The Innocence Files (2020) s01e05 Episode Script

Too often, an eyewitness
on the witness stand at trial
is like a sausage.
[male voice]
The sausage is made by the millions
to satisfy the desires
of both young and old.
[Gary L. Wells]
How did these witnesses get created?
The jury doesn't see the process.
They don't see
what went into making this witness.
[male voice] To satisfy the huge
American appetite for sausage,
much of the pork is ground up, seasoned,
and made into the familiar links.
[Gary] By the time
these witnesses take the stand,
they have morphed into
very persuasive, positive eyewitnesses.
[male voice] Seventy percent or more
of the live weight of a hog
is made into edible products
of great variety.
[Gary] It looks great.
Why wouldn't you buy it?
But if you knew the process
and all that went into
making that sausage,
you might not buy it at all.
[opening theme music playing]
[indistinct police radio chatter]
[sirens wail]
[man] The prosecution said,
"The facts are simple.
A man is dead.
We have five credible witnesses
who say,
'He's the guy who did it. I saw him.
He leaned out the window.
He pulled the trigger. It's him.
I saw him do it.'"
[woman] To me, they seemed like,
"That was the guy."
They were 100%.
There was never any one of them
that led me to believe otherwise.
[gunshots]
[man]
Did you know at the time that,
just a few months
before the trial that you were sitting on,
there had been an earlier trial
of Franky and the same charges,
and it had ended in a mistrial?
Actually, I didn't know
that there was a mistrial.
I don't think that I was aware
that there was an entire first trial.
[man] The different testimonies
of the six individuals
that were on the lawn,
it was really hard to say
what they were making up
and what they really saw.
You expect someone to say,
"Hey, that's the person who did it."
Nobody was really sure
that this was the guy who did it.
[woman] In the first trial,
all the witnesses had a testimony
that was wildly inconsistent.
[lawyer 1] Can you describe the car?
[man 1] A tan Buick,
or a Regal or a Cutlass.
[man 2] It was a two-door Buick Regal.
[man 3] A Monte Carlo.
[man 3] Buick.
[man 1] Like a brown Cutlass.
I think it was a Cutlass.
Like, with a beige cover.
- [lawyer 2] Do you know what color it was?
- Black.
- [man 3] Tan.
- [man 2] Brown
[man] Truth was coming out
about theeyewitnesses' inability
to really get a good view.
[lawyer 1] Can you show us
somewhere in the courtroom
the distance, approximately,
as to where the defendant was
when you first recognized him?
[man 4] From me to that wall.
Approximately 47 feet.
- [lawyer 2] 100 feet away, would you say?
- [man 5] Yes.
[lawyer 2] About 15 feet?
Parts of his testimony,
he could identify the person.
[lawyer 1] Was the lighting sufficient
to recognize the defendant's face?
[man 5] Yes.
Other times, he wasn't sure.
[lawyer 1] And at that time, were you able
to see anybody's face inside the car?
[man 5] No.
Giving me a bunch of baloney.
[David Yates]
We wanted to get things right.
We didn't want to convict
an innocent person.
We knew that it was our responsibility
to do our best
to try to come to an agreement.
We talked,
we heard each other's arguments,
and nobody was moving, you know.
And it had become very clear
that we were not going
to be able to reach a verdict.
And that's why it ended up as,
you know, as a mistrial.
[gavel bangs]
[Ron Kaye] After the hung jury occurred,
I believe the prosecution met
with the witnesses and prepped them,
advising them where they went wrong
in the first trial,
and suggested to them,
"This is how you need to present this
in order to be a convincing witness."
I always ask the witness,
"Do you see the person
who fired that gun in court today?"
And the witness will go,
"Yes, it's that man."
Then the judge will say,
"Identifying the defendant."
In the first trial,
Dameon Sarpy kind of hesitated.
After the first trial, I said,
"Look in your heart.
Are you sure you saw him?"
"Yes." "How sure?"
"Absolutely."
"Then convey that to the jury.
You're asking these people
to convict Franky Carrillo of murder.
You better be convincing
if that's exactly what you believe."
[woman] So, by the time of
the second trial, things fell into place.
It was cleaned up.
They got a dress rehearsal.
And they did very well the second time.
[lawyer] What did you see him do?
[man 1] Point his hand out of the window
and start just start firing.
[man 2]
He reached out and pulled the trigger.
- [lawyer] Do you see that person in court?
- [man 3] Yes, ma'am.
[judge]
Pointing to Mr. Carrillo, for the record.
