Part 1
Until today, Jimmy affirms his innocence. After studying his case thoroughly, indeed there is no reason to doubt his innocence. We firmly believe that this is the wrong man in prison! Documents from lawyers, eyewitness testimony and police documents that we have read and studied prove this. There is simply no reason to believe that Jimmy had anything to do with this crime.
1) No evidence
There is no stalwart piece of evidence linking Jimmy to the crime or showing that Jimmy had something to do with it. The murder weapon has never been found. Even though no gun was found among Jimmy’s possessions, the prosecutor used a “model” gun in order to not be in front of court with empty hands and to at least present some kind of physical evidence, even though there wasn't any. He showed this “model” gun to witnesses and asked them if they had seen a gun like that on the day that the victim was shot and killed. The “model” gun resembled with the gun they remembered. By representing an evidence weapon “similar” to the one used in the murder, jurors naturally tend to infer a connection between the weapon and the murder simply from a mere viewing of the material object, although such a connection is not proven. The prosecutor used this method to confuse the jurors to link Jimmy to the crime, pretending to have evidence where there was none.
The jury was left with the impression that there was physical evidence against Jimmy.
Furthermore, the stolen earrings have never been recovered. They have never been in Jimmy’s possession.
A button had been ripped off of the victim’s clothes. Until recently, this was not examined for fingerprints. Meanwhile (about 14 years later!) the defense finally received approval for forensic testing on the button. Unfortunately, no fingerprints or DNA evidence were found on the button. Consequently, the real perpetrator was not conveyed through the button. But these test results also show that Jimmy’s fingerprints cannot be found on the button, either. Again, there is no stalwart piece of evidence against Jimmy.
In addition, the getaway car of the three perpetrators has never been found. Jimmy neither had a license nor did he own a car.
Conclusion: There isn’t any physical evidence that links Jimmy to the crime: no DNA traces, no fingerprints, no murder weapon, no stolen earrings, no getaway car, simply no single proof that can be held against Jimmy.
2) Conflicting testimonies of witnesses
The witnesses’ descriptions of the perpetrator in their statements and testimonies do not match with Jimmy’s physical appearance. Witnesses described the perpetrator as being at least 5'9" or 5'10" tall and about 180 pounds. Also, the skin colour of the perpetrator has been described as being very dark. Jimmy on the other hand is only about 5'4" and weighed approximately 130 pounds at the time of the murder. A clear fact that can not be disclaimed! Also, his skin complexion is not as dark as descriptions given by eyewitnesses. Two of the three witnesses (the third one didn’t give any statements of the physical appearance of the perpetrators in his first statement) that later identified Jimmy at trial, described the perpetrator in their original statements as being 5'9" or 5'10" tall and depicted him as being significantly heavier than Jimmy was at the time of the murder.
Thus, it is inapprehensible why those witnesses identified the much smaller and lighter Jimmy (even the guards on death row call him “Shorty”!) as being the perpetrator, while his appearance doesn’t match their previous descriptions. In addition, all three witnesses had only been able to see the perpetrator for a few seconds.
The prosecutor, Roger King, tried to distract the jury by saying "We're talking about the right to take public transportation...'Cause this is what this case is about, ladies and gentlemen. It's not about race, it's not about size and height…"
So the Jury had to balance – did the witnesses correctly identify Jimmy as the perpetrator and only were mistaken in their original physical descriptions of the perpetrator, or did the witnesses identify the wrong person but originally were accurate in their description of the perpetrator’s appearance? The jury decided to go with the first version.
Today, studies show that witnesses are more likely to make a mistake when identifying someone rather than make a mistake when describing physical features. A crime which takes place within a short amount of seconds such as this case - often lead to wrong identifications. To read more about that, go to:
http://jimmydennis.org/eyewitnessidentificationinvolvingstrangers.html
According to one of the three witnesses that burdened Jimmy in front of court, there were at least 50 witnesses that have been present at the crime. Nevertheless, only three witnesses testified at trial. Thus, witnesses that could have provided hints on the true perpetrator, and also would have been willing to testify in front of court and to exculpate Jimmy, were not heard.
In the evidentiary hearing of May 2005, witness George Ritchie underlines again, that Jimmy is not the perpetrator.
