Court’s Decision Frees Woman After Decades in Prison

Missouri woman Sandra Hemme, wrongfully convicted of murder, walks free after 43 years behind bars, but not without a fight from the state’s Attorney General.

At a Glance

Sandra Hemme, 63, released after serving 43 years for a murder she didn’t commit.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey fought to keep her incarcerated despite court rulings.
Hemme’s conviction was based on an unreliable confession obtained while she was heavily sedated.
Evidence suggesting another suspect was not disclosed during her trial.
The case highlights persistent issues with wrongful convictions and the challenges of overturning them.

A Decades-Long Injustice Overturned

In a landmark decision, the Missouri Court of Appeals has overturned the conviction of Sandra Hemme, who spent 43 years in prison for a murder she did not commit. Hemme, now 63, was released after multiple courts, including the Missouri Supreme Court, ruled in favor of her innocence. The case has brought attention to the complexities and challenges within the legal system when addressing wrongful convictions.

Hemme’s conviction stemmed from a confession obtained while she was heavily sedated and in a psychiatric hospital. No other evidence linked her to the crime. The Innocence Project, which worked on her case, stated that Hemme was the longest-held wrongly incarcerated woman in the United States.

Attorney General’s Controversial Stance

Despite the overwhelming evidence of Hemme’s innocence, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey fought to keep her incarcerated. Bailey argued that Hemme posed a safety risk and that the evidence supporting her innocence was not “newly discovered.” This stance drew criticism from legal experts who viewed it as an unjust attempt to prolong Hemme’s imprisonment.

“It was too easy to convict an innocent person and way harder than it should have been to get her out, even to the point of court orders being ignored. It shouldn’t be this hard to free an innocent person.” – Sean O’Brien

The Attorney General’s actions led to delays in Hemme’s release, causing emotional distress to her family, particularly as her father is in palliative care. Judge Ryan Horsman even threatened the attorney general’s office with contempt before Hemme was finally released.

Evidence Suppression and Alternate Suspects

A key factor in Hemme’s wrongful conviction was the suppression of evidence suggesting another suspect, Michael Holman, was involved in the crime. This crucial information was not disclosed during her trial. Additionally, Hemme had an alibi for the time of the murder, which was not shared with the jury.

“This Court finds that the evidence shows that Ms. Hemme’s statements to police are so unreliable and that the evidence pointing to Michael Holman as the perpetrator of the crime (is) so objective and probative that no reasonable juror would find Ms. Hemme guilty” – Horsman

The appellate court questioned the handling of evidence, including a palm print linked to Holman and the victim’s earrings found in his home, which were never presented to the jury. These revelations underscore the importance of thorough investigations and transparent legal proceedings.

Implications for the Justice System

Hemme’s case has brought to light persistent issues within the legal system, particularly regarding the handling of wrongful convictions. The difficulty in overturning her conviction, despite clear evidence of innocence, raises questions about the effectiveness of current legal processes in rectifying miscarriages of justice.

As Hemme adjusts to life outside prison after more than four decades, her case serves as a stark reminder of the human cost of wrongful convictions and the ongoing need for reform in the criminal justice system. It also highlights the crucial role of organizations like the Innocence Project in advocating for those who have been unjustly imprisoned.