Archive for the 'Criminal Justice' Category

Wetzel’s Innocence

Published on September 16, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 0 Comments

I am not in any way personally connected to Frank Wetzel, but having learned of his case, have become increasingly outraged and wish to reverse this 52-year old miscarriage of justice.

The evidence on his side is overwhelming and compelling.

Eighty-eight year-old Frank Wetzel, a New Yorker who has been wrongfully incarcerated in North Carolina since 1958, was found guilty in two separate trials of killing two State Troopers who were shot nearly 50 miles apart – and within 20 minutes of each other. The evidence presented in the trials should have exonerated him of both murders, not convicted him. The police engaged in a clumsy and transparent attempt to frame the only suspect rounded up after the murders.

The sole “eyewitness” recanted his testimony in 1986. He said he had implicated Frank Wetzel because, as a black man in North Carolina police custody in the 1950’s, he had feared for his life while a police officer stood over him with a blackjack until he identified Mr. Wetzel as the murderer.

Frank Wetzel was not represented by counsel in his first hearings in those pre-Miranda days. His court-appointed attorney was an ex-FBI agent who provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

  • He had not challenged glaringly conflicting and inconsistent testimony.
  • The sole “eyewitness” described the killer as dark-complexioned and Hispanic, with a foreign accent—whereas Frank Wetzel is fair-skinned, was born in the U.S., and has no foreign accent.
  • The car was described as two-toned; Mr. Wetzel’s car was black.
  • A page in a hotel log that would have proved Frank Wetzel was far from the scene of the crimes was found to be missing, having been clumsily torn out of the book.
  • Finally, saying the case was “too hot” at the time, Mr. Wetzel’s court-appointed attorney advised him not to appeal the convictions.
  • Having not appealed within the legal time frame, Mr. Wetzel was denied recourse to later legal rulings protecting his rights as the accused.

In sum, Mr. Wetzel’s counsel made serious errors which prejudiced the defense – errors so serious that he was not functioning as the ‘counsel’ guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. When Mr. Wetzel did not receive the death sentence for these heinous murders, the jurors said that seemed only fair: After all, they said, there was “reasonable doubt” as to his guilt. Reasonable doubt was an understatement, since counsel entirely failed to subject the prosecution’s case to any meaningful adversarial testing.

As if all this were not enough, Mr. Wetzel has been eligible for parole since 1978, yet, among the longest-serving U.S. prisoners, he still remains behind bars. His regular requests for a review of his case have been denied. No justification is required.

Because of the length of incarceration and Mr. Wetzel’s advanced age; because the evidence points to his innocence, not guilt, in these crimes; and because he was wrongfully convicted and denied his constitutionally-guaranteed rights, with the help and support of Mr. Wetzel’s family and a foundation they are starting, I am launching an appeal to North Carolina Governor Perdue to grant Frank Wetzel immediate clemency.

To sign the petition please go to:
http://helenfogarassy.com/petition-to-free-frank-wetzel/

or click on the “Wetzel Petition” link in the menu at the top of the page.

If you wish to read more, including citations from original news articles from 1957 through the present, please read my earlier blog posts below. There is also additional information at freefrankwetzel.com.

Thank you,

Helen Fogarassy

Post to Twitter

How the Media Locked Up Frank Wetzel and Threw Away the Key

Published on August 31, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 0 Comments

Based on a wrongful conviction, an innocent man, 88-year old Frank Wetzel has been incarcerated for 52 years.

Why is Frank Wetzel in prison? There are compelling reasons to believe he is innocent of the charges – and to believe the conviction violates U.S. law:

  • In 1958, Frank Wetzel was not represented by legal counsel during his first hearings.
  • His court-appointed attorney (an ex-FBI agent) for the trials rendered ineffective counsel.
    • He did not question conflicting testimony, including glaring discrepancies in the color of the car involved (two-toned tan and brown vs. black)  and the physical description of the killer (dark-complexioned  vs. very fair).
    • He excluded exculpatory evidence:  He did not bring out the fact that there was a missing page in a hotel log that would have proved Frank Wetzel had been far from the site of both killings.  This was highly suspicious, and seemed to indicate Mr. Wetzel was being framed.
    • He advised Frank Wetzel not to appeal his convictions within the timeframe that would have given him recourse to later legal rulings protecting his rights as the accused.
  • The only “eyewitness” later recanted, saying he had feared for his life and felt forced by police, while in custody,  to name Frank Wetzel as the killer
  • Frank Wetzel was nowhere near the scene of either murder, but a Bible and gloves belonging to the sole eyewitness (who later recanted), were found between the two murder sites. No physical evidence linking Frank Wetzel to either murder was ever discovered.
  • The press of the 1950′s was notorious for convicting suspects as soon as their names were made known.  This is what happened to Frank Wetzel.
  • Why was he not given a life sentence?  … because members of the jury, when questioned, said they had “reasonable doubts” as to his guilt.