- [man 4] It's him right there.
- [lawyer] Are you positive?
[man 4] Yes.
[Franky Carillo] In my second trial,
the witnesses' testimony
now was really tight.
It was just about,
"We know him from the shooting,
and we're sure it's him."
[Gary] Starting off as a hemming, hawing,
unconfident eyewitness,
over time, what's going to happen
is they're going to talk about this.
They're going to share
little bits of things,
reaching a point
where they've been led to believe
through other people telling them
that this is the guy.
That's very powerful.
You can't blame the jury.
They don't see the process.
They don't see what went
into making this, um, sausage.
We were all pretty confident
in our decision
that he was the actual shooter.
We all believed that he had done it.
I mean, we believed that he had done it.
[Franky] I arrived to adult prison.
It was a gradual fading of a future
that I maybe thought I had some day.
I couldn't envision myself free,
I couldn't envision myself with a family.
It was, like,
very difficult to remain hopeful.
What a waste that I'm not out,
not being able to live the life
I want to live.
I was trying to get out. I wanted help.
I needed lawyers to come rescue me.
But I was also alive, so I made friends,
filling your time going to school.
You're definitely alive,
but not the life you want to live.
[muffled speech over radio]
[Franky] One of the worst experiences
that occurred during my incarceration
my dad had gotten sick,
and there was only one final visit.
I knew this would be
the last time I would see my dad alive.
I wheeled my dad to the outside
of this little patio,
where he and I just started talking.
And, you know, my dad started off
by saying that he's going to die.
And, um
And I just said, "I know you are."
[sighs]
He started crying.
Not crying because, um, of his pain.
He was really apologizing
for not being able to help me.
Just trying to find the way to explain
over and over that,
you know, he wished
he could've been able to protect me and
You know, I said it wasn't his fault
and things are going to be okay and
I'm not gonna give up.
[thunder rumbles]
My dad's death wasn't just
my father passing away,
but it was also the passing away
of my only alibi witness.
My father was home with me
when this crime happened.
Even though it was hard
to separate those things,
I knew that I was also mourning,
to some degree,
the possibility of someone saying,
"Well, Franky, it's too bad.
The only person who could ever
vouch for you is now dead as well."
[woman] He was charged and convicted
when he was just a child.
Convicted as an adult.
I, William Jefferson Clinton,
do solemnly swear
[woman]
He then had the right to a direct appeal,
and he lost that direct appeal.
Then he is without a lawyer
and he's on his own.
The Internet is amazing,
and it's changing every day.
[Bill Clinton] I did not have
sexual relations with that woman.
[male reporter]
Florida, too close to call.
[woman] Franky brought a motion
for writ of habeas corpus,
which was denied.
The state's obligation was done
in Franky's case.
[Franky] I had written hundreds of letters
to judges, news organizations,
individual people,
just anyone I can get a hold of.
Just write them about my story,
about my plight.
At this point in my life,
I felt that I had knocked on
every door possible.
I was really appealing
to, um, the people who
At the time, I wasn't really sure
what role they played,
but it was pretty obvious
that they were involved in this crime.
I knew Oscar from Cub Scouts.
Oscar, he had written a confession,
and had come to court
to turn himself in.
So it's pretty clear that he himself
was involved in this crime.
"Well, Oscar,
I think you know why I'm writing.
I seriously need your help.
Oscar, you can save me.
I'm afraid
and I simply can't take it anymore.
I beg you, please help me
so that I may be free
and live the life I've been dreaming of
for all these years."
I was writing from a very dark place.
I mean, I was deep in this well.
I wasn't embarrassed to do that.
I was really, really banking on
him doing the right thing.
We believe that the sheriff's department
is out of control in general,
and Lynwood is just an example
of what is going on county-wide.
[Ron Kaye] Back in 1991,
David Lynn was a private investigator
working with Franky's defense attorney,
and had a calling
for uncovering corruption.
He created a relationship in Lynwood
with the Young Crowd.
He had their trust.
The Lynwood community
was very, very up in arms
that Franky was being prosecuted.
People knew
that Franky wasn't the shooter.
Wind got to David Lynn
that Oscar Rodriguez was involved
in the shooting.
David went to meet with Oscar,
and David asked questions,
and Oscar responded.
[man] David Lynn had handwritten notes
by Oscar Rodriguez.
[Ron] Oscar took him to the site
and knew facts with regard
to the shooting of Donald Sarpy
that only somebody who was there
would know.
When David was interviewing Oscar,
Oscar had his jaw wired shut.
