Category Archives: The Case

This case is astoundingly complex. All posts related to the case, its investigation, those that played a role, the trials, etc. will be posted here.

The Times They Are A Changin’ – Eugene Vent Granted an Appeal Today

Posted on by
5

“I praise the ones who persevere in seeking justice through the law. I caution there are those who felt abandoned and betrayed by what they saw. Some stood in halls of silence, with icy hints of violence, when they went to seek justice from the law.” – Dar Williams, from the song “Write This Number Down.”

This morning the State of Alaska Court of Appeals has ruled that Eugene Vent should receive a new hearing based on his claim of ineffective counsel. The ruling comes just two short days after Eugene was featured on KTUU’s 49th Report: The Fairbanks Four.

Eugene had argued in an appeal that his attorney was ineffective in arguing to allow an expert in false confessions and the Reid Method of interrogation to testify at trial. (Read about Eugene’s interrogation HERE and the Reid Method HERE) His appeal was denied when it was presented in Fairbanks Superior Court to Judge Ben Esch. The Alaska Court of Appeals ruled today that judge Esch erred in making that ruling, and cautioned that the denial created the “appearance of partiality.”

We agree. Big time. Judicial conduct in the cases of the Fairbanks Four has created the appearance of partiality. It has contained actual partiality toward the prosecution, and conduct which unbecoming of any public servant or person on God’s Earth, and sometimes conduct which reaches far beyond partiality into corruption. (Read about some concerning conduct HERE)

The ruling is welcome news, and a step in the right direction. We caution all that it is one small step, but in the right direction. It is also a reminder why we fight INSIDE the justice system even though we have seen it fail. The justice system is ours. It is as imperfect as we are, as vulnerable, as corrupt, as sinful. But it is also just as capable grace. Peppered amongst the worst and most biased rulings in this case have always been rulings that contained strength and independence of intellect.

We have said many times over, echoing Martin Luther King, that we know the moral arc of the universe to be long, but also that it bends toward justice. Someday, maybe in a series of events that begins with today’s ruling, and maybe not, our system will bend toward justice in the case of the Fairbanks Four. It will bend toward justice because of the goodness of people. People like all of you. Reporters like Brian O’Donoghue, Rhonda McBride, Steve MacDonald – members of the press who remember their calling as bearers of the truth. It bends because of people like you who have given time in prayer, work, donated a dollar, and hour, or a thousands of each. The list of names would be so long that I could never write it out. Long enough to change the moral direction of our community and court system. So, thank you, all of you, for today’s ruling.

At the conclusion of the ruling the court states that:

“We conclude that vacating the judgment in this case will promote justice in future cases: It will clarify the proper scope of judicial notice and encourage judges to avoid ex parte investigations that may create an appearance of partiality.“We also conclude that, when a judge reaches outside the record to marshal evidence that benefits one party, the unfairness of the resulting decision is apparent. A failure to act in these circumstances could undermine public confidence in the judicial process.”
We could not agree more.

Let the Circus Begin – The First Days of the Hartman Case in the Press

Posted on by
9

For those of you that have read this blog from the beginning, consider for a moment that most of the events we have discussed here represent mere hours of real-time. If this blog took place in real-time, the victim in the crime would still be on life support in ICU, not yet identified. The evening news would come on with a picture of his badly beaten face, identifying him only as John Doe, and pleading with residents of Fairbanks to help identify the boy.

Eugene would be in Fairbanks Youth Facility, just beginning to sober up, no doubt terrified and confused from many hours of interrogation with the Reid Method. He would be spending the first of the more than 5,300 nights in jail to come.

George would still be in interrogation. Later that night he would go home, tell his girlfriend’s brother about the interrogation, how terrified he had been, that he felt like they had made him agree to a crazy story, that he was afraid. Then he would  lay down and let his small daughter fall asleep beside him for the last time.

Marvin would be at home with his mother, bewildered and shaken by his interview with police but confident that the ordeal was over, and with no idea that the police were coming to arrest him in mere hours.

Kevin would be at home with his mother and girlfriend, watching that broadcast, not yet aware that the police were already using his name in their theories and as a device in interrogations of others.

And in the press room of the local Fairbanks Daily Newsminer, the first articles about this case were being checked for typos. Headlines were being written. And as those first words went to press, the saga of the Fairbanks Four began in earnest, as did the decades long role of the media in this case.

Our next posts will be copies of the original newspaper articles in the case.

“In a sense, words are encyclopedias of ignorance because they freeze perceptions at one moment in history and then insist we continue to use these frozen perceptions when we should be doing better.”
– Edward de Bono

The first newspaper article on the case appeared on Monday, October 13th. The front-page article was titled “Teen dies in hospital after downtown attack” and contained little information. It said that four men and one juvenile were being held on $1 million bail, and that the motive for the attack was unknown. They promised details would follow the next day.

The next day, on October 14th, the case was front page news again, this time with details that ignited a deep and widespread rage throughout the small Alaskan city. Most of the details would prove to be fiction in the days and weeks to follow, but the damage was done. These details would be the ones that Fairbanks residents remembered about the case forever – these details would inspire randomized attacks on Native Alaskans with crowbars downtown in the days to come. These details would create a divide that may never be healed.

The headline of that article was “Attack called “random violence” and beside it was a picture of John Hartman, aged 13 in the photograph, kneeling in his Redskins Youth Football League Uniform.The caption of the photo was “Random Victim John Hartman.”

The article began with a sentence that no doubt made most readers shudder: “The 15-year-old boy beaten to death by four assailants early Saturday was kicked in the head at least 15 times and then sexually assaulted in what the police say was an act of ‘random street violence.’ ”

The article goes on to say that the four had attended a wedding reception, and that a string of random violent assaults began there and culminated with the fatal beating and sexual assault of Hartman. The article insinuates that the four were together, began a string of violent attacks at the wedding reception, attacked Hartman, and then attacked a hotel clerk. The article is short – very short  – with an astounding number of inaccuracies and contradictions. Among the most important:

1. The victim was “kicked in the head at least 15 times and then sexually assaulted.” In reality, there was no confirmation of any kind that there had been a sexual assault. The manner of death remained unknown, and the number of blows suffered remained unknown. The victim had been found with oversized pants near his knees(belonging to Chris Stone, the last person to see him alive), creating speculation among hospital staff that he may have been sexually assaulted.  Ultimately the medical examiner would state there was not evidence of a sexual assault. Other experts to review the report would agree that there had been no sexual assault.

