The Skeptical Juror Blog

99 Cent Experiment Bites The Dust

2011-04-15T19:44:00.000-07:00

Sales were up, yes. But not enough to sustain the experiment.

Numbers, you say? Previously, sales were about 1 per day, 30 per month, of all three Skeptical Juror books combined. We cleared about $2 per book, because $2.99 qualifies for a 70% royalty on Amazon.

With a price of 99 cents, Amazon only allows a 35% royalty, or 35 cents per copy. So we have to sell around 7 times as many copies to break even.

We only sold about 60 copies in the month of the experiment.

So, we have to try harder to publicize the book, because frankly, if you're going to buy at 99 cents, shouldn't you be interested enough to buy at $2.99?

A new E-Tome from the Skeptical Juror Guy

2011-04-10T12:50:00.000-07:00

We've taken the Smashwords plunge to publish a book that is not intended to see the light of day as a print work. Inferno: An Inquiry Into the Willingham Fire will be an ebook first, and most likely, always.

Smashwords converts an uploaded book into a number of different formats, for reading on all the different ebook platforms out there. Kindle, Sony, Nook, and Apple, the major players, all have their platforms. We've priced the book at 99 cents, continuing our 99 cent experiment in other markets.

The SJ's book about Cameron Todd Willingham is selling, slowly, at Amazon. Mostly in Kindle format. This book is an extension of that one, an investigation of the possible actual causes of the fire. While people mostly debate as to whether or not it was arson, there's nothing else written about the question of if it's not arson, what could have caused it?

One of the advantages of ebooks is that publishing color graphics is so much easier than in print. So there are plenty of pictures and graphs to illustrate points made in the text.

We're also treating this as a learning experience for our upcoming publication of The Rate of Wrongful Conviction (thrilling title, isn't it? We have to come up with a better one), coming soon. Ish.

The 99 cent Experiment

2011-03-14T09:27:00.000-07:00

Given the results obtained by Joe Konrath and other writers (though they are fiction writers and TSJ most emphatically is not), we're trying a little experiment, starting today.

We're dropping the Kindle pricing on the books about Byron Case, Cory Maye, and Cameron Todd Willingham to 99 cents each. Amazon will only transfer 35 cents of that to us...however, we're currently making less than $2 a day on all three titles. Not a lot of risk, there.

99 cents may get us all the way to #1 in the categories the books are listed in. Once that happens, we may get some attention in various venues. Certainly, we expect to sell more copies, in an absolute sense.

And there's other publishing news coming. Interesting times are ahead.

The Kindle Edition of Book #3 is Available

2010-10-23T14:55:00.000-07:00

The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham is now available on Amazon.

This whirlwind effort was written in just about 4 weeks, then edited and submitted to both our digital print house and Kindle in less than a week! Kudos to TSJ for marathon days, nights and weekends in the Chair of Writing. Talk about your buns of steel!

In just a few days (we hope by next Tuesday) the print version will be available on Amazon and Barnes & Noble as well. We'll update the links when that happens.

Cameron Todd Willingham is a case getting national notoriety right now. No sooner had the Kindle version become available than we sold a copy, with zero marketing efforts! No telling what might happen with a bit of marketing on our parts.

Here's hoping that this is the big break the entire series needs. Watch this space!

Marketing Efforts and Future Directions

2010-08-30T09:23:00.000-07:00

Cory Maye, as noted, is on Amazon now, so the next big effort is marketing. We're mailing books with a cover letter to a bunch of Mississippi newspapers, and we've submitted to a listing that goes to 35,000 librarians. Hey, if we could get one book in each library.....

And, watch this space! Last weekend we noticed a new bookstore had opened just two blocks from our house. It's been open since the first of August, so perhaps we're a little slow on the uptake. We walked down to Gatsby Books to meet and talk to the owner, Sean Moor. He's a nice young man who has been making a living selling books online and on Amazon. He took it to brick & mortar to have the experience of running a bookstore. His collection of used books is of extremely high quality, and he also carries new books.

He's enthusiastic about local authors. You can get much more local than two blocks away! After some discussion we took him up on his offer to use his store space for a book signing, tentatively scheduled for 7pm October 20, 2010. We'll be working on some flyers, and other ways of publicizing the event.

We also left a copy each of Cory Maye and Byron Case with Sean. We're in a bookstore!! Yay. First one anywhere.

So we'll be planning and working for the talk TSJ will give at the signing. Maybe we'll draw people in by talking about self-publishing. Yeah, that's the ticket!

