Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 1200 | Exposing the Innocence Project: Fake Evidence, Dark Funding & Protecting Monsters

Starting point is 00:00:00 If you are looking to refinance or maybe you are looking to get into the home that you need or your family wants right now, then you need to call my friends at Fellowship Home Loans. Mike and Brian are the real deal. They are going to bring you excellent service and help you get in the financial position that you need to maybe get some extra margin in your finances. If you need to refinance or to make sure that you get the mortgage that you need for the home that you are looking to purchase, They do their business by the book, not just by the book, but by the book, but by biblical principles. Those are the kind of people that you want to trust with such a big decision like this. If you go to fellowshiphomeloans.com, you'll get $500 of credit at closing.

Starting point is 00:00:46 That's fellowship homelones.com slash alley, term supply, see site for details, fellowship home loans, mortgage lending by the book, nationwide mortgage bankers, DBA Fellowship Home Loans, equal housing lender, NMLS, number 819382. A man who was released from prison because of the efforts of the Innocence Project has now been arrested for the possession of child sex abuse material. This is just the most recent example of criminals who have been advocated for by the Innocence Project who have gone on to re-offend. And actually, the Innocence Project has a very long history of defending those who, beyond a reason, doubt have committed heinous crimes, including the rape and the murder of children. And today we are exposing the Innocence Project.

Starting point is 00:01:40 Who is actually funding them, the ideology behind them, the truth behind some of the most prominent cases that they have been involved in, including a recent Texas case of a man named Robert Robertson. He narrowly escaped execution last year. Now his fate hangs in the balance. the media and the Innocence Project would have you believe that he is being discriminated against and he is actually an innocent grieving father. But what do the facts actually say? We're bringing all of that and more to you on today's special episode of Relatable. It's brought to you by

Starting point is 00:02:15 Kexie. Kexe is a family-run cookie company rooted in faith, tradition, and real ingredients. Their cookies make an amazing Father's Day gift and they ship nationwide. I am a huge fan of these cookies, trust me, they are so good. Go to kexie.com. That's k-e-k-s-I-com. Use code Alley-15 for 15% off kexie.com. Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Hope everyone is having a wonderful week so far. Today, we are finally revealing research that we have done on an organization called the Innocence Project. And I'll just ask you at the top of this episode to please pray, for me, pray for our team, pray for this episode because there are some very powerful people in politics that don't want this information getting out, who have associated themselves

Starting point is 00:03:20 with the Innocence Project and would much rather you not know the details that we are about to reveal to you today. But if you are a Christian, you care about justice. You care that justice is carried out in a way that is fair in a way that is truthful. And any organization or individual that is trying to inhibit justice, we need to stand in their way. As Christians, we should be on the front lines of justice, especially on behalf of the most vulnerable. And that means justly punishing wrongdoers. Today we'll go through a few stories. of people who have been defended by the Innocence Project and those associated with them, we will give you the facts that have not been revealed to you,

Starting point is 00:04:16 and we will compare those facts to the narrative that is being spun by the Innocence Project in others. We will talk about how this organization persuades the public, and then how they use public distress and public outrage to then influence and even manipulate and bully those in charge to make sure that justice is not carried out for those who have committed crimes. All right. Let's start with a recent story, one that you may know, or maybe you didn't hear about this. There was a lot going on at this point last year. So maybe you weren't aware of this person named Robert Robertson. Last year, you may have heard of him. Robert Robertson was in the news. You may have heard that he was an innocent man on death row.

Starting point is 00:05:10 Dr. Phil interviewed him. And in Dr. Phil's promotion of the interview, he said that Robertson is on death row for, quote, a crime he did not commit. Prominent figures like Brett Weinstein, who rose to fame as a progressive professor. I've had him on my show. He fought against left-wing group think. He questioned the COVID vaccine. Last year, he publicly on X called on the Texas legislature and Governor Abbott to stop Robertson's execution. He was set to be executed on October 17, 2024, but the cries of the public were effective. There was a judge who granted a temporary order stopping his execution. So now Robertson's fate hangs in the balance.

Starting point is 00:06:00 According to the Innocence Project, an organization that purports to get innocent people off death row, Robert Robertson is an autistic man who was wrongly convicted in the death of his two-year-old daughter, Nikki, in 2002. The case against Robert Robertson, the Innocence Project claims, was built on assumptions. When Nikki, who had been sick with a fever, fell from her bed in 2002 and later became unresponsive, Robert took her to the hospital. That is how the Innocence Project describes what happened over 20 years ago. Robert was unemotional about his child's injuries. The hospital noted, but the Innocence Project asserts this is because of his autism. Doctors claimed that this was a case of shaken baby syndrome, the Innocence Project says, and that Robert was responsible. But Robert's defenders say that these doctors ignored the clear evidence that Nikki's,

Starting point is 00:07:00 death was the result of natural causes. Her pneumonia and the accidental fall from her bed actually caused her death. And a grieving father, the narrative goes, was labeled a monster because he didn't grieve the way that they thought he should, that the hospital and his family members thought he should. Those on Robertson's side say that he was a quiet man, that he had a kind heart. He was often compared to Forrest Gump for his sincerity, his childlike innocence. But the Innocence Project says the state didn't care about these things. He was arrested. He was prosecuted. He was sentenced to death cruelly. And for over 20 years, Robert has lived in this tiny cell on Texas death row awaiting execution for a crime they say never happened. Many scientists, doctors, and even

Starting point is 00:07:55 faith leaders now say they believe that Robert was wrongfully convicted. Even the Autism Society of America and the Autism Society of Texas have pleaded for mercy, urging the state to recognize the injustice here of putting an autistic man on death row for a crime that apparently never occurred. Last year, Robert narrowly escaped his execution, and this year he may or may not. for now he waits. He waits for the courts to recognize what so many already say they see, that he is not a murder. This is the story the Innocence Project would have you believe. But the question is, the really only question that matters is, is it true? Is it true? God gives us a picture of what justice looks like, especially when it comes to trial.

