I am Innocent

A Comprehensive Encyclopedic History of the World’s Wrongly Convicted Persons

Jay Robert Nash

Da Capo Press 2008

Never trust anybody with your freedom. That’s about the only conclusion I can draw from this book. It is a litany of all the worst of human nature, in so far as the imprisonment or execution of the victims is concerned. It covers lazy lawyers, incompetent judges, uncaring governments, publicity seekers, and particularly people in high office who are prepared to see the laws trampled on to preserve their power.

A particularly good example is the crucifixion of Jesus, which is explained by the author in terms of the politics of Roman-occupied Judaea at the time, and the desire of the priest class to keep their privileged position. Balanced against this is the ruling class, who don’t want to see any sort of gathering point for rebellion in their area.

Similarly, Joan of Arc was forced into execution by an established religion that didn’t want the common people having direct conversations with God, and a ruling class who didn’t want Joan as a rallying point for revolution. “Witch Trials” were another convenient way to maintain religious control over the population.

In more modern times as the common people gained power, they also abused it to vent their prejudices against race, religion, money (or lack of it), and as a quick and lazy way to gain prestige within their community. The United States does not come off well in this book, and the state of Florida particularly comes in with a large share of race-inspired bigotry leading to incorrect imprisonment and executions. Its judges, prosecutors and even the juries in some cases have been guilty of some of the grossest miscarriages of justice catalogued in the book.

Not all confessions are genuine. Nash has a fascinating segment on false confessions. The reasons people confess to crimes is fascinating, but not as fascinating as the motives of the law enforcement officers who accept these confessions even though they are obviously false. In far too many cases the confession was accepted and the conflicting evidence quietly hidden. There are examples where a convicted person has requested DNA testing to prove their innocence, but the local authorities have denied this simple test lest it bring the evidence given in the trial into question.

The legal system is not above criticism. In the Pellegrino murder case in Chicago, an ex-policeman, Steven Manning, was arrested for the murder. Manning had been working for the FBI as an undercover informant, but had told them he wanted nothing more to do with them. They insisted and he took civil action against the FBI for harassment. He was put in a cell with a notorious informer and known liar, who was promised a reduction in his sentence if he could tape an incriminating admission by Manning. The tapes revealed nothing, but the informer said Manning had admitted it during a blank 2-second section of the tape. Judge Edward Fiala admitted the tapes into evidence, even though there was no mention of Pellegrino on them. The jury was not told that the tapes had no evidence on them. Pellegrino’s wife said in evidence that her husband had warned her Manning was out to get him. On this irrelevant evidence Manning was sentenced to death. Seven years later, following appeals and a newspaper campaign, Manning was finally freed after the Appeals Court ruled Judge Fiala should not have admitted the tapes, and Pellegrino’s wife’s evidence was only hearsay and should not have been admitted either. The informant’s sentence was reduced by eight years. Manning was immediately rearrested on a prior kidnapping charge and started a 100-year sentence.

He fought the kidnapping charge through appeals and six years later a jury ruled he was not guilty of either Pellegrino’s death or the kidnapping. The jury said he had been framed on both charges by two FBI agents, Robert Buchan and Gary Miller, over his refusal to continue working undercover. Manning was awarded 6.6 million dollars in compensation for his fourteen years in jail. The FBI said that it did not believe the agents had engaged in any misconduct. At the time of writing both agents were still employed by the FBI. Who are the criminals in this case?

The idea of an incompetent judge going along with framing a suspect is not unique. In the United States, where so many public officials are elected and a high public profile is necessary, there have been many cases of officials railroading suspects into jail. This is to show they are tough on crime, to go along with local racial prejudices, or because other powerful figures have placed weak officials under pressure to go along with it. Florida features prominently in some of the most blatant miscarriages of justice, particularly in racially-motivated cases. They are not alone, however. Chicago has had its share of ethnic troubles, and a number are detailed in the book.

Although the book is strongly U.S – oriented, many other countries come in for there share of comment. It appears that the longer the justice system as we know it has existed in these countries, the more enthusiastically it is abused.

Nash is a good writer, and although his work raises indignation in the reader it is more factual than sensational or emotional. He has researched and catalogued the foibles of world justice systems for many years. This book is the latest in his series of reference works, which have won “Best Reference” awards from the American Library Association. This is in spite of his known habit of including some fictitious entries in his books to trap copyright violaters. Subject to this caveat, the book is a worthwhile read on subjects that will make the reader uncomfortable about the safety of their freedom.