• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Elroy Phillips sits in prison despite proof of his innocence

J

Josh

Lifer
Elroy Phillips doesn't look much like a legal expert. With a pair of gold teeth, a short-cropped goatee, and a 245-pound build on a five-foot-ten frame, he looks twice as thick as an average man.

But while serving a 25-year sentence on a drug charge, Phillips has earned a paralegal degree and worked in the law library. He has also helped about 20 fellow prisoners a year with their appeals.

But there's one inmate, a prisoner with seemingly irrefutable evidence of his innocence, that Phillips, known among fellow inmates as Law, has been unable to free: himself.

For all the help he has offered others, the 45-year-old known as Eighty-Six when he was growing up on the streets of Miami sits behind bars charged with a crime legal experts say he likely didn't commit.

Read More: http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2011-0...its-in-prison-despite-proof-of-his-innocence/


Very interesting story. If what the man is saying is true, that the cop wasn't even on duty that night who supposedly made the buy from him...it's absurd he's still in jail.
 
dabuddha said:
I didn't read the article but why would it matter if the cop that made the buy was on duty or not?
Click to expand...

Just read the article, it isn't hard.

So Phillips did something his attorneys had never done: He requested the evidence logs to see what had transpired the night of his arrest.

On May 4, 2009, he received a copy showing 84 times that cops took out "investigative funds" in the days before and after his arrest. Nobody had checked out cash April 6, 2001. Ghent hadn't checked out funds since two weeks before the arrest, and the $40 he had taken wasn't for undercover drug work.

The log from the Property & Evidence Section of the department also showed that the next time anyone checked in narcotics was ten days after Phillips's arrest.

Police department regulations also dictated that all employees must clock in using a system called Oracle Payroll. So Phillips asked for records of officers who had worked on his case. Only one of the five cops working on the case had clocked in that day. Ghent wasn't on duty.

Figuring he might be on to something, Phillips requested Ghent's personnel record and received a copy in early 2010. In it, he discovered that Ghent had been at a hostage negotiations class at Palm Beach State College the night of the bust. Ghent took a final exam that night and later accepted a $50 bonus from the police department for completing the course.
Click to expand...
 
dabuddha said:
I didn't read the article but why would it matter if the cop that made the buy was on duty or not?
Click to expand...

Because it was stated taht he was an on duty undercover cop making the sale. Later it was found that he was not on duty that night. Plus he has since turned his badge in after facing accusations of being a dirty cop. Not saying that it is proof but it does not look good when you quit and run.
 
glad to hear a man that rehabilitated himself behind bars.

now once he gets out, i hope that he uses what he obtained to better himself, along with understanding and forgiveness, not revenge and bitterness as most people are out of prison.

he might have been wronged, but now he has a future as long as he isnt bitter and stupid about it. if anything hes got karma on his side.
 
Spikesoldier said:
glad to hear a man that rehabilitated himself behind bars.

now once he gets out, i hope that he uses what he obtained to better himself, along with understanding and forgiveness, not revenge and bitterness as most people are out of prison.

he might have been wronged, but now he has a future as long as he isnt bitter and stupid about it. if anything hes got karma on his side.
Click to expand...

Funny post considering your avatar.
 
Spikesoldier said:
glad to hear a man that rehabilitated himself behind bars.

now once he gets out, i hope that he uses what he obtained to better himself, along with understanding and forgiveness, not revenge and bitterness as most people are out of prison.

he might have been wronged, but now he has a future as long as he isnt bitter and stupid about it. if anything hes got karma on his side.
Click to expand...

You're right, he's got karma on his side, he should be sure to tell the court that. Really this situation could be construed as karma for his past.
 
dabuddha said:
I didn't read the article but why would it matter if the cop that made the buy was on duty or not?
Click to expand...

Figuring he might be on to something, Phillips requested Ghent's personnel record and received a copy in early 2010. In it, he discovered that Ghent had been at a hostage negotiations class at Palm Beach State College the night of the bust. Ghent took a final exam that night and later accepted a $50 bonus from the police department for completing the course.
Click to expand...