Starting point is 00:08:55 especially when it comes to law giving. Leviticus 1915, God says you shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great. But in righteousness, shall you judge your neighbor in truth, in integrity, in rightness, in correctness, you judge your neighbor. We've talked about this many times, but at least four characteristics of God's justice that we see in his law giving to Israel in the Old Testament that gives us a model for what justice should look like today, even though we are not in ancient Israel. We don't have to take all of the

Starting point is 00:09:33 laws of ancient Israel and put them here in America today, but it would be wise of us to look to the God who created justice to tell us what justice should look like. And we see that justice is at least four things. It is true. It is impartial. It is proportional and it is direct. So it is based on truth. It doesn't defer to the poor. It doesn't defer to the great. It directly deals with the person who is involved in this case. You're not punishing someone's cousin for what they did. It is proportional. The punishment should fit the crime. And what is relevant here is that facts matter. And to know the facts, we have to dig beyond the headlines. And as we'll explain later, we have to dig beyond what the Innocence Project says. We have to look at the court documents. This is sourced

Starting point is 00:10:27 from the judicial opinion from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in the case, Roberson v. the state 2007 and Roberson v. Stevenson, 2015, as well as a statement from the office of the Attorney General. And the statement from the Office of Attorney General is based on the facts in these cases. Now, we're not talking about the opinion of the attorney general. We are only looking at what these court cases actually say. We are looking at witness testimony. We are looking at expert testimony that is completely left out of the narrative that we are seeing spun by the media. Quick pause to tell you about our first sponsor for the day. And that is WeHeart Nutrition. I have been taking WeHeart Nutrition supplements since the beginning of the first sponsor.

Starting point is 00:11:23 of 2024. And honestly, I have never felt better. And I think my supplement regimen from WeHeart Nutrition is a huge difference maker. I recently added in their new product, the wholesome balance vitamin, into my daily regimen. And it has helped so much. It helps with cramps and PMS, all types of symptoms associated with your cycle. But also, if you are pregnant and you're dealing with nausea, you're trying to recover postpartum, or if you're going through paraminopause or menopause, and you want to make sure that all of your hormones are balanced the way that they should be so that you feel your best. This wholesome balance product is for you. It's filled with clinically backed ingredients in just the right amount. It's got saffron, ginger, curcumin, key B,

Starting point is 00:12:17 vitamins, all in research-supported doses. This one product, covers so much. Weheart Nutrition has even more information about the science behind it on their website. So go to weheartnutrition.com. Use promo code Alley. You'll get 20% off your order when you do. That's weheartnutrition.com code Alley. Nikki Curtis was the daughter of Robert Robertson and his girlfriend Teddy Cox. The week of Nikki's death, her mother, Teddy, was in the hospital for a his husband. hysterectomy. Nikki's grandparents babysat her because Cox didn't want to leave her daughter alone with Roberson. She was very troubled by his behavior. She didn't trust him. So she left her daughter

Starting point is 00:13:09 alone with her parents. However, when Nikki's grandmother got sick, Robertson was then told that he needed to come pick up his daughter, which made him very angry according to Teddy Cox's testimony in court. This was the first time. according to Teddy, Nikki's mom and his ex, Robert's ex. This was the first time that Robert was ever left alone with Nikki as her sole caretaker. The next morning, Teddy, her mom, was discharged from the hospital and she called Robert to ask for a ride from the hospital. He responded reportedly that he probably needed to come to the hospital anyway because their daughter, Nikki wasn't breathing. Well, obviously, her mother, Teddy, was freaked out by this and begged him

Starting point is 00:14:01 over the phone to take their daughter to the hospital as quickly as possible. And there are some questions within that. How long would it have taken Roberson to actually take Nikki to the hospital if Teddy hadn't called to ask him for a ride? Teddy testified that Roberson wasn't upset at all about the situation. He didn't seem flustered. He didn't seem like he was in a hurry. He didn't even pull up to the front door of the hospital. Instead, he took the time to find a parking spot. There was a nurse there that day, Kelly Gerganis, and I think I'm pronouncing her last name correctly, she testified in court that she was working in the ER in Palestine, Texas, when Roberson came in and that he was pushing Teddy in a wheelchair. And so Teddy, remember,

Starting point is 00:14:53 she had just had surgery and Teddy had Nikki, their daughter, in her lap, covered in a blanket, according to this nurse's testimony. And by the time that she arrived at the ER in Palestine, Texas, Nikki was not breathing. She was limp, according to the testimony of this nurse. Her skin had turned blue. Nurse Gerganis testified that in all of her years of nursing, she had never seen anyone appear that deep shade of blue, not even a drowning victim. A CT scan showed severe trauma to Nikki's brain. The doctors that were on call that day concluded that she needed to be transported to a different hospital to Children's Medical Center in Dallas for further care, and that is where she ultimately passed away. Now, the Innocence Project asserts that Nikki's death was

Starting point is 00:15:46 because she had pneumonia and had also been given some medications such as codeine. And that was standard care at the time if someone had that kind of illness. But that kind of medication is no longer used in children today. So the Innocence Project is saying C, that was dangerous. They shouldn't have given her coding for her pneumonia. And that probably caused her death. Yet neither an illness nor the medications that she was given can, explain the extensive injuries that Nikki sustained. Board-certified pediatrician, Dr. Janet Squires,

Starting point is 00:16:24 who examined Nikki before she died, attributed her injuries to massive head trauma and concluded that she had been a victim of abuse. And when questioned at the hospital, her dad, Robert, told a nurse that Nikki's injuries were falling from a bed. She immediately, that nurse immediately had staff called the police, as she knew she deemed in that moment that it was impossible for such severe injuries to result from a minor fall, and she knew that he was lying. There was another emergency room nurse. Her name was Andrea Sims. She observed a handprint on Nikki's face and noted that the back of her head. This is disturbing. I'm about to say a lot of disturbing things, but if this little girl endured these things, then we have to be tough enough to describe them because it's important to know the

Starting point is 00:17:15 details here that the Innocence Project doesn't want you to know. So this nurse, Nurse Sims, says that when she felt the back of Nikki's skull, that it was mushy, that it was bruised and it felt like mush. Dr. John Ross, the pediatrician who examined Nikki, testified about this significant bruising. He said that she had a large subdural hematoma. So that is where the blood collects between the brain and its outer covering and that her brain swelling, this child's brain swelling was so severe that her brain had shifted from the right to the left. He asserted that these injuries were intentionally inflicted, that there was no way it could have happened from falling from a bet. I mean, a lot of us have children out there. We've seen our

