My blog stats are showing that most of my random hits are from people searching for information about Ryan Ferguson’s appeals. As a blogger and a thinking human being, I have a very strong opinion about Ryan’s conviction. As a journalist who once covered the story, I feel a small nagging to remain neutral in my writing lest I ever have a chance to cover new developments for a news organization. That being said, I want to help anyone reading this blog who wants to know what’s happening with Ryan Ferguson.
If you need the backstory, check my older post. Another good link I’ve found is this magazine story- it gives an interesting and fairly complete recounting of Kent Heitholt’s murder, Chuck Erickson’s muddled confession, and Ryan Ferguson’s conviction despite all the contradictions and lack of evidence against him.
Here’s the latest news I could find on Ryan’s appeals:
January 9, 2009- Judge Richard Callahan denied Ferguson’s appeal based on improper jury selection. This appeal claimed that the jury selection wasn’t fair because Lincoln County allowed potential jurors to get out of serving by doing community service, preventing the jury from being a fair random sample of the population. Callahan thought the jury selection was fair. Ruling in favor of the appeal could have unleashed a plethora of appeals from cases decided in that county based on improper juror selection- so this ruling is in the favor of overall damage control. Read the Tribune story here.
Judge Jodie Asel has yet to rule on Ferguson’s civil appeal. It claims that former prosecutor Kevin Crane (now a judge) withheld exculpatory evidence from the defense during the murder trial in 2005. This would mean that Crane had evidence that would have helped Ryan’s defense, and illegally kept the information from Ryan’s lawyers. Asel said she wouldn’t announce her decision until after Callahan’s ruling. *See my comment below for more information on this appeal (the exculpatory evidence as well as Ryan’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel).
That’s all I can find for now. I will continue to post updates as I find them. Please feel free to comment with opinions or share any relevent info/links you’ve come across.
Do you know what the exculpatory evidence is? And if it’s found to be legit (and illegally withheld) what would happen to the prosecutor from the 2005 trial? At least 40 years if you ask me, since that’s what ryan was sentenced. Seems fair right? Probably wont happen though… I get so pissed off every time I hear about how this kid got shafted and that common sense has failed so tragically. And the system takes so long to accomplish anything, almost 5 years of his life have been taken from him. The real shame about all of this is that even if Ryan doesn’t get out of prison until 36 years from now, he’ll be thrown right back in after he brutally murders Charles Erickson for destroying his life. 15 years is a long time for Charles to find a good hiding place, but I don’t think it’s long enough. Vengeance is nigh Charles, you’ll get what’s coming to you, even if it takes 36 years… Haha, maybe I shouldn’t say things like that. But wouldn’t it make an awesome movie? Kinda like shawshank redemption where Tim Robbins (can’t remember his name in the movie) exacts his revenge on the warden and escapes to freedom. Anyway, now I’m just rambling.
Neutrality? I don’t think a journalist should ever serve up “pablum”.
The crime: I’ve often felt a coworker would be most able to approach someone at that time of night, particularly since there some indications that the initial attack was as the victim was entering his car, however, it may simply be a question of vigilance. Some people may be hulking ex-athletes but that doesn’t mean they are alert to danger particularly when they are on familiar turf.
The problem is that any coworker would have had a zillion ways to arrange a better time and place. Just about anyone on the paper would know that a dozen people would be leaving through those doors since all the computer terminals were automatically powered down at about that time.
So I think it was a violent criminal and not some college kids who later wandered by, discovered the corpse and then went to their dorm rooms because they sensibly knew not to get involved.
It certainly was not Ryan Ferguson or Chuck Erickson! The cops had a case that was bringing them bad publicity. The DA had an opportunity for a feather in his cap!
As to the appeal on the jury issue: The decision may have spoken of timeliness and minimal impact but I’m sure there was an awareness of the number of similarly situated defendants.
As to the appeal relating to representation and prosecutorial abuse, it seems the judge was quick to try to duck the issues by needlessly papering the file with a notice of intent to defer to the proceedings in Cole County concerning the jury issue. I think the Judge wants to avoid that hot potatoe on her dockett.
As to the exculpatory evidence:
1. Police interviewed a man in prison who reported to them and to his lawyer that he knew who killed the reporter because the murderer had told him that he did it. The police told the man his story didn’t match their investigation and never filed a report or told the defense about it. The defense therefore was never able to investigate the possibility that this man was the true killer- obviously a pretty material bit of information.
2. Shawna Ornt- the cleaning lady who saw two men by Heitholt’s body the night of the murder- told the prosecuting attorney repeatedly that Ryan and Chuck were not the men she saw at the Tribune. She was used as a witness for the prosecution, but they never asked her to identify Ryan in the courtroom as one of the men she’d seen (because she told them in advance she wouldn’t do it.) The defense never knew about this, so neither did the jury. That’s blatantly withholding important evidence- she was one of the only witnesses to the murderers and she said it wasn’t Ryan and Chuck.
In the same appeal, Ryan is claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on very damaging mistakes made by his original defense attorneys. Some of their mistakes:
1. They failed to subpoena the police officer who’s dog tracked a scent trail of the killers (going the exact opposite direction of where Chuck Erickson claimed they went.) This would have discredited Erickson as a witness, effectively eliminating any case against Ryan.
