After Innocence (2005)

After Innocence Review

1. The documentary overall was great, but if I had to pick one scene that stuck out to me it had to be Nick Yarris and his story. Nick Yarris was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder and was sentenced to death row. He spent 23 years in prison and to make matters worse they were in solitary confinement. In the documentary, he stated he wasn't allowed to talk for the first two years which is just outlandish. Yarris also described that he was sent to a prison that was condemned by the United Nations for its practices of torture. I could only imagine being wrongfully convicted, but then to end up in a prison that's known for torture its prisoner is just horrible. When he was first released he said he felt allergic to the air and that it was actually hard to breathe. This made me feel sorrowful because it shows just how accustomed to prison he was. He also stated that the world was too loud and this made me angry because he did not deserve to be in solitary confinement for all those years. An example of some dark humor I found was when he insisted on driving in a Jeep with all of the sides open because he wanted to be outside every chance he got. Although that was kind of funny it's also very sad because he was in solitary confinement for 23 years. Another thing he said that impacted me the most was when he was being sentenced the judge couldn't even look him in the eyes. Yarris then told the judge, "Look at me. You can't even look at me in the eye, and you're about to sentence me to die". This made me very angry because it shows how little sympathy people in high authority have nowadays. This situation also made me upset because even if he were guilty he is still a human who has feelings and deserves some form of respect even if it's just looking at them in the eyes. 
2. A lot of things surprised me throughout this documentary. The first thing just so happened to be the opening statement that said, "In the United States more than 150 people have been exonerated and freed by DNA evidence after spending decades in prison for crimes they did not commit". Although at first glance this may not seem like such a big number the fact that there are 150 (probably even more) people locked away for no reason is and should be alarming. Another thing was a lot of the men and woman wrongfully imprisoned have to do a lot of the work on their own to get out because some can't find lawyers and many don't believe them. There is something called the Innocence Project whose goal is to help the wrongfully convicted be freed, but with so many that need help a lot of them are still in jail. Thirdly I learned that "eyewitness misidentification was the leading cause of all wrongful conventions". I was somewhat shocked but just saddened that the police would rather go off looks than to double check and test DNA as well. I was also surprised to hear there's a Life After Exoneration Program that works with families and the community to find out what resources are available. This made me happy because it shows that there are people out there who care and are working to fix this problem. Lastly, I was surprised to hear that one of the exoneree's (Vincent Moto) criminal record hasn't been expunged in the 8 years since their exoneration! I believe this is the first thing that should be done because even after being free having this record can prevent someone from trying to accomplish many things.
3. My main question has to be what has been done since this documentary's been released to help those that are wrongfully convicted? Another question is where and what are those that were highlighted in this documentary currently doing? Some feelings that stayed with me after the film is some anger that this may still be going on and no one is really doing anything drastic to fix it. Also some sadness for those that are currently or had to go through such a life-changing experience. I guess you could say whenever someone is telling me something I tend to believe and trust them more and not question them as much. It was somewhat funny because when I think someone's lying I tend to grill them for a little bit but I've come to be more passive and hear what people have to say before I form my opinions. Now five problematic concepts I saw in the film that I'd like to research later on is one clearly define what states actually compensate the wrongfully convinced because in the film they only mentioned that Flordia didn't compensate. Secondly, explain what exactly goes on in a case like this because in the film I only got a glimpse of it. Thirdly, explain why the system would rather cover up a case where someone is wrongfully convicted than actually helping them? Fourthly, include more statistics like how many men are convicted versus females because only men were highlighted in this film. Lastly, a follow up with each individual would be very helpful in answering the questions I still have, but also to show whether or not if justice in one way or another is attained.