Starting point is 00:17:59 child jump from the couch to the floor. We've seen them fall, trip, hit their head. And yeah, they might have a little goose sag. I remember when I was in kindergarten, I fell hard on the concrete. I tripped and I fell on this concrete step. And I had a huge, goose egg right there. But did I have a hematoma? Did my brain shift from left to right? No, because God created our skulls to protect our brains and it takes a lot of trauma, especially intentional trauma to inflict that kind of injury on the brain. Also, Dr. Thomas Conjoian, the ER physician that was also there when Nikki was brought in, noted bruising on Nikki's jaw and described something. something called an un-cal herniation. And you medical people out there, if I'm mispronouncing these

Starting point is 00:18:49 words, I apologize. And that is where part of the brain gets pushed out of position. So what we just described, her brain shifting from one side to the other. And that is a precursor to brain death. He said that it was, quote, basically impossible for such trauma to result from falling out of bed. There was a forensic pathologist, Dr. Jill Urban, who conducted Nikki's autopsy. She concluded that Nikki died from, quote, blunt force head injuries. Now, the Innocence Project claims that Roberson was convicted based on a debunked theory of shaking baby syndrome. But this is not true. That's not what happened.

Starting point is 00:19:28 This is a straw man argument. Although Roberson did have a history of shaking Nikki, Teddy's family testified that he would shake Nikki by the arms and had in one instance thrown her off the bed. okay, that was previous to what happened the week of her death. Shaken baby syndrome was mentioned during the court hearings, but the various medical professionals who actually examined her after she died testified that Nikki didn't die from shaken baby syndrome, that she died from head trauma. In 2016, Dr. Urban reiterated that Nikki, quote,

Starting point is 00:20:04 died as a result of blunt force head injuries in response to the Innocence Project's attempts to claim that Robertson's convictions, or conviction was based on debunked science. She also noted, Dr. Urban noted, that a fall from the bed would cause a, quote, single impact rather than the multiple discrete impact sites found on Nikki's head. Another false claim by the Innocence Project is that Robertson has, quote, maintained his innocence since being accused. But that's not true. At Anderson County Jail, Teddy Cox, Teddy Cox.

Starting point is 00:20:40 so Nikki's mom said that she asked Robertson directly if he had killed Nikki. She says that his response was that if he did do it, he didn't remember, but he might have, quote, snapped. Robertson also told Dr. Kelly Goodness, one of the defense's own witnesses, that he did not remember what happened, but then later confessed that he had lost his temper and began abusing Nikki. at the original trial, even Robertson's own defense team, okay? His own defense team at the original trial did not argue that he didn't kill Nikki.

Starting point is 00:21:18 Instead, they sought to reduce his culpability, citing his low IQ, 85, his poor impulse control, impaired decision making, essentially conceding that Robertson fabricated the story of the fall from the bed. Their strategy was actually to argue that Roberson lacked the mental capacity. to form intent. And so pushed for a lesser homicide charge than capital murder. So this challenge is another Innocence Project claim that Robertson was convicted largely due to his autism and that this was some sort of discrimination and bias against people with special needs. But his mental state was thoroughly examined at the time and central actually to his defense. Yet he was not diagnosed with autism. He wasn't diagnosed with autism until 15 years later. So this raises doubts about the validity of the diagnosis.

Starting point is 00:22:11 And I just want to say, not everyone who is awkward or who doesn't show emotion has autism. And by the way, even if you have some sort of autism diagnosis, that doesn't mean that you're not culpable of beating a child to death. The Innocence Project has gone to great lengths to portray Robertson as a gentle, childlike man akin to Forrest Gump to suggest that he could not have committed. had such a brutal crime. But his criminal record and family members tell a different story. And by the way, that whole portrayal as Forrest Gump, it might be closer to Lenny of mice and men. He was also childlike, but he murdered someone.

Starting point is 00:22:53 Although I don't even think that you could say that Robertson is in that kind of category. This seems a lot more intentional and malicious. Robertson had multiple felony conviction. So he was with it enough to commit multiple felon. felonies, including burglary and theft, he had been arrested at least 17 times before Nikki's murder. He also had a history of violence and threats toward Nikki. Rachel Cox, Teddy's 10-year-old daughter, testified that Robertson had a really bad temper and had even threatened to kill Nikki at one point. Robertson's own mother said at one time, quote, one of these days he's going to

Starting point is 00:23:33 kill her. And it's going to be too late for anyone to do anything about it. Huh. In the end, the prosecution only sent the murder or only sent the charge of, quote, murder of a child under six years old to the jury. And this was enough to give Roberson the death penalty. So that's what they went with. But originally they had included that Roberson had murdered Nikki, quote, in the course of committing or attempting to commit the offense of aggravating. sexual assaults. There remains significant evidence that Robertson also sexually assaulted Nikki. And we will get into the disturbing details of that in a second and like just take a breather for a second because I will have to describe what they found on Nikki's body that proves this.

Starting point is 00:24:22 I just want you to know the kind of person that Innocence Project is protecting and that people tried to defend, especially last year. Share the Arrows 2025 is brought to you by our friends at Good Ranchers, y'all. I am so pumped. We only have four months until Share the Arrows. I'm wearing my little gold, Share the Arrows bracelet from Carly Jean, Los Angeles right now to remind me that we are so close. I am so excited, y'all.

Starting point is 00:25:00 Thousands of you have already signed up, but if you haven't signed up, now is the time. This week, you will also see speakers releasing their promo codes for 15% off. So if you want to go ahead and purchase right now, I'll just give you one promo code and I'll change every time I promote. You could use Abbey 15. That's ABB-B-I-E-15. When you go to Ticketmaster, you just press the unlock button. And then you type in that promo code and it will automatically discount all of the prices on all general admission tickets. We have Hillary Morgan Ferrer, Elisa Childers, Ginger Dugger Volo, Abby Halberstadt, Shauna Holman, Katie Faust, Taylor Dukes, Francesca Batistelli.

