http://www.news-leader.com/story/news/local/ozarks/2017/04/01/what-happened-aurora-man-who-pardoned-gov-carnahan/99862152/

Still lives in the town.

Still lives with his mother, has a job mowing lawns, and likes to keep to himself.

So it seems he is doing quite well, just a tad reserved.

Thanks for post this Dazzler.

Why couldn't they get a better picture?

Nice to hear he's doing well. After seeing a few Topix pages about this case, it seems like there are people from the area who still believe Johnny's guilty, so I'm sure this will always follow him around.

One thing I've always been curious about is if Chris Brownfield actually had an accomplice who participated in the murder. I wouldn't be surprised if he fabricated that part so that he could confess, but absolve himself of some responsibility by pinning the worst aspects of the murder on his "accomplice".

I've always felt so bad for this poor guy. He was absolutely railroaded by inept cops and an over zealous prosecutor. God forbid anyone on the investigation of this case had any common sense. Thankfully Johnny was released but he will never get back those years he lost and the stigma he has to live him. Through no fault of his own

Nice to hear he's doing well. After seeing a few Topix pages about this case, it seems like there are people from the area who still believe Johnny's guilty, so I'm sure this will always follow him around.

I wondered about that too. For example, on UM it was mentioned that some people in town had erected a billboard with some statements supporting Johnny's innocence, yet Stack mentioned that it was "firebombed by an unknown party." I could only assume from that that not everyone was supportive of Wilson.

One thing I've always been curious about is if Chris Brownfield actually had an accomplice who participated in the murder. I wouldn't be surprised if he fabricated that part so that he could confess, but absolve himself of some responsibility by pinning the worst aspects of the murder on his "accomplice".

That is a really good point I hadn't thought of, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.

I was kind of surprised though to find out that, in the end, it doesn't seem as though Brownfield's confession played that much of a role in Johnny's exoneration.

I wondered about that too. For example, on UM it was mentioned that some people in town had erected a billboard with some statements supporting Johnny's innocence, yet Stack mentioned that it was "firebombed by an unknown party." I could only assume from that that not everyone was supportive of Wilson.

I'm sure some people wouldn't have been able to get over the fact that Johnny confessed to the crime. Back in the eighties, the public wouldn't have been as knowledgable about false confessions and how often they can occur, so they probably figured "Why would Johnny have confessed to the crime if he didn't do it?".

I don't get why the police would do this. Surely it is better to catch the real murderer to not only get justice for the victim but also stop them from potentially doing this to someone else. Who does this benefit?

I don't get why the police would do this. Surely it is better to catch the real murderer to not only get justice for the victim but also stop them from potentially doing this to someone else. Who does this benefit?

I do not stand behind this practice at all (I think that goes without saying), but I have heard of high-profile cases where the police/DA's are under tremendous pressure to make an arrest to help ease the public's concern about having a violent person on the loose.

I do not think arresting/prosecuting the wrong man helps anyone. It's a waste of taxpayer money and it's unethical, at least from my perspective. If I'm charging someone with a crime and going all the way to trial, I'm damn sure the person I've charged committed the crime. Maybe I overthink my role in these cases, but I find it very important for me to be able to look the jurors in the eyes and say, "The evidence has shown you the defendant committed the crime," not "Well, he *could* be the guy. I'll let you decide." My credibility in front of a jury is everything to me. I understand there are prosecutors out there who seek to "make a name" for themselves, but I do think they are the minority. I think the majority of prosecutors are truth-seekers and want to genuinely help society.

This is very easy for me to say-- I admittedly have not handled a homicide in my office. By the time I get a case, the police are positive we have the right person under investigation. I cannot imagine the pressure someone would be under to make a community feel safer... however, I don't believe that excuses arresting the wrong person and taking away their liberties. That's just me.

Some police departments truly do not give a crap. Saw a horrible case recently of a young girl (4-6 years old) who was home with her brother and father, went missing, and turned up dead in a creek some distance away. The PD browbeat her father into confessing that he had accidentally killed her by opening a bathroom door too suddenly, panicked, and disposed of the body. The police totally missed the detail that she had been molested and didn't even look at the family's home to see that their bathroom door opened in the opposite direction than the forced confession said. Luckily a smart lawyer on the job got the father cleared and eventually the true criminal was captured. It turned out the brother must have slept through any commotion and the father heard nothing because the kids were sleeping in the living room and the father was in his room with a large fan running. The mother was away at the time. The perpetrator was drunk or drugged or both, just passing by, and committed a random crime.

