March 23, 2023 • 46 mins
Keith shares some of the potentially exculpatory evidence he says prosecutors withheld from his Defense team, proving he didn’t receive a fair trial back in 1995. Turns out, there are other people on Death Row saying prosecutors did the same thing to them.
If you have any information about the murder of Amber Garrett, contact the Office of the Ohio Public Defender at: 614.728.2715 or teamwogenstahl@gmail.com
To learn more about Jeffrey Wogenstahl’s case: https://jeffreywogenstahl.com/
For photos and documents related to this and every episode: https://www.instagram.com/the_real_killer_podcast/?igshid=MGU3ZTQzNzY%3D
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
A warning. This episode contains language and depictions of violence
that may be disturbing to some listeners. How often do
you think about the Uprising and Warrior trial? I really
mattered thinking about it. I'm living it out, but not
the repercussions for real estate. Keith Lamar has been on
(00:24):
death row since nineteen ninety five, almost all of it
spent in solitary confinement. Keith says he's innocent and may
be executed by the State of Ohio because prosecutors withheld
evidence which deprived him of getting a fair trial. I
think they just didn't want to take any charances, so
they came up with this kind of scheme to effectively
(00:46):
deny me excoverture evidence. The prosecuted job is not to
hearing the gifty body, but to see that justice is done.
But we know that it's not how, It's just the work.
I'm Leah Rothman. This is the Real Killer. Episode seven.
(01:11):
A caricature, a travesty, an obscenity. I think discovery is
probably the most important issue in Keith's trial. I think
that is where the case really went off the rails.
(01:34):
That's Alice Lynde. She and her husband Stoughton are widely
respected civil rights and labor activists, authors, and lawyers. They've
spent roughly twenty years focusing on the Lucasville Uprising and
the cases of the five men currently sitting on death Row.
Much of their research went into Stoughton's book Lucasville, The
(01:54):
Untold Story of a Prison Uprising. Back when I first
started working on Keith's story, I visited with Alison Stoughton,
who were in their early nineties. They declined to be
interviewed for this podcast, but have been helpful behind the scenes. Sadly,
Stoughton passed away in November of twenty twenty two. Although
(02:15):
our time together was brief, I feel lucky to have
spent any time with them at all. Back in twenty fifteen,
Stoughton and Alice are interviewed for Barbara Wolf's documentary Condemned,
and Miss Wolfe has been kind enough to share her
footage with me. In it, Alison Stoughton talk about Keith's case,
the issues with discovery, and what they believe are clear
(02:38):
Brady violations. Take Stacy Gordon. He was one of the
five prisoner witnesses who testified for the state, saying he
saw Keith lead a death squad through L six. Stoughton says,
there's a valuable piece of the Stacy Gordon puzzle that
was left out and had it been turned over, it
could have changed the outcome in key trial. Stacy Gordon
(03:03):
was one of two key witnesses against Lamar. This man
was probably the most significant prosecution witness. He lied through
his teeth. In fact, I think Stacy Gordon was probably
the individual who actually coordinated the death squad, but setting
(03:25):
that aside, less than a year before Keith's trial, the prosecution,
which had indicted mister Gordon for a surprising number of
violent actions during the eleven days, dropped the more serious
of those charges and entered into a plea agreement. And
(03:48):
at that particular time and place, the prosecutor elected to
ask mister Gordon a few additional questions and had them
transcribed by a court reporter. Why he did this, I
don't know, but my wife and I discovered this paper
in reviewing multitudinous documents about the case. The prosecutor asked
(04:16):
mister Gordon on that occasion, do you know Keith Lamar?
Answer no question. Did you see Keith Lamar in the
l six block in the early hours of the riot
at Lucasfeld. No, well, this is what Brady understands as
(04:38):
impeaching evidence. That is to say, if a given witness
makes a statement on the witness stand and the defense
lawyer is able to say, in this case, now, mister Gordon,
you just said, I believe that you didn't see mister Lamar,
I have take a look at it. I am reading
(05:01):
that correctly, Am I not? And Gordon has to say yes,
And the defense counsel then says, well, what should we
then make of your testimony, your elaborate, detailed testimony about
what you saw mister Lamard on April eleven. I mean
(05:22):
that could have changed the outcome of the trial. There
would have been both exculpatory and impeaching evidence concerning mister
Gordon had the prosecution done what Brady demands. So to
reiterate on the stand, Stacy Gordon testifies Keith led the
(05:42):
group of men sell to cell, killing the alleged snitches,
but in an interview with prosecutors, Stacy Gordon says he
didn't know Keith nor did he see him in l
six during the early hours of the uprising and Stoughton
says had that interview been turned over to Keith's attorneys
in night, it could have made a difference. Another example,
(06:07):
on the eve of trial, the prosecution asked the highway
patrol to interview a particular witness because the prosecution thought
he might be called as the defense witness. In other words,
they thought he might know something harmful to them. The
(06:29):
highway patrolman conducted the interview. This is less than a
week before trial, and he reported to Attorney Tiger to
the prosecutor, he doesn't want to be involved, but if
he's called, he'll say that he didn't see Lamar do anything. Now,
(06:52):
talk about exculpatory information. What a yummy for the defense
counseled to have had at trial a week later. The
prosecution did nothing to make that information available to the defense.
(07:13):
So this was a caricature, a travesty and obscenity. I
dilatwards to describe what an insult, not just to the
defendant and defendants council. This is not what Brady versus
Maryland intended. I wonder did Ohio have some kind of
(07:39):
loophole to Brady back in the day. I mean, Brady
was and is a US Supreme Court case that should
apply to everyone, including those in Ohio. But maybe there's
something I'm missing. I asked Bob Toy, one of keith
nineteen ninety five trial attorneys, about it. The discovery practice
back in the night nineties was really outrageous, and I
(08:03):
know that because I was involved in it from seventy
eight to ninety two. As a prosecutor, you basically try
your case without providing the defense much evidence at all,
just the bare basics. Right now, we have open discovery,
which the way the case would be tried today would
(08:23):
be nothing like it was tried in the nineties. As
far as I'm concerned, if somebody were to look at
it today, they throw this out and say this was
not a fair process, because it wasn't a fair process.
Back to Stacy Gordon, it seems he's no longer incarcerated,
at least in Ohio. I've tried to track him down
(08:46):
but haven't had any luck. Keith says, besides Stacy Gordon's statement,
there are many other examples of exculpatory evidence withheld from
him at trial, like an actual confession made by a
man named Aaron Jefferson. I have the transcript of his confession.
In it, Aaron Jefferson describes in great detail how he
(09:09):
killed Darryl Depina, one of the alleged snitches in L six.
Aaron Jefferson apparently came forward a year so after the
riot and confessed to killing darl Deepina, someone whom I
was ultimately sentenced to death for killing. I wasn't uh
giving his statement prior to trials. Another inmate named Hackett
(09:32):
alleged Lee daw Aaron Jefferson killed a white inmate in
L six. And so this it wasn't It wasn't only
that Amoron Jefferson confess. It was also that they would
held statements from people who witness correborated that confession, you know.
And so by the prosecution might say where Amorons Jefferson's
(09:54):
recollections are faulty, he was wrong about you know, his
you know, his involvement. Is hard to d and say
that or make that claim when you have when it
is correborating, you know, the profession. How can that not
make a difference? If the system itself is legit, how
can that not make a difference. According to the transcript
(10:17):
from Keith's arraignment hearing, defense attorneys ask prosecutors to turn
over any statements where people like Aaron Jefferson confessed to
or were accused of hitting or harming any of the
victims Keith was on trial for killing. Judge Fred Crowe
grants the defense's request. Prosecutor Seth Tiger says he will
(10:41):
comply the best he can. Then Judge Crowe tells the
prosecutor that he doesn't have to go through every document,
but he should comply to the fullest extent possible in
good faith with the court's order. Again, I have Aaron
Jefferson's full confession now, but were the full statements and
(11:03):
interviews with Aaron Jefferson and the others ever turned over
back then. I don't know. Maybe they were, I just
haven't seen any documentation that confirms they were. Regardless, the
state says, Aaron Jefferson's confession is not credible. So I
(11:25):
just want to make sure that I'm clear because in
reading everything that I'm reading and trying to wrap my
head around all of it, still, even this many months in,
it's not easy to say. When you started to receive
some exculpatory evidence or discovery that could have helped you
that wasn't turned over at trial. Are you able to
(11:46):
say I got this on this day, I got this
on this day. No, because they came you know, to
you know, random sources at different time it happened. I
teached me a little you know, to back. But Keith
says some came in via the other four on death row. Remember,
after Keith's two thousand and seven evidentiary hearing, the attorneys
(12:10):
for the four other filed motions and were granted access
to evidence they hadn't been given before. Well supposedly, if
while going through the evidence they saw something that pertained
to Keith, they would share it with him. But Keith says,
it's not how he got any of this potentially favorable
evidence that's important. It's what he got that matters. Well,
(12:31):
access to all the evidence that I've been able to
obtain over the years, I think that it would be
hard for a jury, a jury of my peers, to
convicting the other's clients. Yeah, you always have in this system,
(13:05):
plausible deniability. I continue my conversation with Keith about his
case and the criminal justice system. He says failed him.