Starting point is 00:25:44 There is not a Christian women's conference like this anywhere else. Solid theology, challenging teaching, so much encouragement and community, an amazing worship. Go to ShareTheaeros.com. Get your tickets right now. That's ShareTheaeros.com. When Nikki arrived at the hospital, there was a nurse who examined the child, and she noted injuries consistent with not just abuse, but sexual assault. Namely, this is so hard to imagine and so difficult to say, but again, if she suffered it, we have to talk about it.

Starting point is 00:26:23 Namely, there were three tears to this child's anus and abnormal rectal laxity, which means she was raped. In addition, Robertson admitted to another cellmate that he had sexually assaulted his daughter. Robertson told him of, quote, putting his penis in the baby's mouth and rubbing his penis against her vagina. Robertson's history of abuse was not confined to Nikki. His ex-wife, Della Gray, also testified that once she left him in a room with her two-year-old daughter, Victoria, for 30 minutes, and Victoria was screaming and upset and had, quote, a hickie on her neck when Roberson finally let her out of the room. She also recounted, leaving their young son alone with Robertson.

Starting point is 00:27:09 Maybe not the best decision here, only to return and find his face covered in bruises. And as in Nikki's case, Robertson explained that the injuries were the result of the child, quote, falling off the bed, huh? Gray herself was abused by Robertson. He strangled her with the coat hanger reportedly, broke her nose with a punch while she was pregnant, beat her with a shovel, allegedly. Further evidence of Robertson's guilt was that he repeatedly changed his story. He first claimed that Nikki fell off the bed and then that she hit her head on the table,

Starting point is 00:27:45 later asserting that he didn't know what happened. She was simply clumsy. She must have somehow injured herself. At one point, he even suggested that she hit her head on the brick floor, although the bedroom had only carpet. Robert Robertson was ultimately convicted based on extensive mass. forensic and testimonial evidence. Nikki's injuries could not be explained by a simple fall or illness.

Starting point is 00:28:14 Multiple doctors, nurses, and forensic experts concluded that she was the victim of intentional violent abuse. Robertson's personal testimony, along with testimony from Nikki's family, portrayed him as a man capable of horrific violence. The Innocence Project's efforts to recast the case overlook these facts. facts. And more importantly, they shift the focus away from the true victim, which is Nikki. This is the worst and the most deadly form of toxic empathy. We have a whole chapter in toxic empathy dedicated to how social justice cherry picks facts purports and upholds one victim,

Starting point is 00:28:57 purported victim, to ignore the person on the other side of the equation, to ignore the real victim. That is exactly what seems to be happening here. The Innocence Projects narrative, which is amplified by this empathetic media, including state legislators to intervene in the judicial process. Just as Roberson was scheduled for execution on October 20, 2004, these legislators issued a subpoena, requiring his testimony before a House committee after his execution dates. 90 minutes before Roberson was put to death, a Travis County District Court judge issued a temporary stay of execution. The stay was quickly overturned by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, but legislators have attempted the subpoena tactic again. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton blocked Robertson from testifying, however, refusing to cooperate with what he viewed as a blatant attempt to undermine the justice system,

Starting point is 00:29:56 and I completely agree with the Attorney General on that. as of February 2025, Robertson and the Innocence Project are again asking Texas to overturn his conviction entirely, claiming that the verdict was based on debunked science of shaken baby syndrome. Again, that's not what the verdict was based on. While the Innocence Project garners these kind of celebrity endorsements for Robertson, they disregard the voices of the person who was most affected, the actual victim, which is this baby girl who is now dead. her brother, Nikki's brother, whose name is Matthew Bowman. He has consistently called for Robertson's execution. He actually traveled to witness the execution in October 24, only for it to be delayed. Bowman remains firm in his stance, stating that this case is about the baby.

Starting point is 00:30:49 Here's not one. It seems like everybody has forgotten Nikki in that if we don't speak, you know, they're going to make it all about him. And people have lost that this is about that two-year-old baby, that didn't get to live our life. He's absolutely right about that. Absolutely right. So the question is, why would the Innocence Project support someone who looks like a monster,

Starting point is 00:31:11 Roberson, and why do so many, even in right-wing and libertarian circles, by these phony narratives? For example, we have Brett Weinstein, who I mentioned earlier. He put out this post on X, 1230 p.m. October 17th, the day. that Robert Robertson was supposed to be executed. He posted, please look into the case of Robert Robertson. I'll provide links in the replies. Please don't wait. He is scheduled to die tonight in Texas.

Starting point is 00:31:40 It is a clear, he says, miscarriage of justice with pharma corruption. As a central element of the story, he is referring to this child taking codeine. As a central element of the story of how he was falsely convicted, we can stop this if we act now. The Texas state legislature has subpoenaed Robertson to testify on Monday. The subpoena does not alone have the power to halt the execution, but sufficient public pressure can save him. This is in our power. We have only hours, okay? This post has 1.8 million views.

Starting point is 00:32:15 And then we also have RFK, who is currently the head of the CDC. Obviously, we like a lot of things that he's doing, but he reposted Brett Weinstein with his own commentary, saying, Robert Robertson is scheduled to die tonight in Texas at 6 p.m. Central Time. His execution would compound an already serious miscarriage of justice. Governor Abbott needs to step in. Sometimes I just wonder if these people are even looking into the cases that they are talking about. Just this week, there's another man that the Innocence Project championed, who was actually arrested again after he was released from prison.

Starting point is 00:32:52 I saw this story first reported by journalist Andy No. His name is Marvin Lee Much. He's now 68. He was convicted in 1975 at 18 years old for murdering 13-year-old Cassie Riley and Union City, California. Cassie was found dead in 1974 in a creek bed beaten and drowned. Trial evidence included Much's sister, saying that he came home late, muddy, washed his clothes right away. A police officer saw much near the crime scene, much admitted, with Cassie, but he just denied killing her. Much served 41 years in prison before the California

Starting point is 00:33:30 Innocence Project took an interest in his case and helped him get out of state prison via a parole program. He went on to become a prison reform activist insisting that he was wrongly convicted for murdering Cassie Riley. And actually, PBS recommended his documentary to show to teachers, for teachers to show their students about the injustice of the criminal system. And so he was released on parole in 2016 after the Innocence Project insisted that he had been wrongly charged and convicted for this murder, citing all different kinds of technicalities in a very similar way that they did for Robert Robertson. And so he was released on parole February 2016. And then last week on May 22nd, 2025, much was arrested in California for possessing child sex abuse material, drugs and having a loaded firearm. And he is held at Solano County Jail on $300,000 bond. And he's facing more felony charges.