His jaw had been broken.
He told David Lynn
all the people he'd shot.
He drove around with David and said,
"We shot that one there, this one here."
[Ron] Franky's about to get sentenced,
and Oscar appeared outside the courtroom
of Franky's sentencing.
[woman] The judge really should have said,
"Oh, my goodness.
Let's please bring him in
and put him under oath
and put him on the stand
and let's hear what he has to say."
[Mary] We didn't believe it.
It's like, "Did you go by Home Depot
and rent someone?
I mean, now, really?
Where was that guy in the trial?"
[Ron] Mary Ann Escalante very predictably
said, "No way. This is ridiculous."
And the judge said,
"I'm not letting this in."
So, critical information,
it's unbelievably exculpatory,
was never brought to the jury.
Franky was sentenced.
Oscar went back to living his life,
and there was I don't think
he ever had the compulsion
to do the right thing again.
[woman] People think
everybody claims to be innocent,
but I don't think that's really true.
I had been doing criminal law long enough
to know that
it's a little bit of a fallacy.
Some do, but I would say most don't.
I became a lawyer
so that I could work for Cesar Chavez
and the United Farm Workers Union.
In 2006, I met a woman at a party.
She was a retired GED teacher at Folsom.
She asked me if I would please meet
with this young man
that she knew at Folsom Prison.
And she believed Franky was innocent
and was sort of begging me
to go meet with him.
I went out and met with him
about two weeks later.
The visiting room was completely empty.
I don't remember
anybody else being in that room.
He was this nice-looking young man,
very well-spoken, very friendly.
And he started telling me his story.
And he had a file with him.
I could see that it was basically
a confession of someone
to the drive-by shooting
that Franky had been convicted of.
And I went to my boss, and I said,
"Oh, my God,
I just went out to Folsom Prison,
and this guy is innocent.
I know he's innocent.
And, you know, I've got to take this case.
I have to do this for him. I have to."
I called Linda Starr
at the Innocence Project, and I told her,
"I'm concerned about this case."
I was so grateful when she said,
you know, "I'm going to look into this,
and we're going to do something about it."
[woman]
Our office was approached by Ellen Eggers
and asked if we'd be interested
in looking into the case.
We'll get a case where somebody says
that they're innocent,
and we have to stay
pretty clinical about it
and look to see what the evidence is,
not just what the person says.
And then if we find evidence
that we believe demonstrates
that the client is in fact innocent,
we then litigate,
and we don't stop litigating until we win.
There were long periods of time
when we were just getting nowhere.
We couldn't find people.
If we did find them,
they wouldn't talk to us.
It was two years of painstaking hard work.
[Linda Starr]
So in order to get a conviction reversed,
there are an enormous number of obstacles.
Counsel has to completely
reinvestigate the case, which takes years.
Witnesses are gone, documents are missing,
people have moved, memories have faded.
And then the standard for getting
a conviction overturned is enormous.
It was just, like, nonstop work,
just tearing that case apart.
Lot of knocking on doors. We just
didn't leave a single stone unturned.
Eventually locating
all these eyewitnesses.
[phone rings]
[phone rings]
[phone vibrating]
[Ellen Eggers] We wanted the DA's office
in Los Angeles County
to know that we existed.
[phones ring]
[Brentford Ferreira] Then I start
getting pestered by Ellen Eggers.
I mean, sort of day and night,
she's calling me all the time.
[Ellen] I told the habeas litigation unit,
"Take a look at this case.
I think it raises serious questions here."
A habeas corpus petition is a way
for someone who's been convicted
and feels they've been
convicted unlawfully
to bring in evidence
that was not presented at trial.
Thousands came to the office.
I can't tell you how many people got out
as a result of filing
habeas corpus petitions.
I know it's a very, very small percentage.
[man] My name is Juan Mejia.
I'm a deputy district attorney
with Los Angeles County.
There were six eyewitnesses
to the murder of Donald Sarpy.
Ellen had located four of the six,
and four of the six
had given declarations
saying that what they said at trial
was not true.
That was very powerful,
but it's not unusual.
There are a lot of reasons
why witnesses recant years later.
Sometimes they feel pressure
from a gang to recant,
or from the people
that are investigating the case.
And so they start to doubt
what they testified to,
especially if a case is
20 or 30 years old.
We started off
by interviewing the eyewitnesses.
This is going to be an interview
with James Munnerlyn.
Let's get to the facts
of what you remember today.
What happened that night?
Well, actually, I was across the street.
I was, uh, over at my mom's house
when all the shooting took place.