A similar confession was forced from a teenage brother when a young girl turned up stabbed in her home. The boy not only implicated himself but a couple of friends. The boy's name was Michael Crowe and his case drew a huge amount of attention. http://www.oprah.com/own-oprahshow/michael-crowes-false-confession

One thing I've always been curious about is if Chris Brownfield actually had an accomplice who participated in the murder. I wouldn't be surprised if he fabricated that part so that he could confess, but absolve himself of some responsibility by pinning the worst aspects of the murder on his "accomplice".

This article (http://articles.latimes.com/1996-03-31/news/mn-53274_1_false-confessions/3) mentions that Dee Wampler found motel receipts and phone records which indicated that Brownfield and an accomplice were in the area at the time when Martz was murdered. Earlier in the article one of the men who helped free Johnny say that Brownfield was not a liar. It goes on to mention that Brownfield had a taped phone conversation with his accomplice set up by Wilson's defense team. It seems like there was never any real open investigation into Brownfield and his accomplice because the prosecutor still believed Johnny to be guilty.

This segment felt like a precursor to Making a Murderer. I was shocked and alarmed, and grateful for the positive update.

Was the real killer ever caught?

This segment felt like a precursor to Making a Murderer. I was shocked and alarmed, and grateful for the positive update.

Was the real killer ever caught?

Well, even though he was never formally charged with Pauline Martz's murder, Chris Brownfield did received a life sentence for the murder of another elderly woman only 16 days later, so at least he was locked away. It looks like his accomplice got away with it, however.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-dna-of-a-killer-who-murdered-idaho-teen-angie-dodge/


speaking of cops railroading and an innocent person serves many years in jail because of false confession, turned out the dna didn't match but was convicted

look up the angie dodge story...don't think UM did an episode but what an amazing story....christopher tapp finally was realeased...then they did a familial dna test at ancestry dot com..... 34 out of 35 markers on a name michael ursy the guy has a son jr

they haul michael ursy jr. in and are very vague, swab his cheek..tell him vaguely about notorious case in a certain city, his friend looks it up and it is the angie dodge case...this guy was there making a slasher film!!!! dna comes back NOT a match...but some distant relative related to someone in his familty a several generations back is the guilty party..they still have no idea who it is

he could have been real dick..but he teamed up with angies mom to find the killer and to get this incredible story out so it doesn't happen to soemone else

his dads dna was at ancestry dot com because the his dad took part in a geneology project at his church.......

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-dna-of-a-killer-who-murdered-idaho-teen-angie-dodge/


speaking of cops railroading and an innocent person serves many years in jail because of false confession, turned out the dna didn't match but was convicted

look up the angie dodge story...don't think UM did an episode but what an amazing story....christopher tapp finally was realeased...then they did a familial dna test at ancestry dot com..... 34 out of 35 markers on a name michael ursy the guy has a son jr

they haul michael ursy jr. in and are very vague, swab his cheek..tell him vaguely about notorious case in a certain city, his friend looks it up and it is the angie dodge case...this guy was there making a slasher film!!!! dna comes back NOT a match...but some distant relative related to someone in his familty a several generations back is the guilty party..they still have no idea who it is

he could have been real dick..but he teamed up with angies mom to find the killer and to get this incredible story out so it doesn't happen to soemone else

his dads dna was at ancestry dot com because the his dad took part in a geneology project at his church.......

Familial DNA is far from an exact science yet. They still have a ways to go with it before it is accepted into mainstream science like other DNA testing. In this particular case, even though there was a familial DNA hit, it could be erroneous. That's how much work still needs to be done.

oh i agree it will become more exact over time..they need to keep working on it

This segment felt like a precursor to Making a Murderer. I was shocked and alarmed, and grateful for the positive update.


Yes indeed, I just re-watched this segment and there are so many similarities to the coerced Brendan Dassey "confession".

"Just sign this and we can all go home." How many cases are there like this with the mentally disabled, that get no media attention?! It is an extremely troubling thought, to think how common of a practice it is...and to think that the DAs, judges, juries all go along with it

Yes indeed, I just re-watched this segment and there are so many similarities to the coerced Brendan Dassey "confession".

"Just sign this and we can all go home." How many cases are there like this with the mentally disabled, that get no media attention?! It is an extremely troubling thought, to think how common of a practice it is...and to think that the DAs, judges, juries all go along with it

"Just sign this and we can all go home" is extremely different from, "We can't make you any promises".