Starting point is 00:34:39 The Innocence Project has not made a statement. So why? That's the question. Why? Why does the Innocence Project choose people that are proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty of heinous crimes? What is their end goal? Who is behind the Innocence Project? What really is going on? And how are they getting so many celebrities into their web? To understand this organization's corrupt motivations, it's success. and deceiving the public. We need to look at its background and the ideological underpinnings and what I see as very dishonest and manipulative legal tactics. So the Innocence Project presents itself

Starting point is 00:35:31 as a champion of justice, working to exonerate the wrongly convicted and reformed the legal system. And that sounds virtuous. But behind that virtuous mission statement lies an army of activists recruited it to manipulate public sentiment, exploit emotional impulses, and push an extremely left-wing radical agenda. At its core, the Innocence Project thrives on what we call toxic empathy, the kind that preys upon people's fear of appearing unkind and unempathetic. And the Innocence Project doesn't just seek justice, or it doesn't at all seek justice for the wrongly convicted. They actually redefine justice entirely. So their premise. is that convicted killers are actually innocent and that the real villain is the justice system

Starting point is 00:36:22 itself. That's not the premise that they tell you, but that is the underlying premise. In this kind of warped narrative, in this backwards worldview, they kind of cast the courts and law enforcement as the oppressors and criminals like Robert Robertson as a martyr or a victim. So the organization's roots, if you look at their roots, that alone reveals who they really are. Founded in 1992 by Barry Schack and Peter Newfeld, both members of O.J. Simpson's infamous dream team, the Innocence Project was built on the same legal gamesmanship that helped a guilty man walk free. In 1995, Shaq and Neufeld secured Simpson's acquittal, despite overwhelming evidence. of his guilt. In a later civil trial, Simpson was found liable for the wrongful deaths of Nicole

Starting point is 00:37:18 Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, even jurors. From the original trial admitted they knew that he was guilty, but voted, quote, not guilty as a form of racial payback. So this is the early history of the Innocence Project that foreshadowed the ongoing obsession with race and racial vengeance and what has now deemed propagandistically as anti-racism. And just like with the OJ case, the Innocence Project actually specializes in freeing people who are guilty, often because of legal technicalities. That is how they seek to exonerate these people. And their mission extends beyond exoneration. One of the Innocence Project's goals is abolishing the death penalty. That's really what this is about, but they don't lead with this goal. Instead, they use these kind of misleading cases

Starting point is 00:38:17 of supposed wrongful convictions to erode public confidence in capital punishment in general. And their strategy is really simple. They convince people that an innocent man or woman is being executed. And eventually, opposition to the death penalty follows because it makes it seem like all of these people who didn't commit any crimes are being unjust. executed. And the results speak for themselves. They're very effective at this. Around the time the Innocence Project was founded, American support for the death penalty peaked at 80%. Today, the number has dropped to 53%. So only a slight majority believe that the death penalty for capital murder, even when someone is convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, is justified. In this way,

Starting point is 00:39:04 as long as the public believes that their clients, that the Innocence Project's clients are Innocence, the Innocence Project advances its agenda, even when executions proceed. The execution of someone perceived as wrongly convicted is actually, for them, even more powerful in swaying public opinion against the death penalty than exoneration. It reinforces this idea that our system is fatally flawed, that we just need to get rid of the death penalty altogether, and that really our criminal justice system isn't one to be trusted, that we're putting too many people in jail and that too many people are placed in jail for the wrong reasons. And it shouldn't be surprising that when you look at the politics of the Innocence Project,

Starting point is 00:39:48 you would think that it would only win over progressives, people who believe that, you know, ACAB, and they believe that our criminal justice system is inherently discriminatory, that it discriminates against black people, that it discriminates against immigrants, that it discriminates with people, diagnosed with special needs like autism, you would think that it would only appeal to people who have that kind of worldview, who are really against Western civilization's creation of a justice system in the first place. But that's not true.

Starting point is 00:40:19 They have actually won allies on the right. If you look at the Libertarian Cato Institute, the Cato Institute awarded the Innocence Project with the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty in 2021, proving that this kind of, manipulative messaging actually is effective across the political spectrum. But make no mistake, the Innocence Project's loyalties lie firmly with the left. Most recently, they praised Biden's commuting of 37 death sentences saying that this prevented the executions of innocent people.

Starting point is 00:40:56 They also attacked Trump for the executions that took place during his first term, noting that quote, a majority of those executed were people of color. Okay, that's a really good thing for us to look at for a second. Like, let's just pause on that because giving a little bit of truth that is supposed to lead people to a particular conclusion while leaving out the other relevant facts is exactly what Innocence Project does. The fact that a majority of people being executed were people of color, not mean inherently that the death penalty is unjust or that those people shouldn't have been sent

Starting point is 00:41:38 to death row. Like, let's ask ourselves, what crimes did they commit? It's really irrelevant what the color of their skin is. But if you can just say, well, a majority of those people were black, they know that's enough for a lot of people to think, well, it must be racist. It must be unfair, even if there's no evidence proving that. They linked a fact sheet that was titled, quote, the Trump executions a race to kill on their website. So trying to say that Trump is just eager to execute people who happen to be black. The Innocence Project is also backed by the usual left-wing billionaires and left-wing political donors. They receive millions, no surprise, from George Soros's Open Society Foundation and radical leftist philanthropist.