2. “Paramedics found him lying in a pool of blood.” Although this is likely true, and corroborated by the statement of the college student Calvin Moses who found the victim, no photographs were taken of the scene. Police would later claim that there was almost no blood, or an “insignificant” amount of blood, and offer that as the explanation as to why there was no DNA evidence of any kind to tie the accused to the crime.

3. “The suspects confronted the victim shortly before 3 am as the teenager walked home from a friend’s house.” No one had described any circumstances surrounding the attack – there was no indication of any kind of confrontation. The victim was walking with a friend, and was not walking home from a friend’s house. More importantly, the assault took much earlier, near 1:30 am, and at a time the men had alibis. Read about that HERE.

4. “A key break in the Hartman investigation came when a hotel clerk reported he had been assaulted by three males in a hotel room.” Although the hotel clerk Mike Baca rapidly confessed to having fabricated the story of the gun-weilding attack, even in his original fictitious report he did not describe being assaulted by three males in a hotel room.

5. “One of them was Vent, who pulled out a handgun.” Eugene Vent did not have any altercation with the hotel clerk. No one pulled a gun on the hotel clerk. The hotel clerk admitted that he made up the story in an effort to get police to respond to a loud and out of control teenage party at his hotel. Security cameras confirmed there was no assault, and no gun. Read more about that HERE and directly from Eugene about that night HERE.

6. “Vent told police he participated in the Hartman assault…..” Read about Eugene’s interrogation and read the transcript of the interrogation HERE.

7. “Frese corroborated Vent’s statement…” Read about George’s interrogation HERE. Hear about that night from George directly HERE.

8. “No one tried to intervene but police have witnesses who heard the assault.” The second title of the story was “FATA:L ASSAULT: Witnesses.” No witnesses had come forward, and witnesses (plural) never did. One ultimately would, but her time-specific testimony would be upending to the police timeframe and theory. Read about her HERE.

9. The four suspects were “probably drinking.” Police knew that Eugene and George had been extremely intoxicated during interrogation, and also  knew that Marvin had been sober the night in question. The insinuation that they were “probably drinking” insinuates that they were together, drinking together, and indicates intoxication as a motive even though the police know it was not a factor that night for all four men. It also reinforces sterotype.

10. “All four defendants…attended a wedding reception at the Eagle’s Lodge.” In reality, only Marvin attended the reception. George was in the parking area at one point, Kevin was in a car that stopped at the reception, and Eugene walked through the reception briefly looking for a friend. The four did not attend the reception together, and three of the four did not truly attend at all. For more information, read their timelines.

11. “The first in a string of assaults occurred in the lodge parking lot.” No assault occurred at the lodge or in the lodge parking lot. Frank Dayton walked to the parking lot of the busy lodge after he was assaulted to get help. Read about that HERE. That said, there was a troubling amount of violence that night, with a car and suspects that did not match the description of the four accused. Read about them HERE.

12. “Some of the people at the reception attended a separate party at the Alaska Motor Inn.” This information is attributed to the hotel clerk, who would not have known if the hotel room party and reception were connected. They were not connected events. One was a wedding reception for a respected and responsible family, the other was simply a teenager’s party.

13. “20 people were drinking in one of the rooms.” There was never any indication that 20 people were present at Alaskan Motor Inn.

14. The article went on to identify Hartman as home schooled (in reality, he was not enrolled in school) and as a football player (he had not played on any sports team for more than a year). The picture used was out of date, exaggerating the contrast between the accused and the victim.

Ultimately, the article was little more than a fictional yet sensational story that would be repeated over and over in the community of Fairbanks until it was universally accepted as true. It was easy to accept that it was true, even though nearly all of it was embellished, because the story woven from half-truths and lies took advantage of racial stereotypes hundreds of years older than any of the people writing or reading it. Four drunk Native men killed a white all-American boy and raped him for no reason, he just happened to be in the way on a night when they were on a spree of random violence. Savage. Attacking children, white children, for no reason. Four on one. Merciless.

America created itself with the Declaration of Independence, which contains the following sentence: ” the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.”

The first newspaper articles on this case printed lies. Lies told by a bored hotel clerk named Mike Baca and  police Lt. Keller who was desperate to solve a crime and save face. The sensational plot line was never plausible, accurate, or backed up by facts. Yet, this story was accepted because it had already been written into this town. Into this country. In newspapers, hearts, minds, souls, history, the future. It struck a chord in a population with a bias, and in shock over a brutal crime, that bias blinded them.

The Fairbanks Four were tried and convicted in the newspaper October 14, 1997.

They were not innocent until proven guilty.

They would be convicted with lies and sensationalism a hundred times in the press before they were convicted with lies in a courtroom that had made its mind up long ago.

In a few short months, newspaper articles would begin to unearth inconsistencies in the case. Ten years after the murder the first ray of hope – the largest and most serious effort to expose the injustice the Fairbanks Four had suffered would be a series of articles, covering the front page of the Fairbanks Daily Newsminer for weeks in a row, just as the case had in those early days. But this series would focus on the many indications that the Fairbanks Four had been wrongfully convicted.

Perhaps they will be exonerated in the press a hundred times before they are exonerated in a courtroom, just as they were convicted first in the press.  Either way, the local press is one of the most compelling characters in this story, one that plays a fascinating and always-changing role – a character we introduce in this post and will write about many times before this story is over.

I Feel Blessed – An Interview with Marvin Roberts

Posted on by
1

Marvin Roberts gave an interview with Dan Bross of KUAC when the reward amount in this case was raised to $35,000. The radio show was brief, but here is the full audio, where Marvin talks about how he feels about his imprisonment and the movement to free him.

Marvin was wrongfully convicted in 1997, just over a year after he graduated as valedictorian of his class. If Marvin can feel blessed in prison, a short season away from the day that will mark his 15th year there, those of us who have the ability to read this, to sleep in a bed, to turn a door knob and walk out a door, to breathe the air and walk with the Earth beneath our feet, are surely blessed beyond belief.