It wasn't later that I was able to really, you
know fully kind of appreciate restarantantly. And I started telling
people like, listen, this is what this guy, Mark pete
(13:25):
Myer did. Mark pete Meyer, remember he was the special
prosecutor appointed to oversee the Lucasville cases. In a deposition
for keith evidentiary hearing, Mark pete Meyer testified that he
applied a quote narrow Brady standard to the Lucasville cases.
(13:45):
Keith says, based on pete Meyer's own admission, that proves
evidence was withheld at his trial. He also says, you
don't have to look far to find someone else. He
did it too. My name is Derek Wayne. I'm the
hundred and nineteenth death row exonery in the United States.
(14:05):
I did twenty years on our house death row. In
August of nineteen eighty four, bartender Gary Mitchell is beaten
to death when two men robbed the Central Bar in Cincinnati, Ohio.
A few months later, a man named Charles Howell is
arrested for the murder. Howell confesses and names Derek Jamison
(14:26):
as the main killer. Howell agrees to testify against Derek
in exchange for a lighter sentence, which turns out to
be ten years in prison despite having at least five
alibis at the time of the murder. In October of
nineteen eighty five, Derek Jamison is found guilty and sentenced
to death. I speak with Derek via zoom from a
(14:49):
hotel room in Tampa, Florida, where he now lives. The
first day I arrived on Ohio death Row one of
the worst days of my life. No pigil mad you
being innocent, not knowing nothing about this case, and they
send you to die and leah. I arrived at the
(15:09):
Maxis Security presidentile looked as filled and they're marching down
down as long part or. The guard said the new
guy here, and he said dead man. While I wouldn't
sail twenty seven, and I was in Sail twenty seven
for fourteen years. It's past the nightmare. It's hell. It's hell.
(15:29):
You were living hell. This is worth worth in the
nightmare because you could wake up from the nightmare. You
can't wake up from a living here. You know, did
you have an execution date set? I had six days
execution six days? Can you imagine that? And then I
was since to die, So you really like seven execute
(15:52):
the date? Let that sink in Derek is scheduled to
be executed seven times, each time receiving a stay from
the governor, the last time coming with only ninety minutes
to spare. I'm trying to understand how psychologically devastating it
(16:14):
is to come so close to being executed. I mean,
what does that do to a person? What does that
do to you? To get so close to being if
if you ain't carefully to destroy you know, because I
saw it destroy a lot of my praying, you know,
like I saw people leah our death, row Louse date
(16:37):
mind right in front of me. You know, it was
real anguish and pain. I mean it would not that
could do either, you know it went it went, that
could do about it. I like it to suffer and
pray in time. A new attorney uncovers exculpatory evidence that
had been withheld from Derek's defense team, evidence that contradicted
(17:00):
Charles Howell's story. He told lawyers to note him did
he live? He told him he did. They had three
different statements for Chop as to how one statement, two
statements is a lie, three statements really a damn line,
you know, But they got they found all this out
(17:22):
out that I've been convicted. He gave the police like
three different statements, you know what I'm saying, And I
went in the court. I went in the court room
with the most powerful prosecutor in the stateable high of
Mark Fredmay. He one of the most powerful prosecutors. But
he made mistakes. Even the best to ever do it
made mistake. I had told Derek one of the reasons
(17:46):
I wanted to talk with him is because of Mark
Pete Meyer's connection to his case. They found out new
discovered evidence that they would him thirty five pieces of evidence.
You only need one new piece of ever did to
get a new trial. They were him thirty five piece.
In May of two thousand, Derek's attorneys file a petition
(18:07):
for a writ of habeas corpus. The court grants the
writ and orders a new trial based on the evidence
withheld back at his original trial. Five years later, on
October twenty fifth, two thousand and five, after the state
decides not to retry him, Derek walks out of prison
a freeman. During Derek's time on death row, he lost
(18:29):
several of his family members and watched as seventeen of
his friends were executed. I halt so watch y'all. Two
of my cousin my days, my mom, my dad, friends,
Pip Piles knowing I'm my friend that I grew up
with a death row twenty years, two decades. It was
(18:49):
just I use circus stands as a poor being poor.
But a lot of people, you know, but guilty. But
a lot of people is in it it too. Keith LeVar,
he is in him and the guy that was the
Lucasfield five ill it should be free. No one think
about the state. The prosecutors they came never admit that
(19:13):
they wrong. You'd never seen a prosecutor admit that they
did wrong in a depth. Doty cap. What would have
happened if your lawyers had not uncovered those thirty five
pieces of evidence that had been with help, I'd be
in the secretary right now. I begad the I begd
(19:36):
So how did this happen? According to court documents back
in the mid eighties, instead of Cincinnati PD turning over
the whole case file to the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office,
they would routinely select certain pieces of information and evidence
that they deemed to be relevant and put it in
something called a quote homicide book and that was handed
(20:01):
over to prosecutors. In a nineteen ninety nine hearing, Mark
pete Meyer testifies that at the time of Derek's trial,
he relied on that homicide book. When answering the defense's
demands for discovery, He said that he would have turned
over any Brady material had he known it existed. Mister
pete Meyer and another prosecutor also stated that they received
(20:24):
no training from the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office as to
what constituted exculpatory evidence. So basically, it seems that the
police cherry picked what was handed over to the prosecutors,
and the prosecutors didn't ask any questions, and that led
to an innocent man. Derek jamieson being wrongfully convicted and
(20:48):
almost executed, Describe the moment that you walked out of
prison a freeman. Oh bad live You remember you remember,
I know you remember this, this go brighten up just
that you remember the day before kiss when he was
a king and they tell you to go to bed
(21:11):
and you'd be lad there. You can't go to sneak
because you're too excite. You remember that feeling, that exciting feeling,
That's what it felt like. It was the most beautiful
day in the world, you know, free. I walked about
it there twenty years the same day, the same day
I walked it there, I walked out. And what did
(21:32):
they give you as a parting gift? Seventy five dollars
as all I ever received from the Stateable Howard, seventy
five bucks after twenty years. I'm so sorry. I'm so
sorry for what happened to you. Thanks, we are, thank you.
For the last several years, Derek has been working with
(21:54):
the nonprofit Witness to Innocence, an organization led by death
Row Exonery focused on supporting each other and their families,
shining a light un wrongful convictions, and abolishing the death penalty.
I get to reach out that people like you, you know,
because you know, in America we need right now, we need.
(22:14):
All we need is love of the past, believe it
or not, via our human beings are sacred, you know,
so we need as much love is path. Keith and
(22:43):
I continue our conversation about his experiences with the criminal
justice system, specifically the prosecutors, none of whom have yet
agreed to speak with me. By the way, this is
another one of those times when Keith's audio isn't great,
but because Keith is particularly passionate during this conversation, I
(23:04):
decide to include it. And let me just be very
clear that I am absolutely trying to talk with Seth
Tiger Anderson Pete Meyer. So far, I've only heard back
from Tiger, who has declined to talk with me. But
(23:25):
I'm not done trying. But that's the thing. They don't
have to respond. They don't have to say anything. They
don't owe you an explanation. You don't have to talk
to Mark Pete Myer. Look at his record withhold in evidence.