So you were not standing
with them in front of the Sarpy house?
Exactly.
So you were not in a huddle
with the rest of the guys?
No.
Were you on the side of the street
where the driver was
or the passenger?
Driver.
Was the driver the shooter
or was the
No, it couldn't have been the driver
had to have been the passenger.
[Juan Mejia] He was claiming that
he was across the street at his house.
That's completely different
than what he testified to.
[man] This is going to be an interview
with Montrai Mitchell.
I wasn't focused
on nobody coming to shoot.
That could have been the last thought
on my mind at that moment.
So, uh, you say in paragraph four
that, um
that the next time you saw Dameon
he told you that the cops
wanted to talk to you,
and you told him
that you didn't see what happened.
Is that accurate?
Yes, sir.
And, uh
you felt intimidated because
you say, because you felt the police
didn't like Mexicans or blacks in Lynwood.
I already know.
It's not how I felt, I know.
[Juan] Montrai Mitchell told us
that he was coerced
into making an identification.
He felt pressure
by the sheriff's department.
[man] An interview with Marcus Stewart.
I wasn't really for sure, like
because it was hard to see.
Like, when they were shooting,
we just get down.
So, it was, like, really
It was hard to really see,
you know what I'm saying?
- Yeah.
- I really didn't
Honestly didn't know, really.
[Juan]
Marcus Stewart said that somebody else
told him who the shooter was.
He said that it was too dark to see.
Did Scotty Turner tell you at all
who he picked or who the shooter was?
Yeah, he did.
Yeah, he did tell us.
Did that influence you
when you made your identification?
Well, yeah, that influenced all of us.
OK, so
before you made your identifications
Scott Turner told you
that he picked number one?
Yeah.
[Juan] It was a very common thread.
They were influenced by Turner,
and it was too dark to see.
There were six young men who were
at the scene of the shooting of Mr. Sarpy.
Only Scotty Turner
was talked to the first night
about making an identification.
[Ron] Turner's 16 years old.
Ditsch knows that he can manipulate him
and pressure Turner
to make an identification.
[Scott Turner] I felt trapped.
I didn't really say,
"Hey, that's the guy."
I just wanted to get up out of there.
[siren wailing]
[Linda] It wasn't until six months later
that the other five witnesses
were shown the same six-pack.
[Ron] You never would do
an eyewitness identification
six months after the offense.
The time to do any identification
is as soon as possible. Minutes.
[Juan] In the six months,
the detective on the case, Craig Ditsch,
didn't change the position
of the photograph.
Franky Carrillo's picture
remained in position number one.
[Ron] They bring the other five boys
into the courthouse.
Turner had told them, "He's number one."
[Linda] They thought he knew,
and they were trying to help their friend
whose father was shot and killed.
[Ron] Turner was manipulated by Ditsch,
and Turner converted these guys
who weren't even on the radar
as eyewitnesses.
[ominous music plays]
[male voiceover] In every case,
the experienced officer knows
that evidence, of course,
is essential to a prosecution.
In any type of investigation,
it must be properly obtained,
identified and handled,
so that from the moment
it is lifted at the scene
until it has served
its particular purpose,
it may be protected from contamination.
[man] Eyewitness memory is corruptible.
There arefactors
that can influence the quality.
Law enforcement,
the process of investigating the crime,
can actually cause evidence to change.
An analogy might be
if the cops got the fingerprints,
and then mixed them up in a file,
or accidentally smeared them.
This can easily happen
in the case of an eyewitness.
There are factors which can interfere
with the quality of that evidence.
[Gary] In our lab experiments,
the thing that stands out to you
when you do these kinds of experiments
where you stage an event
for unsuspecting people
and then you put together a lineup
and see if they can pick him out
is just how often people make errors.
In our lab, people may come to a study
thinking that they're going to do
some kind of task on a computer.
Then someone comes in
and engages in
some kind of unusual behavior.
We then put together a lineup.
Witnesses would pick someone,
but the real perpetrator's not there,
so they pick an innocent person.
For half of them,
we would just give them some feedback,
say, "Good, you identified the suspect."
And for others, we wouldn't say anything.
Shortly thereafter, we would ask them, uh,
"At the time you made your ID,
how certain were you
that you picked the right person?"
Oh, and also,
"How closely were you paying attention
at the time of the crime?"
And also,
"How good of a view did you have
when you were witnessing that crime?
And all three of those things
jump up dramatically
in the condition in which all you did
was give them a bit of encouragement
after they made their ID.
