Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 03/17/2026 10:49:22 PM PDT by xxqqzz
Miami Twp. continues to face responsibility for paying a $45 million verdict to a man wrongfully convicted for more than two decades after the U.S. Supreme Court denied a request to review the case.
Miami Twp. previously asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a $45 million verdict awarded to Dean Gillispie, who spent more than 20 years in prison for sexual assaults he didn’t commit and later sued over constitutional violations in the investigation that led to his wrongful conviction.
Miami Twp. submitted a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, which, if it had been approved, would have asked the lower federal court to send up the record of the case for review. A writ of certiorari is a legal tool meant to address potential errors or constitutional questions among lower courts.
That petition was denied on Monday.
“We are grateful, but not at all surprised, that the Supreme Court has sided with Mr. Gillispie and allowed Judge Rose’s orders to stand,” a statement from Gillispie’s attorneys, David Owens and Mike Kanovitz of Loevy & Loevy, reads.
Gillispie of Fairborn spent more than 20 years behind bars for sexual assaults he didn’t commit following an investigation by former Miami Twp. detective Matthew Moore.
In 2008, Gillispie sought and received a new trial claiming evidence — including the identification of an alternative suspect and police reports possibly eliminating him as a suspect — were never turned over to his attorneys.
State and federal courts, along with the Ohio Supreme Court, released Gillispie, exonerated him and admitted he had been “wrongly imprisoned.”
Gillispie was freed from prison in 2011 after a federal judge ruled that the reports were never provided to his trial attorney.
In 2013, Gillispie filed a lawsuit, challenging his wrongful conviction. s
(Excerpt) Read more at daytondailynews.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
In certain states, Virginia, Texas, New Hampshire, and Maine, government has sovereign immunity. That can sometimes be gotten around, but hard to collect multimillions in those states.
Stupid should hurt.
I’d be good with Matthew Moore actual 20 sentence ..
It appears after reading some entries in the Federal docket for the case that Detective Matthew Scott Moore’s actions in the case were inept and wrongful but not in bad faith. If they were in bad faith he could have been liable personally for the jury award.
In the end, Miami Township is going to have to pay.
They prove reasonable doubt.
I have no argument with that.
Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is a time honored legal standard I support and defend.
I do have a problem with a $45 million punitive settlement that bankrupts a small town.
He should be required to prove he is innocent before he gets that much money.
Wut??
A bit harsh given SA are some of the most pernicious charges to defend against.
I personally think the standard for SA needs a little higher threshold, like timing of the claim closer to the actual event and actual physical evidence that can be connected to the defendant.
I have no idea if this guy’s case had any of that, just a general opinion of mine.
1. You can never prove innocence. You can only prove guilt. The assumption is always innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.
2. 20 years of his life for $45M is the bill in this case. His entire life was taken from him for something that he did not do. The penalty for government should be like it is for citizenry. Make it hurt enough that you dont do stupid chit again.
They denied him evidence to defend himself, and clear himself.
Terrible.
Prove innocence?
How patently ridiculous a statement. Let’s just turn the whole of the American criminal justice system on its head...Sheesh!
How about reforming the criminal elements of SA and requiring actual physical evidence in order to prosecute? And, a narrower statute of limitations.
Key evidence that exonerated Gillispie included:
Withheld Alibi Evidence: Detectives failed to disclose receipts and documentation showing Gillispie was camping in Kentucky when some of the crimes occurred.
Contaminated Eyewitness Identification: A detective used suggestive, unfair, and non-standard photo lineup procedures to pressure victims into identifying Gillispie.
Suppressed Evidence: Law enforcement failed to turn over evidence to the defense, including reports that would have undermined the testimony of the witnesses.
Lack of Physical Evidence: No forensic evidence, such as DNA or fingerprints, ever linked Gillispie to the crimes.
Alibi Evidence: Receipts from a camping trip showed Gillispie was in Kentucky during two of the three attacks.
Original Suspect Eliminated: Early reports from two detectives concluded Gillispie did not match the victims’ physical descriptions and had no criminal history, but these findings were never shared with the defense.
Lost Forensic Samples: Hair samples recovered from the crime scenes were initially claimed to be lost but were later found and excluded Gillispie as the source.
Suggestive Photo Lineups: Gillispie’s photo was purposefully made to stand out; it was larger, closer-up, had a different colored background (yellow vs. blue), and a matte finish compared to the other photos.
Coerced Identification: The detective allegedly claimed a witness had identified Gillispie when she actually had not.
Misleading Information: To explain why victims might not recognize him in court, the detective falsely told witnesses that Gillispie might have dyed his hair.
Their insurance carrier went bankrupt in the 1990’s from other instances. I would be curious to see if this was somehow a pattern. When an officer or department sets a mind of guilt in the investigation, they have been known to break the law to get the conviction.
He was exonerated by the courts including the Ohio Supreme Court, that's about as close to proving his innocence as your likely to find in our legal system. They took 20 years of his life for a crime he didn't commit because the cops framed him, and the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence. Just how much should he have gotten for spending 20 years in prison, $1, $1,000, $1,000,000 or...? A federal court determined $45,000,000 was the amount, and SCOTUS agreed.
It sounds like the prosecution purposely acted in bad faith.
I watch a lot of true crime, and this happens. Cops, DAs, etc., put their focus on one suspect and it’s just easy for them to trudge ahead with that one in mind. They might have to start the investigation over again if another suspect is identified. That would be haaaard for lazy people.
“... the identification of an alternative suspect and police reports possibly eliminating him as a suspect — were never turned over to his attorneys.”
For me, being accused of something I didn’t do is one of the worst things, even if it’s very small. Imagine cooling your heels in prison for 20 years, wrongly. Horrible.
It should be paid out of the police pension fund.
Our legal system works on reasonable doubt not proving innocent.
Proving innocence is nearly impossible in most situations.
When an officer or department sets a mind of guilt in the investigation, they have been known to break the law to get the conviction.
I am curious because I am not familiar with the specifics here. The prosecution withheld evidence. Did the police actually withhold evidence to the prosecution, or did the DA make the call. If the DA made the call, blaming the police officer is just scapegoating.
First from the pockets of the officers and prosecutors involved. THEN the pension fund. Then any other assets of the local FOP. Hit the voters only after the actual miscreants have paid.
A sworn officer laughingly referred to “ testilieing” i a conversation with me many years ago.
Bad or lazy police have always been a problem.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.