After Innocence (2005) User Reviews

A compelling and vitally important statement about wrongfully convicted prisoners freed by DNA evidence.

[BradBate · 9/10 · 31 October 2005]

Again and again the revelations in Jessica Sanders' documentary brought audible gasps from the Hawaii International Film Festival audience. Here, in stark images and gut wrenching narrative, were the stories of men imprisoned, sometimes for 20 years and more, because of erroneous victim identification, sloppy or corrupt police work and over-zealous prosecutors. Here, in footage as raw as reality, is proof positive that much of the American judicial system is more righteous than just, and almost incapable of even saying to a guy, "I'm sorry," before dumping him on the streets, penniless.

"After Innocence" shows us the maddening frustration of convicts who fight to re-open their cases on the basis of DNA evidence, and then what becomes of them if and when that evidence exonerates them. It is a deeply disturbing picture. It also shows you the dedicated work of not-for-profit organizations such as The Innocence Project that are overwhelmed in their attempts to help. It is clear that there are literally thousands of wrongfully imprisoned people in America, most of them with little hope of ever being vindicated.

Sanders' film focuses on seven men, including a police officer, an army sergeant and a young father, all released, plus a man in Florida still behind bars over three years after irrefutable DNA evidence cleared him of rape. Some of them had been in solitary confinement on death row, frequently for decades, for crimes they did not commit. Eight years after being exonerated, the now-graying dad has been unable to get his conviction expunged from official records, making it almost impossible for him to find meaningful, full-time employment. Despite being absolved of any involvement in the crimes for which he was imprisoned, he is still treated as an ex-con.

"DNA is God's signature," says one man, imprisoned for well over 20 years. "And God doesn't lie." Unfortunately, our governmental systems don't always tell the truth.

Jessica Sanders was nominated for an Academy Award for her 2002 short documentary, "Sing." It was released in theaters and aired nationally on Public Television. "After Innocence" will also have a theatrical release and is scheduled to air on Showtime early in 2006. Eventually it will be released on DVD. It has the power to ignite a firestorm of protest over our failed judicial system and to be a catalyst for important change. Ms. Sanders, who sees herself as a filmmaker, not a journalist, is currently working on the screenplay for a dramatic film. When "After Innocence" was screened at the Sundance Film Festival she indicated she wants to continue to use film "as a way to give people a voice that don't necessarily have that means." She doesn't have a new documentary project in the works right now, but one can hope that she will continue to demonstrate her enormous talent in this field.

500,000 innocent Americans in jail?

[rberg · 7/10 · 14 April 2006]

This movie introduces you to a handful of men who have been freed from long prison terms after being exonerated. As shocking and heartbreaking as this movie is, it gives no hint of the scale of the problem. While it is a powerful experience to get to know these men, I found myself urgently wondering what percentage of the prisoners who get DNA tests turn out to be innocent. A little web surfing led me to this quote from William Sessions (former director of the FBI):

"In early 1988, the FBI Laboratory Division created a DNA testing lab; by year's end, testing was completed in 100 active cases. I was fully expecting the results to confirm the careful investigative and evaluative work that had gone into the decisions to prosecute these suspects. Instead, I was stunned by the results. In about 30 percent of the cases, the DNA gathered in the investigation did not match the DNA of the suspect. Fifteen years later, this rate remains virtually the same. Approximately 25 percent of DNA tests do not produce a match."

Now, it would certainly be reasonable to suppose that this rate of failure of our justice system's "careful investigative and evaluative work" is a similar 25% to 30% in the rest of the cases where it hasn't been scientifically checked by DNA testing. With two million Americans in the prison system, if 25% of them are innocent, then we have 500,000 innocent Americans in jail.

After Innocence is a very good film but I think its impact could be much greater if it gave some context to these seven individuals by talking, even briefly, about how many other wrongfully incarcerated Americans may be moldering away in prison. The only hint of this in the film is a shot of a bank of filing cabinets at the Innocence Project that contains thousands of requests for help – all unopened.