2. They also failed to use Dallas Mallory, who Erickson claimed they talked to after the murder, and who made a sworn affidavit that he didn’t see them. Mallory was actually in the courtroom, but the defense never called him to the stand.
3. They didn’t talk to the cleaning lady themselves to find out she couldn’t identify Ryan.
4. They didn’t provide character witnesses to discredit Erickson for his drug and alcohol abuse and reputation for telling wild stories. They didn’t provide character witnesses to show that Ryan was popular, well-adjusted, and well-behaved. The prosecution had no one to challenge them when they portrayed him as a coldblooded killer.
5. They didn’t use the bouncer from the bar Erickson claimed they went back to after the morning, who would have testified that the bar had never been open past 1:30 (in accordance with city ordinance), and therefore Erickson’s story that they were there after 2 am was impossible.
Those are just a few of the reasons listed in the appeal that Ryan Ferguson has the right to a retrial.
[...] http://nicolemueller.wordpress.com/2009/01/14/ryan-fergusons-appeal-denied/ [...]
I’m just an English housewife who happened to catch the 48 Hours documentary on TV over here. I could not believe what I was seeing – how could this young man be convicted on such strange evidence? I’ve not been able to get the case out of my mind, and have been trying to find out all there is to know, and following the various appeals. I’m sure the same thing could probably happen here too, but it’s important that the people keep asking questions and bringing it to the forefront of public conciousness. I feel that it’s probably more of a political hot pototo now that the former detective is a judge, and the powers-that-be are not going to want to have to concede that they didn’t play fair at the original trial.
I agree that judges are probably a lot less likely to find that Crane did anything wrong since he’s now a judge. We can only hope that the judge’s first priority is justice for the innocent and that public clamoring for fairness will keep our officials honest. I’m not a legal expert by any stretch, but I don’t believe there would be any actual legal repercussions for Crane at this point if a ruling of unfair trial is made. I could be incorrect on that though.
Update: http://nicolemueller.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/another-appeal-for-ferguson/
N/A
Unlike most folks on this blog, I feel like these two are guilty as sin. I too watched 48 Hours on this story, more than once. I watched intently as the first guy told his story and I have read a lot about it since. He gave lots of information. Why would anyone tell such a story…giving up his life and all? Why would he do it? Ryan Ferguson seems like a pretty boy that’s always had his way, he’s a liar and he just sat and glared at his friend as he testified as to what they both had done. He will take the truth to his grave I bet. Alcohol and drugs added fuel to the fire. These two teenagers didn’t think they would get caught. How sad for the victims family. To loose such a beloved father, husband, friend, etc.
>Why would anyone tell such a story…
>giving up his life and all? Why would he do it?
I don’t know. Perhaps it was for the exact same reason Chuck Erickson lied about the jail cell vandalism that he in fact played no role in whatsoever, yet willingly confessed to.
Do you think he lied in each these two incidents for the same reason or for different reasons?
By the way, the jury does not have to find out WHY Chuck Erickson lied, only that he did lie.
Unfortunately, the juror actually believed that demented twerp.
Hello. I watched a show about this trial last night and just had to look up the story today. I was very much hoping that Ryan’s family had been able to get him an appeal and a new trial. The conviction the first time as far as I am concerned was just baseless when it was so obvious from the information provided that the police had just latched onto these two boys because they so desperately wanted the case solved that they couldn’t see that the one confessing ( Chuck ) I’m pretty sure had some kind of mental illness. I am a registered nurse, and if you work in the health care field you are aware of the fact that most mental illnesses start presenting in the late teens or early twenties, he seemed to be having delusions. Schizophrenia maybe? I am not sure really, but it at least should have been looked into. The poor guy went to talk to the police in a terrible state of mind, and they told him how he killed someone because he sure didn’t seem to know, heck, he didn’t even know where he did it. I am just so saddened these kinds of failures take place in our legal system, and that these two young men, one who probably needs some psychiatric help, and one who probably had a very bright future ( we are approximately the same age so that makes it hit home a little more for me I suppose) ahead of him, just ripped away with so little care it seemed to me. Police work needs to be so very diligent. You know, when it comes to health care and policemen, we really can never take our jobs too seriously, because peoples’ lives really are in our hands, peoples’ everything, the most important people in their world, so you have to really, really, know before you say ” I am sure without a doubt”, or “Yes, this is what it is”. I certainly wouldn’t feel of a lump on a womans breast and say, “Ya know, you smoke cigarettes, you’re in your 40’s, you’re not breast-feeding, that’s cancer!” I feel like it was kinda rushing it to just take someone’s word for it and not have any backing evidence, even if Chuck said he did it, Ryan didn’t, so you still have to prove him guilty, and I’m sorry but you really didn’t, so do us all a favor and let the innocent man go!!!!
i think it wasnt neither of them and that chuck belived he did it but he really was never there and it was someone else because nothing linked chuck or ryan to the murder
i think it wasnt neither of them and it was someoen else there is no evidence to link them to the murder