>> Bill: SO A DEATH ROW INMATE IN ALABAMA NOW HAS HOURS TO
LIVE.
LIVE. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. IS
CALLING ON THE GOVERNOR IN THAT
STATE TO STOP HIS SCHEDULED
EXECUTION.
EXECUTION. BACK IN 2005, A JURY CONVICTED
NATHANIEL WOODS IN THE SHOOTING
DEATHS OF THREE POLICE OFFICERS.
THERE’S NO EVIDENCE THAT HE
FIRED THE WEAPON BUT PROSECUTORS
SAY HE CONSPIRED WITH THE
GUNMAN.
GUNMAN. ALABAMA’S AG CALLED THIS AN
EFFORT TO SAVE NATHANIEL WOODS
FROM HIS JUST PUNISHMENT.
MEANWHILE, ANOTHER MAN, THE
CONFESSED SHOOTER THAT SAID HE
ACTED ALONE AND THAT WOODS IS
100% INNOCENT.
100% INNOCENT. I WANT TO BRING IN THE JUDGE ON
THIS IN A MOMENT.
BUT FIRST, MARTIN LUTHER KING
III IN ATLANTA.
WELCOME.
WELCOME. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. HOW DID YOU GET INVOLVED IN THIS
CASE?
CASE? >> FIRST OF ALL, I HAD HEARD
ABOUT IT.
ABOUT IT. I HAPPENED TO BE IN ALABAMA ON
SUNDAY FOR THE BLOODY SUNDAY
ANNIVERSARY.
ANNIVERSARY. >> Bill: OKAY.
THAT WAS JUST WITHIN THE LAST
WEEK THEN.
WEEK THEN. >> YES, A COUPLE DAYS AGO.
WHEN I HEARD ABOUT THE PROSPECT
AND AN INNOCENT MAN WOULD BE
EXECUTED, I BECAME CONCERNED.
WHENEVER THERE’S ANY INKLING OF
A CHANCE THAT SOMEBODY MAY BE
INNOCENT, ALL OF THE FACTS WILL
BE EXHAUSTED.
BE EXHAUSTED. >> Bill: HOW DO YOU KNOW HE’S
INNOCENT?
INNOCENT? >> THE PERSON THAT PULLED THE
TRIGGER AND CONFESSED OVER AND
OVER AGAIN AND HE WAS THE
TRIGGER MAN AND NATHANIEL WAS
NOT INVOLVED, MR. WOODS, I JUST
KNOW OF THE BACKGROUND OF THE
CASE.
CASE. THE SECOND THING IS THERE’S A
LOT OF TESTIMONY.
UNFORTUNATE
UNFORTUNATE UNFORTUNATELY, MR. WOODS HAD
POOR COUNSEL.
POOR COUNSEL. I DON’T THINK IT’S EVER TOO LATE
WHEN SOMEONE MAY BE INNOCENT TOO
REVIEW ALL OF THE INFORMATION TO
MAKE SURE.
MAKE SURE. >> Bill: YOU SAID MAYBE.
YOU’VE ALSO SAID VERY LIKELY
INNOCENT.
INNOCENT. YOU’VE ALSO SAID APPEARS TO HAVE
BE STRONGLY MISHANDSELED BY THE
COURTS.
COURTS. THERE’S A LOT OF IFS IN THERE,
MARTIN.
MARTIN. >> SO YOUR QUESTION IS WHAT?
>> Bill: WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU
HAVE THAT HE’S INNOCENTS?
>> THE GENTLEMAN THAT SAID HE
DID THE CALLING AND NATHANIEL
WAS NOT INVOLVED.
I’M NOT A LAWYER.
I CAN’T DEBATE YOU.
ALL WE CAN LOOK AT IS THE FACTS.
IF A PERSON IS INNOCENT, THEY
SHOULDN’T BE KILLED IN THIS
COUNTRY.
COUNTRY. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KILLED AND HUNG
FOR DOING NOTHING.
MANY THIS CONFESSION, IF THAT IS
THE PROSPECT, AT LEAST GO
THROUGH THE FACTS AND THE
INFORMATION AND GIVE THE SYSTEM
AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK IF IT DID
NOT WORK.
NOT WORK. UNFORTUNATELY, THE SYSTEM DOES
NOT WORK FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS
AND POOR PEOPLE OVER AND OVER
AGAIN.
AGAIN. >> Bill: HERE’S WHAT THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID.
HE SAID NATHANIEL WOODS WAS
FOUND GUILTY BY A JURY OF HIS
PEERS.
PEERS. THE ONLY JUSTICE IS THAT THAT
WAS INFLICTED ON THE FOUR
POLICEMEN IN THAT TERRIBLE DAY
IN 2004.
IN 2004. TO THOSE FAMILIES STILL LIVING
WITH THIS.
WITH THIS. >> THERE’S NO QUESTION THAT
THOSE MEN SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN
KILLED.
KILLED. NEVER SHOULD OFFICERS BE KILLED
DOING THEIR JOBS.
HOWEVER, NOR SHOULD AN INNOCENT
PERSON BE KILLED.
>> Bill: I’M JUST ASKING WHAT
EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT HE’S
AN INNOCENT MAN?
I KNOW WHAT YOUR OBJECTIVE IS.
I RESPECT THAT.
FOR THE SAKE OF OUR VIEWERS, WE
HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE
FACTS ARE.
FACTS ARE. >> Bill: THAT’S THE PROBLEM.
YOU CAN’T GO THROUGH THE FACTS
IF THE TRIAL WAS BUNGLED.
YOU HAD AN INDYIGENT DEFENSE
COUNSEL WHO HAD BUNGLED
INFORMATION.
INFORMATION. I’M NOT TRYING TO BE A LAWYER
BUT IT SEEMS IRRESPONSIBLE AND