A Compelling, Impactful Documentary

[mikewelch7 · 9/10 · 29 January 2005]

Bringing to light recent exoneration's made possible through newly admissible DNA evidence, Jessica Sander's "After Innocence" is a very compelling and important documentary.

The film focuses on the Project Innocence group, a team of lawyers dedicated to freeing those imprisoned unjustly. This film focused on several Project Innocence cases, where individuals were sentenced, largely based on eyewitness identification, and without physical evidence. Through the use of DNA, the lawyers are able to have their subjects released.

As the film relates, being released from prison is not the end of the inmates' struggles. They return to society with nary an apology (much less restitution for unjust imprisonment) from the state's where they were incarcerated. The exonerees then deal with a whole host of complications (such as getting their records expunged of their crimes) after they are released, partly due to the lack of provision for such releases on behalf of the judicial system, and partly due to the uncertain status they are accorded by society.

This film was well received at the 2005 Sundance festival. At the end of each showing, the exonerees stood for question and answer sessions, which were highly memorable for all involved.

I highly recommend this film, and hope to see it picked up by a film distributor for general release in 2005.

Release from death row is just the beginning of the rest of your life

[roland-104 · 10/10 · 31 May 2006]

Documentary about men who had been incarcerated, some for 20 years or more, awaiting certain execution on death row, who subsequently have been exonerated after their convictions for capital crimes were overturned as a result of new, DNA-based evidence proving their innocence.

These conviction reversals are, almost without exception, the result of pro bono legal assistance provided by the Innocence Project, a non-profit legal clinic established in 1992 at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City.

The two founders of the clinic, Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, have waged a relentless battle to aid wrongly convicted men facing execution, in the process encouraging the development of similar clinics in 30 states. To date, 175 persons have been exonerated through these efforts.

Former Illinois Governor George Ryan was so impressed by the likelihood of error in capital convictions that, shortly before leaving office early in 2003, he commuted the death sentences of all convicts awaiting execution in his state.

This film focuses on several affected men, exploring the events and circumstances that followed the demonstration of their innocence. Exoneration brings no assistance to these men. For example, even the expungement of the conviction from the criminal justice record is not automatic. It must be applied for through a convoluted paper process. In one state, the exonerated individual must pay $6,000 in fees to gain an expungement.

Whereas guilty felons placed on parole may be entitled to many services and sources of aid for things like education, employment and heath care, exonerated persons receive no such entitlements. No state has arranged a program to offer compensation to any of these people. In nearly every instance, they don't even get an apology from the State for erroneously taking away their freedom for years upon years.

We also are reminded of bad things we already knew from other films, namely, that prosecutors and judges are often loath to accept the DNA evidence, insisting, if you can believe this, that because a case was tried fairly, i.e., the trial met acceptable prosecutorial and judicial standards, the convict should continue to be incarcerated and even executed, despite proof of innocence!

In one man's case that we follow throughout this film, prosecutors stalled for three years after DNA testing had proved that he was not the perpetrator, during which time the man remained in prison, before Innocence Project lawyers prevailed in bringing the DNA evidence to court and winning an acquittal. Interviewed for the film, one member of that prosecuting team justified the effort to keep the convict on death row on the basis that "the victim's family needs closure."

Not every case reveals such perversely twisted sentiments. In a heartwarming example of the opposite reaction, we see a prosecutor embrace another newly released, exonerated man, apologizing for the hardship caused by his false conviction and incarceration.

We see in this film stories of success and failure after release of these men from prison. One gets a good job from a sympathetic truck repair shop owner. Another successfully pursues his dream of becoming a psychotherapist, first obtaining an A.A. degree, then his B.S. in Psychology. But others fail to find decent work, their records still blemished by unexpunged information regarding their false convictions. One man dies of a heart attack a few years after his release. A successful support group is formed in one locale, and we learn of various efforts now underway to seek compensation, though none has so far succeeded.