The three witnesses identifying Jimmy as the shooter in court:
Zahra Howard, Thomas Bertha, James Cameron
Zahra Howard: She went with victim Chedell Williams to purchase a subway ticket when two men demanded Chedell William’s earrings. Ms Howard stated the shooter was as tall as or a little taller than the police officer, who questioned her. Therefore, the perpetrator had to be 5'9" or taller. At the Preliminary Hearing, she stated she saw the perpetrator’s face for about 5 seconds.
When shown a photo spread and asked to identify the murderer, she selected Jimmy’s picture but clearly was insecure about her choice. She stated: “This one looks like the guy, but I can’t be sure”.
Statement Zahra Howard 10-25-1991
Statement Zahra Howard Preliminary Hearing
Thomas Bertha: He testified at court that he gave police the statement that the perpetrator was about 5'9" and weighed approximately 180 pounds. He saw the perpetrator’s face for only a single second according to his testimony at the preliminary hearing.
Statement Thomas Bertha: (1) (2)
James Cameron: Though he didn’t give any description of the height or weight of the perpetrator in his statement to police, he testified at the preliminary hearing that he was only able to see the perpetrator’s face for a very short time (about 20 seconds). He also stated that there were up to 50 witnesses present. When shown a photo spread, James Cameron stated, "Number one looks familiar [Jimmy Dennis] but I can't be sure." This also shows that he was not very confident when he identified Jimmy.
3) Additional witnesses exonerating Jimmy have not been heard
The defence failed to call additional witnesses to court. Those included David LeRoy, Dr. Clarence Verdell, George Ritchie and Anissa Bane.
David LeRoy described the perpetrator as 5’10” and taller than the victim. He refused to select anyone from the police’s photo spreads, saying “I will not make an identification that could wrongly affect someone’s life.”
Dr.Clarence Verdell selected several suspects from the photo spread.
George Ritchie also described the assailant as being 5’9” or 5’10” in height and weighting about 170 to 190 pounds.
He told the police he would definetly be able to recognize the perpetrator again. During a new evidentiary hearing in May 2005 George Ritchie clearly stated that Jimmy was not the perpetrator.
To conclude, out of the approximately 50 witnesses, only 3 spoke at trial. This does not only speak for the miserable investigation work, but also shows that important witnesses, which would have testified for Jimmy’s innocence, did not get a chance to contribute to the clarification of the case.
Those three witnesses, that supposedly recognized Jimmy as the perpetrator in court, described the suspect in their original statements as being much taller and heavier than Jimmy is.
Also, the fact that witnesses could only see the murderer for a couple of seconds leads to reasonable doubt towards their identification of Jimmy as the perpetrator.
| Description of the perpetrator |
| witness Howard: described the perpetrator as 5’9“ or taller (about 1,80m or taller) |
| witness Bertha: described the perpetrator as 5’9“(about 1,80m) and as ca. 180pounds (about 80kg) |
| witness LeRoy: described the perpetrator as 5’10“ or taller than 5’10“, the victim’s height (about 1,85m) |
| witness Ritchie: described the perpetrator as about 5’9“ or 5’10“ (approximately between 1,80m and 1,85m) and between 170-190 pounds (approximately between 75 und 85kg) |
Jimmy, on the other hand, is only 5’4“(about 1,65m) and his weight at that time was approximately 130 pounds (less than 60kg)!!
4) Charles Thompson: A critical prosecutor’s witness who later admitted he lied
Charles Thompson was a member of Jimmy’s singing group “Sensation”.
On November 8 , 1991, he stated that he saw Jimmy with a gun on the night of the murder during singing rehearsal. He also stated this at trial. According to Mr. Thompson, he observed Jimmy with a silver .38 calibre gun that resembled the gun Ms. Williams was shot with. Mr. Thompson therefore provided the only link between missing physical evidence and Jimmy and thus connected Jimmy to the crime directly.
On January 24 ,1996 though, he recanted this statement and admitted that he had lied. He rectifies that he never saw Jimmy with a gun and that he didn’t have any hints of Jimmy being involved with this crime. Thompson said “It was in my conscience, I couldn’t sleep and get it out of my mind. It was like a monkey on my back.” However, Thompson said that the prosecutor, Roger King, told him prior to the trial that nothing could be changed in his statement.