Print Edition now on Amazon

2010-08-18T15:18:00.000-07:00

As you see, the link to Amazon now leads directly to the print edition of The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye. This is the first (and as of this date) the only book about the case.

We are working at present at marketing this book, and Byron Case as well. Two in a series...what will be the third??

Cory Maye To the Printers!

2010-08-14T11:16:00.000-07:00

We've finished editing the proof copy of Cory Maye, and have released it for production, which means that quietly, in the night, without notice to anyone, it will appear on Amazon. When we discover it, we'll let you all know.

Which means we go back to compulsively checking Amazon. Frequently. Because who knows when it will appear? It's like mushrooms sprouting after rain. Well. In rainy places. Not in Southern California, because it'll probably be November before we get rain again. Gosh, I've gone all Bulwer-Lytton, here.

But you know what I mean.

The incidence of errors in the proof wasn't too bad. Either that or our editing got really crummy. You'll let us know, I'm sure. We've ordered a case of publisher's copies for publicity purposes, we'll be mailing them out to interested parties, including every crime reporter in Mississippi whose address we can dig up.

More updates as news happens!

Late Update

2010-07-27T22:36:00.000-07:00

Today, we uploaded the cover and text of Cory Maye to our digital print house.

We await the proof copy, the better to find most of the mistakes the last editing process missed.

So, probably 3 weeks out on the availability of print copies! With almost all the misteaks corrected. You never catch them all.

In other news, even without publicity, 3 copies of the Kindle version have sold! How exciting.

Now, it's time for bed on the Left Coast.

Cory Maye Kindle Edition Now Available!

2010-07-23T14:12:00.000-07:00

The second book in the Skeptical Juror series, The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye, is now available for Kindle.

The print edition will be to the digital print house in a day or so, and after checking the proof, we'll release it for publication. So look for that version in about 2 weeks.

Cory Maye is the story of a young man in Mississippi who shot and killed a police officer who entered his home. The circumstances are tragic, and there is no denying that Maye shot the officer. Maye was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death.

But did he know the intruder he was shooting at was a police officer? Or did he think it was a burglar or other criminal? He says he was protecting his young daughter, who was asleep in the house.

Now, The Skeptical Juror has uncovered facts in the court and police documents that throw some doubt onto the conclusions of the prosecution. Cory has gotten a new trial, but is still incarcerated.

This new book in the series tells a dramatic story, and raises some shocking questions.

A Flying Update for Our Blog Readers

2010-07-15T13:35:00.000-07:00

All three of you.

TSJ has finished the writing of The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye. And I, in turn, have finished the first copy and style edit of the manuscript, and returned it to the author with a few brief suggestions for some relatively minor additions.

I think we must be getting the hang of this author/publisher stuff. For the first time, a substantive review has not resulted in suggestions that result in major rewrites.

The book is turning out well. It's a national story, with a subject who is coming up before the Mississippi Supreme Court this fall. And it's told, this time, in a more entertaining and readable, and yet scientifically compelling way, than the Byron Case book.

We'll be publishing, I hope early next week, on Kindle, then on to paper publishing soon thereafter.

Good Things Come To Those With Buns of Steel

2010-06-28T14:35:00.000-07:00

For sitting on while waiting, of course. The buns of steel, that is.

Today, we got our first teeny-tiny reimbursement check from Amazon for the sales of our Kindle edition of The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Byron Case. It's a beginning.

In furtherance of our purposes, nefarious and otherwise, we also signed up today for the Reporter Connection, and HARO (Help A Reporter Out, out of what they don't say). Both of these are connection sites that work by putting together reporters in search of expert sources, and sources in search of publicity.

So, who knows. We may come up with interviews or newspaper stories where The Skeptical Juror is the perfect expert. We'll be watching our email!

In that vein, on July 20th, TSJ will be interviewed at 3pm, Pacific Daylight Time, on BlogTalkRadio, on the Women Behind the Wall show. It will be his first interview about the book. He'll be talking about Byron Case, and wrongful convictions in general. The host of the show, Gloria Killian, was herself wrongfully convicted and exonerated and released after 17 years in prison. The questions ought to be interesting!

Flying Times

2010-06-22T17:49:00.000-07:00

Yesterday was the Summer Solstice, the longest day of the year. Happy Solstice to those who celebrate.

It doesn't seem possible that half a year has passed since we published The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Byron Case. Already! Holy cow. We just got our first publisher's compensation from the digital print house. Somewhere in the vicinity of 200 books are out there in the world, what with publicity copies we've ordered, and given to various and sundry folks. Byron Case's mother is busy working to place them in book stores and libraries in Kansas City.

