48 Hours - Star Witness

Episode Date: August 20, 2026

Are they guilty of terrible crimes or are they victims themselves?  "48 Hours" examines two separate reports: Gloria Killian, who was arrested for a robbery-homicide she claimed she did not commit, and Clarence Elkins, who was incarcerated for the murder of his mother-in-law but maintained his innocence. "48 Hours" correspondents Peter Van Sant and Susan Spencer report.This classic "48 Hours" episode last aired on 9/13/2003. Watch all-new episodes of “48 Hours” on Saturdays and stream on demand on Paramount+.

This man is in prison for life because of the testimony of a six-year-old child, his own niece. With no physical evidence, Clarence Elkins was convicted of murdering his mother-in-law. I thought I was my Uncle Clarence. Case closed? Not by a long shot. Now, five years later, the little girl is changing her story. Do you think it was Uncle Clarence? At first, yeah. Susan Spencer investigates, is an innocent man behind bars?

It is outrageous what they have done to this child. And Gloria Killian was on her way to becoming a lawyer. She ended up in prison for masterminding a robbery homicide. I just kept thinking, this can't be happening. It can't be happening. The key witness? A career criminal. Would you have believed his story?

Quote, I even lied my ass off on the stand for you people. 16 years later, she's out. But for how long? Peter Van Sant reports prosecutors want to put Gloria right back in jail. I would rather die and go back to prison. 48 hours investigates. Star Witness.

Gloria Killian has waited a long time for this moment. It's the most beautiful sight on earth. 16 years and four months, to be exact. It's hard to believe looking at her, but that's how long she was locked away. We're going to recal. Here in a California state prison. I would rather die than go back to prison.

What's more, it was for a robbery murder, Gloria says she didn't commit. I'm innocent. I did not plan the robbery. I did not know those people. I was not involved. And I'm not the perpetrator. And I'm really here! She's not out of prison today because she was found to be innocent. A technicality has gotten her out. You can say that.

Lana Wyant is with the district attorney's office in Sacramento, California. She wants Gloria back in jail. We're convinced that she was the mastermind of this murder. Rosewood Drive is a sleepy street in the Rose Mott section of Sacramento. The crime Gloria was convicted of occurred in 1981. Two burglars apparently searching for what could have been gold in the house. In this quiet, middle-class neighborhood of Rosemont, California near Sacramento. The place had been ransacked.

and things thrown out of the closet in search of... Detective Stan Reed, now retired, was among the first to arrive on the scene. Drawers pulled out things on the floor, closets in disray. Two men had broken into the home of 71-year-old Ed Davies, a coin collector who kept gold and silver in his house. Davies was found dead on his kitchen floor,

shot twice to the head, once at point-blank range. saw my face, you die. You die. No witnesses. No witnesses. Within days, authorities acting on a tip. This is a photograph of Gary Massey at the time of his arrest. Arrested career criminal Gary Massey and charged him with the Davies murder. How did you find out about the crime? I saw it on television, and that's really all that I remember about it. Divorced in her mid-30s, Gloria had almost finished law school, but decided to to take time off to enjoy life.

I love to go to clubs. I love to party, love to dance. So I went out a lot, went out a lot. Was this a wild time for you? You could say that. You could say that. I knew some people I should not have known. And one of those people was a friend of Gary Massey,

the man arrested for the Davies murder. Gloria says she never knew Massey. But when the anonymous tip mentioned her name and his together, she was arrested. They cuffed me and took me away. What's going through your mind? Panic, hysteria. I have no idea what is happening to me, and I'm terrified.

But detectives didn't buy her claims of innocence after they discovered a notebook in her purse, including this address, 8-933 Rosewood. Two doors from the victim's home. After her stating, she didn't know where that was. Also in the note, notebook, a list of items that could have been used in the crime, including rope. Mr. Davies' feet were tied with rope. And gloves.

Not one fingerprint was found that indicates to you that they wore gloves. They took some completely unrelated lists and phrases and cobbled them together to constitute what they called corroborating evidence. It was enough for authorities to charge Gloria with murder. with murder. But after spending three and a half months in jail awaiting trial, she was released. Charges are dropped? Yes. For lack of evidence. Yes. A year later, Gloria was re-arrested. What had changed? Well, what had changed is that Gary Massey went to trial. He was convicted on all counts, and he was sentenced to life without the possibility

of parole. But Massey's sentence was withdrawn and eventually reduced to 25 years to life. after he testified against Gloria, saying for the first time, she was the real mastermind behind the Davies murder. Gloria was convicted and sentenced to 32 years to life. You go from somebody who's working with a private investigator, three years law school, bright future, to what? Felon, convicted criminal, condemned. I just kept thinking this can't be happening.