An Interview with George Frese

Posted on by
2

Dan Bross of KUAC here in Fairbanks, Alaska did a brief segment on the reward increase to $35,000 and was gracious enough to share the unedited full audio with us. Unfortunately, George’s interview was cut short when the prison went on lockdown because of a violent episode – he had a lot more to say. In the future we will bring you direct conversations with the Fairbanks Four, so if there are any questions you would like to hear them answer, let us know in the comment section.

There is an important reality in hearing George go on lock down – these men live in a horrible place, intended to be a hell on Earth. Do not let their optimism or hope confuse you; let it inspire you and impress you. These young men have managed to hold onto faith, hope, inner peace, and have done the incredible work of holding onto themselves in an environment that is designed to take all of that away. Society would like to believe that the wrongfully convicted are simply sent away, or locked up, that to wrongfully convict a person costs them time, but nothing more. Prison is a violent, brutal, miserable place. The wrongfully convicted are sent to the worst environment that America could engineer, and live among the worst humanity has to offer. None of the Fairbanks Four speak much or dwell much on the darkest sides of their story, but to understand the cost of wrongful conviction, we must understand what it really means to send four innocent adolescent men into this environment and keep them there for 14 years.

Below is the interview with George Frese, who is speaking from Spring Creek Correctional Center, where he could spend the next 83 years unless this injustice is corrected.

 

 

Alibis and Witnesses X – Gary Edwin

Posted on by
9

Gary Edwin is originally from Tanana, Alaska. He is the proud father of five, and works for Doyon Drilling.  Gary is arguably Marvin’s most important alibi. In 1997 he was 24 years old, working as a substance abuse counselor, and spent the evening with his wife, Marvin, and Angelo at the wedding reception at the Eagle’s Hall. His younger cousin Angelo Edwin,  spent the entire evening with Marvin. Both Angelo and Gary appear over and over in Marvin’s timeline which you can read HERE.

Through the years there have been many accusations from the community that the Native witnesses that came forward as alibis in this case had alcohol-affected memories and were conspiring to create a cover-up for the Fairbanks Four. It is important, then, to note that Gary was not drinking the night of the murder. It is also important to note that Gary and his brother Angelo went voluntarily and immediately to the police when they heard Marvin had been arrested for a crime committed that night, and that they had not had time to falsify a story, and in fact made statements before anyone knew the time that the assault had been committed against John Hartman (read more about the time of the crime HERE). In a nutshell, the prosecution’s contention that the alibis were either drunk or making up stories simply hold no weight whatsoever in regards to Gary Edwin.

Gary lives with a burden that is tragically not unique in this case – he does not need to read case files, newspapers, opinions, or rulings to know that his young friend was wrongfully convicted. For him there is no speculation of police misconduct, no question about whether or not the evidence in this case was manufactured – he watched it happen. He has never read the content on this blog, yet his story is painfully familiar. It is the kind of thing that a person never forgets. Below, he tells his story in his own words:

On That Night

“I spent the entire, well hours you know, of that night with Marvin. I would say from around midnight until at least 2 am, even later, when the reception ended. He sat with us at our table, and I saw him basically the whole night. Dancing, visiting, having fun.”

Note – Gary had a conversation with Marvin during the night at what ended up being a very critical moment, when 911 was called to bring aid to a beaten and shaken Frank Dayton (whose assault  you can read about HERE). Although no one, including the police, had yet established a timeline on the assault for John Hartman at the time Gary first gave the police this information, Gary was having a conversation with Marvin concerning Frank Dayton at the exact same time that Hartman was being beaten to death blocks away.

The Next Day

“The next day I went over to Marvin’s  he was, he sold me a pair of Oakley’s that he had gotten but didn’t like, and I had seen them the night before and said ‘well, I’ll bring money over for them tomorrow.’ So, I brought him the money had he gave me the glasses. He asked if I wanted to go up and play ball, and I told him I would go pick up Angelo on my way home and grab my ball gear, and meet him up at the SRC.”

Marvin was not at the SRC for the planned basketball game. By then he was sitting with the police, insisting that he was innocent and pleading with the interrogators to listen. Gary Edwin called Marvin’s mother.

“And then his mom asked if we had seen what was on the news. And she said they had picked up Marvin, George, Kevin and Eugene. And I was like, damn.

She said, ‘I thought you guys were with Marv last night.’

And we were like ‘Yeah, all night.’

I asked, what’d you guys do after the reception? And he told me that after they stopped by the bar or party they kinda drove around a little bit, that they went through the drive-thru, and then he dropped him off at home.

So, I was like, wow, you know, we need to go down to the police station and tell them, make a statement. We thought, of course, that was the thing to do.”

On the Interviews with Police

When we got down there, the detectives were acting pretty weird about our statements, we were like, “hey, we were with Marvin all night, you know from this time to this time.”

When I went in with the detectives that were taking my statement they kept trying to twist what I was saying. Finally it just came down to me just wanting to give a statement and get out of there. So was like, just give me a piece of paper and I’ll write it down for you. And I was so uncomfortable, I was writing it, but I was more worried about getting out of there.

When I got out to the lobby, Angelo came out of his room after me, and he was really shook up. And one of the detectives grabbed Angelo by the arm and was like, “You better make DAMN sure you know what you’re saying to be the truth, because we have a 15-year-old kid that’s been murdered and this is, this needs to be taken serious, or something to that effect.

When we left, Angelo said he experienced the same thing while being interrogated, or while he was trying to give a statement.”

On Why These Memories Remain So Clear Today

“You know, I went in believing I was doing the right thing. To show up and have people that are supposed to help and protect you, making you feel like you actually did something wrong, or you are involved in something that’s wrong, it’s….it is a real eerie feeling.

I was twenty-four in 1997, four years older than those others at least. I mean, more or less, we went in there thinking we were doing something to help the police, and by the time we left it was like, we wanted to run, just get the hell out of the police station. I was educated, and I wasn’t as afraid because I know my rights. But the young people that didn’t know their rights, maybe the only interaction they had with police officers was this, was bad, I totally understand how bad it must have scared them.