This is his m oh, this is how you get
to be where Yet right now you know he didn't
keep there by playing by the rules. Because I'm saying
(23:46):
the Puma was being fair. We're talking about the balanced thing.
My record is all open for interrogation. You're asking me
all these difficult questions. I don't mind answer them, but
they're not going to talk to you and all, you know, explanation.
They're not fighting for their life trying to do in
addition to fighting for my life, I'm trying to say
that I am not that person. That's not me. But
you're reading the records you're reading the files about my case,
(24:07):
about my history. You're talking to my family, people who
knew me when I was nine years old, ten years old,
so on and so forth. And I don't mind you
doing that now ask them to do that, because I
wanted you to have before you know access, but it
would be you know, not it won't be for the
balance story if you're don't do the same thing with them,
you know what I mean. I'm not talking about some angels,
(24:28):
people with stellar reputations, people who have reputations of you know,
playing everything by the book. These people are cooked and
that needs to be a part of the story as well.
And I think, you know, for the de justice, if
that's what you're trying to do with your salvery, with
your podcast, you know, talking about the real killer. You
got to look at for a Mark quick Miles and
(24:49):
his records. You don't have to say anything. Its records
speaks for just like my record speaks for me, you know,
and shit, I gotta answer to you know. So far
we haven't found a bunch of other examples of stories
like Derek Jamieson's and I'm looking, well, you don't need
a hundred examples that one example was enough. I mean,
that's enough what they did to him. There's one person
(25:12):
Keith says that withholding evidence is Mark Pete Myer's m O.
Then he says, I shouldn't need a ton of examples.
Derek Jamieson is enough. It's a contradiction, sure, but I
understand his point and Keith's write about this. What I'm
trying to do with this podcast is tell a balanced story.
(25:33):
And that means not only looking at Keith, but looking
at the prosecutors and the system that's about to execute him.
But there's other examples. Who's doing other people what he
did at to be and I just write a body.
I mean, you know, it's an article in the Daily
Beats about the practices of the prosecutors, not just human Ohio,
but across this country. This is what there is not
(25:55):
even about more people. Are we talking about a system
or little jefice system. There's no accountability before prosecuting, there's
no acountability. Mark Pepe Mark, what did he do to
Derek Jamison who with healthless corporatory evidence they resolving Darren
Jadness and being sent to death. Well, Keith says he
first learned about Derek and his case. While researching Mark
(26:16):
Peetemeyer's role in his own he and Derek have spoken
a few times since Derek was exonerated. Derek Jamison, that's
all of that time I came home. They didn't even
compensate then give me any money. They'd apologize nothing, And
right now he lived the shambels he living, you know,
also the good will and kinds of strangers and the
ship is that that's that's about meaning about this business
(26:38):
is you know, this is slammed. These people have just
let off the hook over and over and over. But
since Keith and I had that conversation, my research turned
up another death row case connected to Mark Peetemeyer, Jeffrey Wogenstall.
(27:01):
He's been on death row for twenty nine years and
is currently housed at Chillicothee Correctional Institution, and like Derek Jamison,
he's had several stays of execution. Back in nineteen ninety three,
Jeffrey Wogenstall is convicted of killing ten year old Amber Garrett.
She had been abducted, stabbed, and beaten to death. Kim Rigby,
(27:24):
one of Wogenstall's attorneys from the Office of the Ohio
Public defender agrees to speak with me about his case.
My client, Jeffrey Wogenstall, was wrongfully convicted based on a
host of Brady violations that were committed at his trial.
This tragic story begins back in nineteen ninety one. So
(27:48):
in the early morning of November twenty fourth, nineteen ninety one,
ten year old at the time, Amber Garrett disappeared from
the bedroom that was in which she shared with her
two younger siblings. And this all took place in the
small town of Harrison, Ohio, in Hamilton County. At the
(28:10):
time of her disappearance, Amber's brother, who was sixteen, I
believe at the time, Eric Horne, was supposed to be
babysitting while her mother, Peggy Garrett, was out supposedly at
various bars that evening. Before long police have a suspect.
Peggy and Eric pointed the finger at Jeffrey Woganstall, who
(28:33):
was an acquaintance of the Garrets at the time and
who had been out with Peggy at least for a
period of time earlier that evening when Amber disappeared. Thus,
state's case against Jeff has Amber disappearing with Jeff around
three thirty am. But Kim says the time of Amber's
(28:53):
disappearance is really based on what Eric and Peggy told police.
Eric says he knew his sister was missing around three am,
but didn't say anything about it to his mother. Peggy
says she only figured out Amber was missing after she
failed to return home from church that afternoon, and that's
(29:14):
when she called police. Jeff had a prior burglary conviction
and so he was on parole. So when Peggy told
the cops that Jeff was responsible for Amber's disappearance and
they came knocking on his door, Jeff opened the door.
He allowed them to search his house, and the cops
at that point saw a marijuana pipe, and they'd attained
(29:34):
him at that point for violating parole. Jeff says around
three am, he went to the house to buy marijuana
from Eric, then Eric asked him to drive him to
a house a couple of blocks away. Jeff says after
dropping Eric off, he went home, where he was alone
until police showed up that afternoon. Several days later, Amber's
(29:57):
body is discovered in Bright, Indiana, about six miles from
her home in Ohio. So what did the police have
other than Peggy and Eric's pointing the finger at him.
Over the time of the investigation, they accumulated a few
(30:19):
other like circumstantial pieces of evidence. There were a few
different witnesses who testified that they saw Jeff and or
a car that looked like Jeff's either driving through Harrison
towards what would be Jamison Road, where Amber's body was found,
or that they saw him and or a car off
(30:41):
the side of the road where Amber's body was later discovered.
There was also an FBI expert that was brought in
who testified that a hair found on Amber's clothing matched Jeff.
There was a minuscule spot of blood that was substantially
smaller than a drop that was found on the door
(31:02):
handle in the backseat of Jeff's car that could have
matched Amber's DNA. There were also small stains in Jeff's
apartment that looked like they could be blood. There was
a jailhouse sinch that testified that Jeff confessed to him,
and finally, there was plant material found on Jeff's jacket
(31:22):
and shoes that was similar to the area where Amber's
body was found. So Jeff was charged with the aggravated
murder of Amber Garrett. He was also charged with kidnapping
and burglary who tried the case for the state. The
lead prosecutor was Joseph Dieters, and the two assistant prosecutors
(31:45):
were Mark Peepemeyer and Rick Gibson. Jeffrey wogenstall Is eventually
found guilty and sentenced to death, So he exhausted his
state appeals and he headed into federal court. He's now
in federal court. It's the early two thousands, and he
finally gets something. He was granted discovery in federal court
(32:10):
and he was specifically allowed to depose people about Eric
Horne and Eric Horn's testimony because there was evidence that
they had at the time that Eric had lied on
the stand about never using or trafficking drugs. See when
Amber's brother, Eric Horne testified at Jeffrey's trial, he stated
(32:31):
that he had never done or sold drugs, which wasn't true.
He was an adjudicated delinquent for trafficking. And once the
defense team realized that the federal court allowed additional discovery
and depositions of Eric Horn, of the police officers involved
(32:51):
from the Harrison Police Department, and also of the three
prosecutors that were involved in trying Jeff's case. In one
of those depositions, an officer who was the lead investigator
in Jeff's case testified that after Eric Horn was arrested,
he called Prosecutor Joe Dieters to tell him he had
just arrested one of their key witnesses. He also testified
(33:14):
that he had other conversations with Mark Petemeyer and or
Rick Gibson as well about the fact that he had
arrested Eric Horn. When Eric was put on the stand
by Mark Peetemeyer, Mister Peetemeyer allowed Eric to state more
than once that he never did drugs and that he
(33:36):
never trafficked drugs, and objected multiple times to questions by
the defense to that effect. The courts ultimately say Eric
Horne's false testimony wouldn't have changed the outcome of Jeffrey's
original trial, but some news from the Department of Justice
may help his case. Remember, Kim mentioned the state's case
(33:58):
against Jeffrey included an FBI expert who testified that the
hair found on Amber's clothing matched jeff Well back around
twenty fifteen, The DOJ, the Innocence Project, and the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers conducted a joint investigation into
microscopic hair comparison. The DOJ reviewed cases where the FBI
(34:21):
tested or submitted reports using microscopic hair comparison, which is
what they did in Jeff's case, and what they found
was that before the year two thousand, the FBI's testimony
contained errors in at least ninety percent of the cases.