It can't be happening. It can't be happening. But it's what happened to Gloria behind bars that makes her story so remarkable. Her passion for the law led to a job in the prison law library. In time, Gloria became the jailhouse attorney, advising her fellow inmates on everything

from parole hearings to appeals. To see her do all the paperwork, all the legal work, and knew that she had so much passion. I'm walking out of this prison soon, and I would not be doing that. without Gloria. It was what gave my life meaning,

and it's what kept me going. Gloria was Johnny Cock. Gloria coached Joyce Houston on how to best present herself to the parole board. I'll never forget her. Never. Her biggest triumph is Brenda Aris,

who was serving a life sentence for killing her husband, who repeatedly beat her. Lost my appeal and had no other resources, so I went to the law library crying, you know, what can I do now? Help me. Gloria sent out more than 6,000 letters on behalf of Brenda

and even published an article about her case in a law review. What was it about Brenda that made you want to help her? Because it was wrong. It was wrong. He broke my jaw. He cracked my ribs. He totally isolated me in the end. I'm not someone who sits around and advocates, oh, everybody in prison deserves to be out or anything like that. but there's so many injustices.

Gloria's efforts paid off. Eress's release six years ago marked the first time a battered woman who killed her husband was granted clemency in California. And that was... It was very powerful. Not because I did it,

but because it was right. So Brenda gets out, Joyce gets out. But Gloria's still in prison. Mm-hmm. There were periods of time when I was sure that I would never get out. I would never, ever get out, that no one would ever care what happened to me. But that would all change the day she met this 79-year-old widow from Pasadena. I am profoundly annoyed by injustice, and I just have to do something.

Let's go. I'm going straight for the cookie aisle. After spending 16 years in prison... I can't stand all the choice. A trip to the supermarket is a real adventure. Oh, my. Oh, well, I can't resist. For Gloria Killian.

Do you know how many years it's been since I've had raspberries? 16 years and four months? Probably longer than that. She would still be in prison, if not for this woman, a widow from Pasadena named Joyce Ride. My daughter's described me as the elderly widow Ride. You'll probably remember one of Ride's daughters. Lift off and the shuttle has cleared the tower.

America's first woman astronaut, Sally Ride. Roger your role, challenge, sir. It seems determination runs in the family. Joyce has been a volunteer visitor at women's prisons for years. I just go in as a friend and listen. In 1992, she listened to Gloria's story and believed it. Clearly, she was innocent of the crime. So at that point, I said, is it all right with you if I hire an investigator?

During the next 10 years, Rides spent nearly $100,000 of her own money to help Gloria. Why do you do it? I'm profoundly annoyed by injustice, and I just have to do something. Joyce hired Bill Genago, a lawyer who specializes in post-conviction appeals. He wasn't optimistic about Gloria's chances. Even if you think the person might have gotten an unfair trial, or even if you have a sense that the person is innocent, and that's just not good enough in and of itself. Janago's law clerk at the time, Lauren Escanazi,

was fresh out of law school and ready to take on the world. I was idealistic, and I was thinking, this is why I went to law school, and this is what it's all about, and I am just as eager as can be to just look at every single piece of paper. Gloria Killian's new legal team had always believed the prosecution cut a secret deal with Gary Massey. Remember, Massey's life sentence was reduced after he testified against Gloria. But in court, under oath, Massey denied any deal existed.

He got on the stand. He said, I don't have an agreement. I don't have any promises. But Janago was given a letter that suggested otherwise. It was written by Massey to the prosecutor's office just months after glorious conviction. In it, Massey refers to, quote, a verbal agreement about a lighter sentence and admits line on the witness. stand during Gloria's trial. Quote, I did my part all the way to the end. I even lied my ass off on the stand for you people. When you read those words,

