison claims to have overheard DeForest Johnson confessing to killing Deputy Bill Hardy during a three-way phone call, making it a key piece of evidence in the prosecution's case.
Critics questioned the testimony due to inconsistencies—such as DeForest's name being written in notes after the call and the claim that only one side of a conversation was heard—raising doubts about its reliability.
Chat with AI
Loading...
Pro features
Go deeper with this episode
Unlock creator-grade tools that turn any transcript into show notes and subtitle files.