The United States Department of Justice sent over a letter
(34:42):
to Jeff's defense counsel to inform them that the microscopic
hair comparison testimony at Jeff's trial was scientifically inaccurate. Around
that same time, defense counsel and this is when I
entered the case, found that the prosecutors allowed the jail
house sna to also lie on the stand. The snitch
(35:03):
testified that he did not receive consideration for testifying. However,
in a sworn affidavit that he gave to defense counsel
in twenty thirteen, he explained that he did in fact
receive consideration. The courts once again say neither the DOJ's
findings on the microscopic hair comparison nor the newly discovered
evidence about the jailhouse snitch would have made a difference
(35:28):
in twenty sixteen, the public records law changed in Ohio,
so defense counsel, including myself at the time, filed a
public records request with the Harrison Police Department. They did
not appear to want to release those records to us. Eventually,
the Appellate prosecutor for Hamilton County allows Kim and the
(35:48):
team to copy the police file, and what they find
is staggering. We've found a treasure trove of police reports
and tips that were previously unknown to the defense. We
found evidence that implicated Peggy Garrett. We found evidence that
(36:11):
implicated Eric Horn. We found evidence that just undermined both
Peggy and Eric's testimony. There were police reports that showed
Peggy hit Amber in the head three times the night
before she went missing. Peggy often had drug fueled parties.
There was a note in the police file that said
that Amber had been raped by one of the men
(36:32):
who had partied at her house. Another note showed that
police were contemplating charging Peggy with child and dangerment. We
found notes that said that Peggy got in deep into
debt and sold Amber to a drug dealer. We found
things that said someone saw Peggy at a waffle house
crying that she had really effed up because she'd sold
(36:54):
Amber for fifteen hundred dollars. We also found a host
of information that implicated Eric Horn and Amber's disappearance. We
found information to show that he was actually a suspect.
There was also evidence that Eric took and failed a polygraph,
and when confronted with that, he said, fuck you, fuck
the machine, I'm out of here. We found things that
(37:17):
also undercut the eyewitnesses more so than before. Kim and
her team uncover more evidence that bring Jeffrey's conviction into question,
like that speck of blood found in Jeffrey's car. Further
testing was done on it, and although Amber could not
be excluded, the state failed to test other possible sources,
(37:37):
like her mother, Peggy, who was known to have been
in the car on several occasions, including allegedly the night
Amber disappeared. And in regards to the blood found in
Jeffrey's house, well that turned out to not be of
human origin. And there's more. Going back to Jeff's coat
(37:58):
and shoes, The process secution called a witness to testify
that the thorns and other plant material found on the
jacket and shoes were similar to the plant materials in
the area where Amber's body was found. However, that plant
material is similar to pretty much anywhere in the woods
(38:20):
in the Midwest. So armed with all of this and
even more new evidence, they amassed Kim and the team
file emotion for a new trial. The vast majority of
our claims are related to prosecutorial misconduct, specifically that they
withheld Brady evidence at the time of Jeff's trial, and
(38:42):
that had this information been given to defense council at
the time of trial, it would have clearly emite a
difference in Jeff's case, and in that he wouldn't have
been convicted. So what are the similarities between Derek Jamison's
case and Jeffrey Woganstall's Well. Both were tried in Hamilton County,
both had Mark Petemeyer as one of the prosecutors on
(39:05):
their cases, and both had allegations of Brady violations which
seemed to stem from what was in the police files
and not turned over. Remember the Homicide book. Just from
reading the record in mister Jamieson's case that mister Petemeyer
had testified in Derek's case about some of the practices
(39:27):
in Hamilton County at the time where the police would
only turn over what they called a homicide book to
the prosecutors before a trial. The police would determine what
would go in that homicide book. So if there was
anything that was exculpatory or potentially exculpatory in the police
file but wasn't given to the prosecutors, the prosecutors at
(39:48):
the time wouldn't be aware and couldn't turn it over. Obviously,
we all know that that's not how Brady works. What
the police know is imputed to what the prosecution knows.
And so regardless, if mister Petemeyer, mister Gibson knew what
was in the Harrison police files, they should have been
(40:09):
aware of that and it should have been turned over.
And I mean, frankly, prosecutors should be seeking justice, not
just convictions. I wonder, are these alleged Brady violations the
only issue the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office has been called
out for. According to a Cincinnati Inquirer article back in
(40:31):
September of two thousand, the Ohio Supreme Court rebuked the
Hamilton County Prosecutor's office for making improper statements to jurors
in fourteen death penalty cases. In the previous twelve years,
statements which could have potentially overturned verdicts on appeal. Kim
says the courts have also taken notice about how Jeff's
(40:54):
case was handled. The first District Court of Appeals Hare
in Ohio had stated the prosecutor's conduct needs reviewed by
other authorities, and that was when they were specifically referring
to the information about them withholding from the defense Eric
Horns trafficking conviction. Is there any oversight? I mean, there
(41:16):
is the state Bar, I mean who oversees all attorneys,
but effectively. Now, for the record, I've found many articles
praising the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office and specifically Mark Pete Meyer.
By many accounts, he's considered a well liked by the
book prosecutor who has worked many high profile cases in Ohio.
(41:40):
And again, he hasn't answered my requests for an interview.
For now, Kim, her team and Jeff are in a
holding pattern. So as it stands, no court has made
a final determination on Jeff's case based on all of
the avidence that we have now. Obviously, I would love
(42:03):
if Jeff was exonerated. I am hoping and I'm more
hopeful that he'll receive a new trial based on our
motion for new trial or our filings in both state
and federal court. We've spent a lot of time in
this episode talking about Mark Petemeyer and two cases other
(42:24):
than Keats handled by him and the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office.
Turns out there's an interesting development in one more. In
December of twenty twenty two, Elwood Jones, who has been
on death row for twenty seven years for the murder
of Rhoda Nathan, is granted a new trial. The Cincinnati Inquirer,
(42:48):
who told Ellwood Jones's story for the fourth season of
their podcast, Accused, is in the courtroom when Judge Wendy
Cross renders her decision. It is clear that the failure
to disclose the existence a relevant exculpatory and impeaching evidence
prior to trial deprived Ellwood Jones of a fair trial.
(43:12):
The sixth Amendment requires a new trial as the only
appropriate remedy. Accordingly, Ellwood Jones's motion for a new trial
is hereby granted. Judge Cross calls out the prosecutors from
Elwood jones original trial. One of the prosecutors just happens
(43:36):
to be Mark Petemeyer. By the way, in January of
twenty twenty three, Joe Dieters, the elected Hamilton County Prosecutor,
leaves the office. Why because he's appointed by Governor Mike
DeWine to be the one hundred and sixty third Justice
of the Ohio Supreme Court. When I speak to Keith
(43:59):
about all this, he says he's not surprised by any
of it. Human beings, but not accountability. People do things
when they when when they are not being watched. You
know what I mean, when they are not being held accountable,
that they wouldn't do if there's consequences too. You have
been uh given the power to simple people to death.
(44:22):
I'm need to take people off the planets, even legal
anxious process. And he don't have to be correct, You
don't have to be upstanding, your your your your practices
don't have to be legit. How you can get this
person to this journey. But this system is not about justice, misnamal,
It's not have anything to do justice. Next time on
(44:52):
the real killer. Do you know Keith Lamar? I know?
Did you see him inside L six the artes? Please?
I speak with two men who had two very different
vantage points during the uprising. Did you ever see Keith
as part of that group? Oh? Yes, Oh yeah, he
(45:14):
was there. Yes. To learn more about Jeffrey Wogenstall's case,
or if you have any information about the murder of
Amber Garrett, please go to our episode page for a
link to his website and the phone number for the
Office of the Ohio Public Defender. The Real Killer is
(45:41):
a production of AYR Media and iHeartRadio, hosted by me
Leah Rothman. Executive producers Leah Rothman and Eliza Rosen for
AYR Media. Written by Leah Rothman, Executive producer Paulina Williams,
Senior Associate producer Jill Pacheznik, Coordinator George Fom. Editing and
(46:04):
sound design by Cameron Taggy. Mixed and mastered by Cameron Taggy.
