Ending Wrongful Convictions



by Lorenzo Johnson

The record number of exonerations of innocent prisoners last year shows that something is very wrong with our judicial system. If the saying “the proof is in the numbers” is true, then why is this system moving at a snail’s pace to combat the causes of wrongful convictions? How many of us have to continue to suffer before our broken judicial system admits that structural changes are necessary and acts to bring that change about?

Recently, exonerees and supporters of still-incarcerated innocent prisoners called on the Mayor of New York to take action. A rally was held on the steps of New York City Hall. The topic was “Stop Wrongful Convictions Now.” Altogether, the exonerees who attended and spoke have spent more than a century in prison for crimes they never committed.

Exonerees Jeffrey Deskovic (16 years imprisonment) and Derrick Hamilton (21 years) spoke about their nightmarish experiences. They called on the NYPD to institute widely accepted methods to help prevent wrongful convictions–such as recording all interrogations and conducting “double blind” procedures in live police lineups and photo arrays. Also speaking at this rally were recent exonerees Shabaka Shakur (27 years in prison), Sundhe Moses (18 years), Kevin Smith (27 years), Henry McCollum (30 years on death row). They all spoke about how the judicial system failed them and described steps that can prevent this from happening again.

Eighty million was spent on wrongful conviction settlements in the past year alone. According to the New York Innocence Project, 52 percent of New York’s DNA exonerations involved eyewitness Purchase tickets to the November 14 Event – Preventing Wrongful Convictions [/pop-up]misidentification. 48 percent of New York’s DNA exonerations involved a false confession. Of the 330 DNA exonerations, 150 actual perpetrators were identified went on to commit 70 sexual assaults, 30 murders and 25 other violent crimes in New York. Eleven Real perpetrators identified went on to to commit five murders and three rapes.

You might think that New York would immediately introduce these reforms–but that’s not the case at all. Instead, Lonnie Soury, Attorney Ron Kuby, and many others called on the Mayor,

Catch our discussion on Wrongful Convictions on November 15 - click on the photo to purchase your tickets
Catch our discussion on Wrongful Convictions on November 15 – click on the photo to purchase your tickets

Governor, Police Commissioner, City Council, and State Legislature to institute reforms that can immediately prevent wrongful convictions. Such procedures have already been implemented in New Jersey, Connecticut, and 20 other states.

This crisis is not only going on in New York; it’s taking place all over. In many other places, it’s been swept under the rug or placed in a closet with plenty of other skeletons. It’s time that society as a whole holds all parties involved in wrongful convictions fully accountable. The job of police, prosecutors and judges is to enforce the law and protect society. When they do the opposite, they are breaking the very same law they took an oath to uphold, and there must be consequences.

Every exoneree and innocent prisoner has a family, so the nightmare of being in prison for a crime we never committed does not only turn our own lives upside down–it does the same to our families. Keep in mind, we are someone’s son, daughter, husband, wife, father, mother, brother, or sister. Wrongful convictions are not mistakes. If they were, the problem would not be such an epidemic. The public has the power to confront this injustice, to hold our judicial system accountable, to create solutions, and to stop this madness. There is no room for error when lives are at stake.

Lorenzo Johnson served 16 and a half years of a life-without-parole sentence, from 1995 to 2012, when the Third Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled there was legally insufficient evidence for his conviction. He remained free for four months, after which the US Supreme Court unanimously reinstated the conviction and ordered Lorenzo back to prison to resume the sentence. With the help of Michael Wiseman, Esq., The Pennsylvania Innocence Project, The Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice, The Campaign to Free Lorenzo Johnson, and others, he is continuing to fight for his freedom. Email him or sign his petition and learn more at: http://www.freelorenzojohnson.org/sign-the-petition.html.


About The Author

Disclaimer: the views expressed by guest writers are strictly those of the author and may not reflect the views of the Vanguard, its editor, or its editorial board.

Related posts

2 thoughts on “Ending Wrongful Convictions”

  1. zaqzaq

    Another propaganda piece written by a man convicted of murder.   Johnson’s case does not involve scientific evidence, a confession or lineup issues.  It hinged on the interpretation of the evidence by the jury.  The appellate court, without observing the testimony, in their ivory tower decided to second guess the jury’s interpretation of the facts and the supreme court found that they used an improper standard in doing so.  Why does the Vanguard publish an opinion piece by a convicted murderer on the east coast here in little Davis?  My technical skills are limited.  Here is my attempt to create a link to the Supreme Court’s decision Supreme Court Opinion

  2. Tia Will


    Regardless of the guilt or innocence of Mr Johnson, is it your assertion that his piece is in error? Which of the men that he noted had been released after erroneous convictions, also as decided by the court system, do you feel was released in error?  Which of his numbers about the amount of money spent in fighting wrongful convictions or his statistics about DNA based exonerations and the subsequent capture of the actual perpetrator after additional crimes are you disputing ? Do you dispute that locking up the wrong man can result in allowing the actual criminal to commit further crimes ?  Do you doubt that locking up an innocent man also has adverse consequences on his family ?

    It would seem that you are not addressing any substantive issue raised here at all. Do you believe that the author has less right to speak because he is a convicted felon ? Or are you saying that we should discount the veracity of his statements and conclusion without consideration of their merits because he is a convicted felon ?

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for