I lied for you, I mean, this was powerful stuff. Right. But the problem was who's gonna believe him? Nobody's gonna believe Massey. He's not a believable guy. Genego knew he needed something else, something even bigger to overturn Gloria's conviction. After months and months,

months and months of digging through court documents, Lauren Escanazi found it. Bill jumps out of his seat. He's very, very excited and he's just like we found the smoking gun. It was another letter, this one written by the prosecutor in glorious case, addressed to the judge who was going to sentence Massey, saying that Massey's cooperation, quote, deserves consideration by the court. This case to me is about the lengths that at least this prosecutor was willing to go to, to get a conviction, absent really any evidence, any credible evidence. There was no verbal agreement with Gary Massey. Lanna Wyant is spokesperson for the Sacramento District Attorney's Office. Why did he think there was one? The only promise that was ever

made to Gary Massey was made to him by the Sheriff's Department, and that was to keep him safe. But he didn't write the Sheriff's Department. He wrote the DA's office about our verbal agreement. There was no such agreement. But what about the recommendation from the prosecutor to the judge, regarding Massey's sentence noted in that second letter. Wyant says that letter had been sealed by the court, and Massey never even saw it. Gary Massey did not know about the letter, so his testimony was not affected in any way by this letter.

But Janago says at the very least, the prosecutor should have handed over the letters to Killian's defense attorney. You know, in retrospect, the letter should have been disclosed, but it didn't matter. Gloria Killian is not actually innocent of the crimes for which she was convicted and her conviction does not lie on perjured testimony. But last year, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denounced the prosecution's conduct, finding that all the errors made were devastating to one's confidence in the reliability of this verdict.

The court set aside her conviction, and after 16 long years in prison, Gloria Killian was released. What was it going through your heart at that, mom? I mean, where you realized I'll be damned, I'm getting out of here? People that I didn't know that were jumping up and down and clapping, and it's like the whole unit is cheering for me. And it was a truly amazing moment. And I'm looking at people that I know are never supposed to get out of prison. And I steal for that tremendous outpouring of love and happiness.

and a hope that I can do something, that I can figure out a way to help everybody else. Specific, this way. And that's exactly what Gloria has been doing ever since her release. Most women in prison, that's the law in the state of California. I would phrase it as a woman's issue. Working full-time, raising money. All of you have contributed, and I'm so, so grateful. And people's consciousness about women behind bars.

She's innocent. I don't know how I would face replacing 20 years of my life. It had simply been wiped out. You have another date. Oh, my God. I came to understand the terrible things that happened to many, many women, and I knew I had to do something about it. I have no intention of turning my back on the people that I left behind.

Gloria Killian has proved true to her word. She recently started her own nonprofit organization called called Action Committee for Women in Prison, dedicated to helping other women who may be victims of injustice. Meanwhile, the Sacramento District Attorney's Office still reserves the right to retry Killian for the robbery and the homicide, but so far has taken no new steps to do so. Now, coming up...

The testimony of a six-year-old sends her uncle to prison for murder. You knew Uncle Clarence pretty well, right? Mm-hmm. But now, she's changing her story. It's one of the worst investigations I've ever seen. Will he be set free? It is outrageous what they have done to this child. This is a tedious job.

Right now, we are preparing the sleeves to go in the candles for the candlelight vigil. Four years ago, my mother was murdered on this day. She was a funny lady. She had a great sense of humor. For Melinda Elkins, the years go by, but the pain and the questions linger. You know, I talked to my mother the day before. I got to tell her I loved her. She cannot stop asking, who could have been so cold-blooded as to want her mother dead.

I miss her. And I know she's not at rest. I thank you for all the blessings that you've given us. given us. And it was a violent death. Fifty-eight-year-old Judith Johnson and her six-year-old granddaughter were at her modest home outside Akron, Ohio, that June night in 1998. Not one of much emergency. Yes, I need an ambulance and the police. Then stabbed. Stabbed, beaten, strangled, and sexually assaulted. I love you, mom. Also assaulted was the six-year-old. Melinda's niece, but the little girl lived.

And she lived to tell a shocking story, that the man who had killed her grandmother was none other than her uncle, Clarence Elkins, Melinda's husband. Within a few hours, police had arrested him and charged him with the murder. And today, 40-year-old Clarence Elkins sits in prison for life, convicted largely on the word of his own niece, for there never was one shred of physical evidence linking him to this bloody crime. I'm not a violent person whatsoever, and I did not do this crime. I'm totally and completely innocent. You didn't kill your mother-in-law.

No, I did not. Categorically, you know nothing about this at all. You were home to sleep. No knowledge. No knowledge. But the jury disagree. I'm going to set the table. Today, Clarence, a steel press operator with no record of violence.

sits in prison. And that's something his two sons, Clarence Jr., now 20, and Brandon, now 17, still have a hard time accepting. Thank you for this food. Thank you for this day. You know, not to have a dad in your teen years, you lose your childhood. That's what happened to me in Clarence. We lost their childhood. How are your sons doing through all this? I can only imagine. I'm just sure they're struggling. and I miss special time in their lives. Did I never get back? Okay, let's carry the stuff out.