Audio engineering by Matt Jacobsen. Studio engineering by Anna Moolshan
Legal counsel for a y R Media, Gianni Douglas, Executive
producer for iHeartRadio, Maya Howard
A warning. This episode contains language and depictions of violence
that may be disturbing to some listeners. How often do
you think about the Uprising and Warrior trial? I really
mattered thinking about it. I'm living it out, but not
the repercussions for real estate. Keith Lamar has been on
(00:24):
death row since nineteen ninety five, almost all of it
spent in solitary confinement. Keith says he's innocent and may
be executed by the State of Ohio because prosecutors withheld
evidence which deprived him of getting a fair trial. I
think they just didn't want to take any charances, so
they came up with this kind of scheme to effectively
(00:46):
deny me excoverture evidence. The prosecuted job is not to
hearing the gifty body, but to see that justice is done.
But we know that it's not how, It's just the work.
I'm Leah Rothman. This is the Real Killer. Episode seven.
(01:11):
A caricature, a travesty, an obscenity. I think discovery is
probably the most important issue in Keith's trial. I think
that is where the case really went off the rails.
(01:34):
That's Alice Lynde. She and her husband Stoughton are widely
respected civil rights and labor activists, authors, and lawyers. They've
spent roughly twenty years focusing on the Lucasville Uprising and
the cases of the five men currently sitting on death Row.
Much of their research went into Stoughton's book Lucasville, The
(01:54):
Untold Story of a Prison Uprising. Back when I first
started working on Keith's story, I visited with Alison Stoughton,
who were in their early nineties. They declined to be
interviewed for this podcast, but have been helpful behind the scenes. Sadly,
Stoughton passed away in November of twenty twenty two. Although
(02:15):
our time together was brief, I feel lucky to have
spent any time with them at all. Back in twenty fifteen,
Stoughton and Alice are interviewed for Barbara Wolf's documentary Condemned,
and Miss Wolfe has been kind enough to share her
footage with me. In it, Alison Stoughton talk about Keith's case,
the issues with discovery, and what they believe are clear
(02:38):
Brady violations. Take Stacy Gordon. He was one of the
five prisoner witnesses who testified for the state, saying he
saw Keith lead a death squad through L six. Stoughton says,
there's a valuable piece of the Stacy Gordon puzzle that
was left out and had it been turned over, it
could have changed the outcome in key trial. Stacy Gordon
(03:03):
was one of two key witnesses against Lamar. This man
was probably the most significant prosecution witness. He lied through
his teeth. In fact, I think Stacy Gordon was probably
the individual who actually coordinated the death squad, but setting
(03:25):
that aside, less than a year before Keith's trial, the prosecution,
which had indicted mister Gordon for a surprising number of
violent actions during the eleven days, dropped the more serious
of those charges and entered into a plea agreement. And
(03:48):
at that particular time and place, the prosecutor elected to
ask mister Gordon a few additional questions and had them
transcribed by a court reporter. Why he did this, I
don't know, but my wife and I discovered this paper
in reviewing multitudinous documents about the case. The prosecutor asked
(04:16):
mister Gordon on that occasion, do you know Keith Lamar?
Answer no question. Did you see Keith Lamar in the
l six block in the early hours of the riot
at Lucasfeld. No, well, this is what Brady understands as
(04:38):
impeaching evidence. That is to say, if a given witness
makes a statement on the witness stand and the defense
lawyer is able to say, in this case, now, mister Gordon,
you just said, I believe that you didn't see mister Lamar,
I have take a look at it. I am reading
(05:01):
that correctly, Am I not? And Gordon has to say yes,
And the defense counsel then says, well, what should we
then make of your testimony, your elaborate, detailed testimony about
what you saw mister Lamard on April eleven. I mean
(05:22):
that could have changed the outcome of the trial. There
would have been both exculpatory and impeaching evidence concerning mister
Gordon had the prosecution done what Brady demands. So to
reiterate on the stand, Stacy Gordon testifies Keith led the
(05:42):
group of men sell to cell, killing the alleged snitches,
but in an interview with prosecutors, Stacy Gordon says he
didn't know Keith nor did he see him in l
six during the early hours of the uprising and Stoughton
says had that interview been turned over to Keith's attorneys
in night, it could have made a difference. Another example,
(06:07):
on the eve of trial, the prosecution asked the highway
patrol to interview a particular witness because the prosecution thought
he might be called as the defense witness. In other words,
they thought he might know something harmful to them. The
(06:29):
highway patrolman conducted the interview. This is less than a
week before trial, and he reported to Attorney Tiger to
the prosecutor, he doesn't want to be involved, but if
he's called, he'll say that he didn't see Lamar do anything. Now,
(06:52):
talk about exculpatory information. What a yummy for the defense
counseled to have had at trial a week later. The
prosecution did nothing to make that information available to the defense.
(07:13):
So this was a caricature, a travesty and obscenity. I
dilatwards to describe what an insult, not just to the
defendant and defendants council. This is not what Brady versus
Maryland intended. I wonder did Ohio have some kind of
(07:39):
loophole to Brady back in the day. I mean, Brady
was and is a US Supreme Court case that should
apply to everyone, including those in Ohio. But maybe there's
something I'm missing. I asked Bob Toy, one of keith
nineteen ninety five trial attorneys, about it. The discovery practice
back in the night nineties was really outrageous, and I
(08:03):
know that because I was involved in it from seventy
eight to ninety two. As a prosecutor, you basically try
your case without providing the defense much evidence at all,
just the bare basics. Right now, we have open discovery,
which the way the case would be tried today would
(08:23):
be nothing like it was tried in the nineties. As
far as I'm concerned, if somebody were to look at
it today, they throw this out and say this was
not a fair process, because it wasn't a fair process.
Back to Stacy Gordon, it seems he's no longer incarcerated,
at least in Ohio. I've tried to track him down
(08:46):
but haven't had any luck. Keith says, besides Stacy Gordon's statement,
there are many other examples of exculpatory evidence withheld from
him at trial, like an actual confession made by a
man named Aaron Jefferson. I have the transcript of his confession.
In it, Aaron Jefferson describes in great detail how he
(09:09):
killed Darryl Depina, one of the alleged snitches in L six.
Aaron Jefferson apparently came forward a year so after the
riot and confessed to killing darl Deepina, someone whom I
was ultimately sentenced to death for killing. I wasn't uh
giving his statement prior to trials. Another inmate named Hackett
(09:32):
alleged Lee daw Aaron Jefferson killed a white inmate in
L six. And so this it wasn't It wasn't only
that Amoron Jefferson confess. It was also that they would
held statements from people who witness correborated that confession, you know.
And so by the prosecution might say where Amorons Jefferson's
(09:54):
recollections are faulty, he was wrong about you know, his
you know, his involvement. Is hard to d and say
that or make that claim when you have when it
is correborating, you know, the profession. How can that not
make a difference? If the system itself is legit, how
can that not make a difference. According to the transcript
(10:17):
from Keith's arraignment hearing, defense attorneys ask prosecutors to turn
over any statements where people like Aaron Jefferson confessed to
or were accused of hitting or harming any of the
victims Keith was on trial for killing. Judge Fred Crowe
grants the defense's request. Prosecutor Seth Tiger says he will
(10:41):
comply the best he can. Then Judge Crowe tells the
prosecutor that he doesn't have to go through every document,
but he should comply to the fullest extent possible in
good faith with the court's order. Again, I have Aaron
Jefferson's full confession now, but were the full statements and
(11:03):
interviews with Aaron Jefferson and the others ever turned over
back then. I don't know. Maybe they were, I just
haven't seen any documentation that confirms they were. Regardless, the
state says, Aaron Jefferson's confession is not credible. So I
(11:25):
just want to make sure that I'm clear because in
reading everything that I'm reading and trying to wrap my
head around all of it, still, even this many months in,
it's not easy to say. When you started to receive
some exculpatory evidence or discovery that could have helped you
that wasn't turned over at trial. Are you able to
(11:46):
say I got this on this day, I got this
on this day. No, because they came you know, to
you know, random sources at different time it happened. I
teached me a little you know, to back. But Keith
says some came in via the other four on death row. Remember,
after Keith's two thousand and seven evidentiary hearing, the attorneys
(12:10):
for the four other filed motions and were granted access
to evidence they hadn't been given before. Well supposedly, if
while going through the evidence they saw something that pertained
to Keith, they would share it with him. But Keith says,
it's not how he got any of this potentially favorable
evidence that's important. It's what he got that matters. Well,
(12:31):
access to all the evidence that I've been able to
obtain over the years, I think that it would be
hard for a jury, a jury of my peers, to
convicting the other's clients. Yeah, you always have in this system,
(13:05):
plausible deniability. I continue my conversation with Keith about his
case and the criminal justice system. He says failed him.