Quote from eyewitness, who later recanted his testimony:

“I was under a lot of pressure and felt as if I was being tried for my life. A Captain Welch pulled his blackjack on me…to make me accept the police’s version of the story.” (Recantation reported in the Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald, May13, 1987.)

In the news:

In perspective:  At the age of 37 in 1957, New Yorker Frank Wetzel was an ideal candidate to be framed for the murder of two North Carolina state troopers on November 5. His continued incarceration 52 two years after his conviction is a glaring testament to lapses in the American criminal justice system nationwide.

As a three-time felon in New York, Wetzel was facing a mandatory life-sentence after he maneuvered his way into a mental facility in a plan to escape and free his brother on death row in Mississippi. That brother was executed four days after the end of Wetzel’s second trial. He was posthumously exonerated a year later.

In New York, Wetzel would have been eligible for parole after serving the minimum years of his sentence. In North Carolina, he never had that chance, not because of the law but because of personal elements projected through the media.

The two troopers were shot within a twenty-minute span at a distance of 40 miles apart. If one person killed both, the driving speed would have been 120 miles an hour non-stop. Yet a Bible and gloves left in the first car by the sole eye-witness were found neatly arranged between the two locations.

A book by the late sportswriter Bill Currie entitled “Guilty with Reasonable Doubt” details allegations about in-fighting between local members of the North Carolina State Troopers at the time. Yet media license to sensationalize brought about the capture, conviction and permanent incarceration of Frank Wetzel.

Frank Wetzel was identified as the killer of both troopers by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on November 14 based on his New York history. His fingerprints were also found in a car he had stolen and abandoned in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

The media ignored the fact that the black car did not match the two-tone car color described by the witness in the first incident. Other discrepancies were also ignored.

The killer was said to be dark-complexioned, perhaps Hispanic, while Wetzel was a blond of German descent. The killer’s height, weight and age were also at odds with Wetzel’s physical description.

Reporters did not investigate. Instead, they played up the drama of Wetzel’s capture and his two separate trials just three months apart.

North Carolina officials travelled to California to bring Wetzel back (Richmond County Journal, November 22, 1957). The story of his tame capture received wide local publicity (ibid).

The drama of the trials included the dismissal of a motion by a ruling judge to declare a mistrial based on the illegal taping of the courtroom by the local media (The Charlotte News, January 10, 1958). The article reporting on the decision identified Wetzel as a “four-time loser.”

On January 16, The Rockingham Post-Dispatch called Wetzel a “bad egg” while reporting on the hunt for a bullet in the second shooting – a bullet which was never found (Rockingham Post-Dispatch, January 16, 1958.   Among those searching were State Troopers and a boy scout troop.

Despite the lack of evidence linking the two killings, the image of a “four-time” loser and a “bad egg” no doubt played on the minds of jurors. For example, in the first trial they were chosen from a pool of 150 in an overtime session (Richmond County Journal, January 8, 1958).

Also undoubtedly influencing the decision to convict was the presentation of Wetzel’s defense. His court-appointed attorney was an ex-FBI agent who did not object to inconsistent testimony. He also advised Wetzel to not testify in his own defense and to not appeal the convictions within the legal time-frame that would have allowed him recourse to later legal rulings protecting the rights of the accused.

The 1963 Miranda law requiring defendants to be advised of their rights was one of those rulings. The Gideon vs. Wainright ruling of the same year was another.  That guaranteed defendants the right to be represented by counsel.  In 1958, Wetzel made his plea of not guilty without benefit of counsel (The Charlotte Observer, January 7, 1958).

The grounds for the court-appointed attorney’s advice to delay submitting an appeal were that the atmosphere was too hot  (The Charlotte News, January 13, 1958). Heeding that advice has kept Frank Wetzel incarcerated for 52 years.

Wetzel has repeatedly been denied the possibility of parole. The decision has been based on the parole board’s decision that he needs further rehabilitation (Daily Herald, May 1, 1986). A review of his case and original trials through a writ of certeriori petition has been repeatedly denied. No justification for that decision is required.

Given the fact that by contemporary standards Frank Wetzel obviously did not receive a fair trial 52 years ago, the repeated denial is a travesty of the principle that the rule of law evolves. Solely on the basis of improving American jurisprudence, Wetzel’s case and trials deserve review.

Yet as recently as 2009, Wetzel was again denied the right to have his case reconsidered. Families of the slain troopers were among those petitioning the denial of that right.

Media coverage from the perspective of those families no doubt played a role in the decision. That projected personal element washed away the fact that Wetzel had not had a fair trial 52 years ago.

The American judicial system calls for a higher standard of justice than personal sentiment, however.  Given the length of time that Frank Wetzel’s rights have been denied, he has earned the right to an immediate exercise of the privilege of Executive Clemency by North Carolina Governor Beverly Purdue.

Post to Twitter

Does 88-year-old Frank Wetzel Deserve to Remain in a North Carolina Prison after 50-odd Years?

Published on June 24, 2010 in Criminal Justice and Politics. 14 Comments Tags: , .