For more than four years, Melinda Elkins has campaigned to convince the world of her husband's innocence. With her in-laws financial help, over $100,000 so far, Melinda hired Martin Yant, a private investigator who has helped overturn eight convictions. It was really abysmal. It's one of the worst investigations. I've ever seen.

An immense amount of evidence was overlooked inside as well as outside. And in this very bloody crime scene, he says, some of that evidence might have provided the killer's fingerprints or DNA. If only police had bothered to test it. There are defensive blows on her arms. Finger nails are ripped off, indicating that she possibly scratched the person. What little testing was done didn't implicate Elkins. In fact, to the contrary.

Lab reports obtained by 48 hours show that two hairs found on Judith Johnson's buttocks definitely did not belong to Clarence Elkins. The little bit of evidence they did bring forth to the trial. It excluded me. The state said it excluded him and his family. It doesn't add up. It doesn't add up. Clarence said he had an alibi for that night,

that he'd gone to several. bars before going home. But at the trial, Melinda's six-year-old niece, whom we've agreed not to identify, was a powerful eyewitness. The jury heard the desperate message she left on a neighbor's answering machine. By the time the child told her mother, Melinda's sister April, what had happened, the attacker was no longer somebody. It was Uncle Clarence. She knew who he was. She knows the sound of his voice. I mean, what was I supposed to do? I had to believe my daughter. I ran by my grandmother's couch and I peaked in the kitchen.

What could you see when you peaked in the kitchen? I saw a man standing over my grandmother yelling at her. You were scared? Yes. Did you think you knew who it was? Yes. And what did you think? I thought it was my Uncle Clarence.

And you knew Uncle Clarence pretty well, right? Mm-hmm. Did you have any reason to think that your grandmother and Uncle Clarence? Uncle Clarence didn't like each other? No, but the people were fighting over money. In court, the sweet, curly-haired little girl was absolutely sure and absolutely convincing. You know, only thing I could think of was mistaken identity

or persuaded by someone. I don't know. You know, it was not an easy decision. It was a very emotional decision. I mean, most of the jury was crying. Roger Owen and Arniece Rice were on the jury that convicted Elkins. Did that trouble the people on the jury, that there was not a shred of forensic evidence linking this guy to this crime? It was disgust, but it all came back to the little girl.

Towards the end of her testimony when she said, why would Uncle Clarence hurt me in the bedroom? I mean, that, to me, was, you know, damaging. That really got to you. Yes, because from her testimony, it was he was close enough. to her, why would she be mistaken if it wasn't him? She knows him. And prosecutor Mike Carroll remains sure to this day that the right man is behind bars. Trust me, based on the evidence and based on everything I know, he did it. There was hatred between Judy Johnson and Clarence Elkins.

I mean, this guy is not the jackal. I mean, how could he possibly have committed this crime and left absolutely no trace. I won't say left no trace because we did have the witness, but once he leaves the house, if he does have bloody clothing or shoes or whatever, all he has to do is dispose of. But Clarence Elkins' new attorney, Elizabeth Kelly, hopes to reopen this case with a remarkable development

that seems too good to be true. Why did you say it was Uncle Clarence? Because it looked like him. It looked like him. The prosecution's star witness, Clarence Elkins' niece, now 10 years old, has recanted her original testimony, saying she never was sure to begin with that it was her Uncle Clarence who attacked her. But do you think it was Uncle Clarence?

At first, yeah. At first, yeah. But do you think so today? No. Okay. So if Uncle Clarence didn't do it, who did? The Elkins team says they think they know. I'm angry. I'm very angry and sad at the same time.

I mean, how can they convict a person with DNA evidence that excludes him completely? It doesn't add up. My mother is still laying six feet in the ground and someone other than my husband has murdered her. for justice. Melinda Elkins has no doubt in her mind that her husband Clarence is innocent of the murder of her mother, Judith Johnson. But a jury found him guilty, and Melinda needs new evidence to get a new trial. This is the suspect that you have in mind. That's right. Martin Yant, the private eye Melinda hired, says his own investigation has convinced him not only that Clarence Elkins did not commit this gruesome murder,

but that this man did, 29-year-old Ryle Rush, whom Yant describes as a Clarence Elkins look alike. Now, this is a picture of Clarence. Correct. That was taken at his arraignment the day after his arrest. You think these two guys look alike? I do. Both have facial hair. Their haircuts are somewhat similar. When you're talking about a six-year-old girl, seeing somebody in a darkened house, I can see how that mistake could be made. All right, Ryle, let's go.