It wasn't later that I was able to really, you
know fully kind of appreciate restarantantly. And I started telling
people like, listen, this is what this guy, Mark pete
(13:25):
Myer did. Mark pete Meyer, remember he was the special
prosecutor appointed to oversee the Lucasville cases. In a deposition
for keith evidentiary hearing, Mark pete Meyer testified that he
applied a quote narrow Brady standard to the Lucasville cases.
(13:45):
Keith says, based on pete Meyer's own admission, that proves
evidence was withheld at his trial. He also says, you
don't have to look far to find someone else. He
did it too. My name is Derek Wayne. I'm the
hundred and nineteenth death row exonery in the United States.
(14:05):
I did twenty years on our house death row. In
August of nineteen eighty four, bartender Gary Mitchell is beaten
to death when two men robbed the Central Bar in Cincinnati, Ohio.
A few months later, a man named Charles Howell is
arrested for the murder. Howell confesses and names Derek Jamison
(14:26):
as the main killer. Howell agrees to testify against Derek
in exchange for a lighter sentence, which turns out to
be ten years in prison despite having at least five
alibis at the time of the murder. In October of
nineteen eighty five, Derek Jamison is found guilty and sentenced
to death. I speak with Derek via zoom from a
(14:49):
hotel room in Tampa, Florida, where he now lives. The
first day I arrived on Ohio death Row one of
the worst days of my life. No pigil mad you
being innocent, not knowing nothing about this case, and they
send you to die and leah. I arrived at the
(15:09):
Maxis Security presidentile looked as filled and they're marching down
down as long part or. The guard said the new
guy here, and he said dead man. While I wouldn't
sail twenty seven, and I was in Sail twenty seven
for fourteen years. It's past the nightmare. It's hell. It's hell.
(15:29):
You were living hell. This is worth worth in the
nightmare because you could wake up from the nightmare. You
can't wake up from a living here. You know, did
you have an execution date set? I had six days
execution six days? Can you imagine that? And then I
was since to die, So you really like seven execute
(15:52):
the date? Let that sink in Derek is scheduled to
be executed seven times, each time receiving a stay from
the governor, the last time coming with only ninety minutes
to spare. I'm trying to understand how psychologically devastating it
(16:14):
is to come so close to being executed. I mean,
what does that do to a person? What does that
do to you? To get so close to being if
if you ain't carefully to destroy you know, because I
saw it destroy a lot of my praying, you know,
like I saw people leah our death, row Louse date
(16:37):
mind right in front of me. You know, it was
real anguish and pain. I mean it would not that
could do either, you know it went it went, that
could do about it. I like it to suffer and
pray in time. A new attorney uncovers exculpatory evidence that
had been withheld from Derek's defense team, evidence that contradicted
(17:00):
Charles Howell's story. He told lawyers to note him did
he live? He told him he did. They had three
different statements for Chop as to how one statement, two
statements is a lie, three statements really a damn line,
you know, But they got they found all this out
(17:22):
out that I've been convicted. He gave the police like
three different statements, you know what I'm saying, And I
went in the court. I went in the court room
with the most powerful prosecutor in the stateable high of
Mark Fredmay. He one of the most powerful prosecutors. But
he made mistakes. Even the best to ever do it
made mistake. I had told Derek one of the reasons
(17:46):
I wanted to talk with him is because of Mark
Pete Meyer's connection to his case. They found out new
discovered evidence that they would him thirty five pieces of evidence.
You only need one new piece of ever did to
get a new trial. They were him thirty five piece.
In May of two thousand, Derek's attorneys file a petition
(18:07):
for a writ of habeas corpus. The court grants the
writ and orders a new trial based on the evidence
withheld back at his original trial. Five years later, on
October twenty fifth, two thousand and five, after the state
decides not to retry him, Derek walks out of prison
a freeman. During Derek's time on death row, he lost
(18:29):
several of his family members and watched as seventeen of
his friends were executed. I halt so watch y'all. Two
of my cousin my days, my mom, my dad, friends,
Pip Piles knowing I'm my friend that I grew up
with a death row twenty years, two decades. It was
(18:49):
just I use circus stands as a poor being poor.
But a lot of people, you know, but guilty. But
a lot of people is in it it too. Keith LeVar,
he is in him and the guy that was the
Lucasfield five ill it should be free. No one think
about the state. The prosecutors they came never admit that
(19:13):
they wrong. You'd never seen a prosecutor admit that they
did wrong in a depth. Doty cap. What would have
happened if your lawyers had not uncovered those thirty five
pieces of evidence that had been with help, I'd be
in the secretary right now. I begad the I begd
(19:36):
So how did this happen? According to court documents back
in the mid eighties, instead of Cincinnati PD turning over
the whole case file to the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office,
they would routinely select certain pieces of information and evidence
that they deemed to be relevant and put it in
something called a quote homicide book and that was handed
(20:01):
over to prosecutors. In a nineteen ninety nine hearing, Mark
pete Meyer testifies that at the time of Derek's trial,
he relied on that homicide book. When answering the defense's
demands for discovery, He said that he would have turned
over any Brady material had he known it existed. Mister
pete Meyer and another prosecutor also stated that they received
(20:24):
no training from the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office as to
what constituted exculpatory evidence. So basically, it seems that the
police cherry picked what was handed over to the prosecutors,
and the prosecutors didn't ask any questions, and that led
to an innocent man. Derek jamieson being wrongfully convicted and
(20:48):
almost executed, Describe the moment that you walked out of
prison a freeman. Oh bad live You remember you remember,
I know you remember this, this go brighten up just
that you remember the day before kiss when he was
a king and they tell you to go to bed
(21:11):
and you'd be lad there. You can't go to sneak
because you're too excite. You remember that feeling, that exciting feeling,
That's what it felt like. It was the most beautiful
day in the world, you know, free. I walked about
it there twenty years the same day, the same day
I walked it there, I walked out. And what did
(21:32):
they give you as a parting gift? Seventy five dollars
as all I ever received from the Stateable Howard, seventy
five bucks after twenty years. I'm so sorry. I'm so
sorry for what happened to you. Thanks, we are, thank you.
For the last several years, Derek has been working with
(21:54):
the nonprofit Witness to Innocence, an organization led by death
Row Exonery focused on supporting each other and their families,
shining a light un wrongful convictions, and abolishing the death penalty.
I get to reach out that people like you, you know,
because you know, in America we need right now, we need.
(22:14):
All we need is love of the past, believe it
or not, via our human beings are sacred, you know,
so we need as much love is path. Keith and
(22:43):
I continue our conversation about his experiences with the criminal
justice system, specifically the prosecutors, none of whom have yet
agreed to speak with me. By the way, this is
another one of those times when Keith's audio isn't great,
but because Keith is particularly passionate during this conversation, I
(23:04):
decide to include it. And let me just be very
clear that I am absolutely trying to talk with Seth
Tiger Anderson Pete Meyer. So far, I've only heard back
from Tiger, who has declined to talk with me. But
(23:25):
I'm not done trying. But that's the thing. They don't
have to respond. They don't have to say anything. They
don't owe you an explanation. You don't have to talk
to Mark Pete Myer. Look at his record withhold in evidence.
This is his m oh, this is how you get
to be where Yet right now you know he didn't
keep there by playing by the rules. Because I'm saying
(23:46):
the Puma was being fair. We're talking about the balanced thing.
My record is all open for interrogation. You're asking me
all these difficult questions. I don't mind answer them, but
they're not going to talk to you and all, you know, explanation.