On What It Is Like to Watch The Case Unfold

It made me really fear Fairbanks Police, for one. I actually moved out of Fairbanks after all of this. Even when we were in Anchorage, when we were there to testify, that Detective and Jeff O’Bryant, they followed us around Anchorage. It was clear, always, trying to intimidate us. My cousin Patrick, they were hard on him. He couldn’t deal with all the harassment from them. It was…..it was unbelievable, but it was happening. Yeah, it changed, wow, it changed a lot of things….. those memories will always be there.”

Witnesses and Alibis IX – The Mugging of Frank Dayton

Posted on by
5

Frank Dayton’s mugging was only one of the similar attacks that occurred the night John Hartman was killed. However, the beating and mugging of Frank Dayton is of incredible importance because of the part it played in the police theory of the murder and the part it played in trials.

In addition to being charged and convicted of the murder of John Hartman, the Fairbanks Four were also convicted of mugging Frank Dayton, primarily off the eyewitness testimony one man provided in exchange for leniency in the serious criminal charges he was facing. It was the only testimony that put the four together that night, or indicated that they were engaged in violent behavior of any kind. That testimony was made by Arlo Olson, and has since been recanted. We hope to post Arlo’s story, and are hoping that he will be able to tell it himself for us and keep with our focus on letting people speak for themselves. Either way, we will discuss Arlo Olsen’s role in this case at length very soon. For now, we will focus on Frank Dayton’s version of events. It is impossible to overstate how important Frank Dayton’s mugging became in the murder trial. In this post we will describe the mugging that Frank Dayton reported to the police and testified to in trial.

Frank was at the the wedding reception at the Eagle’s Hall along with hundreds of other guests. Sometime around 1am, Frank decided to walk a few block over to meet a friend. Much like Hartman, he was walking alone in the cold late night. He was soon assaulted in a disturbingly similar way.

Frank was in the 300 block of 1st Avenue when he heard a car rolling up behind him. He assumed that the car was slowed to a crawl so that it could pull into the parking lot he had just passed. When he turned around he saw the car. He described it as a four door light colored car (white, or a very light tan or gray). The assailants ran up to him and he was immediately tripped and knocked to the ground. His elbow, knees, and face smashed into the cold pavement. He made a movement to stand, but one of the attackers slammed their foot down on his right hand. Another stood over him. They kicked him in the side and back. As he lay with his face pressed into the pavement he saw the show standing on his hand – a white high top.

The attackers assaulted him primarily by kicking him while he was on the ground. They reached into his pocket and took the $20 he had. They then ran to their car and sped off, disappearing as quickly as they had appeared.

Frank was not able to describe his attackers, it had all happened fast and in the dark, and he was held face-down to the ground during the beating. He was able to see and remember the car well, which he described as a “good-sized” light four-door sedan. Frank even drew a picture of the car for the police, which is pictured above.

In the police theory, they surmised that the Fairbanks Four – Kevin, Eugene, Marvin, and George – had gone on a violent beating spree that night attacking people at random. Indeed, there is a distressing theme in the violence that occurred that night. Three others reported nearly identical attacks which you can read about HERE. In those attacks the eyewitnesses or victims also described a light four-door sedan as the car, but the others were able to provide a better description of their attackers, and across the board they ALL described four young African American men in that light car, getting victims to the ground, kicking them, and speeding away.

Frank Dayton was wearing a leather jacket than night. One that likely had the palm and fingerprints of his attackers on it – Frank offered it up to be tested, and the investigators declined to take it. There are a lot of opportunities lost in this case – Frank Dayton’s jacket was one of them, but much like Conan’s pager (read about that HERE), yet another opportunity to collect that evidence was passed up. It is a theme in the case that is disturbing to say the least.

After the beating, Frank Dayton returned to the Eagle’s Hall, where his sister in law Susan Paskavan called 911. The call is logged at 1:34am, roughly the same time that the assault on John Hartman ended.

Prosecution and police relied on a theory that the Fairbanks Four beat and mugged Frank Dayton, then drove the several blocks to 9th and Barnette and fatally beat John Hartman in a similar way. There are many holes in that theory, but here are some of the most important ones:

* Frank Dayton’s attackers drove a light full-sized four-door sedan, Marvin drove a bright blue two-door tiny car.

* None of the four were there. Read their timelines for more details (MARVIN, GEORGE, EUGENE, KEVIN).

* Marvin was at the Eagle’s Hall when Frank Dayton returned and 911 was called. Gary Edwin testified that he KNOWS Marvin was there at the time because as Gary was leaning over the injured Frank Dayton, Marvin approached him and said, “What happened?” Gary responded that he didn’t know and was trying to figure it out himself.

* None of the four were wearing or owned white high-tops. The shoes that the police collected from the men were listed as brown boots, black boots, and black Nike Air tennis shoes. NO white high-tops. Remember that George, Kevin, and Eugene were all arrested in the shoes they had worn. Marvin’s house was searched and all of his shoes were taken.

* Frank Dayton was Eugene Vent’s cousin. It seems unlikely that Eugene, a person with no history of violence, would attack anyone, but especially his own family. It also seems unlikely that Frank Dayton would not recognize his young relative. It also seems unlikely that Frank Dayton would not be able to identify the suspects as Native given his level of familiarity with a Koyukon Athabascan accent.

* Frank Dayton himself believes the Fairbanks Four are innocent, and KNOWS that they are not his attackers. He said this on the stand, and has said it for the last 14 years.

Despite all of this, the Four would eventually be tried for the mugging of Frank Dayton and the murder of John Hartman in one trial. Juror’s would later say that Arlo Olson’s testimony, which convinced them that the Fairbanks Four were guilty of mugging Frank Dayton, was one of the biggest factors in them finding the men guilty.

Love Gonna Bust Me Out – A Letter from Kevin

Posted on by
26

Kevin has spent many years in silence. In the early media reports in  and in the press coverage throughout the trials Kevin was relentlessly attacked, more so than the others. The police pushed this media agenda, because in their theory they considered him the ringleader.  It was amazing in a way to watch it unfold – to watch him remain quiet and outwardly calm while his world crumbled around him. Steady.

