D A Landmark documentary focuses on a handful of prisoners, whom after 10,15,20 or so years, have been eventually found innocent and set free, only to fall on deaf ears in society. In detailing the startlingly inept justice systems' process dealing with the exonerated, director Jessica Sanders and producer Marc H. Simon largely succeed in documenting the tragic flaws of our system and it's ultimate hypocrisies of presuming innocence. Not only do we get a scathing survey of our governments apathetic synapses when it comes to dispensing justice, but at the heart of this difficult film lies the wounded and warped psychologies these stunningly brave and fierce seven men have been left by society to sift through as they are literally thrown onto the street after decades of wrongful imprisonment with nary a dollar of compensation to their name, often having to fight and pay their own money just to have their false charges expunged.This project illuminates the grim underbelly of our judicial system in a way I think even the most hardened cynic would appreciate, and matched with the emotional perspectives shown struggling and grasping for relevance in a world that could care less, urges viewers to wake up to the less comfortable aspects of our legal system. After Innocence packs even more sting from the tense and unpredicted outcome of these fates, highlighted in particular by inmate Wilton Dedge's ongoing fight for release, an outcome that became the brilliant and triumphant finale only through the goodwill of fate, as the documentary was already due at Sundance before any real resolution was filmed with his scenario. Dedge's Florida case was infamous for having proved his innocence, beyond any shadow of a scientific doubt whatsoever, yet still remained in jail for another 3 years, a testament to how corrupt and proud our monster of justice really is.Anyone who takes a slightest interest in powerful, insightful documentary film-making, promotes social and just change, or wishes to examine the absolute pit of ignorance that remains our legal precedents, should remain riveted throughout the important piece. If the simple and profound legal ramifications dictating how justice is being perverted in our country do not rile you where you sit, behold these seven men and their haunted subtleties, and begin to never take your freedom for granted.

roland-104 Documentary about men who had been incarcerated, some for 20 years or more, awaiting certain execution on death row, who subsequently have been exonerated after their convictions for capital crimes were overturned as a result of new, DNA-based evidence proving their innocence.These conviction reversals are, almost without exception, the result of pro bono legal assistance provided by the Innocence Project, a non-profit legal clinic established in 1992 at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City.The two founders of the clinic, Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld, have waged a relentless battle to aid wrongly convicted men facing execution, in the process encouraging the development of similar clinics in 30 states. To date, 175 persons have been exonerated through these efforts.Former Illinois Governor George Ryan was so impressed by the likelihood of error in capital convictions that, shortly before leaving office early in 2003, he commuted the death sentences of all convicts awaiting execution in his state.This film focuses on several affected men, exploring the events and circumstances that followed the demonstration of their innocence. Exoneration brings no assistance to these men. For example, even the expungement of the conviction from the criminal justice record is not automatic. It must be applied for through a convoluted paper process. In one state, the exonerated individual must pay $6,000 in fees to gain an expungement.Whereas guilty felons placed on parole may be entitled to many services and sources of aid for things like education, employment and heath care, exonerated persons receive no such entitlements. No state has arranged a program to offer compensation to any of these people. In nearly every instance, they don't even get an apology from the State for erroneously taking away their freedom for years upon years.We also are reminded of bad things we already knew from other films, namely, that prosecutors and judges are often loath to accept the DNA evidence, insisting, if you can believe this, that because a case was tried fairly, i.e., the trial met acceptable prosecutorial and judicial standards, the convict should continue to be incarcerated and even executed, despite proof of innocence! In one man's case that we follow throughout this film, prosecutors stalled for three years after DNA testing had proved that he was not the perpetrator, during which time the man remained in prison, before Innocence Project lawyers prevailed in bringing the DNA evidence to court and winning an acquittal. Interviewed for the film, one member of that prosecuting team justified the effort to keep the convict on death row on the basis that "the victim's family needs closure." Not every case reveals such perversely twisted sentiments. In a heartwarming example of the opposite reaction, we see a prosecutor embrace another newly released, exonerated man, apologizing for the hardship caused by his false conviction and incarceration.We see in this film stories of success and failure after release of these men from prison. One gets a good job from a sympathetic truck repair shop owner. Another successfully pursues his dream of becoming a psychotherapist, first obtaining an A.A. degree, then his B.S. in Psychology. But others fail to find decent work, their records still blemished by unexpunged information regarding their false convictions. One man dies of a heart attack a few years after his release. A successful support group is formed in one locale, and we learn of various efforts now underway to seek compensation, though none has so far succeeded.Some sobering comments on the problem of false conviction are offered by Barry Scheck and others along the way. The exonerated persons represent the tip of a huge iceberg. The various Innocence Projects around the country receive hundreds and hundreds of requests for aid, far more than they can even answer, much less take on. We are shown files drawers full of unopened envelopes, letters from convicts seeking the help of Scheck and Neufeld's clinic. Scheck says that DNA analysis is possible in only about 10% of the cases they do review. In the other 90% of cases, materials on which DNA analysis can be performed were either absent, were rendered unusable because of botched evidence collection, have been destroyed or lost in the years since the trial.Scheck also tells us that eyewitness reports constitute the sole evidence base for successful prosecution in 78% of capital crime convictions among persons now on death row. This despite the fact that a huge body of psychological research, conducted by experts like Elizabeth Loftus at the University of Washington (now professor at the University of California, Irvine), has demonstrated the frequent unreliability of such evidence. One exonerated man's story, followed in this film, has, since his release, brought him into contact with the rape victim who erroneously identified him in a police lineup, the sole basis of his conviction. He and the woman that he did not rape have become friends, and they share a common goal of improving the evidence base relied upon by prosecutors.This film is extraordinary insofar as its subject - life in the community after exoneration - has not previously been explored in any depth, factual content is lucidly presented, the men featured are articulate, highly interesting individuals (almost all, for example, are remarkably free of hostility about their experiences), the talking heads are informative and kept to an essential minimum, and the photography, editing and continuity are first rate. Jessica Sanders makes her debut here as the (co)writer-director of a feature length documentary. It's a splendid beginning. My grade: 10/10