They're not fighting for their life trying to do in
addition to fighting for my life, I'm trying to say
that I am not that person. That's not me. But
you're reading the records you're reading the files about my case,
(24:07):
about my history. You're talking to my family, people who
knew me when I was nine years old, ten years old,
so on and so forth. And I don't mind you
doing that now ask them to do that, because I
wanted you to have before you know access, but it
would be you know, not it won't be for the
balance story if you're don't do the same thing with them,
you know what I mean. I'm not talking about some angels,
(24:28):
people with stellar reputations, people who have reputations of you know,
playing everything by the book. These people are cooked and
that needs to be a part of the story as well.
And I think, you know, for the de justice, if
that's what you're trying to do with your salvery, with
your podcast, you know, talking about the real killer. You
got to look at for a Mark quick Miles and
(24:49):
his records. You don't have to say anything. Its records
speaks for just like my record speaks for me, you know,
and shit, I gotta answer to you know. So far
we haven't found a bunch of other examples of stories
like Derek Jamieson's and I'm looking, well, you don't need
a hundred examples that one example was enough. I mean,
that's enough what they did to him. There's one person
(25:12):
Keith says that withholding evidence is Mark Pete Myer's m O.
Then he says, I shouldn't need a ton of examples.
Derek Jamieson is enough. It's a contradiction, sure, but I
understand his point and Keith's write about this. What I'm
trying to do with this podcast is tell a balanced story.
(25:33):
And that means not only looking at Keith, but looking
at the prosecutors and the system that's about to execute him.
But there's other examples. Who's doing other people what he
did at to be and I just write a body.
I mean, you know, it's an article in the Daily
Beats about the practices of the prosecutors, not just human Ohio,
but across this country. This is what there is not
(25:55):
even about more people. Are we talking about a system
or little jefice system. There's no accountability before prosecuting, there's
no acountability. Mark Pepe Mark, what did he do to
Derek Jamison who with healthless corporatory evidence they resolving Darren
Jadness and being sent to death. Well, Keith says he
first learned about Derek and his case. While researching Mark
(26:16):
Peetemeyer's role in his own he and Derek have spoken
a few times since Derek was exonerated. Derek Jamison, that's
all of that time I came home. They didn't even
compensate then give me any money. They'd apologize nothing, And
right now he lived the shambels he living, you know,
also the good will and kinds of strangers and the
ship is that that's that's about meaning about this business
(26:38):
is you know, this is slammed. These people have just
let off the hook over and over and over. But
since Keith and I had that conversation, my research turned
up another death row case connected to Mark Peetemeyer, Jeffrey Wogenstall.
(27:01):
He's been on death row for twenty nine years and
is currently housed at Chillicothee Correctional Institution, and like Derek Jamison,
he's had several stays of execution. Back in nineteen ninety three,
Jeffrey Wogenstall is convicted of killing ten year old Amber Garrett.
She had been abducted, stabbed, and beaten to death. Kim Rigby,
(27:24):
one of Wogenstall's attorneys from the Office of the Ohio
Public defender agrees to speak with me about his case.
My client, Jeffrey Wogenstall, was wrongfully convicted based on a
host of Brady violations that were committed at his trial.
This tragic story begins back in nineteen ninety one. So
(27:48):
in the early morning of November twenty fourth, nineteen ninety one,
ten year old at the time, Amber Garrett disappeared from
the bedroom that was in which she shared with her
two younger siblings. And this all took place in the
small town of Harrison, Ohio, in Hamilton County. At the
(28:10):
time of her disappearance, Amber's brother, who was sixteen, I
believe at the time, Eric Horne, was supposed to be
babysitting while her mother, Peggy Garrett, was out supposedly at
various bars that evening. Before long police have a suspect.
Peggy and Eric pointed the finger at Jeffrey Woganstall, who
(28:33):
was an acquaintance of the Garrets at the time and
who had been out with Peggy at least for a
period of time earlier that evening when Amber disappeared. Thus,
state's case against Jeff has Amber disappearing with Jeff around
three thirty am. But Kim says the time of Amber's
(28:53):
disappearance is really based on what Eric and Peggy told police.
Eric says he knew his sister was missing around three am,
but didn't say anything about it to his mother. Peggy
says she only figured out Amber was missing after she
failed to return home from church that afternoon, and that's
(29:14):
when she called police. Jeff had a prior burglary conviction
and so he was on parole. So when Peggy told
the cops that Jeff was responsible for Amber's disappearance and
they came knocking on his door, Jeff opened the door.
He allowed them to search his house, and the cops
at that point saw a marijuana pipe, and they'd attained
(29:34):
him at that point for violating parole. Jeff says around
three am, he went to the house to buy marijuana
from Eric, then Eric asked him to drive him to
a house a couple of blocks away. Jeff says after
dropping Eric off, he went home, where he was alone
until police showed up that afternoon. Several days later, Amber's
(29:57):
body is discovered in Bright, Indiana, about six miles from
her home in Ohio. So what did the police have
other than Peggy and Eric's pointing the finger at him.
Over the time of the investigation, they accumulated a few
(30:19):
other like circumstantial pieces of evidence. There were a few
different witnesses who testified that they saw Jeff and or
a car that looked like Jeff's either driving through Harrison
towards what would be Jamison Road, where Amber's body was found,
or that they saw him and or a car off
(30:41):
the side of the road where Amber's body was later discovered.
There was also an FBI expert that was brought in
who testified that a hair found on Amber's clothing matched Jeff.
There was a minuscule spot of blood that was substantially
smaller than a drop that was found on the door
(31:02):
handle in the backseat of Jeff's car that could have
matched Amber's DNA. There were also small stains in Jeff's
apartment that looked like they could be blood. There was
a jailhouse sinch that testified that Jeff confessed to him,
and finally, there was plant material found on Jeff's jacket
(31:22):
and shoes that was similar to the area where Amber's
body was found. So Jeff was charged with the aggravated
murder of Amber Garrett. He was also charged with kidnapping
and burglary who tried the case for the state. The
lead prosecutor was Joseph Dieters, and the two assistant prosecutors
(31:45):
were Mark Peepemeyer and Rick Gibson. Jeffrey wogenstall Is eventually
found guilty and sentenced to death, So he exhausted his
state appeals and he headed into federal court. He's now
in federal court. It's the early two thousands, and he
finally gets something. He was granted discovery in federal court
(32:10):
and he was specifically allowed to depose people about Eric
Horne and Eric Horn's testimony because there was evidence that
they had at the time that Eric had lied on
the stand about never using or trafficking drugs. See when
Amber's brother, Eric Horne testified at Jeffrey's trial, he stated
(32:31):
that he had never done or sold drugs, which wasn't true.
He was an adjudicated delinquent for trafficking. And once the
defense team realized that the federal court allowed additional discovery
and depositions of Eric Horn, of the police officers involved
(32:51):
from the Harrison Police Department, and also of the three
prosecutors that were involved in trying Jeff's case. In one
of those depositions, an officer who was the lead investigator
in Jeff's case testified that after Eric Horn was arrested,
he called Prosecutor Joe Dieters to tell him he had
just arrested one of their key witnesses. He also testified
(33:14):
that he had other conversations with Mark Petemeyer and or
Rick Gibson as well about the fact that he had
arrested Eric Horn. When Eric was put on the stand
by Mark Peetemeyer, Mister Peetemeyer allowed Eric to state more
than once that he never did drugs and that he
(33:36):
never trafficked drugs, and objected multiple times to questions by
the defense to that effect. The courts ultimately say Eric
Horne's false testimony wouldn't have changed the outcome of Jeffrey's
original trial, but some news from the Department of Justice
may help his case. Remember, Kim mentioned the state's case
(33:58):
against Jeffrey included an FBI expert who testified that the
hair found on Amber's clothing matched jeff Well back around
twenty fifteen, The DOJ, the Innocence Project, and the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers conducted a joint investigation into
microscopic hair comparison. The DOJ reviewed cases where the FBI
(34:21):
tested or submitted reports using microscopic hair comparison, which is
what they did in Jeff's case, and what they found
was that before the year two thousand, the FBI's testimony
contained errors in at least ninety percent of the cases.