[man] What did Deputy Ditsch do
in terms of identifying Franky Carrillo?
[Scott] When I came upon a picture
of Frank, he was like,
"It could be him
'cause he's trying to make his bones,
he's trying to get his stripes."
And that's how I came to that picture.
The criminal justice system
does not fully appreciate
how susceptible
the witness' memory actually is
to influence and contamination.
For many types of forensic evidence,
it's very well understood.
There is a chain of command that must be,
you know, kept and followed.
But the same is not necessarily
appreciated with eyewitnesses.
[man] With regard to eyewitness training,
were you trained on how to work
with eyewitnesses?
I'm not sureI wastrained necessarily.
I don't recall that being
part of our training.
[Ellen] To give the sheriffs
every benefit of doubt,
they were dealing with
a huge gang problem in LA,
and a lot of shootings all the time,
and murders and drive-by shootings,
and I'm sure they were overwhelmed.
But that certainly should not have
relieved them of their obligation
to do it carefully and properly,
obviously.
That's their sworn duty,
not just to lock up anybody
within striking distance
by pushing youngsters to identify
someone that is their hunch
based on wrong information
and mistakes that they had made.
And I can't say whether Craig Ditsch
did it on purpose,
knowing that it was a mistake,
but he definitely did horrible, sloppy,
I would say corrupt police work.
[Dameon Sarpy]
The police should've done their job
and not muddied the waters.
We all sat in the same area.
We were able to talk to each other.
I believe you're supposed to be separated.
I picked Franky's picture
on the word of Scott
who said he knew him.
The very first time I walked in
and saw Franky in court,
I really just wanted to jump
over the stands, just fuck him up.
Just kill him.
But Franky's face, in my mind now,
is in that passenger seat
with a gun out the window.
I honestly believed it was him
for all these years.
[Ellen] Dameon was just very resistant.
He was a tough nut to crack
because he did not want to
He didn't want to meet with me.
[Dameon] She started to come around
and leave her card and things like that
on my door
and say she wanted to speak with me.
But to go and revisit
the most painful moments of my life
My father was the glue to our family.
He organized everything,
he kept us together.
We were together every day, every weekend.
We're doing family things.
And when he passed, slowly,
we all went our own separate ways.
It's a draining experience.
You know, you want to be done.
I wanted it to be over.
I just said,
"Dameon, I just want you to know,
I believe there's been
a terrible mistake made.
Look at the evidence that we have."
Oscar's handwritten notes.
I had some maps of the neighborhood.
About six pieces of information
that I showed
to try to demonstrate
that a mistake had been made.
She convinced me to sit with her,
and I did.
And, um, she laid out so many things
that I had no idea about,
and I truly believed her
after I went through it with her.
[Ellen] He said, "So what do you want
from me?" And I said,
"I just want you to tell the truth,
Dameon, and I want to put it in writing."
[Dameon] For my father, you know, I, um
I just wanted to do, you know,
the right thing.
I don't think that
anybody should be trapped up
like an animal,
in a cell for, like, 22 years and
um, unless they deserve it.
[Juan] Dameon's whole family felt
that they had closure,
that they had the right person in prison,
and he here was helping
these defense attorneys
release the killer of his father?
That took a lot of courage for him
to stand up and try to right the wrong.
Dameon's signature on that declaration
began what unraveled the rest of the case.
Then the sheriff's department
got wind of the fact that
"Oh, my God, you kept us out of this.
This was our case. This was
We developed this evidence,
and you didn't even tell us
this was going on."
And so then the sheriffs want to go out
and reinvestigate everything again.
And that's when they started
hassling people, in my opinion.
[siren wailing]
Did they tell you from
the very beginning of that interview
that the wrong guy was in custody
or something?
Did they kind of pre-preface
your interview?
Or do you remember?
You're talking about
the two detective guys?
We're talking about the lady
From the Innocence Project.
Oh, well, she did, yeah.
[siren wailing]
[Ellen]
They tried to pressure the Sarpy family.
The Sarpy family
was completely freaked out
at the way the sheriffs had been acting.
Since this was
a sheriff's department case
we were asked just to get involved
and see if
Do you feel at all
When you met with these people
from Innocence Project
were they manipulative with you,
did they direct you?
No, I don't feel
that they were manipulative.
[Ellen]
They were just bullying everybody.
We had heard, and we're not trying
to put words in anybody's mouth
We had heard that
you had expressed to some detectives
that that lady
from the Innocence Project
was trying to make you say something.
Is that true?
Like, about?
