6 ms·

I wonder if Dateline would have interest in updating his story, and if there might be any compensation for something like that. I'm not involved in TV productio

by fecak 10y ago

I wonder if Dateline would have interest in updating his story, and if there might be any compensation for something like that. I'm not involved in TV production, but you would think if they had enough interest to report on his conviction (which happens every day) there would be an even better story regarding his release.

ClintEhrlich 10y ago
Dateline has asked me to sit down for an interview with Keith Morrison. I may do that, but there will be no compensation involved.
- mratzloff 10y ago
  You may do that? You absolutely should. You're promoting his cause. See if you can have space in the program to talk about his transition and the financial assistance campaign in particular.
  - ClintEhrlich 10y ago
    There's a ton of media interest. I'm only going to appear on Dateline if I have some assurance that the new piece will be fairer than the original one that got my attention.
    - danso 10y ago
      What did you find unfair about the original piece? I haven't seen it but I had assumed it would be relatively favorable if Dateline had chosen to publicize the case 15 years after the murder and 6 years after the conviction.
      - ClintEhrlich 10y ago
        The Dateline piece came out right after Ray's conviction. I just happened to see it 5 years later. It portrayed him as a craven killer who was brought to justice only through the Herculean efforts of police and prosecutors who wouldn't let the absence of any physical evidence stop them from getting a conviction.
        danso 10y ago
        Goddamn that's scary that this man's exoneration depended on a chance viewing of Dateline...Props to you...my initial reaction to this post (I hadn't seen your other appeals to HN) were that this sounded too good to be true, but even the stories and accounts about Mr. Jennings that were pro-status-quo were alarmingly flimsy. I don't have faith that the justice system will naturally get things right, but I do have a general faith that the bureaucracy and motivations of the system would prevent such a conviction from ever happening in the current day...e.g. DA's not wanting to screw up their conviction rate by bringing such a weak case to trial. My faith is pretty shaken now...if this is the kind of case that can make its way to a murder conviction and rejection of review by the state Supreme Court, it most definitely leaves me unsettled about all the kinds of cases that don't receive media attention. This frequently posted video ("Don't talk to police") now looks much more naive than cynical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
        ClintEhrlich 10y ago
        Sadly, this case has deeply shaken my confidence in the criminal-justice system.
        Casseres 10y ago
        "(T)his is a court of law and not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (Associate Justice for the United States Supreme Court)
        btilly 10y ago
        In Holmes' defense, the job of a Supreme Court justice is to establish common law precedent for the future, not to get the right decision for the case at hand. So, for instance, if an illegal search turns up clear evidence that a company is evading taxes, justice for the case at hand says that the company should be punished. But the principle of law says that precedent must be set that the police can't violate the 4th amendment. This is not a hypothetical example. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._Uni....
- fecak 10y ago
  Your original question was "how I can help him get money for housing, food, and clothes?". Whether or not you speak to the media, and whether those appearances are paid, probably wouldn't impact your client's financial situation unless you intended to share it. If Dateline is interested in speaking to you, one could be relatively sure that Dateline would be equally (if not more) interested in speaking with him. I see your post now mentions that he might be reluctant to speak until his charges are formally dropped (I don't recall seeing that initially, so either I missed it or you edited it perhaps?). Scheduling an interview and having it go to air is likely to take time anyway, but I'd imagine that if he requested some fee to speak to Dateline that they'd oblige given the situation. Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic, but I'd like to think that a network that profited over the publicizing of a conviction would give at least some small compensation to have the convicted discuss his release and case.
- whamlastxmas 10y ago
  Why not ask for compensation to a charity to helps people in this situation?

by fecak 10y ago

ClintEhrlich 10y ago

Dateline has asked me to sit down for an interview with Keith Morrison. I may do that, but there will be no compensation involved.

mratzloff 10y ago
You may do that? You absolutely should. You're promoting his cause. See if you can have space in the program to talk about his transition and the financial assistance campaign in particular.
- ClintEhrlich 10y ago
  There's a ton of media interest. I'm only going to appear on Dateline if I have some assurance that the new piece will be fairer than the original one that got my attention.
  - danso 10y ago
    What did you find unfair about the original piece? I haven't seen it but I had assumed it would be relatively favorable if Dateline had chosen to publicize the case 15 years after the murder and 6 years after the conviction.
    - ClintEhrlich 10y ago
      The Dateline piece came out right after Ray's conviction. I just happened to see it 5 years later. It portrayed him as a craven killer who was brought to justice only through the Herculean efforts of police and prosecutors who wouldn't let the absence of any physical evidence stop them from getting a conviction.
      - danso 10y ago
        Goddamn that's scary that this man's exoneration depended on a chance viewing of Dateline...Props to you...my initial reaction to this post (I hadn't seen your other appeals to HN) were that this sounded too good to be true, but even the stories and accounts about Mr. Jennings that were pro-status-quo were alarmingly flimsy. I don't have faith that the justice system will naturally get things right, but I do have a general faith that the bureaucracy and motivations of the system would prevent such a conviction from ever happening in the current day...e.g. DA's not wanting to screw up their conviction rate by bringing such a weak case to trial. My faith is pretty shaken now...if this is the kind of case that can make its way to a murder conviction and rejection of review by the state Supreme Court, it most definitely leaves me unsettled about all the kinds of cases that don't receive media attention. This frequently posted video ("Don't talk to police") now looks much more naive than cynical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
        ClintEhrlich 10y ago
        Sadly, this case has deeply shaken my confidence in the criminal-justice system.
        Casseres 10y ago
        "(T)his is a court of law and not a court of justice." - Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (Associate Justice for the United States Supreme Court)
        btilly 10y ago
        In Holmes' defense, the job of a Supreme Court justice is to establish common law precedent for the future, not to get the right decision for the case at hand. So, for instance, if an illegal search turns up clear evidence that a company is evading taxes, justice for the case at hand says that the company should be punished. But the principle of law says that precedent must be set that the police can't violate the 4th amendment. This is not a hypothetical example. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silverthorne_Lumber_Co._v._Uni....
fecak 10y ago
Your original question was "how I can help him get money for housing, food, and clothes?". Whether or not you speak to the media, and whether those appearances are paid, probably wouldn't impact your client's financial situation unless you intended to share it. If Dateline is interested in speaking to you, one could be relatively sure that Dateline would be equally (if not more) interested in speaking with him. I see your post now mentions that he might be reluctant to speak until his charges are formally dropped (I don't recall seeing that initially, so either I missed it or you edited it perhaps?). Scheduling an interview and having it go to air is likely to take time anyway, but I'd imagine that if he requested some fee to speak to Dateline that they'd oblige given the situation. Perhaps I'm being overly optimistic, but I'd like to think that a network that profited over the publicizing of a conviction would give at least some small compensation to have the convicted discuss his release and case.
whamlastxmas 10y ago
Why not ask for compensation to a charity to helps people in this situation?