Ryle and Johnson did know each other. They're seen here dancing at a friend's wedding. But Yant claims Rush was interested in more than friendship, that he had a crush on the much older woman and that Johnson's rejection could be a motive for the murder. Yant also says Rush, who lived in Johnson's neighborhood, was known to carry a club like this one for protection. It's a pool queue that was sold off at both ends.

And that the six-year-old girl who survived the attack said the man was carrying just such a club. Clarence Elkins' attorney Elizabeth Kelly claims the most damning piece of circumstantial evidence. That's outside of the funeral home. Okay. Is ironically a police surveillance video. Shot the day of Judith Johnson's funeral. Whoa. Exactly.

That man does not want to be seen. Kelly says it shows Rush had deep scratches on his face and hand. Where's the scratch on the cheek? On the cheek. And you say his finger has a bandage on it? She wants police to collect a sample of Ryle Rush's DNA. To see if it matches DNA from the two hairs found on Judith Johnson's buttocks, ones that did not match Clarence Elkins.

You characterize this as though this necessarily means that he's a guilty man. We filed a petition naming Mr. Rush based on overwhelming evidence that shows that he is the murderer. It is not something we did lightly. I'm a nice guy. I'm a nice guy. I go to work and back on. Not looking for trouble. Right.

Rush, a factory worker, has served jail time for disorderly conduct. But he insists that in this case, he doesn't. too is an innocent man. Did you kill Judy Johnson? No. You didn't have any kind of crush on Judy Johnson? No. Did you ever ask her out? Joke around yeah, but it was a joke. Rush denies he ever carried a club, and as for those scratches, he claims they were from rough sex with a woman he met at a bar. Prosecutor Mike Carroll. In investigating this, to your knowledge, did the name Ryle Rush ever come up? Never. You sort of laughed at that.

Well, I've been going through this now for a fair amount of time, and I think it's very unfair to Mr. Rush that this has been put upon him, you know, after the fact. But no, it did not. I mean, they're just grasping at straws now. They are desperate people trying to get this guy out of prison, even though he committed this crime. But the Elkins defense team insists prosecutors cannot ignore a stunning development in this case. The prosecution's own star eyewitness, the little girl, who's now 10, has seen a photo of Ryle Rush, and she now says that he looks like the man who attacked her.

And she claims that she was never as sure as she may have seemed four years ago when she sat in this very courtroom and pointed a finger at her uncle Clarence. I remember the face of the guy that was there and it looked like Ryle. Are you assured this time that it's not Uncle Clarence? Yeah. Really? Yeah. The defense videotaped the little girl's new deposition. I thought I made the guy, but then I was scared because he was a guy and I was so little.

Okay. Do you think today that Uncle Clarence was the same man, you see? saw in the kitchen that night with your grandma? No. You know, why would these things just suddenly occur to her? I couldn't tell you that. I couldn't answer that. The other side would intend that she's now being coached.

I don't believe that whatsoever. I believe she wants to tell the truth. It's probably been on her mind from the beginning. It is outrageous what they have done to this child. But prosecutor Mike Carroll is suspicious of the child's sudden change of heart. You're absolutely sure that she was coached. Oh, absolutely.

The driving force behind all this is Melinda Elkins, who just likes to be the center of attention. Somehow the child changes her story. We have been telling her to tell the truth, not what we want to hear. But isn't it perfectly obvious to her what you want to hear? Yes, I think it is, the truth. When did you realize that you weren't sure anymore?

I started remembering things. when I went over to Miami's house. I saw a picture of my uncle Clarence. He has blue eyes. I remembered brown eyes. What's also troubling to the prosecution is that these new details emerged only after the defense had the little girl hypnotized. Legally, hypnotism is looked upon with great disfavor.

He dangles a watch in front of her and says you're getting sleepy. and then she changes her story, to me it's a Las Vegas act. I don't blame people for being suspicious about the recantation. Dr. Elizabeth Loftus at UC Irvine is an expert on eyewitness testimony. When you hypnotize someone, by definition, they are in a heightened state of suggestion and suggestibility. And Dr. Loftus points to two very troubling statements in the child's recantation. Why are you talking to me today about? the night that your grandma died? Because we got more information? Well that is at least

evidence that she is getting fed other information, not deliberately necessarily, but that she's being exposed to it. Do you think he was the same man who punched you in the cheek? No. And why do you think that? Because he would never do that to me and my grandma and they loved each other. They loved each other. Is this something that she thought of on her own? Is this something she overheard other family members saying? I mean, it's really hard to know.