Its irrelevant of weather he did it or not. Later in the article he admits that he sold drugs when he was younger the point it is trying to make is that theres enough evidence that he uncovered as his own lawyer to overturn his conviction but he is facing stupid amount of red tape about it in an attempt to cover up former police corruption.
 
zokudu said:
Its irrelevant of weather he did it or not. Later in the article he admits that he sold drugs when he was younger the point it is trying to make is that theres enough evidence that he uncovered as his own lawyer to overturn his conviction.
Click to expand...

No, the article is merely stating that he has accumulated enough evidence in the eyes of people non-prejudiced in the case to warrant a new hearing.
 
dabuddha said:
I didn't read the article but why would it matter if the cop that made the buy was on duty or not?
Click to expand...
If you read the article it says that not only was he not on duty, he wasn't there to make the buy. The cop is dirty and the whole thing is a conspiracy cover up, and the guy has plenty of evidence to prove it.
 
If anything the least they can do is release him for time served. But based on the news story it appears to me he is innocent.
 
He is attacking this in the entirely wrong way. He needs to appeal on evidentiary errors that looked like they were preserved by his defense team.

Although, I don't have the record so I can't say for sure, but the article makes it seems the unsigned police report with alleged statements from the CI probably should not have come in. Furthermore, the CI should have been made to testify in court, or her statements should not have been used. Its to bad his arrest was before 2004, if it was after 2004 he'd have a good chance of over turning based on constitutional issues.
 
Last edited:
DominionSeraph said:
If you're this susceptible to spin, I'd suggest you stay far away from Fox News.
Click to expand...

If he could get a new trial it would be cut and dry. He would not be convicted because the CI, the only witness other than the office, who somehow didn't testify in the first trial, would contradict the police officer on the stand and the police officer has since been kicked off of the force.

If this case had been after 2004 he would have gotten the case vacated and a new trial based on 6th amendment claims, his constitutional right to confront the CI. Unfortunately for him the SCotUS ruling in 2004 wasn't retroactive.
 
Last edited:
Proof of innocence comes when the evidence is presented in a court of law. Not until then.

What you have is a group of legal beagles looking at what the defendant has presented and stating that there is a problem.

But they are not the judge that makes the decision on a new trial or to vacate the sentence.
 
EagleKeeper said:
Proof of innocence comes when the evidence is presented in a court of law. Not until then.

What you have is a group of legal beagles looking at what the defendant has presented and stating that there is a problem.

But they are not the judge that makes the decision on a new trial or to vacate the sentence.
Click to expand...

QFT.

like a lot of people that were shocked by the casey anthony verdict.

i say: that judge sure as hell had a lot more facts presented to him in that courtroom than the armchair judges across america whose facts are presented to them by the propaganda media outlets.
 
He is awaiting the judge to review his appeal. Looks like it is the third or fourth appeal? Maybe, once the judge can review the case he will be freed, but given the back log of other appeals cases he will have to wait. He should tell all his fellow inmates to stop wasting the courts time and let the judge get to his case. An unlikely possibility.
 
Spikesoldier said:
QFT.

like a lot of people that were shocked by the casey anthony verdict.

i say: that judge sure as hell had a lot more facts presented to him in that courtroom than the armchair judges across america whose facts are presented to them by the propaganda media outlets.
Click to expand...

If the CI says she was never there. And the cop was later found to be dirty. And they were the only two witnesses linking the defendant to a crime, it looks highly suspect.
 
Wreckem said:
If he could get a new trial it would be cut and dry. He would not be convicted because the CI, the only witness other than the office, who somehow didn't testify in the first trial, would contradict the police officer on the stand and the police officer has since been kicked off of the force.
Click to expand...

The problem is that there are apparently other cops who can corroborate surrounding details, like the fact that Ghent was there, and the presence of the CI. In fact the story says that Ghent frisked the CI in violation of department policies -- how does that happen if neither of them was there?
The other cops not being able to corroborate the buy itself is of little meaning. Ghent thought he was under full surveillance, so he was in no position to try anything.

The story leaves out the police narrative (all of the positive evidence they have) and doesn't even have a counter-narrative (the defendant obviously wasn't sitting at home minding his own business.)

Honestly, y'all are stupid to be falling for this crap. It's Fundie 101.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top