We should do that too, I know. Maybe when we have the second book available.

The other day I was wondering, if we donated copies of the book to a library, who assigns Dewey Decimal numbers to it? Is each library responsible for their own classifications or is there some giant master list somewhere. Seems like there has to be a master list, doesn't it? Otherwise how could interlibrary loans work?

I know, I could look it up. But instead I'm going to work on editing the next section of Cory Maye. We really want to get this puppy up and out by the end of July. That way we may have a fair chance of getting Susan B. Anthony published this year as well. Or #3 in the series. Not both, probably. Turns out that writing and publishing books is a slower process than one would imagine, when one is a naive young (relatively speaking) author.

Most people think they can write a book. Nearly all of them think writing is an easy way to make a living. Until they try it. Then only the real writers stick it out and finish a book.

Before we turn around, it'll be Christmas and New Years. I'll try to post again before then. Really.

We're RICH!!

2010-06-05T20:39:00.000-07:00

Okay, not so much.

But we now have gotten to the other side of the whole process, the part where we actually have some publisher's compensation for The Skeptical Juror and The Trial of Byron Case returned to us from the digital print house. It came in the mail today.

These are the returns for February, the first full month of publication. Wait, you say, it's friggin' June! Yep. They keep track of sales monthly, then delay sending a check until 90 days after the end of the month. I presume that's to accommodate those publishers that may have returns. Or they're just playing the float as long as they can. So this check wasn't cut until June 1.

These are not all the books printed, of course. There must be 150 or so other copies floating about out there. We sent copies to friends, family, early readers, and some folks we wanted to review it. We sent cases to people who said they would be willing to publicize it.

And we've been selling at cost to Evelyn Case, allowing her to keep the profits and apply them to Byron's defense fund. Seems like the least we can do, at the moment.

Bottom line is we are doing a poor job marketing the book, and that is reflected in the sales. Nonetheless, we now have the excitement of receiving the first revenue for our hard work on this new venture. We have something to look back upon and say "Remember back when ..."

On the upside, the Cory Maye edits are going well. I like the way the deliberations are shaping up. Jury dynamics promise a lot of interesting byplay and tension.

And once Cory Maye is published, we will do a better job of publicizing both that work and Byron Case.

So we're not rich, except in experience. We'll get there. Still not quitting the day jobs, though.

There, In the Distance, a Light!

2010-05-31T10:35:00.000-07:00

The Skeptical Juror reports that he's finished writing the trial and the deliberation portions of The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye.

A modest celebration took place at Pei Wei, one of our favorite chain restaurants. It's the only place we know where you can get good, healthy, fresh food nearly instantanously. Don't know how they do it, but you order, find your seat, put your number in the number stand on the table, and almost before you can fetch the drink and the silverware, the first plates are on the table. And the food is consistently yummy.

The structure of this second book in the series is a bit different. It begins with the deliberation, and the trial portions are interspersed with that, as support of the drama in the jury room. We think it will deliver more of the writing that got the best reviews in Byron Case.

We are more realistic now about the work and the time it takes to get a book to the printer and online with Amazon, Kindle, and all. Roughly in this order, we'll be editing the first part while TSJ writes the Aftermath section, then we'll have to lay the whole book interior out, provide copy to our designer for the cover, approve the cover, create the print and Kindle PDFs, upload it hither and yon.....taking time out for a breath.... get the proof copy, re-edit and resubmit, and then go live.

Then I get to wrassle Amazon through the process of linking print & Kindle editions, and try to market both books.

June 30? July 15? No later than that, certainly.

We'll also have some updates on what's going on with Byron Case, the person, not the book.

Connections, Connections

2010-05-15T19:31:00.000-07:00

We had a note today from Evelyn Case, the mother of Byron Case.

She met and exchanged books with Dennis Fritz, who was the subject of The Innocent Man by John Grisham. The book has been made into a movie to be released sometime in the future.

So perhaps we'll get some feedback from Dennis Fritz, who was wrongfully convicted, exonerated, and released from prison.

Sloooooowly, I Turned.....

2010-05-05T11:58:00.000-07:00

Updates might be slow here, as we ramp up to getting The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye published.

A sincere publisher/author discussion yesterday clarified the direction of the narrative. The story itself is interesting, but confusing in the testimony part. The jury itself is proving fractious, thus adding drama. Which is good, as that's the part most readers said they enjoyed in the first book. Just like actors say it's more fun to play bad characters, it may be more fun to write about them than goody two-shoes characters.

