Imagine being confined to a walk-in closet, your every move monitored 24  hours a day.
You’re living within a constant pall of depression, dodging  gangs and assaults, no freedom of when, where or what you will eat, no sense of  caring from anyone, stripped of your dignity, your identity reduced to a number,  no future, trapped within a life that has no life — for 27 years.
Worse  yet, imagine if you were innocent of the crime.
It’s unimaginable. But it  happens.
Such is the case of Satellite Beach resident William Dillon, who  went to prison for murder at the age of 22 and is now released as innocent at  the age of 49.
Key evidence for his conviction was a discarded shirt  stained with the victim’s blood that was mistakenly attributed to Dillon. DNA  testing proved he hadn’t worn that shirt, though another unknown person  did.
The case was replete with other questionable issues, including a  homicide investigator’s affair with Dillon’s former girlfriend. Her damaging  testimony against Dillon was later recanted, but too late. A dog handler who  testified against Dillon was later discredited, and a jailhouse snitch was known  to have given inaccurate information.
But Dillon stayed in prison  anyway.
Dillon is the 223rd inmate released from American prisons since  the inception of DNA forensics, 17 of those were released from death  row.
Why isn’t anyone asking, “What took so long?”
Bogged-down  appellate courts are generally more interested in court procedure and attorney  conduct when reviewing cases, and less concerned with the viability or truth of  evidence. Yet, an inmate who can show that witnesses were not truthful and  evidence was flawed, or that DNA may prove him innocent, must wait up to 27  years for an opportunity to exculpate himself.
There’s something wrong  with that.
In Dillon’s case, a petition was finally filed for DNA testing  in October 2006, yet it took two more years of his life waiting for the legal  eagles to duke it out. If prosecutors are confident they convicted the right  man, there should be no objection to DNA testing.
In truth, it’s unlikely  that every one of those 223 who have been released based on DNA testing were  actually innocent. But most are. In 89 of those cases, the true perpetrator  ultimately was identified and arrested.
I’ve learned through my own  experience in criminal justice that DNA is not always the end-all. Sometimes,  additional information exists that still points to guilt. Retrying someone for a  crime that happened decades earlier is nearly impossible, as witnesses disappear  and evidence often is lost.
However, in cases where the veracity of  several witnesses is seriously in question and there is any chance that a human  being is wrongfully languishing behind bars, the state should not be  stonewalling efforts to seek out justice. In the name of humanity, they should  be part of the truth-seeking effort.
Unfortunately, the courts have  become an arena of legal combat that ignore the signs above the bench: “We Who  Labor Here Seek Only Truth.”
Dillon may eventually win monetary  compensation from the state. But it can never give back 27 years from the prime  of his life.
Frank is a writer and retired Miami police detective who  lives in Melbourne.