Some sobering comments on the problem of false conviction are offered by Barry Scheck and others along the way. The exonerated persons represent the tip of a huge iceberg. The various Innocence Projects around the country receive hundreds and hundreds of requests for aid, far more than they can even answer, much less take on. We are shown files drawers full of unopened envelopes, letters from convicts seeking the help of Scheck and Neufeld's clinic. Scheck says that DNA analysis is possible in only about 10% of the cases they do review. In the other 90% of cases, materials on which DNA analysis can be performed were either absent, were rendered unusable because of botched evidence collection, have been destroyed or lost in the years since the trial.

Scheck also tells us that eyewitness reports constitute the sole evidence base for successful prosecution in 78% of capital crime convictions among persons now on death row. This despite the fact that a huge body of psychological research, conducted by experts like Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington (now professor at the University of California, Irvine), has demonstrated the frequent unreliability of such evidence.

One exonerated man's story, followed in this film, has, since his release, brought him into contact with the rape victim who erroneously identified him in a police lineup, the sole basis of his conviction. He and the woman that he did not rape have become friends, and they share a common goal of improving the evidence base relied upon by prosecutors.

This film is extraordinary insofar as its subject - life in the community after exoneration - has not previously been explored in any depth, factual content is lucidly presented, the men featured are articulate, highly interesting individuals (almost all, for example, are remarkably free of hostility about their experiences), the talking heads are informative and kept to an essential minimum, and the photography, editing and continuity are first rate. Jessica Sanders makes her debut here as the (co)writer-director of a feature length documentary. It's a splendid beginning. My grade: 10/10

After Innocence

[jshornoff · 10/10 · 14 January 2006]

To those of you who commented on After Innocence, thank you. "I hope that this letter finds you and finds you well." Those words are contained in a letter written by Tim Robbins' character, Andy Dufresne, to his friend, Morgan 'Red' Freeman, in the motion picture 'The Shawshank Redemption,' and how I either began or closed many of the thousands of letters I wrote while wrongfully imprisoned in RI's prisons for six years four months and 18 days of a life sentence for a murder I did not commit. Being innocent made the time excruciatingly frustrating; being a city police detective made the dehumanizing education especially humiliating. Upon my release, the people involved in the single and focused investigation that led to my wrongful imprisonment have attempted to spin a false claim that I continually lied to investigators, and brought the ordeal down upon myself. I think they are mad at me for being innocent and for making them look bad. During the last three years, I have attempted to reconnect with my sons, take care of my ailing Mom, have remarried and have a new baby girl; I have guest lectured at high schools, universities and conferences nationwide as well as other avenues for prison and judicial reform advocacy; participated in several national profiles, and documentaries, including the award-winning 'After Innocence' film; I'm finishing up a Master's of criminal justice at Boston University, researching PhD programs of universities; won reinstatement to the Warwick police department nearly two years ago, still waiting for the 'expedited' hearing in front of the RI Supreme Court since Warwick's mayor is appealing the order by RI's Superior Court chief justice, recently filed a 1983 Federal civil suit; occasionally have substituted at RI high schools, looking for other employment opportunities...my Mom wonders what I do all day. Marc Simon, Jessica Sanders, Brian Johnson and the rest of the AI team were (and are) thoughtful, considerate and aware. They are also heroes in the birth of this new civil rights movement. As my wife Tina aptly calls us: America's newest subculture. Scott Hornoff

Lopsided Documentary With Significant Information

[fwomp · 6/10 · 21 February 2007]

A telling documentary about the failings of criminal investigative law in the U.S., AFTER INNOCENCE is a poignant, if somewhat stilted, telling of the lives of men who've been wrongfully imprisoned for years and years (sometimes decades and decades) only to be released after advances in DNA evidence free them.

The documentary follows only men through this process, most of them having been identified during their trial by a person who is wrong about them. Not really a surprise, as eyewitness identification is now being proved to be one of the least accurate ways in which to prosecute someone.