I'll be giving more attention to my bead blog, and will continue efforts to try to promote the main Skeptical Juror site.

But I'm giving myself permission not to feel guilty over not posting here daily. I'll write when a milestone happens.

I Was Told There Would Be No Math

2010-04-30T19:26:00.000-07:00

Then I married an Engineer. The capital "E" is because he's really an Engineer for Life, though that's not how he makes his living anymore.

Now, math and I have a nodding acquaintance, as long as my husband, The Skeptical Juror, also known to our clients as Algorithm Guy, takes the trouble to explain things in plain English, in small words. Slowly.

The concepts I can generally understand. Don't ask me to solve equations. Often these concepts have to do with aerodynamics, or other aspects of physics, explored by TSJ in his guise as Geek in Residence. (have I mentioned that I really like geeks?)

Right now, TSJ is working with a very scholarly paper by a statistician (another species of mathematician) to translate the concepts into words we can all understand. The paper is about how to derive the numbers of factually guilty people who have been convicted in this country. Or so I understand. TSJ will correct me if I'm wrong. TSJ read me part of one sentence. After the first 15 words contained both "Sigma" and "covariant" I tuned out. This is why we need translators!

This paper has direct application to the project he's working on over at TSJ main site. He's very enthusiastic about the progress he's making, which is lovely to see. Enthusiasm that is.

In other news, the first segment of the Cory Maye book, second in the series, has now been through initial edits. I think the new format is going to be a winner!

Time For An Update, Sportsfans

2010-04-13T08:56:00.000-07:00

So what does a Skeptical Juror do in the aftermath of a whirlwind release of a fabulously overlooked first book?

He buckles down and keeps working on the next in the series. Because so far, not dime one has trickled in from the sales of the book. Don't get me wrong, some books have sold. But publisher compensation is slow (30-90 days) to arrive. The Amazon Associates program hasn't made enough for them to cut us a check this quarter. We need to sell at least an order of magnitude more books. Maybe two orders of magnitude. That is to be devoutly hoped for.

We've been accused in various venues of profiting from murderers, or our recounting of their situations, with implications we're getting rich off the misfortunes of the victims.

Well, not so much. We believe sales will grow with time, and with the expansion of the series. We've gotten some really great reviews on Amazon, from people we do not know at all. This is extremely encouraging.

A big part of the feedback is that the fictionalized jury deliberations is either readers' favorite part, or one of their favorites. In the spirit of giving the readers more of what they want, the second book, "The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cory Maye" is going to be restructured to be almost entirely from the perspective of the jury deliberations. The trial portions will be incorporated as part of the deliberation process, as flashbacks to justify the arguments being made in the jury room.

We've also got some jury room fireworks planned with difficult personalities and a bit of...well, you'll have to read it.

TSJ himself has committed to working at least an hour a day on the manuscript, but it's nearly a total rewrite. We thought the format of the first book would hold throughout the series, but like most battle plans, it didn't survive first contact with the enemy....er....the readers.

So don't hold us to publication before the end of April. That's not going to happen. Progress is being made, we promise.

Later, more on our perspective on victims, perpetrators, justice and profits.

A Precious Gift

2010-03-27T11:33:00.000-07:00

Every time we touch someone, talk to someone, email them, contact them in any way, they grant us the precious gift of their time.

For most of us, that's a tiny fraction of the time we have to spend in our lives. The value of 1/1,000,000 of someone's remaining time is small, but not negligible. We thank people for spending their time with us frequently. We resent it when telemarketers or door-to-door salespeople steal our time.

What does it become when it's a large and measurable fraction of someone's remaining time? Perhaps people know this from spending time with terminally ill loved ones. Fortunately, this situation has not come into our lives yet.

But last week, we got an incomparable gift, from a man who knew exactly when he was going to die. Read about Hank Skinner here. Last Tuesday, we got a package from Hank's wife, Sandrine. It contained a printed copy of the ten part series linked above, each paragraph numbered.

It also contained a 24 page letter, in Hank's handwriting. It was dated the 11th of March, so at the time he started, he had 13 days left to live. How long did it take him? No way of knowing. But it was not only hand-written, it was a thoughtful commentary on the article, paragraph by paragraph, referring to the numbers on each. Some he agreed with. For others he offered corrections of fact, and in some places, personal information that would help us understand him better. So hours at the very least. Perhaps days.