After his conviction, many people stood behind his claim of innocence, but none as strongly or courageously as his mom, the late Carol Pease. He is pictured with her here. It is hard to imagine the grief that Kevin has had to live with. He lost his father a short time before being wrongfully accused, and his mother shortly after his wrongful conviction, all as a very young person. Yet, amazingly, through all of this his faith remains strong.

In this post, Kevin tells his own story. Like with the other letters, the truth in his words is palpable. Painfully clear. Facts, documents, transcripts, legal opinions, and the like abound in this case, and they all back up the claim that these men are innocent.  Still, nothing makes that statement as poignantly than the truth in their own words. Here they are:

PLEASE, if you or ANYONE you know has information about the case call, write, email or do anything you like, just do the right thing. The best person to bring new information and tips to is Bill Oberly at the Innocence Project in Anchorage – 907-279-0454. His email is info@alaskainnocence.org and tips can be made anonymously.

If you were involved in any way in this case, please consider coming forward today and submitting your OWN story. These pieces build a picture together, and each piece is important. Contact US on the Facebook page.

HATE, indeed, put these men in prison, and LOVE will set them free someday. YOUR LOVE, courage, and support, to be specific. So keep it coming!!! Sign the petition, join us on Facebook, and spread, spread, spread the word. We send these pages back to the boys, so feel free to add a comment for Kevin below.

Blood in the Streets – Other Crimes that Night

Posted on by
6

Who killed John Hartman? We don’t know. And if this case has taught us anything it is that accusations of this seriousness should not be levied lightly. But from the beginning, evidence has pointed firmly away from the Fairbanks Four and toward attackers that have not yet been identified. Over the years at least two serious theories have emerged among readers –  this post outlines one.

One of the most stunning elements of the investigation and arrest of the Fairbanks Four for the murder of John Hartman is that there was no shortage of evidence pointing away from them. In fact, on the night of October 10 into the early morning hours of the 11th, there was a litany of violent beatings and robberies. The victims of these attacks described their attackers as four African-American men in a light-colored four door sedan. These crimes were sickeningly similar – multiple assailants violently kicking and robbing victims who were vulnerable and on foot. They shed terrible light on what John’s terrible last moments may have been like.

Robert John was walking down the road late in the night of October 10th when a light-colored car pulled up behind him. When he turned around, three African-American teenagers jumped out of the car and began a sudden unprovoked attack on Robert John. They attempted to knock him down and began kicking him. They were not successful in knocking him down, and he escaped. He walked into Pastime Card Room, badly shaken, and told Rubin Sam the details of the attack.

12:15 am (approximately) While walking out of Spade Room, Raymond Stickman saw a sight that he will never forget. An older Native man was on the ground, clearly just assaulted, with three young African-American men wearing dark-colored clothing surrounding him. The assailants took off running, jumped into a car with a waiting driver, and sped away. The Native man got up and went into an adjacent building – Raymond Stickman followed him in to be sure he was okay, and the man told him that he had been knocked to the ground and kicked by the group. It is unclear whether he was robbed.

1:00 am (approximately) Frank Dayton left the reception at the Eagle’s Hall and walked along the south side of First Avenue. He was violently assaulted and robbed about ten minutes later. According to Frank, he heard a car rolling up behind him at a slow speed and assumed it was pulling into a parking lot. The next thing he heard was the rapid approach of feet. He was knocked down to the ground, and struck his right knee, elbow, and head on the pavement. One of the attackers stepped on Frank’s right hand, and Frank was able to see a white high-top shoe. While he was pinned to the ground they kicked him in the side and back. One of the  attackers reached into Frank’s pocket and stole the $20 he was carrying. His attackers rushed back to their car and pealed off. Frank Dayton described the car as a large white or light tan four-door sedan. He did not see his attackers. The only details that he was able to provide were the exact location, the description of the car, and that one assailant was wearing white high-top sneakers.

1:30am  Frank Dayton arrives shaken and injured back at the Eagle’s Hall. His sister-in-law calls 911 and the call is logged at 1:34am. Multiple witnesses place Marvin Roberts at the Eagle’s Hall during this 911 call (you can see his timeline HERE).

1:30 am  A few blocks away from the site of Frank Dayton’s attack, John Hartman is beaten to death. The wallet he had with him was never recovered, making it seem as if he also was robbed. The attack on Hartman lasted only five minutes (read about the attack HERE and read his timeline HERE).

Don Moses is a non-drinker and his memories of his attack are still clear these many years later. Don was attacked in the early morning hours of October 11th as well. His attackers pulled up in a car, and four men got out and rushed toward him. He said while recounting the incident, “I have never done anything like this in my life before, but I rushed back at them as if I was ready and willing to fight.” His instincts told him that his life was in danger. At the same moment, sirens rang out nearby. The attackers reacted to either Don’s bold posturing, the sirens, or both, and ran back to their car and drove off. Don does not know the exact time of his attack, but the chilling possibility exists that the sirens in the distance were the ones called to an ailing Frank Dayton, while just a few streets over John Hartman lay unconscious.

Ultimately, the night that John Hartman was murdered was a cold and bloody night on the streets of Fairbanks. Hartman will never be able to describe his attack in his own words. But several others were attacked at random that night and were able to relate the experience, and through them a troubling and uninvestigated thread emerges.

These attacks point to another early investigative failure. ALL of the listed attacks were known to investigators and the DA, and more may have occurred and gone unreported. When at least four similar attacks take place in the span of a few hours with three victims living and one fatally wounded, it is incomprehensible that investigators did not pursue the young men or the getaway car described. But, they did not. With an abundance of evidence indicating that they should be looking for four African-American teenagers in a light-colored four-door sedan, they arrested The Fairbanks Four one at a time through happenstance encounters, with no evidentiary indication that any one of the four had committed the crime. They would eventually enter into evidence Marvin’s bright blue two-door car and four pairs of shoes, none of which were white high-tops.

At least one person reading this blog KNOWS who killed John Hartman. Someone went to high school with these teenagers cruising in that light sedan. Someone remembers. Someone suspects. No information is too small. No gut instinct should be ignored. At least one person, and probably many more, can step forward anonymously and write an ending to this story. Change it from a tragedy to a triumph. Please, please, do.

COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS tips can be emailed to info@alaskainnocence.org or called in to the Innocence Project at 907-279-0454

Method to the Madness – Officer Reid’s Torture Technique

Posted on by
14

We have, over and over, referred to the specific method of interrogation that was used on the Fairbanks Four AND on many alibi witnesses who were questioned. We have heard from these people that their interrogations or interviews were some of the worst experiences of their lives. Some, even a decade and more later, still suffer nightmares about the experience. These people have done a wonderful job describing how this interrogation technique feels. We want to also help you all understand how it works. And the best place to start is the very beginning, so bear with us for what is going to be a long, but very informative post.

From America’s earliest days as a country well into the 1940’s, suspects of crimes were by policy routinely interrogated with a method known as the “third degree.” Some highlights of this technique included violent beatings, holding heads under water, starvation, threatening to kill a suspect and their families, sleep deprivation, electrocution, and a slew of other nasty tactics that make water-boarding sound like a fun jaunt through a sprinkler on a sunny summer day. These tactics were the rule, not the exception, and officers were trained to use torture because it worked.

These methods produced many confessions, and sent many confessed murderers to their prison cells and graves. There is no question that the third degree was an effective way to get confessions. But by the 1930’s, scholars began to notice that many of these confessions were false. The public became increasingly critical as well and people began asking a lot of questions. When hundreds of people were beaten at rallies the press reports were not favorable. NAACP began an anti-lynching movement. A new era was on the horizon and suddenly the general public was not content with the status-quo. A civil rights movement was a-brewin’.  This whole third degree thing was, after all, pretty outdated. Decades and decades old. It was time for a change, and it was clear that the third degree had to at least begin to die out with the 30’s. With no alternative available the third degree continued to be the standard through most of the 1930s.

By the 1940, the practice of physical torture in order to elicit confessions was rapidly falling out of favor. Several courts had found it to be unconstitutional, forcing the practice underground. Investigators tried beating people with rubber hoses so that there would be less bruising, but it was clear that a more lasting alternative was needed. Society (including most police officers), thankfully arrived at a point where most people were not too keen on confessions being beaten, starved, dunked, and cut out of suspects. No, it was time for something more civilized.

Enter John Reid – an Irish cop from Chicago with no background in psychology whatsoever. If the American law enforcement had not been so desperate for a less violent but effective form of interrogation, his psychology-based method could well have been laughed off. But sometimes timing is everything. Reid had a gift. He could, without beating someone, persuade them to confess. We will never know if Reid himself had a gift for obtaining true confessions, false confessions, or both, but we do know he got more than 5,000 of them during his career. He shared and taught his technique. Eventually, he published a book on interrogation –  it came at the perfect moment in history, and it was rapidly adopted. In lieu of physical torture Reid’s book recommended something equally as effective but much less likely to leave visible marks: psychological torture!

The Reid Technique of Interrogation was simple, easy to learn, and it worked! It produced confessions! As a matter of fact it worked better than old-fashioned torture. So, police officers across the country and world began to use his 9-step process. By the time 1960’s passed the third degree had been all but replaced by the Reid Technique. The process works something like this:

The first order of business is to perform a non-accusatory interview, review the evidence, and be reasonably sure that the suspect is guilty of the crime. The 9 steps are supposed to be used on people who are GUILTY of a crime, so it is important to be reasonably sure that you are dealing with the perpetrator. So, how do investigators know they have the right guy? Basically, one of two ways. In the first scenario, they have mountains of evidence (eye-witnesses, fingerprints, found the guy at the murder scene covered in blood and holding a knife – that kind of thing). In the second scenario the officer determines that the person is guilty using their expertise in psychology. You know, the expertise they got in the book written by a guy with no background in psychology. Sadly, as with many of life’s crappy ideas, the Reid Technique of interrogation often fails before it even begins.

Because the investigator believes they can spot guilt just by looking at or interacting with a suspect (and in fact have been instructed that they can) these investigators rely on this  super-power to be sure that they have the right guy. The good news? One person did do a study which concluded that investigators are better than the average joe-shmo at spotting guilt. The bad news? That guy would be John Reid. After he finished pretending to be a psychologist, he moved on to the illustrious position of pretend-scientist. The other bad news? Pretty much every other study done on the topic shows that police officers are no better than spotting a guilty person than the average citizen, and sometimes worse. But the problem is that unlike the average citizen they BELIEVE they have the right guy. And as soon as they are sure they have the guy, Reid interrogation process beings in earnest.

Once the investigator is sure he’s got the right suspect, he starts the nine step process. Here are the nine steps:

  • Step 1 – Direct Confrontation. Lead the suspect to understand that the evidence has led the police to the individual as a suspect. If there was no evidence, lead them to believe this by MAKING UP evidence. (Case Example: Telling Eugene there was blood all over his shoes, telling George that a science lab had matched his shoe to the victim, telling Marvin that eyewitnesses and tire tracks proved his car was at the scene).
  • Step 2 – Shift the blame away from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that prompted the suspect to commit the crime. (Case example: Suggesting that Kevin was the ringleader, that the others were just in the wrong place at the wrong time). That is, develop themes containing reasons that will justify or excuse the crime. (Suggesting that perhaps the victim had used racial slurs, was gay, had ripped them off, that it was a gang initiation). Themes may be developed or changed to find one to which the accused is most responsive. (Themes were changed constantly, probably because none of the accused responded with anything but denial to the theories).
  • Step 3 – Don’t let the person say they are innocent. Reid training video: “If you’ve let him talk and say the words ‘I didn’t do it’, and the more often a person says ‘I didn’t do it’, the more difficult it is to get a confession.” (Case example: They tried to interrupt or correct Marvin every time he claimed innocence, and verbally attacked George and Eugene when they claimed innocence or brought up that they felt they were being brainwashed).
  • Step 4 – At this point, the accused will often give a reason why he or she did not or could not commit the crime. (Example: George saying he would never do something like that, Eugene saying he was just not that kind of person, Marvin pointing out that it was impossible) Try to use this to move towards the confession.
  • Step 5 – Reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive.
  • Step 6 – The suspect will become quieter and listen. Move the theme discussion towards offering alternatives. If the suspect cries at this point, infer guilt. (Shara David’s interrogation is a great example – when she was so terrified that she was crying they inferred guilt).
  • Step 7 – Pose the “alternative question”, giving two choices for what happened; one more socially acceptable than the other. The suspect will choose the easier option but whichever alternative the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted. (Case examples: Eugene – I think you ran away when the assault got real bad, or were you the ringleader? Which was it? George – You seem like a nice person, I think you only kicked the kid a few times? If you won’t admit that, we’ll have to assume you were really involved. So, were you a little involved, or very involved? Marvin – Maybe you just drove the car, or did you participate in the assault? With witnesses Edgar , Vernon, and Conan the choices were, did you commit this murder or did you witness your four friends together that night?)
  • Step 8 – Lead the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses and develop corroborating information to establish the validity of the confession. (Case examples: None. This step did not succeed, they immediately recanted their statements and no evidence ever corroborated them)
  • Step 9 – Document the suspect’s admission and have him or her prepare a recorded statement (Case examples: None. Neither Eugene nor George ever prepared a confession).

