Nashville man exonerated after 18 years in prison for murder sues city for $18 million

[bobsguns]

Story

 

Quote

Paul Shane Garrett spent 18 years in prison for the murder of Velma Tharpe, who was found in an alley with parts of her body exposed and what appeared to be semen on her body according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit states Garrett, then a 28-year-old tow truck driver was developed as a suspect and a detective with the Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) used "coercive, deceptive, and manipulative techniques to try and extract a false confession from Mr. Garrett. Over the course of these interrogations, and in another conversation with his wife that was secretly recorded by Detective Dunaway, Mr. Garrett explicitly denied murdering Ms. Tharpe nearly 50 times; offered to take a polygraph examination 8 times; and encouraged a comparison of his blood sample to the DNA found on the victim 8 different times."

Sounds to me like he had nothing to hide & wanted to prove his innocents.

 

Quote

The lawsuit claims MNPD fabricated evidence and fabricated a confession from Garrett, despite the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) providing DNA test results which excluded Garrett from DNA found on the woman's body.

 

So, despite TBI-performed DNA tests showing he had nothing to do with the rape & murder of this poor woman, Det. Dunaway STILL got this poor man an illegal conviction. Det. Dunaway should have to forfeit his pension & be made to serve the 18 years this innocent man did. 

Wonder how many other cases Det. Dunaway falsified evidence on? Is he in fact still on the job with Metro PD or any other agency? If so, why? And WHY did the DA agree to go along with his horse manure? 

This entire thing stinks six ways from Sunday. It reminds me of the old Marsha Trimble case where the investigating detective hounded a suspect (Jeffrey Womack) who was later shown to not be involved in her murder at all. 

[E4 No More]

I used to be all for the death penalty, but no longer. There are way too many stories of mistaken identity or outright misconduct like this. The detective should be criminally charged.

[pop pop]

They were not using DNA testing 18 years ago were they? 

[bobsguns]

14 minutes ago, pop pop said:

They were not using DNA testing 18 years ago were they? 

The story says the TBI did indeed do DNA testing. Aside from that, I don't know what to tell you.

[E4 No More]

14 minutes ago, pop pop said:

They were not using DNA testing 18 years ago were they? 

 

DNA fingerprinting was first used in a police forensic test in 1986.

[Erik88]

It's one thing for a detective or prosecutor to make a mistake but I've seen so many examples now where they have all but framed an innocent person. It's maddening. They are almost never prosicuted either. Imagine losing 18 years of your life for something you didn't do. 

[bobsguns]

2 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

It's one thing for a detective or prosecutor to make a mistake but I've seen so many examples now where they have all but framed an innocent person. It's maddening. They are almost never prosicuted either. Imagine losing 18 years of your life for something you didn't do. 

I would love to be on a jury for someone whom extracted revenge on a DA who conducted gross misconduct or withheld exculpatory evidence. They would get a walk in a NY minute, IMO. 

[No_0ne]

4 hours ago, pop pop said:

They were not using DNA testing 18 years ago were they? 

 

4 hours ago, bobsguns said:

The story says the TBI did indeed do DNA testing. Aside from that, I don't know what to tell you.

Much like the early days of fingerprinting, the technology to perform DNA testing existed before such evidence was ruled admissible in court, and before that evidence was considered reliable.  I don't know the exact date when this occurred in Tennessee, but the use of DNA evidence as definitively exculpatory is a relatively recent phenomenon ...

[monkeylizard]

Remember . . .18 years ago was 2004. We're not talking about 1964 here.

[No_0ne]

Reading a little further about this case, the murder occurred in 2000, the trial in 2003.  Garrett entered a guilty plea to involuntary manslaughter to avoid a possible death penalty, was sentenced to 15 years and released in 2011.  The TBI information showing a possible link to the the real killer's DNA was provided to the prosecution in 2004, but nobody ever bothered to follow up on it.  During Garrett's original interrogation, investigator's lied about finding Garrett's DNA at the crime scene to try to coerce a confession from him ( courts have repeatedly ruled that during interrogations, police are generally under no obligation to tell the truth to potential defendants and are essentially free to lie).  After Garrett's release in 2011, it's taken another 10 years for the real killer to finally be charged and arrested, finally leading to Garrett's original conviction being thrown out last year, thus the lawsuit filed recently.  I would say he has a pretty good chance of winning this one ...

[Erik88]

Netflix has two great series on this. The Innocence Files was both disturbing and shocking to watch. I don't think any show has made me as angry as this one.

I learned that even after being exonerated some states don't allow former prisoners to be compensated. They are let out of prison without any money to get their life in order. 

 

 

This one is also good.

 

 

Edited January 26, 2022 by Erik88

[No_0ne]

Be careful about using a Netflix, or any other TV series as a source for information about what's going on in the criminal justice system.  Those shows are designed to inflame your opinion, by showing only what the director wants you to see about these cases.  A good example of that was the series "Making a Murderer", that ran a few years back.  While it was an entertaining show, and did a great job of leading the viewers to a definite conclusion about the case, it was sorely lacking when it came to presenting the facts of the case in an unbiased light, omitting or glossing over a lot of evidence pointing to Avery's guilt, while concentrating only on the inconsistencies that exist in virtually every investigation ...

[bobsguns]

14 hours ago, Erik88 said:

It's one thing for a detective or prosecutor to make a mistake but I've seen so many examples now where they have all but framed an innocent person. It's maddening. They are almost never prosicuted either. Imagine losing 18 years of your life for something you didn't do. 