The United States Department of Justice sent over a letter
(34:42):
to Jeff's defense counsel to inform them that the microscopic
hair comparison testimony at Jeff's trial was scientifically inaccurate. Around
that same time, defense counsel and this is when I
entered the case, found that the prosecutors allowed the jail
house sna to also lie on the stand. The snitch
(35:03):
testified that he did not receive consideration for testifying. However,
in a sworn affidavit that he gave to defense counsel
in twenty thirteen, he explained that he did in fact
receive consideration. The courts once again say neither the DOJ's
findings on the microscopic hair comparison nor the newly discovered
evidence about the jailhouse snitch would have made a difference
(35:28):
in twenty sixteen, the public records law changed in Ohio,
so defense counsel, including myself at the time, filed a
public records request with the Harrison Police Department. They did
not appear to want to release those records to us. Eventually,
the Appellate prosecutor for Hamilton County allows Kim and the
(35:48):
team to copy the police file, and what they find
is staggering. We've found a treasure trove of police reports
and tips that were previously unknown to the defense. We
found evidence that implicated Peggy Garrett. We found evidence that
(36:11):
implicated Eric Horn. We found evidence that just undermined both
Peggy and Eric's testimony. There were police reports that showed
Peggy hit Amber in the head three times the night
before she went missing. Peggy often had drug fueled parties.
There was a note in the police file that said
that Amber had been raped by one of the men
(36:32):
who had partied at her house. Another note showed that
police were contemplating charging Peggy with child and dangerment. We
found notes that said that Peggy got in deep into
debt and sold Amber to a drug dealer. We found
things that said someone saw Peggy at a waffle house
crying that she had really effed up because she'd sold
(36:54):
Amber for fifteen hundred dollars. We also found a host
of information that implicated Eric Horn and Amber's disappearance. We
found information to show that he was actually a suspect.
There was also evidence that Eric took and failed a polygraph,
and when confronted with that, he said, fuck you, fuck
the machine, I'm out of here. We found things that
(37:17):
also undercut the eyewitnesses more so than before. Kim and
her team uncover more evidence that bring Jeffrey's conviction into question,
like that speck of blood found in Jeffrey's car. Further
testing was done on it, and although Amber could not
be excluded, the state failed to test other possible sources,
(37:37):
like her mother, Peggy, who was known to have been
in the car on several occasions, including allegedly the night
Amber disappeared. And in regards to the blood found in
Jeffrey's house, well that turned out to not be of
human origin. And there's more. Going back to Jeff's coat
(37:58):
and shoes, The process secution called a witness to testify
that the thorns and other plant material found on the
jacket and shoes were similar to the plant materials in
the area where Amber's body was found. However, that plant
material is similar to pretty much anywhere in the woods
(38:20):
in the Midwest. So armed with all of this and
even more new evidence, they amassed Kim and the team
file emotion for a new trial. The vast majority of
our claims are related to prosecutorial misconduct, specifically that they
withheld Brady evidence at the time of Jeff's trial, and
(38:42):
that had this information been given to defense council at
the time of trial, it would have clearly emite a
difference in Jeff's case, and in that he wouldn't have
been convicted. So what are the similarities between Derek Jamison's
case and Jeffrey Woganstall's Well. Both were tried in Hamilton County,
both had Mark Petemeyer as one of the prosecutors on
(39:05):
their cases, and both had allegations of Brady violations which
seemed to stem from what was in the police files
and not turned over. Remember the Homicide book. Just from
reading the record in mister Jamieson's case that mister Petemeyer
had testified in Derek's case about some of the practices
(39:27):
in Hamilton County at the time where the police would
only turn over what they called a homicide book to
the prosecutors before a trial. The police would determine what
would go in that homicide book. So if there was
anything that was exculpatory or potentially exculpatory in the police
file but wasn't given to the prosecutors, the prosecutors at
(39:48):
the time wouldn't be aware and couldn't turn it over. Obviously,
we all know that that's not how Brady works. What
the police know is imputed to what the prosecution knows.
And so regardless, if mister Petemeyer, mister Gibson knew what
was in the Harrison police files, they should have been
(40:09):
aware of that and it should have been turned over.
And I mean, frankly, prosecutors should be seeking justice, not
just convictions. I wonder, are these alleged Brady violations the
only issue the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office has been called
out for. According to a Cincinnati Inquirer article back in
(40:31):
September of two thousand, the Ohio Supreme Court rebuked the
Hamilton County Prosecutor's office for making improper statements to jurors
in fourteen death penalty cases. In the previous twelve years,
statements which could have potentially overturned verdicts on appeal. Kim
says the courts have also taken notice about how Jeff's
(40:54):
case was handled. The first District Court of Appeals Hare
in Ohio had stated the prosecutor's conduct needs reviewed by
other authorities, and that was when they were specifically referring
to the information about them withholding from the defense Eric
Horns trafficking conviction. Is there any oversight? I mean, there
(41:16):
is the state Bar, I mean who oversees all attorneys,
but effectively. Now, for the record, I've found many articles
praising the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office and specifically Mark Pete Meyer.
By many accounts, he's considered a well liked by the
book prosecutor who has worked many high profile cases in Ohio.
(41:40):
And again, he hasn't answered my requests for an interview.
For now, Kim, her team and Jeff are in a
holding pattern. So as it stands, no court has made
a final determination on Jeff's case based on all of
the avidence that we have now. Obviously, I would love
(42:03):
if Jeff was exonerated. I am hoping and I'm more
hopeful that he'll receive a new trial based on our
motion for new trial or our filings in both state
and federal court. We've spent a lot of time in
this episode talking about Mark Petemeyer and two cases other
(42:24):
than Keats handled by him and the Hamilton County Prosecutor's office.
Turns out there's an interesting development in one more. In
December of twenty twenty two, Elwood Jones, who has been
on death row for twenty seven years for the murder
of Rhoda Nathan, is granted a new trial. The Cincinnati Inquirer,
(42:48):
who told Ellwood Jones's story for the fourth season of
their podcast, Accused, is in the courtroom when Judge Wendy
Cross renders her decision. It is clear that the failure
to disclose the existence a relevant exculpatory and impeaching evidence
prior to trial deprived Ellwood Jones of a fair trial.
(43:12):
The sixth Amendment requires a new trial as the only
appropriate remedy. Accordingly, Ellwood Jones's motion for a new trial
is hereby granted. Judge Cross calls out the prosecutors from
Elwood jones original trial. One of the prosecutors just happens
(43:36):
to be Mark Petemeyer. By the way, in January of
twenty twenty three, Joe Dieters, the elected Hamilton County Prosecutor,
leaves the office. Why because he's appointed by Governor Mike
DeWine to be the one hundred and sixty third Justice
of the Ohio Supreme Court. When I speak to Keith
(43:59):
about all this, he says he's not surprised by any
of it. Human beings, but not accountability. People do things
when they when when they are not being watched. You
know what I mean, when they are not being held accountable,
that they wouldn't do if there's consequences too. You have
been uh given the power to simple people to death.
(44:22):
I'm need to take people off the planets, even legal
anxious process. And he don't have to be correct, You
don't have to be upstanding, your your your your practices
don't have to be legit. How you can get this
person to this journey. But this system is not about justice, misnamal,
It's not have anything to do justice. Next time on
(44:52):
the real killer. Do you know Keith Lamar? I know?
Did you see him inside L six the artes? Please?
I speak with two men who had two very different
vantage points during the uprising. Did you ever see Keith
as part of that group? Oh? Yes, Oh yeah, he
(45:14):
was there. Yes. To learn more about Jeffrey Wogenstall's case,
or if you have any information about the murder of
Amber Garrett, please go to our episode page for a
link to his website and the phone number for the
Office of the Ohio Public Defender. The Real Killer is
(45:41):
a production of AYR Media and iHeartRadio, hosted by me
Leah Rothman. Executive producers Leah Rothman and Eliza Rosen for
AYR Media. Written by Leah Rothman, Executive producer Paulina Williams,
Senior Associate producer Jill Pacheznik, Coordinator George Fom. Editing and
(46:04):
sound design by Cameron Taggy. Mixed and mastered by Cameron Taggy.
Audio engineering by Matt Jacobsen. Studio engineering by Anna Moolshan
Legal counsel for a y R Media, Gianni Douglas, Executive
producer for iHeartRadio, Maya Howard
Host
Leah Rothman
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!