If it was only one day, that was something like 1/13 of all Hank's remaining days, at the time. That is an immense gift. Holding something like that in your hands is humbling. We never expected any sort of contact with Hank personally. We didn't expect he would ever know of our efforts on his behalf. We did all of this, the graphic, the mailing campaign, the website, etc, because it was the right thing to do, once we knew the facts of the case.

TSJ has committed to compose The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Hank Skinner as another book in the series. He hopes (wants, needs) to have it done before the election date in early November where Rick Perry will be up for re-election. Ideally, it might be done before the Supreme Court gets around to considering Hank's case before it. All of that is designed to pressure the State of Texas to release the DNA for testing.

We speculate that in giving us this gift of his time, Hank wanted to have his story told as only he could tell it. He was, in fact, the only living person present at the murder scene that day. No other witnesses survive. Someone who is a suspect as the real murderer has since died.

We thought that our book might be published after Hank's execution. Thanks to the Supreme Court stepping in, and no thanks to Perry or the DA's office, we now have an opportunity to get it out while Hank still has a chance for exoneration, and life.

TSJ is working on it. The rest of the team is supporting him. This blog will tell the story.

Not today, Hank

2010-03-24T15:32:00.000-07:00

Well, as you can see on the main site, Hank Skinner isn't going to die today.

There will be more later on how this has affected all of us here. Wow.

Publisher, Publisher, Wherefore Art Thou Publisher?

2010-03-18T16:34:00.000-07:00

My superhero alter-ego is that of a publisher, though I wouldn't dare take off my glasses to fool my friends and colleagues, being blind as a bat without my specs.

But right about now, I'm feeling bat-blind in the publishing persona too. We did everything right. We wrote and designed a quality product, and edited it until our fingers bled. (figuratively) We wrangled our way through the Publish-on-Demand morass to get the book onto Amazon, the Kindle version up, the two versions connected. We've networked and talked to people about the book. We've purchased crates and crates of the darn things, and given them to various people to sell for us, or to use for publicity purposes.

TSJ has been all over the internet, posting comments on appropriate blogs, trying to drive traffic to the site. We've asked people to review the book on Amazon or B&N, but not many have done so. In fact, our only unrelated review on Amazon is from a hostile friend of....well, I'll let you read it, along with the following comments. We've sent out one copy for review, clearly we need to send out more.

Now my dad tells me that on Barnes & Noble they only promise delivery within 6 weeks. I'm not sure what that's about, for me it says "ships in 24 hours." But then, I didn't go through with the order. I've got enough copies hanging about. Perhaps that comes later in the order process.

Finally, and not insignificantly, TSJ has been distracted for the past six weeks or so by his effort to spare Hank Skinner the Texas needle. Any difficulty we may have pales in comparison the ultimate injustice being heaped upon that man.

With respect to our marketing effort, the bottom line is that the book is not selling well. We need some big darn impetus to get people to view, buy, enthuse, tell all their friends, woohoo! Perhaps we need to take books in hand and visit some local bookstores.

I suspect that this is the point at which most self-published authors fail. Marketing, it's not for the faint of heart.

TSJ is working right now on his first Skeptical Juror Brief, which is The Trial of Susan B. Anthony. He's uncovered some political chicanery about her trial for (gasp!) actually voting while being a woman that will curl your hair. Or maybe it just proves that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Those politicians back then would be right at home in Washington DC today.

Perhaps two or three books will become a critical mass of literary merit and they'll all start selling. We can only hope! And in the meantime, persist.

Common But Unconscious Attitudes, Number The Fourth

2010-03-17T14:52:00.000-07:00

Okay, time to dive into the eyewitness issue, #4 on the list of unconscious but common attitudes one deals with in a jury trial.

Let's start with a bald assertion. Most of the people who have been exonerated in this country were convicted by eyewitness testimony. We're just dealing with the exonerated because it's too hard to prove that people still in jail were wrongfully convicted.

The national Innocence Project has a lot of information on reforms that have been made and more that should be made in order to increase the accuracy of eyewitness identifications, which are a primary source of convictions. In various studies and documents cited, you'll find figures of anywhere between 60% and 90% of proven wrongful convictions were based on eyewitness testimony or identification.

There are so many factors here that we can't deal with all of them. Just a few include human perception problems, human memory issues, and a jury member's belief that he or she can determine honesty. Elizabeth Loftus is an acknowledged expert in the area of eyewitness testimony, memory, and the effects of first-person testimony at trial. Reading just a few of her works and the studies that have come from them will open your eyes to the vast swamp that is the human mind and memory. I got a lot of these references from a work about the witness perceptions of the JFK assassination, most of them to studies performed by Loftus.

