
Six men from Indiana had their day in court. All proclaimed and maintained their innocence to the prosecutors and defense
attorneys handling their cases and to the judges and juries presiding over the trials.
In the end, Hoosier courts handed down a combined sentence of more than 350 years, and those six men served an aggregate
83 years behind bars. Dozens of hands within the state’s criminal justice system police, prosecutors, defense attorneys,
judges, court and law firm assistances at the trial and post-conviction levels have touched those cases at some point but
didn’t stop what turned out to be eight decades of incarceration.
Defendants Richard Alexander, Harold Buntin, Larry Mayes, David L. Scott, Dwayne Scruggs, and Jerry Watkins have no connection
because the facts of their cases, the charged offenses, criminal proceedings, and ultimate convictions were unrelated. But
a common thread among those six is that each was wrongfully convicted and served time behind bars for crimes they didn’t
commit before being exonerated.

It’s an ongoing saga unfolding nationwide, and the numbers continue to increase. Before 2008, Indiana had five exonerations.
Now, six have been freed, and other defendants who’ve maintained their innocence from the start are attempting to obtain
their own exonerations.
Those on the front lines say it’s part of a bigger puzzle that may have an undefined number of pieces and intricacies
within a case, past and present. Variables can include underfunded police, a demanding public and political pressure, crime-tough
prosecutors wanting to ease that pressure and ensure public safety, inadequate public defense, overwhelming court dockets,
appellate judges bound by caselaw and precedent for deference to lower courts, and forensic crime labs that face backlogs
in reexamining decades-old DNA, evidence, and criminal justice procedures.
“It’s awful to have someone in prison you believe is innocent,” said Fran Watson, an attorney and Indiana
University School of Law - Indianapolis professor who leads a criminal defense clinic that handles wrongful-conviction cases.
“It’s not just enough to be innocent; you have to show the violation. As long as it takes, you’re particularly
glad when justice gets done, finally.”
Hoosier exonerees
Five of the six Hoosier exonerees have been freed in the past decade; the most recent exoneration was in January and the
earliest of these cases dates to 1993. The Innocence Project has taken on four more cases in recent years, according to staff
attorney Jason Kreag, and so far, Watson said that Mayes’ release is the clinic’s only exoneration.
In January, Scott was freed from prison after 23 years and four months behind bars, which was part of the 50-year-sentence
he received for the murder of an 89-year-old woman in Terre Haute during a home burglary. DNA tests last year implicated another
man and a suspect in Kentucky has since been arrested.
Another man, Buntin, was released last year after serving 13 years from a conviction in a 1984 rape case. His case took a
twist, though, in that DNA proved his innocence in 2005 but the Indianapolis man stayed incarcerated for almost two additional
years because of misfiled paperwork at the court. That has led to disciplinary proceedings against Marion Superior Judge Grant
Hawkins and Commissioner Nancy Broyles. Buntin has filed lawsuits against the jurists and county.
Indianapolis attorney Michael Sutherlin, who represents Buntin and is also working on a possible civil suit in Scott’s
wrongful conviction, said the trends are becoming more apparent. He sees innocence initiatives exposing the fallibility of
the criminal justice system overall, but he acknowledges there sometimes can be “a perfect storm of events” -
brutal crimes, judges who want to be hard on criminals in an election year, communities up in arms, pressure on police to
find the person who committed the crime, and pressured public defenders with overwhelming caseloads.
It can be tough to find the problems, particularly in older cases where evidence has been lost or damaged and witness accounts
may no longer be available, Sutherlin and other attorneys say.
“These things can happen so easily, and these cases can open people up to the dangers of the system,” said New
York attorney Nick Brustin, who has handled at least 20 wrongful-conviction cases nationally, including Mayes’ federal
civil rights lawsuit stemming from a wrongful conviction and 21 years of incarceration. “Our hope is that these will
lead to change.”
The Indiana connection
A part of a national network of law and journalism schools working on wrongful-conviction cases, the IU School of Law - Indianapolis
clinic is dedicated to raising awareness about the failings of the criminal justice system and the thousands of innocent people
in jail and on death row. The clinic has worked for the past decade with the New York-based non-profit Innocence Project,
the nation’s most prominent organization devoted to proving wrongful convictions.
They often work with a wrongful-conviction clinic through Northwestern University and others throughout the country and cooperate
with the Indiana State Public Defender’s Office, Watson said.
The Indianapolis clinic is currently the only one in the state affiliated with the network, Watson said. She and her students
have filed appearances in about a dozen cases through the years, but they’ve put in hundreds of hours of work investigating
and researching other cases that ultimately couldn’t be pursued.
While the wrongful-conviction clinic currently operates through the criminal-defense clinic at the law school, Watson said
it will become independent in the future.
“This has the feeling of a movement and is all about what the system does wrong and what we can do better,” she
said.
Studies of wrongful convictions suggest that thousands of innocent people are in jails and prisons across the country. The
Innocence Project pursues 250 cases at any given time and reviews thousands of additional cases for legal action, according
to Kreag, who handles all the wrongful-conviction cases from Indiana. Hundreds of letters are received each month, but only
about 1 percent of those cases will be accepted, he said. A third of those accepted cases are ultimately closed because evidence
has been lost or destroyed over time, Kreag said.
The most common legal issues in cases of wrongful convictions involve inaccurate witness identification, false testimony,
government misconduct, and DNA-based evidence that later proves that person wasn’t the one responsible, according to
Kreag. Indiana has adequate post-conviction laws that allow the DNA testing, but it doesn’t have any DNA storage laws
or recorded interrogation statutes to improve the process.
Three-quarters of the DNA-based cases involve original misidentification of the perpetrator, Kreag said.
The Innocence Project reports that more than 220 exonerations have occurred nationally based on DNA evidence, but Kreag said
that doesn’t take into account the criminal cases it doesn’t get involved with those lacking any biological evidence,
such as burglaries, thefts, or criminal mischief convictions.
“Mistakes can be made so easily, and they are made routinely and that’s why it’s essential that everyone
be aware no matter what part of the system they’re at,” Kreag said. “There’s no reason to think these
mistakes can’t and aren’t happening in other cases we can’t get to, where there is not any biological evidence
to review. We’re only seeing a small portion of what’s happening out there.”
To read more about Larry Mayes, read "After Exoneration," which appears in the Sept. 17-30, 2008, issue
of Indiana Lawyer














G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.
SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.
Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.
Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.
Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.
This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.