The film begins and ends with its focus on Wilton Dedge in Brevard County, Florida. Sentenced to life in prison for sexual battery and burglary, Dedge has steadfastly commented on his innocence since his imprisonment some 22 years earlier. Never having given up, Dedge has the physical evidence collected from his crime sent to a forensic lab for DNA study. By the end of the film, we learn that none of it matches Dedge and he is sure to be released. But the prosecutors from the District Attorney's office are reluctant to let him go. Why? That's the biggest stickler in the entire film. Even when faced with overwhelming evidence of innocence, our supposed community service men and women are unwilling to admit their errors. That's very frustrating and shown quite well.

The problem with the documentary, though, is that it never really shows the "other side." In other words, the D.A.'s perspective. Perhaps the D.A.'s didn't want to be filmed. But we're never told either way. Only once do we ever see a prosecutor discussing DNA cases, and that is very short indeed. Thus, this gives the After Innocence a very lopsided/one-sided viewpoint. If the D.A.'s didn't want to be filmed, I would've liked to have seen the film-makers attempting to get in to see them only to be rebuked and booted out. Again, we don't know if this happened or if the film-makers ever tried to get the other side.

The other notable portion to the film is that prison affects these men very differently. Vincent Moto seems to have lost his willingness to better himself, while Herman Atkins now has a Ph.D in psychology. Dennis Maher and Nick Yarris seem to have mental health problems thanks to their long and wrongful imprisonment, each appearing either lackluster about life or having an inflated ego about their own importance rather than the importance of the situation itself.

Regardless, After Innocence is informative in its own, one-sided way. Just make sure you check out both sides before deciding on its entire significance.

You will be changed by this.

[john-1490 · 10/10 · 4 December 2005]

I saw this documentary last night and after the showing heard the producer as well as two of the men wrongfully imprisoned and featured in the film. The theater was packed and many were obviously moved by the stories of men sent to prison (some for decades) for crimes they were falsely convicted. Thanks to DNA evidence, the truth came out. In most cases these innocent men received no compensation and not even an apology for the times when the system clearly has gone woefully awry. The men were remarkably not bitter but moved to improve criminal justice. I urge all to see this film. I am a simple movie-goer, but this is more than another mere film. It is a clarion call to right some terrible wrongs, and this film skillfully conveys the story.

A focused, personal, often haunting document of lives lost at ignorance's expense

[oneloveall · 8/10 · 3 February 2007]

Landmark documentary focuses on a handful of prisoners, whom after 10,15,20 or so years, have been eventually found innocent and set free, only to fall on deaf ears in society. In detailing the startlingly inept justice systems' process dealing with the exonerated, director Jessica Sanders and producer Marc H. Simon largely succeed in documenting the tragic flaws of our system and it's ultimate hypocrisies of presuming innocence. Not only do we get a scathing survey of our governments apathetic synapses when it comes to dispensing justice, but at the heart of this difficult film lies the wounded and warped psychologies these stunningly brave and fierce seven men have been left by society to sift through as they are literally thrown onto the street after decades of wrongful imprisonment with nary a dollar of compensation to their name, often having to fight and pay their own money just to have their false charges expunged.

This project illuminates the grim underbelly of our judicial system in a way I think even the most hardened cynic would appreciate, and matched with the emotional perspectives shown struggling and grasping for relevance in a world that could care less, urges viewers to wake up to the less comfortable aspects of our legal system. After Innocence packs even more sting from the tense and unpredicted outcome of these fates, highlighted in particular by inmate Wilton Dedge's ongoing fight for release, an outcome that became the brilliant and triumphant finale only through the goodwill of fate, as the documentary was already due at Sundance before any real resolution was filmed with his scenario. Dedge's Florida case was infamous for having proved his innocence, beyond any shadow of a scientific doubt whatsoever, yet still remained in jail for another 3 years, a testament to how corrupt and proud our monster of justice really is.