People believe they can identify faces at distances far greater than objectively possible. They believe they can reliably identify individuals of other races, though studies have shown that this is far more difficult than distinguishing among similar appearing faces of the same race as the witness. Memory is notoriously unreliable, open to bias from the moment it is formed. Memory can be influenced by past experiences of the witness, by discussion with other people, by the wording of questions asked by interviewers, even evolving over time as subsequent memories are formed.

People tend to trust their own memories, so they trust the memories of other people, that those memories are reliably formed and truly related. This is one reason why eyewitness testimony is so crucial. More weight for truthfulness is given by juries to witnesses who display great confidence and who provide small but seemingly critical details with their testimony. The problem with that is that believability and actual truth have no relationship whatsoever. A person who testifies may be absolutely telling the truth as they remember it, but that truth may bear no resemblance to reality.

Juries trust eyewitness testimony because they don't understand the myriad ways in which perception, memory and retelling can be manipulated. It doesn't even have to be deliberate manipulation on the part of the prosecution or the witness themselves. Most witnesses do not commit perjury. They genuinely try to get it right. And the juries help by believing them when they point at the defendant and say, "He did it." But a jury's interpretation gets no closer to the truth than before.

But think of this. In nearly every one of those exonerations list on the Skeptical Juror site, some eyewitness sincerely testified that, "He did it." And they were wrong.

Do a little googling about "eyewitness testimony accuracy" and you'll never trust anyone's testimony again. Not to paraphrase Jerry Macguire, or anything, but SHOW ME THE PROOF.

And I mean hard, objective, covered with DNA, photographic, not relying on eyewitnesses, proof.

Inside, Outside, All About The Town, Hank Skinner Down to 19 Days To Live Again

2010-03-06T19:21:00.000-08:00

Okay, that's a strange subject for a blog.

It's been a few days since the last post, and I've found myself putting off working on Part 4 of the Attitude posts, because talking about the reliability of eyewitness testimony actually takes some research, and that's The Skeptical Juror's gig, not mine. I'll get there.

Inside, it's warm, dry, well lit and cozy. The refrigerator is right over there <--- and well stocked with yummy food. Outside, it's a bit coolish (53F) and raining gently. Earlier today, TSJ and I attended a lovely orchid show and sale in Torrance. We splurged more than we should have on some gorgeous orchids, which now grace our living space. Then we went out for a nice dinch (what we call that meal that falls between lunch and dinner). The waitress was sweet and she brought us exactly what we ordered.

So what does this have to do with Hank Skinner? Often as we go through our days, I think of Hank and his fellow Death Row inmates. We take our freedom to move, to choose, to associate, to possess, and to live so much for granted. Hank, originally scheduled to die on February 24, was granted a one-month stay because the state of Texas got some paperwork screwed up. Never mind that pesky "is probably innocent, test the DNA" thing. He was re-scheduled to die on March 24. He got screwed out of three days because February is a short month.

TSJ and I went through some frantic times early in February, preparing the graphic that we mailed to all and sundry, including incumbent and probably next Texas Governor Rick Perry. We're hoping that simple human decency and perhaps a sense of shame will prod Perry into delaying the execution until all the DNA in the State's possession is actually tested. We're hoping that during an election year, someone in Texas will have the balls to stand up and say "This is wrong!!" Whether it's Perry, his opponent(s), the news media or anyone with a voice, we don't care. Someone ought to.

Otherwise Hank Skinner will die.

We haven't forgotten that. Even while we enjoy our freedom, TSJ is planning and working a continuing campaign. You can read about it, and we'd love to know about anyplace we could send the missives that TSJ is now distributing. We're calling for innocence projects, the news media, politicians, political activists to stand up and say that Hank has been factually exonerated, and it's time to step back and test the DNA before he's dead.

We can't work at the frantic pace of February, but we haven't given up. Inside, outside, anywhere.

Common But Unconscious Attitudes, The Next Generation

2010-03-01T20:13:00.000-08:00

Our last post on attitudes was #2, that bad things like accusations, arrest, and trial don't happen to good people. Or at least well-behaved, law-abiding people. I think we're over that one, now. Next up, #3.

"If by some awful coincidence, an innocent person is accused, all they have to do is tell the truth, and the truth will set them free."

Just tell 'em! They'll believe you. Starting with the police.

The police are lied to, bald-faced, over the top, unremittingly and egregiously, by nearly everyone they deal with who is accused of any crime. Why should they believe anyone, ever? Going by experience, the odds aren't good that any given person is telling the truth. This extends as well to DAs, judges, and, by and large, defense attorneys. It's just a given.