Starting point is 00:42:23 McKinsey Scott, that is Jeff Bezos's ex-wife, were still. they siphon off taxpayer dollars. Millions of our taxpayer dollars flow to the Innocence Project in all of their affiliated organizations through the U.S. Bureau of Justice Assistance. This is an office within the Department of Justice. I would love Pam Bondi to look at this and ensure that our tax dollars are not funding stopping the execution of convicted murders. If there were any doubt about the Innocence Project's ideological bent, they're not

Starting point is 00:42:58 just some apolitical organization that's trying to exonerate innocent people. You just need to look at its leadership. Next sponsor is Good Ranchers. So if you are scrambling, wondering what to get your dad or the related bro in your life, your husband, the father of your children for Father's Day this year, then you should just go ahead and get them a present. You know they'll use. You know they'll like and that is a box of Good Ranchers meet. Did you know that 85% of the grass-fed beef sold in U.S. grocery stores is actually imported from abroad. Even the grass-fed beef that says made in the U.S., that only means legally, that only has to mean that it's packaged in the U.S. If you want American meat from American farms and ranches,

Starting point is 00:43:50 then you've got to get it from good ranchers, whether it's seafood, whether it's beef, different cuts of steak, whether it's their better than organic chicken. It is all coming from American farms and ranches. We rely on good ranchers every night in this ducky home. It is so good. I had their fillet a couple weeks ago. Best fillet that I've had just as good as any fancy steakhouse. And so get your father, your husband, the gift that keeps on giving in Good Ranchers meet. Go to good ranchers.com. Use code Ali. You will get $40 off. Go ahead and subscribe. You'll get an even bigger discount when you do that. Go to good ranchers.com code alley.

Starting point is 00:44:40 So here are, here's the leadership of the Innocence Project. Executive director Christina Allison Swarns. She previously worked for the NWACP, which is a very progressive political organization. She famously helped overturn the death sentence of convicted cop killer and former Black Panther, Mumia Abu Jabal. His guilt was never in question by this. the way. Sworn simply ensured he shouldn't, he wouldn't face execution. He remains in prison for life. The organization's board of directors reads like a who's who of left-wing activism.

Starting point is 00:45:21 Sociologist Alondra Nelson served in the Biden administration. She wrote books, admiring the Black Panthers, outlining how DNA testing can help get slave reparations to African-American We've got Andrew Tannenbaum, a Democrat computer scientist. He runs electoral vote.com, which falsely predicted that Trump would lose in 2016 and 2024. We've got former police chief Cedric Alexander and Obama advisor who also writes for CNN. We've got law professor Iqao in Yanka, who penned an infamous New York Times op-ed in which he declared that he wouldn't allow his children to befriend white people. All right. Then we've got Yusuf Salam, one of the Central Park Five, who campaigned for Kamala Harris at the Democrat National Convention. Since the founding of the National Innocence Project Organization, activists have created numerous regional chapters operating at the state and the local levels.

Starting point is 00:46:25 These independent but related groups employ similar strategies to challenge convictions and share the same ideological motivations. as the national organization. Ultimately, the Innocence Project is not about justice. It's about partisanship. It is about undermining law and order, rewriting history, changing the facts, advancing a radical leftist, often racialized agenda under the guise of compassion and empathy and justice. So they turn criminals into victims and the justice system into the oppressor. They distort reality and erode the very foundation of accountability. in lawfulness in America. If justice matters, then the truth about the Innocence Project must matter.

Starting point is 00:47:13 It must be exposed. So let's look at their formula because they have a repeatable formula that they use to hoist up a particular person that they cast as a victim and get them off of death row. The Innocence Project follows this formula to change public opinion and their approach relies on manipulating public perception, exploiting legal technicalities, rather than proving actual innocence. You'll notice that the Innocence Project chooses cases that have a narrative of some kind of minority victimhood. So it's an immigrant. It's someone with supposed special needs. It's someone who is black. They do this to push this idea that minorities are under continual

Starting point is 00:47:57 persecution because of systemic bias. And they know that a lot of people in America just assume that. They don't have to convince people of it. In these narratives, it's not just that a mistake was made, but rather all of these cases are evidence of racism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia. The list goes on. In the case of Robert Robertson, a white male, they had to make this effort to shape the narrative around him being autistic. They claim that his being a member of this minority group is a fundamental reason he was treated fairly. But just remember, he wasn't actually diagnosed with autism until 15 years later. He had a history of violence. that had no, there's no evidence that had anything to do with him being convicted. So they've posted multiple headlines saying that women are more vulnerable to unfair convictions,

Starting point is 00:48:46 that LGBTQ people are more vulnerable to being convicted, disabled people, African American people, Latinx people, autistic people. The demographics of the Innocence Project cases reflect this emphasis on minority status. Black and Hispanic people represent 31% of the U.S. population, but 53% of death row inmates, for example. But the Innocence Project exonerations are nearly 75% black and Hispanic. Okay, so it's not just about the death penalty. It's not just about exoneration. This is extremely racialized.

Starting point is 00:49:24 This answers the question. Why does the organization take on so many cases of people who are clearly guilty? It's because the innocence of the victim or of the purported. victim of the charged criminal is not as important of a criterion as there being a member of some kind of minority group. Because the majority of the Innocence Project's cases are of racial minorities, playing the race card is a key part of this exoneration formula. So here are the few things that the Innocence Project does. One, it plays the race card. So they'll say things like this person was black and he was convicted for murdering a white person and the majority of the jury was

Starting point is 00:50:09 white. And they don't even have to say there's evidence of racism. All they have to do is say there was a black person who was convicted of something. There were white people on the other side. It was in some kind of southern state like South Carolina. And the assumption that people are going to take from that because everyone's read to kill a mockingbird is that, oh, well, this person must have been wrongly convicted. So if they can paint that narrative, which good propaganda doesn't have to answer questions about truth, it just has to put assumptions in your mind and affirm the biases that you already have. So that's what they did, for example, with Rodney Reed. There was a campaign by the Innocence Project to say that Rodney Reed was framed for the killing of a white woman named