Quote: laws grind the poor, and rich men rule the law (Oliver Goldsmith)

In the news:

Man’s Name Is Frank Wetzel: Search For Him Is Intensified Over Nation (Rockingham Post Dispatch, November 14, 1957)

Patrolman’s killer named by FBI: man escaped from mental hospital (Richmond County Journal, November 15, 1957)

Jury would have convicted Wetzel had the evidence been conclusive (Rockingham Post-Dispatch, January 16, 1958)

Court of Appeals Renders Opinion (Justia, U.S. Court of Appeals Cases and Opinions, argued June 4, 1980; decided Oct. 27, 1980)

Pardon sought for Wetzel in 28-year-old slaying: star witness says ID “prompted by pressure” (Roanoke Rapids News, March 14, 1986)

1957 Murders Leave Lingering Mystery Despite a Conviction (Los Angeles Times, February 05, 1995)

What is Frank Wetzel doing in prison after 37 years? (Herald Journal, February 12, 1995

Definitions (Oxford Concise English Dictionary):

frame-up: a conspiracy, especially to make an innocent person appear guilty

conspiracy: a secret plan to commit a crime or do harm, often for political ends

in perspective:

Frank Wetzel was 37 when he was convicted of killing two North Carolina state troopers in two separate incidents at the end of 1957, nine years before the 1966 Miranda Rule protecting the rights of the accused came into effect. The two trials regarding the killings took place after Wetzel was hunted down by the FBI in an all-states alert based on his history.

News headlines at the time were allowed to identify Wetzel as the killer rather than as a suspect. Stories cited his criminal record and that he was an escapee from a mental institution. His institutionalization and escape, however, were part of a plan to free a brother on Death Row in Tennessee, who was executed the year Wetzel was sentenced and then was exonerated the next year.

Born in the Depression era of 1921, Frank Wetzel and his brother Bill had been encouraged to contribute to the family income by any means possible. From an early age, both brothers served time for theivery but not for violence.

Armed with munitions to break his brother out of Death Row, Frank was headed south from New York when he was caught in the North Carolina jam. Two state troopers were shot in one night in two towns forty-five miles apart. A states-wide bulletin was issued by the FBI the next day. Wetzel was captured in California a week later and was returned to North Carolina by local law-enforcement officers traveling by train to take him into custody.

Three months later, Wetzel was convicted of both killings based on the identification of a hitchhicker who had witnessed the first killing, despite the fact that the witness’ initial description did not apply to Wetzel. The witness had described a dark-complexioned driver, for example, while Wetzel was a blond German. The driver’s described height was also at odds with Wetzel’s, as was the car color and the subjects talked about during the drive prior to the killing.

Nevertheless, Wetzel was convicted in the first trial on the basis of that testimony and on circumstantial evidence that at the time required no safeguards of fingerprinting or comparison of tire tread-marks to ensure the same vehicle was involved in both incidents. Discrepancies went largely unchallenged by Wetzel’s court appointed attorney, who was a fomer FBI agent.

Based on that first verdict, Wetzel was convicted in the second trial. Based on his attorney’s advice to postpone filing an automatic appeal because the case was “too hot” at the time, Wetzel lost his legal window of opportunity and has been a prisoner of the North Carolina legal system ever since.

The testimony that served as the basis for Wetzel’s conviction was recanted 30 years later by the “Negro” sole eye-witness, as reported in the Roanoke Rapids Daily Herald on March 14, 1986. In the recantation, he said he was “under great pressure by the police” to identify Wetzel as the killer.

The recantation came about as a result of investigative work by reporter Bianca Brown, who also succeeded in obtaining the death certificates of the two officers. Those indicated that the shootings had occurred within 15 minutes of each other and not an hour as had been testified in the trials.

Bianca Brown was drawn into Wetzel’s situation on reading a news article that Wetzel had been denied a requested transfer when a prison guard overheard him discussing escape plans with another inmate. Seeing no sense in such self-sabotage, Brown met with Wetzel and presumed she would easily secure his release through her well-positioned connections.

Over 20 years later, Wetzel’s continued incarceration raises serious questions. They concern not only the legal and penal systems in North Carolina and the country beyond the state, but also the political.

Convicted by legal standards no longer allowed by modern law, Frank Wetzel at the age of 88 remains at the vagary of humanly implemented law. Appearing at his first hearing without benefit of legal counsel, he obviously did not receive a fair trial in 1957. Despite that obvious injustice and false testimony about the timing of the killings, Wetzel is routinely denied his writ of certeriori petition for a review of the trials.

The February 1995 Herald-Journal article quotes inmate advocate Jim Lewis as saying “No governor wants to touch this. If Frank Wetzel gets out on their watch — oh my.”

At present, as Frank Wetzel’s next parole hearing nears in September, a former governor of North Carolina is under investigation for corruption. That seems to indicate that perhaps Frank Wetzel’s case needs to be taken beyond the state.

One final point about the question of Frank Wetzel’s guilt or innocence seems of paramount relevance. If he did not commit the two murders on the November night of 1957, then a “cop-killer” is still on the loose somewhere in North Carolina 50 years later.

Post to Twitter