But it's also hard to know, according to Loftus, if the child was coached the first time around, before she took the witness stand. Something happened between her saying, somebody killed my grandma and Uncle Clarence, And Loftus says this very traumatized child could just have been trying to please the adults around her by identifying a suspect. I mean, if I were a judge in this case, I'd be wanting some more physical evidence because the little girl is not giving us a good answer to this problem. What do you want to happen next?

I want my uncle plans to get out of jail. You think he might get out of jail now? Yeah. But it will be up to a judge to decide if this child's testimony, is more reliable now than it was four years ago. And whether the lack of forensic evidence itself is enough to set Clarence Elkins free. That's next.

I hate coming down here. Every time I do, I get nervous and angry. The thought of him in there, it's like, you know, this isn't real. It's a nightmare. Melinda Elkins dreads this road trip every time she takes it. Four tedious hours to the Ohio Prison,

where her husband Clarence sits. Sentence to life for the murder of Melinda's own mother. I feel victimized by the system. But she hangs on to the hope that she may not have to make this trip much longer. It's just so hard leaving him there. The same judge who presided over Clarence's trial for the murder of Melinda's mother now has agreed to hold a hearing on the defense claims that new evidence warrants giving Clarence a new trial,

if not setting him free altogether. I lost four years of my life and my families being together because I'm falsely accused and wrongly convicted. You think this time around a judge will be convinced of that? I'm hoping he will. I'm trusting he will. When the day arrives, emotions understandably are at the breaking point. Though the two Elkins' son,

steal themselves, seeing their father in shackles is too much. The courtroom is packed. Defense Attorney Elizabeth Kelly begins by presenting her case against Ryle Rush. We have discovered a man who looks like Clarence Elkins, sounds like Clarence Elkins, and who in all probability murdered Judith Johnson. we have pending before this court a motion to obtain a hair sample from this alternative suspect. But Judge John Adams insists he has no legal authority to order a DNA sample from Rush. What about his constitutional rights? He hasn't been charged with any offense at this point in time.

All I have is the information gathered by your private investigator. That's sufficient for me to order sampling to be done to this individual. Kelly then cites a laundry list of potential evidence from the crime scene that never even was tested by police. Failure to test items in the kitchen. Failure to test a bloody fingerprint. They failed to test the fingernail scrapings from Mrs. Johnson. But Assistant District Attorney Richard Kaysay insists jury members were well aware of the lack

of physical evidence tying Elkins to the crime. And it didn't seem to bother them. The jury heard it. The jury considered it. The jury found Mr. Elkins guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. What clinched it for the jury was the testimony of the child eyewitness. That child, Kelly argues, now has recanted, saying she was wrong. Do you think it was Uncle Clarence?

At first, yeah. At first, yeah. But do you think so today? No. Judge Adams has real doubts about this recantation. It would be reprehensible if a child who has been the victim of a brutal sexual assault witnessed the killing of her grandmother was being manipulated to free an individual who was guilty. With those ominous words, the hearing ends.

Truth, justice. And all the family can do now is wait for the judge's ruling. Summer's grass is covered with snow before the decision comes down, four agonizing months later. We're scared, but we're hopeful. I'm hoping for fairness today. I'm hoping that he at least will allow us to have another chance. Hello. A local newspaper reporter calls from the courthouse with word of a ruling.

Hi, Karen. The news is devastating. The judge has denied the defense's motion for a new trial. I have a bench. Oh, my going to talk class. Try to prepare. yourself for this there's no preparation none hello Melinda breaks the news to her husband who calls from prison he denied the motion

Clarence I don't even know to say oh what worry that much judge Adams has rejected the child's recantation calling it unreliable and having presided over the original trial he said the jury knew all about the absence of physical evidence, and it still found Clarence guilty. I think he's afraid if we get another chance in court, we're going to prove ourselves right. As for Ryle Rush, the judge says it's up to prosecutors to decide if they want to investigate him. Meanwhile, Melinda Elkins vows to take her battle next to federal court, insisting this fight is far from over.

Maybe years down the road we're still be fighting, but I can't give up and I won't. In 2005, Clarence Elkins was exonerated and released from prison. DNA evidence implicated Judith Johnson's neighbor, Earl Mann, as her killer. In 2008, he pleaded guilty to murder and rape and was sentenced to 55 years to life in prison.