Starting point is 00:50:53 Stacey Stites by a white police officer who was also her fiance, Jimmy Fennell. That is what his defense argued at the time. The Innocence Project ran with that. He got Kim Kardashian or the Innocence Project got Kim Kardashian, Rihanna, Beyonce, Susan Sarandon, Oprah Winfie, or Free Dr. Phil, Sean King, many other very prominent people. He got, Sean King got three million signatures. 2020 made a documentary about this. There was a whole media blitz saying that Rodney Reed was innocent, that he was framed because of the color of her skin, of her. his skin and the color of her skin, the victim. But when you go through the court documents, when you go through the testimonies and the facts of the case, it shows that Reed was almost certainly guilty. He had actually already been proven guilty in another rape case. There are so many different underlying factors here and facts that have been glossed over by the Innocence Project. And we don't have time to go through in detail every single one of these cases. But I encourage you. I encourage you. you to actually read the court cases themselves and we will link the, we will link the source to

Starting point is 00:52:09 these court cases so you can read them and look at the facts for yourself. But this is another instance of someone who was almost certainly guilty being hoisted up by the media and by the Innocence Project. The second thing that the Innocence Project does is leverages the court of public opinion. While the Innocence Project does work in court, much of its strategy actually relies on public relations, on PR. So their lawyers generally appeal to narrative, appeal on narrow, often irrelevant points about forensic evidence. Once they've reopened a case, they can construct a media narrative that generates public outcry. The narrative is amplified by documentaries and by celebrities, even by legislators.

Starting point is 00:52:56 And this pushes the narrative that everyone knows that it's so obvious that this person is innocent. Another case that proves this is Julius Jones, who was convicted of the 1999 murder of Paul Howell in front of his sister and daughters as he pulled into his parents' driveway. Friends Julius Jones and Christopher Jordan had been driving around looking for a car to steal. And apparently Julius Jones exited. the car wearing a red bandana carrying a gun and shot Howl in the head. That is according to the Oklahoma District Attorney who is involved in this case. The Innocence Project, though, claimed that Julius Jones was a victim of racism. Viola Davis even hosted a documentary showing that this person or trying to prove that this person was a victim of racism.

Starting point is 00:53:49 Steph Curry, Demi Lovato, again, Kim Kardashian came to his defense. But there are massive problems with the Innocence Project's narrative about Julius Jones. It is nonsensical to claim that racism motivated those involved in the case when the claim is that it was actually the other guy, not Julius Jones. The Innocence Project is saying that it was his friend, Chris Jordan, that actually killed this person, not Julius Jones. But Chris Jordan is also black. And so how could it be racism that motivated the conviction of Julius Jones? The sister who witnessed the murder identified Jones with stunning accuracy, including the red bandana that he was wearing during the crime.

Starting point is 00:54:37 And when police searched Jones's room, they found that red bandana and they found the gun used to kill Howell. Third, while it's true that the bandana wasn't tested for DNA at the time, but has been tested since and the results prove Jones's guilt. So there was DNA evidence on the bandana that he was wearing when the person who witnessed the murder says that the person who killed Paul Howell was wearing a red bandana. So this person is in all likelihood guilty. And yet with this racial narrative, with generating public outcry, they have convinced many people that he was innocent. They weaponized DNA testing. This is another tactic.

Starting point is 00:55:20 Their most fundamental tactic is demanding new DNA testing. on decades-old evidence. They did this in the case of Marcellus Williams. This is a prime example. He is a black man convicted of the 1998 murder of Felicia Gale, a white woman. He reportedly entered her home, found a large butcher knife in the kitchen, stabbed her to death. He then left taking some valuable items from the home. But the narrative pushed by the Innocence Project is that Marcellus Williams couldn't possibly have killed Gail because new testing revealed his DNA wasn't on the murder weapon, but two other people's DNA was. The truth is, however, that Williams was already known to be wearing gloves during the murder.

Starting point is 00:56:01 So it's no surprise that his DNA was not on the weapon. And while it's true that they found two other individuals' DNA on the knife, it was the prosecutor and a detective who handled the weapon during the trial, not even during the case when they were looking at the evidence at the scene of the crime, but during the trial. So all of those who work at the end. The Innocence Project knows that this is bunk, knows that this is manipulation, and yet they push it anyway. They also, this is their other tactic.

Starting point is 00:56:31 They exploit the passage of time. So they wait for decades after a case is passed when tensions are a lot lower, when people feel less sad or less shocked by, less passionate about this particular victim's murder. For example, when we're talking about Robert Robertson, they didn't push this right after this young child. had been murdered because they knew that the sympathies, that the anger was so high and that people were more likely to think this guy was guilty. And so they exploit the passage of time knowing that they will be more likely to convince people that the people on death row are innocent. They did this with someone named Sean Thomas. Sean Thomas was convicted in 1990 of murdering a 78-year-old man. In 2017, 27 years after the crime, the Innocence Project successfully

Starting point is 00:57:29 argued for Thomas's relief or release. Prosecutors did not declare Thomas Innocent, declined to retry him, though likely because of public outcry. Thomas walked free after serving 24 years in prison was awarded a $4.1 million settlement. And it's a little bit confusing all of the technicalities that were exploited by the Innocence Project to try to say that he was innocent. But then in 2023, he was headed back to prison for murdering a man over $1,200. Okay? So the guy spent almost 30 years in prison convicted for this murder. Innocence Project said, no, he is totally innocent, probably pushed some kind of racial bias. narrative. And then in 2023, he murdered a man and went to prison. Will the Innocence Project

Starting point is 00:58:19 say that he is innocent now? Not sure. And then they also will manufacture new evidence. This is what the Innocence Project does. In extreme cases, these convicts have been exonerated using falsified evidence created by activist attorneys. An example of this is Maurice Caldwell. The exoneration of Maurice Caldwell. He was convicted of murder in 1991. He was released after Paige Keneb, a lawyer from the Innocence Project, obtained a confession from Marit Funchez, his friend, Funchez, who was already serving a life sentence without parole for another murder, took the blame for the killing and identified someone else as his accomplice. Caldwell won $8 million in a settlement from the city. Funchez wanted his family to get part of that money when that

Starting point is 00:59:10 didn't happen, he came forward and exposed, accused attorney page Keneb of enticing him into providing a false confession. Keneb made contact with Funchez, texting him almost every day for a year, messaging him almost 9,000 times. She sent him reportedly racy photos, sex, so sex text messages, money, and various gifts to lure him into giving a false confession. Although the North Carolina Northern California Innocence Project has stood by Caldwell's exoneration since these damning revelations. Keneb is no longer with their organization. So those are the tactics of the Innocence Project. They will sometimes manufacture new evidence. They will exploit the passage of time. They will weaponize DNA testing. They will leverage the court of public opinion. And they will play the race card.