Anyone who takes a slightest interest in powerful, insightful documentary film-making, promotes social and just change, or wishes to examine the absolute pit of ignorance that remains our legal precedents, should remain riveted throughout the important piece. If the simple and profound legal ramifications dictating how justice is being perverted in our country do not rile you where you sit, behold these seven men and their haunted subtleties, and begin to never take your freedom for granted.

brilliant and moving

[witham-4 · 10/10 · 29 May 2008]

I couldn't sleep, so was watching early morning TV. This film killed sleep that night.I was crying, with anger, empathy ...and remorse, because I have never done anything to highlight such miscarriages of justice.

The prosecutor in Mr Dregde's case - who could not admit he got it wrong, and made him spend 3 more years in jail. A seriously stupid and blinkered man.

The lack of conscience of the state and prosecutors - who did not expunge the records, and left these people with a tragic life on the outside, worse than if they had been guilty.

The one prosecutor who apologised is a man of honour.

Governor Ryan is a very brave man, and one of conscience - would we had more in Government! May I recommend John Grisham's book, The Innocent Man, For another tale of criminally inadequate judiciary - I don't even like him as a writer, but I was given this book, and slept less because of it.

How many people rot in jail because of incompetent prosecutors and lazy investigators? Thank God for DNA - as the film said - "God's Fingerprint".

I have never written to a website before - I don't like giving details for Spam senders - but this film has made me so ANGRY!!! Can anyone support the death penalty having seen such spectacular miscarriages of justice? The people not shown,on death row,whose evidence has been "lost".

The lack of expungement, and thus hurdles in getting a job.

The FEE to get an expungement in some states - take my life and then charge me to get it back? Compensation for lost earnings, and for monies spent on defence, should be automatic for all exonerees - in most cases, they have lost the best years of their life, and their chance to establish themselves financially, through the incompetence of the justice system. The lawyers from the Innocence Project got it right - this should be a clarion call to all of us, to reform the system.

Thank you to the filmmakers for such a coherent and impressive film - and to those who helped finance it. It should be shown weekly on national TV.

0

Important and recommended

[sleacc · 10/10 · 11 November 2005]

I just saw After Innocence at the Get Real Film Festival in Minneapolis. I too was aware of the Innocence Project - but now I am So Much more informed in regard to this important issue. I hope this film is seen widely as there are important issues needing attention...the after innocence issues. For instance, it's important that an innocent person who is exonerated receive compensation for their time. As it is they receive nothing upon release. How much is 5-10-20 years of a life worth? How does a family recoup money spent to fight for the truth? How does one rejoin society after years of imprisonment? An exonerated person also needs to have their record expunged. Altho they have their exoneration certificate, their record of jail time is still there. An exonerated person may receive no assistance with employment, no assistance with reintroduction into society upon release. I believe this is unlike the guilty, who after serving their time, receive medical coverage, monetary benefits and assistance with employment.

It was so nice and so moving to meet Wilton Dedge in person after the film. For me to fully appreciate the impact of serving 20 plus years for a crime not committed is impossible. But as Wilton commented after the film, it is very important to be aware of this issue and involved -- as this could happen to anyone.

Inspirational

[surfergirl1584 · 10/10 · 1 February 2005]

I saw the last screening of this movie at the Sundance Film Festival and all I can say is thank you. The story was extremely compelling and opened my eyes to things I knew were going on, but didn't fully understand. We were artfully introduced to each subject, being allowed to get to know them as individuals on a very personal level. The subject development was just what we needed to really share at least some part of their struggles. To witness Wilton Dedge overcome everything at the end was a much needed touch. Props to Jessica, you did a wonderful job. Being able to talk to the people that were exonerated after the showing was incredible and very gracious of them. Thank you again, best of luck.

this is why we want the death penalty abolished entirely

[lee_eisenberg · 10/10 · 24 April 2022]

Only a sadistic ideologue could watch "After Innocence" and still support the death penalty. It shows how the criminal justice (more like criminal injustice) system actively seeks to punish, not rehabilitate, and very often imprisons the wrong people, even resulting in wrongful executions. And sure enough, even after convicted people have gotten proved innocent, the prosecutors refused to apologize. And of course, a disproportionate number of the people on death row are people of color.