If that happened to me, I would be back in prison for murdering the people who falsely convicted me knowing it was wrong.  

I agree that these cops & DA's are rarely punished for amounts to be both perjury & malfeasance of office. Should be a mandatory 30 years in prison when they do that.

[bobsguns]

7 hours ago, No_0ne said:

During Garrett's original interrogation, investigator's lied about finding Garrett's DNA at the crime scene to try to coerce a confession from him ( courts have repeatedly ruled that during interrogations, police are generally under no obligation to tell the truth to potential defendants and are essentially free to lie).  

But should a person lie to the police, they can be charged! Which is complete BS!!!!  

That court ruling allowing cops to lie with no pushback has got be one of THE worst court rulings in US history, IMO. 

Were I on a jury & it was established that a cop lied, I would ask the other jurors in deliberation, "If he lied then, how do we know he didn't lie on the stand?" Lying is a pattern, once people start doing it, they continue doing it. Too often when it's not even needed either, IMO. 

I hope everyone involved in this goat screwing loses their pensions & gets prison time. 

[Erik88]

5 hours ago, No_0ne said:

Be careful about using a Netflix, or any other TV series as a source for information about what's going on in the criminal justice system.  Those shows are designed to inflame your opinion, by showing only what the director wants you to see about these cases.  A good example of that was the series "Making a Murderer", that ran a few years back.  While it was an entertaining show, and did a great job of leading the viewers to a definite conclusion about the case, it was sorely lacking when it came to presenting the facts of the case in an unbiased light, omitting or glossing over a lot of evidence pointing to Avery's guilt, while concentrating only on the inconsistencies that exist in virtually every investigation ...

Good point but not really apples to apples comparison. I'd have to watch it again to be sure but I believe every person in the Innocent Files had been exonerated. There was a lot of police misconduct or incompetence.

I remember thinking that Avery was likely guilty. 

[No_0ne]

4 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Good point but not really apples to apples comparison. I'd have to watch it again to be sure but I believe every person in the Innocent Files had been exonerated. There was a lot of police misconduct or incompetence.

I remember thinking that Avery was likely guilty. 

He was also one of those exonerated in the Innocence Files database, for the crime he was falsely convicted of in the 80's.  After his release, he committed the murder which landed him back in prison ...

[MrsMonkeyMan2500]

This case is a really interesting one. The man who walked free since committing the crime is the scary part. I have actually met him before. I don't want to get into specifics but he's a dangerous person and the insane thing to be is that while awaiting trail he has been released from prison and is out on bond. Not only that, but he is working as a "care giver" for one of his family members and is receiving pay from TennCare for it. It blows my mind. Oh, and a few years back he had a fiancé die. Id Detective Dunaway arrested CA II, who knows. The fiancé may not have died. I'm of the opinion he should face charges, not just lose his pension.

[10-Ring]

Here's a nifty article that outlines several of (former) Det. Dunaway's transgressions.  It appears that Dunaway took a voluntary resignation 7/2007 after getting caught giving false testimony in another trial.  It's a common (and unfortunate) practice, and one that MNPD, as well as other departments have a tendency of doing with disgraced officers.  I have to ask why an incident that resulted in a plea deal where Dunaway resigned from the department was not reported to the POST commission.  For those not in the know, the POST commission certifies police officers, if their certification is revoked they don't have the ability to work for another department.  Another example of this involved Ofc. Chad Knaggs who is currently a Sergeant with the City of Springhill.  (I'll post article below).  Knaggs took a voluntary resignation from Metro after he was charged with assault for using excessive force when he repeatedly kneed a suspect in a wheelchair.  The article that I'm posting elaborates on MNPDs history with voluntary resignations.  I'll end this post by clarifying that by no means am I anti police, I just have no tolerance for public servants who don't do their jobs correctly. 

http://thenews.org/2016/05/05/interim-chiefs-past-raises-questions/

 

https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/some-metro-police-disciplinary-actions-going-unreported

Edited January 29, 2022 by 10-Ring

[bobsguns]

8 minutes ago, 10-Ring said:

Here's a nifty article that outlines several of (former) Det. Dunaway's transgressions.  It appears that Dunaway took a voluntary resignation 7/2007 after getting caught giving false testimony in another trial.  It's a common (and unfortunate) practice, and one that MNPD, as well as other departments have a tendency of doing with disgraced officers.  I have to ask why an incident that resulted in a plea deal where Dunaway resigned from the department was not reported to the POST commission. 

The sad part is, other detectives/officers HAD to know about this false testimony and/or bad conduct but said NOTHING about it. Hard to earn the respect of the public with things like this, IMO. 

[MrsMonkeyMan2500]

 

On 1/28/2022 at 9:58 PM, 10-Ring said:

I'll end this post by clarifying that by no means am I anti police, I just have no tolerance for public servants who don't do their jobs correctly. 

I'm 100% pro-LEO but with you on that. Having said that I think that Chief Drake is a good man in a very difficult position right now. I think he has some really good officers as well. But there are bad apples every where and that is just something that has to sadly be peeled away. But hopefully Nashville is headed in the right direction. Mostly. They did just find a body yesterday in Crieve Hall where we used to live so I am kinda glad I am in the hills and not the city.

The worst part about this case to me, is that even though he was given DNA info from the TBI nothing was done. Like I said before CA II was walking free while having murdered someone. I knew there was something off about him when I met him once. Luckily I was at a large funeral and didn't have to interact with him more than offering my condolences on his fathers passing. I can't imagine leaving someone behind bars and letting a guilty party walk free.