Starting point is 01:00:01 Now, that is not the definition of justice. This is a project that has nothing to be. to do with justice. It has nothing to do with innocence. And if your representative, if your friend, if the elected officials, even some of the people that Trump has appointed, if they are partnering with or offering validity to the innocence project in any way, then you need to call them and you need to hold them accountable. It is one thing for someone in charge to think someone is truly innocent and try to get them exonerated and try to ensure that they don't meet a faith that they don't actually deserve to meet, but they don't need to partner with the Innocence Project, who is actually perverting justice. It is no small thing. Let me tell you this. It is no small

Starting point is 01:00:52 thing to inhibit justice for the murder of a child. God does not take that lightly. If you are someone who is just against the death penalty, just say that you're against the death penalty. Say that you're against the death penalty for pedophile murders. Just come out and say that. Don't lie and say that this person is innocent based on a false narrative and based on distorted and ignored facts. Don't do that. Just say that you're against execution altogether, but you manipulating the public to stay the execution of someone who's God, whom God's word says. deserves to be executed because in Genesis 9,6, we read before the establishment of Israel, before the creation of the law, but something that is actually rooted in the Imago Day,

Starting point is 01:01:42 that execution is the just punishment for murder, and it still is the just punishment for murder. So if you were against that, if you are against God's justice, then just be honest about it. But don't lie about who these criminals actually are. it is no small thing in the eyes of God to deter justice in that way. Remember that. If you don't care about being held accountable by us, if you don't care about being held accountable by voters, know that you will be held accountable by God.

Starting point is 01:02:15 Realize that. This is a big freaking deal. You do not need to be supporting or hoisting up or celebrating or associating yourself with the Innocence Project ever. And if you are a voter and you have seen that from your representative, from elected officials, then you need to call them. And you need to let them know that you take issue with this as someone who cares about true compassion and true justice.

Starting point is 01:02:44 Next sponsor is Every Life. Okay, I know I say this a lot that, oh, this sponsor is the sponsor whose products I use the most. And it's really a tough competition because when I say that I use a product here, I really use the product. If I say I use the product every day, I use the product every day. But when I think about how often I use a product, it probably is every life that wins because we are using every life diapers multiple times a day in our home. We love our every life diapers and wipes. We love that they are made from all clean materials. But my favorite part about every life is that they are America's

Starting point is 01:03:22 only pro-life diaper company. It's sad to say that these other major diaper brands support the abortion lobby. They donate to pro-abortion politicians. They donate to pro-abortion organizations. You don't have to worry about that with every life. They partner with pregnancy centers to make sure these places have the resources that are needed to support moms in crisis pregnancy situations. They fully support all of their employees who are adopting or having babies of their own. It's just an amazing company all around. And the diapers are really. great. Go to everylife.com. Use code Alley 10 for 10% off your first order. That's Everylife.com code Alley 10. The Innocence Project presents itself as this champion of justice,

Starting point is 01:04:17 but its track record reveals a totally different reality. They don't prioritize truth. They strategically manipulate public perception. They exploit racial and social justice narratives, and they push a left-wing anti-justice agenda. This is, as we've said, a textbook example of toxic empathy, a well-intentioned sometimes impulse that when weaponized leads to devastating consequences. But by redirecting our empathy, our compassion away from true victims, toward convicted criminals, the Innocence Project distorts justice and creates a culture where accountability is eroded in favor of emotional activism and virtue signaling.

Starting point is 01:04:58 And so we have people who are very likely monsters like Robert Robertson being praised as a martyr while victims like Nikki Curtis are completely forgotten and neglected and justice is never one for her. That is not right. That is the disordered view of justice and Christians should stand against it. And I've had conversations about these cases in the past where child abusers are less. off death row because of the false narratives of the Innocence Project. And I can really think of few things more wicked than that. When the Innocence Project succeeds in exonerating its clients, murders, rapists, and career criminals walk free, often reoffending. There are real victims. There is a cost to toxic empathy. There is a cost to this injustice. In the end, the Innocence

Starting point is 01:05:55 Project's goal is not the exoneration of the wrongly convicted, but a broader effort to delegitimize law enforcement, weaken the justice system, and ultimately push for the abolition of the death penalty, regardless of guilt, regardless of how heinous of a crime has been committed. So it's not just justice that they seek, but a political victory gained at the cost of truth, at the cost of lies, the safety of our communities, and at the expense of those who are truly innocent. So there should be no support of this organization and we should do everything we can to champion true justice in the next time you hear a narrative of someone who is innocent on death row. Before you buy into the documentary, before you buy into the media blitz and the celebrity campaign

Starting point is 01:06:43 strategy, make sure you know what is actually true. Before we head out, I want to tell you about a new special that just dropped on Blaze TV for subscribers only. It is an explosive investigation. You've got to see it. It has been five years, believe it or not, since the George Floyd riots turned so much of the world upside down, especially in Minneapolis. And now for the first time ever, three active duty Minneapolis police officers are speaking out on camera anonymously to tell the truth about what really happened. I mean, what they reveal about Derek Chauvin, Governor Tim Walls, the breakdown of law in order. order is absolutely jaw-dropping. You've got to see it. You can watch the first 10 minutes for free

Starting point is 01:07:35 right now on YouTube. Just search Blaze TV, Minneapolis. But for the full unfiltered investigation, you have to be a Blaze TV subscriber. Go to blazestiv.com slash Allie. Get $20 off your subscription. You'll get access not only to this documentary, but all of the subscriber-exclusive content that we have at Blaze TV. Go to blazTV.com. slash All right. That's all we've got time for today. We'll be back here tomorrow.

Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 1200 | Exposing the Innocence Project: Fake Evidence, Dark Funding & Protecting Monsters

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.