sleacc I just saw After Innocence at the Get Real Film Festival in Minneapolis. I too was aware of the Innocence Project - but now I am So Much more informed in regard to this important issue. I hope this film is seen widely as there are important issues needing attention...the after innocence issues. For instance, it's important that an innocent person who is exonerated receive compensation for their time. As it is they receive nothing upon release. How much is 5-10-20 years of a life worth? How does a family recoup money spent to fight for the truth? How does one rejoin society after years of imprisonment? An exonerated person also needs to have their record expunged. Altho they have their exoneration certificate, their record of jail time is still there. An exonerated person may receive no assistance with employment, no assistance with reintroduction into society upon release. I believe this is unlike the guilty, who after serving their time, receive medical coverage, monetary benefits and assistance with employment.It was so nice and so moving to meet Wilton Dedge in person after the film. For me to fully appreciate the impact of serving 20 plus years for a crime not committed is impossible. But as Wilton commented after the film, it is very important to be aware of this issue and involved -- as this could happen to anyone.

mikewelch7 Bringing to light recent exoneration's made possible through newly admissible DNA evidence, Jessica Sander's "After Innocence" is a very compelling and important documentary.The film focuses on the Project Innocence group, a team of lawyers dedicated to freeing those imprisoned unjustly. This film focused on several Project Innocence cases, where individuals were sentenced, largely based on eyewitness identification, and without physical evidence. Through the use of DNA, the lawyers are able to have their subjects released.As the film relates, being released from prison is not the end of the inmates' struggles. They return to society with nary an apology (much less restitution for unjust imprisonment) from the state's where they were incarcerated. The exonerees then deal with a whole host of complications (such as getting their records expunged of their crimes) after they are released, partly due to the lack of provision for such releases on behalf of the judicial system, and partly due to the uncertain status they are accorded by society.This film was well received at the 2005 Sundance festival. At the end of each showing, the exonerees stood for question and answer sessions, which were highly memorable for all involved.I highly recommend this film, and hope to see it picked up by a film distributor for general release in 2005.