ACCSED OF A CRIME THAT HE CLAIMED HE DID NOT COMMIT
Here is the scenario: A tragic story hit the news: the mother of three little girls , ages three (3) to five (5) who lived with their mother and father was accusing the father of sexual assault of all three children!
The father is arrested and pleads not guilty. He goes through a trial only on the mother's testimony and is found guilty with 3 life sentences plus 67 years. An exam showed that the children had in fact been assaulted, but did not show who as there was no DNA.
The father contacts the exoneration project which reviews the evidence. Questions arise: Where was the mother when this was happening? Were the children ever babies? Did the mother and baby sitter testify at the trial? What was his background like prior to the allegations and trial? Were there swabs? Turns out that only the mother testified as the babysitter could not be located.
newly discovered evidence is one of the ways to get this person back in court if he was innocent and can be used to prove it. However, it's an uphill battle. So DEEP springs into action gathering all the information and locating the babysitter, who claims she received money to implicate the father.
Although it's never this easy, there are many cases that TEEP receives where evidence that was not available at the time of the crime is now available or can be located by going the extra mile. In the scenario above it looked bleak, but with the help of a lawyer the person was exonerated.