To give John Reid and his modern associates some credit, they recognize that this method produces confessions, and that it produces confessions from the innocent and guilty alike. So, they stress that investigators must not start in on a suspect until they are reasonably sure they are guilty. And really, that makes sense. Here is an interrogation method that will nearly always produce a confession, so if used on a guilty person, that is a good thing. But when it is used in the innocent, it is a recipe for disaster.

When this method is exposed and examined it seems – well, barbaric. Out of time. Like some brutal junk-science from the 40’s cooked up by an unqualified nut. And it seems that way because IT IS. The Reid Technique is crap. It is illegal in many places, considered controversial at best and criminal at worst by scholars, and the winds of society are already changing. Someday, probably someday soon, this will go the way of the third degree. The Reid technique will disappear into an embarrassing chapter of our history where it belongs, and we will progress.

In a world where it is very well established that false confessions happen, how can a person tell a false confession from a real confession? Once in possession of a confession, a well-trained investigator will take a look at the statements and make sure that they appear to be accurate. There are some tell-tale signs of a true confession:

1.)  Physical Evidence Backs Up the Confession. Did that happen in this case? Read the physical evidence for yourself HERE.

2.) The Suspect Provides Details of the Crime. If you isolated the statements of the Fairbanks Four you would not know who had been assaulted, where they had been assaulted,what day they had been assaulted, why they had been assaulted, who else was there, when it had happened, or ANY other detail of the crime. Read their interrogations: George, Marvin, Eugene, Kevin. For most of George’s confession he thinks that Eugene is the person in ICU. Eugene thought that a fight had taken place in front of Alaska Motor Inn over a dime bag of weed and that he is being questioned about that. Their statements in isolation mean nothing.

3.) The Suspect Does 80% of the Talking. Read any of the interrogations. The investigator does more than 90% of the talking, the suspects less than 10%.

4.) Circumstantial Evidence Lines Up. For example, in most true-confession scenarios, an investigator will find that the accused has no alibi, or was seen acting suspiciously, or seen with their co-conspirators. They do not usually find that the suspects were miles and miles across town, attending a wedding reception, at a party, or spending the post-murder hours dancing away. See timelines for Kevin, Eugene, Marvin, and George to judge the circumstantial evidence for yourself.

5.) The Confession Reveals Motive. No one at any time has ever been able to connect the Fairbanks Four to the victim, to the victim’s whereabouts that night, or establish motive of any kind (beyond that the suspects were wild Natives).

SO……in the case of the Fairbanks Four, the use of the already shady Reid Technique went wrong before step one. Long before the investigators and the Fairbanks Four came into contact, a fundamental problem already existed in that the training the investigators received was flawed, and the the background of the four was poorly matched to the tactic.

But even with the stage set for disaster, if the investigators had adhered to the first step of the technique, things would have likely ended before they began. There was no evidence to indicate that the teenager in custody was tied to the crime in any way, let alone any evidence to make the investigator “reasonably sure” he was guilty. If the Reid technique of interrogation had been applied properly, these suspects would have been dismissed after the non-accusatory interview. Should they have been erroneously interrogated after the interview, their interrogations should have been ceased when investigators realized the boys in custody were underage, intoxicated, or had questionable memory due to intoxication. If that fail-safe failed, the interrogations should have been dismissed when they failed to meet even ONE of the litmus tests of an accurate confession. Yet…..they were not. This case serves as a scathing expose of the weaknesses of the antiquated and ill-founded interrogation method. The Reid Technique is the corrupt foundation on which many injustices are built.

We wish we could say that this interrogation tactic failed with horrific consequences only for the Fairbanks Four. Sadly, it has led to so many wrongful convictions that it would be impossible to enumerate them here. Perhaps one of the best examples is the case of the Norfolk Four which became the subject of a very well done PBS Frontline program called “The Confessions” which you can and should read about HERE.

Want to read more? Check out these articles and references. Criticism and evidence that debunks the validity of the Reid Interrogation Technique is so prolific that this is a miniscule sampling:

Click to access Arguments%20Against%20Use%20of%20the%20%20Reid%20Technique%20CLRv10i2.pdf

http://nymag.com/news/crimelaw/68715/

http://blog.law.northwestern.edu/bluhm/2006/10/reid_interrogat.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2003/01/27/interrogation030127.html

http://www.llrx.com/features/falseconfessions.htm

Click to access icprogramfinal.pdf

In the Air – Alibis and Witnesses VIII

Posted on by
3

Edgar Henry is originally from Tanana, and spent his earliest years being raised along the Yukon, with strong traditional Athabascan values, learning to hunt and live with the land. Today he is the proud father of a seven year old girl, who has him pretty wrapped around her finger. He says she is “the boss.”

He spent the night of the murder with George (see him on George’s timeline HERE) along with his brother, the late Patrick Henry. Edgar drank heavily, alongside George. However Patrick did not drink at all, and was very conscious of time that night. He was absolutely certain on the timeline of the group’s movements, and knew George’s whereabouts from well before the time of the murder until after 3am. Edgar’s memory was not as clear.