It's worth noting that after going from dictatorship to democracy, countries tend to abolish the death penalty (Italy, Romania, etc). Indeed, a number of US states have either abolished the death penalty or imposed a moratorium on it. Retaining it keeps the US government in line with China and North Korea.

Innocence?

[EXodus25X · 8/10 · 25 July 2008]

After Innocence is an eye opening look into the imperfections of the United States justice system. Without going any further I would like to remind everyone of how superior that same system is in compared to other countries in the world. I realize that means nothing to the men in this film that have been unjustly convicted of horrible crimes. It is very emotional to listen to these men tell there story and to see how their time in prison has changed them. The fact that the prosecuting lawyers or the state or someone is not responsible for some kind of reimbursement for these men after they are released is absolutely ridicules. As one man said, they had taken away the key years of his life, the years he either gains a college education or establishes a career. I do think it is extremely honorable of the prosecuting attorneys, judges and in some case prison wardens who have given heartfelt apologies to these men and I admire those men for that because I feel it can give them hope in society and it's people again. But an apology can't feed you or get you out of living under your parents roof at the age of 40. With all that said I do feel that some of theses men have turned this horrible experience into a crutch, a crutch that they lean on and use as a consistent excuse for not being able to get their life back in line even years after. People have and will always go through tribulations in there life and men are defined by what they do after that not by how much they live in the past. I understand that a lot of people may be mad at me for saying such a thing but I'm just expressing my opinion and if you didn't like that you won't like this. In a couple of these cases I honestly don't know if I buy into the innocence, as my friend pointed out, that is the point of this film, that people judge based on how the person looks or acts and not on the facts of there case. I agree with that completely and I try as hard as I can to be fair and objective, but I do feel that of all the men who have been acquitted of crimes the odds say that at least a few of them are guilty. Then with all the media attention and people in your face constantly talking about your innocence I believe that a guilty man would start to really believe his innocence. I'm not going to go into who I think and why because I don't think documentaries always represents men completely fair and I don't have all the facts, just opinions. Overall though I believe most the men are completely innocent of their crimes and I totally buy into the theory that victims can't always be accurate in their descriptions of their assailants and can be traumatized by the situation or just down right lie. So with all that a very interesting documentary that will hopefully open the eyes of people in a position to change the problems of our justice system.

The judicial system is not perfect

[PWNYCNY · 9/10 · 20 June 2011]

The problem with this movie is not the subject matter, which is compelling, or the way in which the movie is presented, which is straight forward. Rather, it fails to offer a suggestions for improving what is obviously a flawed judicial system. Miscarriages of justice occur. They occur throughout history. Books have been written on this subject; it has been dramatized and discussed, e.g., The Count of Monte Christo, Judge Dredd, indeed Jesus Christ himself was crucified although found by the chief magistrate to have done nothing wrong. The judicial system is imperfect and the machinery of justice has some loose nuts and bolts which effect its operation. Most of these wrongly convicted gentlemen whose cases are discussed were found guilty based upon the evidence presented at their trials. It was the admission of additional evidence years later, after the their trials were concluded, that caused their convictions to be later reversed. That this country has an appeal system that allows the admission of new evidence after a trial is adjourned and sentence pronounced is a sign that may be the system is in fact working properly, that even years later, a court is willing to give a case a second review.

Powerful

[orangeisthenewawesome · 9/10 · 24 April 2014]

I knew from reading and research that the criminal justice system was deeply flawed on many levels. This movie beautifully and powerfully illustrates all that is wrong with our system. Men are incorrectly identified by witnesses; even after being excluded as the perpetrator by DNA wrongfully convicted individuals sit in jail as part of a show of force by the DA. Once released, some still have criminal records and find it difficult to get jobs. Some have difficulty acclimating to life outside of a cage. They have no skills. They have no money. They are broken. They are angry, and you will be too after watching this. Wilton Dedge's broken spirit will stick with you. Fortunately, he received 2 million dollars for 22 years in prison.