So why should the innocent person stand out? They don't. Even a person with no criminal background can go bad. Or they just haven't been caught yet. It's a cynical, jaded view, but it's one shared by nearly everyone in law enforcement. They don't see enough innocent people in a week to count on one foot. In that regard, the system is actually doing its job.

But the rare innocent bird is a clog in the system. That's where it tends to break down.

Anyone who is innocent is starting from the bottom of deep, dark hole, in getting anyone to believe them. It's nearly a black hole, in that no rays of innocence can escape. Police are supposed to be gathering and analyzing evidence, and if that evidence shows the person is innocent, they're supposed to release that person, or the DA is supposed to instruct them to. But as Hank Skinner's case shows, both the police and the DA can, either consciously or by assumption of guilt, slant the evidence to show exactly what they want it to. Don't collect or test probative evidence. Don't release evidence to the defense for their own testing. In Byron Case's trial, evidence was tampered with, but still allowed at trial. It was kept from Byron as he languished in jail awaiting trial, so he couldn't identify those facts that might have acquitted him.

As The Skeptical One and myself have seen in real life, an attorney with an actually innocent client has a whole different case than they likely are experienced with. In the case I'm thinking about, we asked the attorney why he defended people he himself knew were guilty, 99% of the time. His response was that almost always, the people he defended were over-charged by the DA, relative to their actual infractions, and he felt it was his job to get them an appropriate sentence, rather than to get them off or to allow them to be sentenced for an infraction far more serious than had actually taken place.

This same attorney, when faced with an innocent client, had no clue how to defend him properly. He was no longer aiming for appropriate sentencing...he wanted acquittal. But his strategies weren't designed that way. In a situation with a guilty client, managing the information that's shown to the jury very carefully is one way to "win." In limiting the evidence presented, the DA nearly always cooperates. They want to slant the evidence their own way, so between prosecution and defense they are very careful what is revealed. In fact, many times the defense simply does not ask for certain evidence, does not ask certain questions on the stand, and hopes like hell that neither his client nor his witnesses will reveal areas he doesn't want explored.

For an innocent client, however, it turns out that the revelation and analysis of all evidence is much more in the interest of the defendant. Getting complete discovery from the prosecution becomes crucial. It is also incredibly difficult. Often, particularly for indigent clients, the only investigators are the ones the DA uses. They may have exonerating evidence. Whether or not they give it to the defense is another issue.

"But if I'm innocent and the DA has evidence that shows that, why wouldn't they just drop all the charges?"

Often, there's an agenda in the DA's office to keep those conviction rates up and investigatory costs down. If they feel they have a case (not even a good case, just any kind of a case) they'll stick with the defendant in custody, rather than releasing him and going after Door Number Two. This is not an episode of Law & Order, they don't routinely get it wrong 3 times before they get it right. They figure that any kind of eyewitness, lineup identification, bad record or minimal physical evidence, plus a good dose of dramatic courtroom table-pounding, and they can most likely get a conviction.

"So my last chance is the jury. I'll tell them the truth, and they'll set me free."

Twelve of your fellow citizens, a few of whom regard jury duty as a responsibility of citizenship. The rest just couldn't figure out how to get out of it. At least one or two don't understand the jury trial process. They don't understand the issues being discussed. Others have their own impressions of you, going in. All of them are under varying influences of these same unconscious attitudes we've been talking about. Remember, most of them are sitting there thinking, "Well, he must have done something to be in that spot! He can't be a good person like us or he wouldn't be here!"

Then the DA stands up, speaking first in opening, and last in closing, and he or she tells them flat out, "The Defendant will lie, because he doesn't want to go to jail. He has every motive to lie, and every motive not to tell the truth." Isn't that just a lovely assumption of guilt, all hidden under a nice coating of advice from someone who surely has the jury's best interests at heart? The DA will rarely if ever, mention the presumption of innocence. That's the defense's job, and if you have a lazy or incompetent counsel, the jury will never hear about that.

But they will, most of them, watch you like a hawk, as you sit there under the testimony of everyone else. If you take the stand yourself, you'll be examined under a microscope. Every flinch, every small smile, every eye contact or avoidance, every sigh and every body posture will be watched. Every intonation will mean something different to each juror. Some will think you arrogant, others stand-offish, others will think you guilt-ridden. Not one of them, unless they truly are a Skeptical Juror, will listen to you with the attitude that you must be speaking from innocence.

