After spending a staggering 34 years behind bars, a man from Missouri was finally released from prison on Tuesday. This follows the overturning of his murder conviction, which despite the state attorney general’s attempts to keep him locked up, was deemed unjust.
Christopher Dunn stood on the steps of the downtown St. Louis courthouse and expressed, “I persevered because my family never lost faith in me.” He acknowledged that in prison, it is effortless to surrender when hope is lost. However, when the system abandons you, it is crucial to question whether you want to accept defeat or stand up and fight for justice.
Upon his release from the St. Louis city jail on Tuesday night, Dunn, 52, was joyfully reunited with his wife, Kira Dunn. The journey to his freedom was marked by a van ride from the state prison in Licking, Missouri, to St. Louis, a distance of approximately 140 miles.
On July 22, a St. Louis circuit judge invalidated Dunn’s murder conviction and ordered his prompt release. Despite the court’s ruling, Dunn still found himself incarcerated due to the disorderly process that ensued after Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey appealed the decision, attempting to keep Dunn behind bars.
According to Dunn, the delay following the judge’s ruling was a grueling experience. He mentioned that it was particularly difficult to hear the decision and then prepare to leave prison, only to be brought back shortly after. The whole experience was nothing short of torture for him.
Bailey’s efforts to keep individuals in custody following overturned murder convictions have been unsuccessful twice in recent weeks. Dunn’s release is the most recent example.
After being incarcerated for 43 years for a murder that a judge believed she did not commit, Sandra Hemme was finally released from a prison in western Missouri on July 19. Despite evidence of her “actual innocence,” Bailey’s office objected to her release while the case was being reviewed by an appellate court. It was only after a judge threatened Bailey with contempt that Hemme was finally able to walk out of the prison a free woman.
According to political scientists and several attorneys, Bailey’s hard-line approach may be an attempt to secure votes ahead of a contentious Republican primary. In the upcoming Aug. 6 primary, he will face off against Will Scharf, a lawyer who represented former President Donald Trump.
Last week, Dunn almost walked out of prison when the circuit judge, Jason Sengheiser, warned a warden that he would face contempt charges unless Dunn was released. However, the Missouri Supreme Court intervened by agreeing to review the case, which temporarily halted Dunn’s release.
On Tuesday, the highest court of the state made a ruling that required confirmation from the St. Louis circuit attorney that there were no plans to retry Dunn before he could be released. Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore quickly filed a memorandum stating that he would not pursue a new trial, which set the process in motion for Dunn’s release.
According to the Midwest Innocence Project, Dunn will finally be able to return home.
In a heartwarming statement, it was expressed that the news of Chris’s release after 34 years of wrongful imprisonment was received with immense joy. The statement expressed the excitement of reuniting Chris with his family and the hope of being a support system as he begins to rebuild his life.
During a news conference on Tuesday, the Missouri NAACP and other organizations accused Bailey of using politics and racism to keep Dunn in prison. Nimrod Chapel Jr., the State NAACP President, stated that Bailey had overstepped his authority by appealing Sengheiser’s decision.
Zaki Baruti from the Universal African People’s Organization expressed his opinion by stating, “This current situation is just another way of carrying out a lynching.”
In a previous statement, Bailey’s office justified the initiative to maintain Dunn’s imprisonment.
In a statement, it was mentioned that Christopher Dunn’s murder conviction has been affirmed by multiple courts during the appeals process. The statement expressed their commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring justice for the victims.
In the shooting incident that occurred in 1990, Dunn was found guilty of first-degree murder in the death of 15-year-old Ricco Rogers. However, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore filed a motion in February to vacate the guilty verdict, which was later followed by a hearing in May.
According to Sengheiser’s ruling, Gore was able to demonstrate “actual innocence” convincingly, which undermined the foundation of Dunn’s convictions. The judge stated that with the emergence of new evidence, no rational juror would have found Dunn guilty of the crimes beyond a reasonable doubt.
During the May hearing, the state’s lawyers from the Missouri Attorney General’s Office objected to the request to overturn Dunn’s conviction. They argued that the initial testimony provided by two boys who identified Dunn as the shooter at the scene was accurate, despite their subsequent recantation as adults.
On May 18, 1990, a group of teenage boys including Rogers was attacked by a gunman. Tragically, Rogers was shot during the incident. The shooter was later identified as Dunn, based on initial identifications by DeMorris Stepp, 14, and Michael Davis Jr., 12.
During the hearing, a recorded interview was played where Davis admitted to lying. He explained that the reason for his dishonesty was because he believed Dunn was connected to a rival gang.
During the hearing, Gore pointed out that Stepp’s story has undergone multiple changes over the years. In his most recent statement, Stepp claimed that he did not see Dunn as the shooter. Gore also brought up the fact that another judge had previously deemed Stepp to be an unreliable witness and urged Sengheiser to disregard his testimony entirely.
According to Dunn, he was present at his mother’s residence during the shooting incident. Nicole Bailey, a childhood friend of Dunn, confirmed this statement and testified that she spoke with him over the phone that night while he was using a phone at his mother’s house.
During the hearing, Tristin Estep, the assistant attorney general, expressed doubts about Dunn’s alibi, stating that it could not be relied upon due to the fact that Dunn’s story has changed numerous times over the years. It is worth noting that Dunn did not testify during the hearing.
In 2021, Missouri passed a law that allows prosecutors to request hearings when they come across evidence of a wrongful conviction. Although Bailey’s office is not obligated to oppose such efforts, he did oppose a similar endeavor in St. Louis that led to the release of Lamar Johnson in 2020. Johnson had served 28 years for a murder case in which a judge determined he was wrongly convicted.
Two men who were imprisoned for decades have been released due to the 2021 law. Kevin Strickland, who was wrongly convicted in 1979 for three murders in Kansas City, was freed after spending more than 40 years in prison. Along with Strickland, the law also led to the release of another man named Johnson.
Marcellus Williams, who was previously spared from lethal injection, is now facing another execution date as another hearing approaches.
According to the prosecutor of St. Louis County, the DNA evidence indicates that Williams is innocent of the crime for which he was sentenced to death. Experts have found DNA belonging to another person, but not Williams, on the knife used in the 1998 murder.
The hearing regarding Williams’ claim of innocence is set to commence on August 21st, while his scheduled execution date is September 24th.
Bailey’s office is also opposing the challenge to Williams’ conviction.