Say something that wasn't
- that wasn't true.
- Say it to get the guy out of something?
Yes.
[Ron] The sheriff's department
are deeply committed
to not admitting wrongdoing.
Are you saying that you think
she was trying to confuse you?
I don't know, basically, to be honest
I don't know if she got paid
from somebody over there
that's related to him.
She's trying to tell me
that he was sitting doing the time
[Ron] They didn't think
Franky Carrillo was guilty,
but they weren't going to let him out.
The sheriff's department wanted
a different result.
They didn't want Franky getting out
and being found innocent
'cause then they were going to get hit
with an enormous lawsuit.
[indistinct chatter]
[Franky] Twenty years passed
after I was convicted.
I was dating this girl
when I was a young boy,
and she got pregnant.
I was 16, she was 15, and I was afraid.
I was not ready to be a dad.
I think it was about
two months after my incarceration
that my son was born.
The more time I spent in prison,
and the more time that he started aging
on the outside,
the more that I wanted
to be part of his life.
Raising a son through the help
of the US postal office is, um
it's difficult.
The letters I would send him
"Hang in there. Don't give up.
Believe in me.
I'm going to get out of here someday."
I felt like for the first time,
I had promised someone something,
and I felt like I needed to make sure
that I kept my word.
[man] When Mr. Carrillo filed his petition
for writ of habeas corpus,
he set forth two primary reasons.
One was that he did not get a fair trial
because the eyewitness testimony
at the time of the trial was false.
And, number two, he also offered
that someone else did the crime.
[man] In Franky Carrillo's case,
and in virtually any
post-conviction case in this country,
the burden of proof is so much higher
than in a criminal trial.
The burden has literally shifted
to the defendant
to prove him or herself innocent.
There's a low success rate.
And in theory, that's the way
that it should be
if we've had fair trials
in the first instance.
They're hard to win. It's that simple.
[chatter]
[gavel bangs]
We knew that the eyewitnesses
were recanting their identifications.
But we also knew that
the court was going to be
in the trap of having to decide
were they lying then
or were they lying now?
Were they mistaken then?
Are they telling the truth now?
Franky really did have a very high burden.
[Franky]
I came back to the Compton courthouse
for my final hearing,
where new evidence was going to be heard
and the judge was going to decide
if it granted enough merit
to release me
or send me back to Folsom Prison.
[woman]
Ms. Escalante, do you know Mr. Carrillo?
I do.
- [woman] How do you know Mr. Carrillo?
- I prosecuted him many years ago.
[woman] Did you notice that
only one of the witnesses, Scott Turner,
had been asked to look at the six-pack
and make a selection?
When I read the file,
I did notice there was only one ID
and his name was Scott Turner.
I was concerned because
there was a lot of witnesses out there
and I was wondering why they were
not shown the six-pack that night.
Juan Mejia came to the courthouse
I was working at to ask me some questions,
and I was also getting calls
from Franky's civil lawyer.
So I thought, "Wow,
somehow he got the ear of someone,
but I know the evidence. I tried the case.
He was guilty.
Five people saw him.
They ID'd him. He did it."
However, Dameon Sarpy called me,
and he said, "I have to tell you something
and I'm so, so sorry" [voice breaks]
"but I didn't really see Franky.
I didn't see him.
They told me it was Franky."
And then my heart sunk.
I believed it with all my heart.
Years later,
I'm told Mr. Sarpy now says
it's not Frank Carrillo.
Why would somebody,
whose dad is dead,
say that he now didn't see it?
So that's what made me
open my heart to the possibility
that maybe he didn't see it.
[woman] Raise your right hand.
[Linda] The Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department
was adamantly defending
their work in this case.
[woman] Could you state your name?
Please spell it for the record.
Craig Ditsch.
[Linda] Deputy Ditsch was a member
of an organization
within the sheriff's department
called the Vikings,
which had essentially been described
by even other court proceedings
as a gang within the sheriff's office.
They were staunch defenders
of their bad practices
and convictions that they had obtained.
Their conduct in the case
was reprehensible.
Scott Turner looked through each page,
each photograph of that book,
until he came to Francisco Carrillo.
- [man] And then he chose that photograph?
- Yes, he did
[Linda] So the court was forced to
consider the testimony of Scotty Turner
and his representation
about how the identification happened
juxtaposed with
how Deputy Ditsch testified.
[man] Did you encourage him in any way
to pick a particular photo?
No.
[Linda] So he had a ranking sheriff
versus a convicted felon.