During his statement in November of 1991 he felt so much pressure through the police that he saw no other way but to lie. In addition, Charles Thompson was accused for an unrelated crime at that time and was expecting help, in return for cooperating with them. After Charles Thompson made his statement against Jimmy, he has never been held responsible for the unrelated crime he was accused for. Thus, we have reason to believe he made a deal with the police in return for his statement.
Moreover, the other members from the group, Marc Nelson, James Smith and Willis Meredith, all testified in court that Charles Thompson was lying and that they never had seen Jimmy with a gun.
Therefore the only link between Jimmy and the murder provided by Mr. Thompson was a lie and no evidence between Jimmy and the crime exists!
Statement Charles Thompson: Recantation 1996
5) Jimmy’s alibi
Jimmy’s alibi is verified by 4 other persons. At the time of the crime, Jimmy had left his dad’s apartment and was riding a bus.
Willis Meredith, LaTanya “Tammy” Cason, James Murray and Anissa Bane can all substantiate Jimmy’s alibi.
LaTanya Cason may be the most important witness. She is not related to Jimmy nor was she a close friend; therefore, she had no motivation to lie.
Jimmy stated that after he talked to his dad at his home on the day of the crime, they walked up to the bus stop. Jimmy’s father supports his testimony. He said Jimmy took the K-bus to Abbotsford Homes at approximately 1:50pm-1:52pm. This collaborates with the time that the crime took place. Jimmy testified that he saw Latanya Cason, an acquaintance, when she entered the bus. Cason remembered seeing Jimmy after they both exited the bus. But she testified that it must have been around 4:00pm or 4:30pm. Through this testimony she destroyed Jimmy’s alibi. Jimmy’s statement and the statements of the other witnesses were put into question.
But Jimmy was not lying. Cason made a mistake in her testimony on the time she saw Jimmy, which can be proven.
Cason assumed that she had worked that day until 2pm, though she did not have a fixed working schedule. This was the time she usually left work and therefore she assumed it had been the same on this specific day. After work she went to the Department of Public Welfare to cash a check. She testified that she was waiting in line to cash her check at approximately 3:00pm or 3:30pm.
On the basis of receipts of the Department of Public Welfare it has been proven that Cason actually cashed her check significantly earlier than she thought she did. The check was stamped at 13:03 in military time which is 1:03pm. Therefore, Ms Cason had left work earlier that day than she believed. Since she stated she saw Jimmy about 1 hour to 1 hour and a half after cashing her check Jimmy’s testimony is true. Because she cashed her check at 13:03, which has been proven, she would have seen Jimmy around 2pm or 2:30pm, and not, like she previously wrongfully thought, between 4pm and 4.30pm. The police and prosecutor knew of the true time when Cason cashed her check because they had copies of the receipt, but they did not inform Cason of this. Cason did not know herself what the time on her check said, since it was stamped in military time and she was not aware of how to read this. At trial Jimmy’s previous attorney, Lee Mandell, failed to properly investigate the background of Cason’s testimony. Would he have requested a copy of the receipt of the check he would have been able to point out that Jimmy was telling the truth and Cason was mistaken on the time.
The fact that the district attorney had a copy of the check and knew of the correct time but yet didn’t correct Cason's statement again shows the corrupt and unfair methods being used in this case to convict an innocent man.
Anissa Bane had talked to Jimmy on the phone shortly before the crime happened. She was willing to testify at trial but was never called to speak. Jimmy's previous attorney, Lee Mandell, never tried to talk to her even though she contacted him many times. Thus, no one ever investigated her phone records, which now – 14 years later- cannot be recovered as too much time has passed by. Would Lee Mandell have called her back and called her as a witness at trial, investigating her phone records, it would have been proven that Jimmy had been on the phone with her while he was at his father's house, shortly before he entered the bus where he later saw LaTanya Cason, the other alibi witness. Anissa Bane was finally called to speak at the latest hearing in May 2005. She supports Jimmy's alibi that he had been at his father's house around the time of the crime. She was able to recognize this, as she could hear his father in the background.