When police interviewed him, as with others who you can read about here, here, and here, they actually interrogated him. Like with others, they interrogated him with the Reid Method of interrogation, a methodology so likely to produce trauma and false confessions that it is illegal in many countries (read about this interrogation method HERE). It is not ever recommended for use on young people, impaired people, people whose memory is somehow corrupted, and is designed for use on suspects who the police already know are guilty of the crime.

Edgar’s interrogation was a nightmare. After hours of unrelenting questioning, threats, and lies, he agreed that he might have seen George, Marvin, Eugene, and Kevin together that night. He recanted immediately.

Below, Edgar discusses that night, the interrogation, the past, and the future in his own words.

What do you remember about that night?

Yeah, well, we were at George’s house for most the night. We drank, like, cases of beer within just a few hours, playing a drinking game. We got totally wasted. Really, I don’t remember much of the details. Like I came to for a second, and there was a whole group of us walking to the reception, a big group. And I remember walking down the stairs of the Eagle’s Hall, like a flash of it. I remember, well I guess kinda remember, being by the Eagles’ Hall. (Read about the science behind blackouts HERE).

Patrick never drank that night. My late brother was a good guy, and the kind of person that paid attention to time, too. He was with us, just watching over us. I was so wasted that night I guess I gave him like close to like 600 bucks that night, I didn’t even remember. It was the money I had to get an apartment, when I woke up I thought i got rolled or something, all my cash was gone, and then my brother gave it back to me.

That night we stayed at George’s apartment, in the morning he was all, “Man, my ankle is killing me.” He was real hurt, and he left. It was sometime that day, or maybe even later, that next day that I heard he was arrested.

What was your reaction when George was arrested?

At first when I heard he was arrested, I was just confused. I knew he was with us that night, ya know, so when I heard he was in trouble at all I just thought it didn’t make sense. When I heard that he was arrested for charges like these, man I don’t know, I was like, how could that be? How could that even be? I remember talking to my brother Patrick about it, and we just couldn’t understand how, after learning what he was in jail for and them saying it was that night, we knew it was impossible. We knew he was with us the whole night.

When did you talk to the police?

It was a long time, they (the police) kept on trying to get a hold of me. I was avoiding them, because – well, I was scared. I grew up afraid of them, and then they had just gone and done this to my bro.They told me I was, that I had no choice and was like subpeonaed and had to go. So I was scared that they would come arrest me or show up at the house or something like that.

What was it like when you did talk to the cops?

Well I went downtown, and they took me to this room. I remember one of the guys, they kept on going in and out of the room, and the interrogation room is really, really small. I sat down at this small little space, there was just one chair in the that corner I sat in. I was literally cornered. These two officers sitting basically knee to knee with me, like they were, just had me completely cornered. They kept me two, three hours or more. I had never been through anything like that before, and I never, ever want to be in that position again. I believed they were going to arrest me, they had just done it to George.

It was like they were, ya know, telling me pretty much –  they were scaring me is what they were doing, saying like maybe you were there, maybe you murdered him, things like that. They way they were questioning me, too, they were asking the same questions over and over and over again, but the question was just asked in different ways and the way they were asking it was pretty much only one way to answer it, which is what they wanted to hear. For hours I kept telling them the plain truth, and they were telling me, “you can’t  black out, alcohol doesn’t black you out,” and they were trying to make it sound like I was lying. Then the one was coming in and out, in and out, and lying and telling me that my story was different than my brother’s, that I was going to get Patrick in trouble if I didn’t answer the way they were telling me to. I, I was just really, very scared.

Eventually, I don’t know, I think it was, when I first started agreeing with their answers I was only saying “I guess,” or  “I don’t know,”  and then they just started making “I guess so” into a “yes.”

That question they kept asking, it was whether you saw these four guys together or getting into a car that night. Did you see those four guys together that night?

No, I only said “I guess so” and all that because, I don’t know, it was like some kind of trick. They would ask, ask, ask, in a different sentence, it was hours of the same question, and I knew that. I knew that the only thing was to just kind of agree, to get out. No, I didn’t see them together that night. I saw George, and that was all.

What about Patrick’s interrogation?

My brother was being questioned at the same time, for a long time too. He, though, he didn’t drink at all, he watched times, he was real sure of himself. He didn’t ever agree to their answers. I guess eventually he told them he wanted he lawyer, so they let him go.

After, after they questioned him and after the trials and all, he was really pissed off at Aaron Ring, and Kendrick, O’Bryant, and all those guys, he was like, man, these guys are racist. That they were just racist. It was so obvious, everyone knew they were not together that night. We knew. They knew. Everyone knew they didn’t do it, Patrick just, he couldn’t believe it.

What was George like back in 1997?

We would always be hanging out, I spent a lot of time with George back then. Lifting weights, sometimes I would babysit for them, just hanging out. George, he was a real good dad, his baby girl was everything to him. Real good dad. I’ve known George, cripes, since I was like 11. Since we were real kids. He’s just a good guy, always liked to joke around, and real cool. He would never do something like this, I mean I know he didn’t, but I know also that he wouldn’t.
You were scared to begin with of the police. Why?

Things back then with the police in general were just bad. I mean everyone was scared. Yeah, even one time when Patrick, when he was like 15 years old, he told me about a time he was driving his bike home and an officer pulled him over, for nothing, then the officer told him to lean against the car with his hands behind his head, and Patrick didn’t hear him, but the officer slammed his head into the car, and said, “Next time you do what I say.” And stories like that, they just happened all the time back then. So of course, of  course we were scared.

You were questioned with the same method they used on George. If they had been interrogating you over the murder, do you think you would have agreed, you know, confessed?

Yeah, I do. Probably, yeah, probably. Because, it’s hard to explain, but the persistence, and the pressure, and they way they talk to you. And the way they make you feel, all in your face, making you feel like you are cornered, really you are cornered. And agreeing is the only way out. It’s all about, it is fear.  Fear.

Do you think they will be free someday?

I believe they will. Yes, they will. The word is out, people are getting more educated on this, they have been in there long enough, too long, in there for nothing. And I just, I feel it. I have had dreams about it. It’s like it’s in the air. I have no doubt, I believe they will get out.