[woman] Do you solemnly swear
that the testimony you're
[Linda] Scotty Turner had nothing to gain
by providing this testimony.
And he was maintaining something
that he had been maintaining for years.
When I was going through the book,
picking different pictures,
I picked one person, and he's like,
"No, it's not him. He's in jail."
[Ellen] Scott Turnerexplains
how Officer Ditsch manipulated
the photo lineup.
I looked through, and I picked a person
that was similar to those other people
that I picked in that book.
When I came upon a picture of Frank,
who I did recognize from around Lynwood,
he was like, "Yeah, it could be him,
'cause he's trying to make his bones,
he's trying to get his stripes."
Basically admitting
that he had done this terrible thing.
[woman] At the time, did you think
the report was accurate?
[Linda] We knew that the judge
had already considered
the admissions by Oscar Rodriguez
as to his participation,
but we knew that that alone
wouldn't be enough
to get the conviction reversed.
And so we realized
that what we needed to do
was see if there was any evidence
we could come up with
that would corroborate
what they were saying now.
And so we consulted
with an eyewitness identification expert
to assess the lighting conditions
and see whether or not
the witnesses could have, in fact,
seen what they claimed to have seen.
Ellen Eggers asked the court,
"Would you go look at this?
We think that if you were to see this,
you would understand
that these witnesses
could not have made this identification."
I said,
"We have got to get the judge out there.
You absolutely need to see this
for yourself.
You need to see this.
You can't make a ruling on this case
unless you've seen it with your own eyes."
[Linda] I think that we were all
really nervous going to the scene.
And while we knew what we had seen,
we were worried that somebody else
might say they saw something.
Mr. Carrillo's lawyers literally wanted
to re-enact the drive-by shooting
which is very rare.
[Linda] We consulted with an expert
named Scott Frazier.
He went and did recreate the scene
with the exact conditions
that would have been in existence
on the day of the crime.
[Judge Bacigalupo]
The moonlight was almost the same
as when the shooting occurred.
[Juan] And so we had the judge come.
I was there with my investigator,
John Colicchio.
And, of course, the defense was there.
And we stood in the exact same spot
where Donald Sarpy was murdered.
[Linda]
We were all really nervous doing it.
We were having a judge stand there
knowing he was safe,
looking at the car
and the person going by.
That's not the situation
these witnesses were in.
[Juan] Someone who is in the car
would stick their head out,
and we would look to see
if we could make an identification.
[gunshot]
[Linda] Under the optimal conditions,
could he even make an identification?
And he could not.
[Juan] We looked right into
the passenger side of the car,
and it was too dark to see.
[engine revs, tires screech]
[Linda] The judge was not giving any clues
about how he felt about the case at all.
Everybody else was, like,
kind of falling apart and very moved,
and it was very dramatic. I mean
He was not showing any emotion at all
about it.
You just couldn't read him at all.
[man] It's time for this man to go home.
It's time for this man to begin
the rest of his life as a free man.
Thank you, Your Honor.
[Linda]
So now it was time for Brent Ferreira
to give his closing argument.
And that was devastating.
There certainly has been no proof
by a preponderance of the evidence
that the sheriff's department
committed any misconduct in this case.
[Ellen]
Brent's just a couple feet away from me,
and he's pulling out every mistake,
every
You know, he's pulling out
the flaws of our case.
It's very bothersome
that Mr. Carrillo,
at some point during the second trial
knew about
the third-party culpability rumors
and did not communicate effectively.
I was explaining to the court
that most of the witnesses
we had heard from were not believable.
He's fighting us tooth and nail,
even though he knows darn well
Franky's innocent.
And I was actually looking daggers
at this man.
Does all of that sufficiently undermine
the confidence of the verdict
that the petition must be granted?
At the same time, I'm thinking to myself,
"Okay,
we're going to have to appeal this,"
because I did not really believe fully
that Judge Bacigalupo was just gonna go,
"Oh, yeah. Franky's innocent."
I have an ethical duty
as an officer of the court
to inform the court
that that standard has been met.
And then I did the unexpected
and told the judge that I had
an ethical and legal responsibility
to ask him to grant the petition.
The court finds that the petitioner
has sustained his burden of proof
by a preponderance of the evidence.
The conviction of petitioner
Francisco Carrillo Jr. is set aside.
- Thank you, Your Honor.
- [judge] Thank you.
It's been my pleasure
working with all of you.
Good luck.
[cheering]
I'm really out. It's the sun.
[laughter and chatter]
It's a beautiful day in LA, man.