So tell the truth. Go ahead. But never assume that the truth is obvious to anyone who hears it. And immediately, you'll perceive what may be the most frustrating thing about a trial. You can determine ahead of time what you want to say, but actually, you can only answer the questions that are asked, by either prosecution or defense. Sure, your defense attorney will ask, "Did you do it?" and you'll look straight at the jury and proclaim, "No, I did NOT!" That carries almost no weight at all.

But the fourth or fifth time the DA asks "So when you went there you were intending to hurt her, right?" and your attorney leaps to his feet and objects, so you never get to answer it, the jury remembers not the answer, but the question. You can tell the truth, but the questions can mutate and obscure the truth into something unrecognizable.

Then your lawyer gets to close. He lays everything out as best he can. He hopes the jury will remember some of it, because....the DA gets to go last. In every court, the DA is the last to speak to the jury, other than the judge who finishes up with some really boring instructions. The DA will put on a performance designed to completely obliterate every bit of defense argument. They will introduce in their closing statement things that were not even testified to, and they know the jury will consider that as evidence, and that the defense now has no opportunity to refute. They will scoff at your "truth" and demean your character and your motives. They will interpret every bit of evidence they have introduced as rock-solid damning proof.

And then the jury retreats to consider all this, the DA's words ringing in their ears. Consider if you were on that jury. In some courts, note-taking during trials is not allowed. Think about sitting somewhere, listening to strange people whose names you didn't quite catch talking for two or more solid days about events that took place months ago, broken up by bathroom breaks, lunches, and a night or two at home, not talking about it or processing it in any way. Now, you get into a room with 11 strangers, and you have to negotiate a new power structure by electing a foreperson and coming to a unanimous decision. And you can't get out until you do.

In a trial that last more than a few hours, it can be very difficult for the jury members to remember anything that was said, let alone those tiny telling details that you think should shout "NOT GUILTY!" Truth gets trampled by the sheer volume of evidence, and non-evidence presented to clutter things up.

Most juries come to a verdict far more quickly than they should, if they were to actually consider all the evidence. An hour or two in a murder case is almost criminal in itself. There is not a lot of room for deliberation, let alone the identification of truth in that kind of time frame. Verdicts are rendered out of unconscious attitudes, misapprehensions, prejudice, and a sincere desire to GO HOME.

"All you have to do is tell the truth, and the truth will set you free."

No. You have to tell the truth. You have to show the truth, with evidence. You have to bring the truth before them, in a process not designed around seeking the truth. You have to make cynical people, clueless people, self-interested people believe the truth, counter to their own agendas, bigotry, assumptions or attitudes. There is no "all you have to do" about it.

And if you can't do that, you have to go to jail. Innocent. And hope for exoneration somewhere down the line. Far too many people are now in this position. TSJ is hoping that advocating for better police and DA procedures, and educating better jury members will help reduce those numbers.

There is at least one more attitude I want to talk about. It leads to far too many convictions, even though it has been proved time and time again not to be true. And that is...

#4. "The best witness is an eyewitness, particularly if they identify the criminal in a lineup. An eyewitness is better than physical evidence."

The Trial of Byron Case, a Review by Byron Case

2010-02-28T10:38:00.000-08:00

Yep. Byron himself has blogged a review of the book. We're grateful that it was so well received by the subject himself.

Remember that when choosing Byron as the subject, we went solely on the availability of trial transcripts and other documents online. We had no idea that there was evidence of actual innocence to be found in those very documents, nor did we have any intention of contacting Byron or his family at the time. It was actually an entirely random choice at the time for the first book in the Series.

It's funny how life works out, isn't it? Because we found that evidence of innocence, we felt we had to contact Byron's defense counsel. When that didn't work out, we contacted Byron's mom, and then, through letters and now, regular phone calls, we're working with Byron himself in seeking out pro bono counsel for his last, best appeal.

And at last, Byron can hold an actual copy of the book we've been working on for so long in his hands. At first, he was a bit skeptical (ironic, isn't it?) of our motives. Now we have committed to help as much as we can, believing in the evidence.

Byron has a tough time posting to his blog. He has to hand-type (no computer, just old-fashioned IBM Selectric) the posts, and mails them to an assistant to post them. Just to illustrate our relative place in the universe, the review post of the book has been superseded by a hilarious entry on toilet-paper in the prison system of Missouri.

Read a bit. It lets you get to know Byron a little bit better. It makes me certain that we have to continue our efforts to improve the quality of jury verdicts in the justice system, so that people like Byron, innocent people, don't waste their lives in prison.