The sun's piercing
through the trees there, and, um
I've always had faith and confidence
that justice would prevail,
and here's proof of it, man.
[camera shutters clicking]
[Ellen]
I mean, I was just so stunned and
I mean, it was the culmination of,
you know, like, five years of work, and
[Brentford] The chief of detectives,
he was so purple in the face,
I thought he'd have a stroke.
[laughter and chatter]
[Juan] I'd never met Franky,
I'd never spoken to Franky,
and I remember, I I shook his hand,
and I said, "On behalf of the people
of the State of California,
I want to apologize
for what happened to you."
My son is a brilliant young man that
when Dad said, "I'll be home," and
he was confident
that would happen someday.
[Ellen] To me,
it's the best thing that a lawyer can do
with their bar license
is get an innocent guy out of prison.
- [man] Amen.
- [Ellen whispers] Amen.
[Franky]
The last time I was here, I was only 16.
There was a lot to get used to,
but I think what was the hardest
was finding my place in society
and my place in the world.
[child babbles]
- Hola!
- What's in your shirt?
- Hi, baby.
- I don't know.
- Hey, how are you?
- Hi!
[indistinct chatter]
[Franky] I'm raising a family.
I have a great, beautiful wife.
I mean, there's just so much to live for.
- I started prepping the potatoes.
- [woman] Okay, good.
[Franky]
I wonder what would have happened if
if my incarceration
wouldn't be part of my story.
And many people talk about,
"Well, you would've been dead,
or you would've been a nobody,"
you know, and that's obviously an option.
But what about the other million options
that exist for any one of us?
Like, what about those?
- It has been a while for you, huh?
- It has been.
[both laugh]
Oh, shoot!
[Franky laughs]
- "Dragons love"
- "Tacos."
[Franky] Now that I'm home,
I feel that I have an obligation
to use my voice for good,
to go to the Capitol
and testify for bills that I support.
If it's when I hear about
someone who's innocent,
then I can go into a rally
and speak on their behalf.
I want to show up and be heard,
and, to some degree, speak for the people
whodon't have a voice
the same way I didn't have a voice.
[child giggles]
It's about being of service
to other people.
I know what it feels like to be in need,
and so now to be able to position myself
in a way that I can help other people
brings me joy.
[Judge Bacigalupo] The fact that there was
finality to Mr. Carrillo's case
leaves the open question:
if it was not Mr. Carrillo,
then who did commit this murder?
[Ron] There is a fundamental premise
to our criminal justice system,
which isn't necessarily followed,
but the premise is to do justice.
[Linda] All these years,
you think the killer's behind bars,
and now he's not.
Where is the killer,
and what's going to happen to him?
[Judge Bacigalupo]
And what does that mean to that family?
What obligation, then, is there for others
who are in positions of authority
to ensure that justice is met?
Good to see you.
You got your earrings on?
[Franky laughs]
I wasn't thinking about your, uh
- I know your dad was a Raiders fan, too.
- Big time.
I remember seeing your mom in court,
and she seemed like a really good lady.
She talked about your dad
She just spoke about your dad in such a
such a beautiful way, man, you know?
Yeah, that's who she is.
She's a beautiful person, and
I know my dad is looking down on her
right now, like, "I picked the right one."
- Yeah.
- You know what I mean? Like,
"Thank you for raising my kids
and holding them down."
But, I mean, for me
And I'm hoping that they, you know,
that we do recapture
- Right, absolutely.
- Justice, you know. I mean You know.
Yeah.
I had
[Dameon]
My family started out wanting justice.
Why would we not want justice now?
There's guys that are guilty,
there's guys that are out there.
And I felt that same justice
needs to be brought
for the people
who really took my father's life.
There's no statute of limitations
on murder.
There isn't.
So, the state of California
has an open murder
Wouldn't it prompt
some further investigation?
It's not up to the DA's office
to reinvestigate.
It's up to the sheriff's department
to investigate.
I think they let a guilty guy go,
but that's my opinion.
[Linda] The Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department
certainly has evidence
that they could pursue
to try to seek justice for the Sarpys,
and to try to hold the killer
of Donald Sarpy accountable.
The sheriff's department have known
about others involved in the murder
since 2011.
I should no longer have to carry
the burden of what happened,
which involves angerand everything else.
Like, let me now be free of this.
The police should've never gotten involved
with our situation the way that they did.
They need to reopen this case
and investigate it.
And it's simple. Just do your job.
It all comes down to do your job.
[suspenseful music playing]
[intense drum and bass music playing]