The Psychological Consequences of a Wrongful Conviction and How Compensation Statutes Can Mitigate the Harms
INTRODUCTION
In 2010, Virginia “Ginny” LeFever was released from a lifelong prison sentence for her husband’s murder, a crime she did not commit.[1] Ginny told police her husband had died by suicide after ingesting a full bottle of antidepressants. Franklin County’s toxicologist, James Ferguson, presented evidence to the contrary. According to Ferguson, the only explanation for his death was that someone—Ginny—injected him with poison.
When Ginny was released, it did not take long for her to realize the world kept going without her while she was imprisoned. At fifty-nine-years-old, Ginny did not have a job and had only a few possessions, including legal documents and a few books. Her parents passed away and some of her children refused to talk to her. In addition, Ginny developed mental health disorders following her release. Specifically, Ginny suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).[2]For Ginny, while she was able to successfully finish school and start working following her exoneration, she was having difficulties interpersonally. Ginny struggled to rebuild relationships outside of prison and found herself in a constant state of hypervigilance.
Ginny is one of many exonerees to develop mental health disorders as result of her wrongful conviction. Gary Gauger, for example, was sentenced to death for the murder of his parents. Following his release and exoneration, he refused to leave his home unless he was forced. Darryl Hunt, who spent nineteen years in prison for a murder he did not commit, committed suicide in a parking lot. It is evident that there is a lack of mental health support for exonerees. The United States has few safeguards in place to ensure exonerees can get back on their feet following their release. Inmates on parole are provided support through reentry programs, but similar networks are unavailable to exonerees. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia have compensation statutes, but the remaining thirteen have nothing at all. This paper explores the psychological challenges faced by wrongfully convicted people and provides an analysis of how compensation statutes can be improved to better meet the needs of wrongfully convicted people.
I. INCARCERATION AND THE REINTEGRATION PROCESS
Incarceration by itself—regardless of guilt or innocence—is traumatic. Several factors contribute to this trauma. The absence of privacy and scrutiny from prison officials can be psychologically debilitating, and the presence of violence triggers constant fear. Research suggests that people in prison “experience mental deterioration and apathy, endure personality changes, and become uncertain about their identities.”[3] Incarceration can also lead to a feeling of helplessness, greater dependence, and introversion.
A. Incarceration and Wrongful Convictions
The effects of incarceration on people are immediate and long-term. In prison, individuals often adapt to survive the traumatic environment. This can result “in higher dependence on institutional structure, hypervigilance, psychological distancing, a lowered sense of self-worth, and post-traumatic stress disorder.”[4] In addition, wrongfully convicted people often develop coping routines to manage the fatigue and despair of prison and legal battles. Incarceration is arguably more debilitating for those wrongfully convicted than those guilty because the traumas and stresses of incarceration are exacerbated by their innocence. People who are in prison for a crime they committed, know they committed a crime. Those wrongfully convicted do not experience criminal thoughts or desires; they know they do not belong in prison. They are aware that their arrest, conviction, and detention are entirely unjust. Individuals who have had their confessions coerced also experience additional distress, which further enhances trauma.
John Wilson, a professor of psychology at Cleveland State University, studies the psychological impact of wrongful imprisonment and characterizes wrongfully convicted people as “normal people who by circumstance ended up in a very horrific system of injustice by the criminal justice system itself.”[5] Wilson has found that wrongfully convicted people and exonerees endure a series of psychological challenges starting from the moment they are arrested. At the time of the arrest, the wrongfully accused person enters a period of disbelief as if it was some sort of mistake that led to the arrest. Soon after, when the “mistake” is not corrected, they begin to experience feelings of injustice.[6] Feelings of injustice transform into feelings of anger and fear of what is to come in prison. While in prison, wrongfully accused people endure a loss of freedom, which may manifest as feelings of vulnerability and distrust. Next, they experience a loss of identity. Wilson explains that this “involves a sense of coming undone, as if the ‘old’ innocent self dies and the new ‘incarcerated self’ is born in its place.”[7] Many wrongfully accused individuals experience feelings of shame and guilt, despite their innocence, since they are portrayed and treated as though they are guilty. These people eventually grow tired of claiming their innocence to no avail. At this stage, those wrongfully convicted “learn to endure their imprisonment by making life structured, ordered, and routine where possible.” The psychological challenges do not cease if a wrongfully convicted person is released from prison.
B. Problems Faced by Individuals Reentering Society
Wrongfully convicted people face a host of obstacles following their release from prison. First and foremost, just because a wrongfully convicted individual has been released, does not mean that individual has been completely absolved of the crime. There is a difference between a wrongful conviction and an exoneration. An exoneration is the legal event that relieves the person of all the consequences of that conviction, and until a wrongfully convicted individual has been exonerated, the conviction stands.
Those with criminal convictions often struggle to find employment. Recently released individuals have difficulties obtaining and maintaining employment since employers are often hesitant to hire people with criminal convictions. Some states even allow employers to deny a person a job if they were arrested, regardless of whether they were ever convicted of a crime. Criminal convictions can also limit an individual’s ability to find housing. When people are released from prison, they often leave with few, if any, financial resources. Moreover, private housing policies are often strict and do not allow criminal convictions and public housing policies typically restrict individuals with drug and felony convictions.
Even following an exoneration, individuals still struggle obtaining employment. Finding employment can be difficult after being incarcerated for a long period of time; not only has the exoneree been out of the work force, but the exoneree must explain why that is to the prospective employer. Moreover, exonerees often have failed to develop skills that would help them find and obtain employment due to their imprisonment. Further, research suggests that exonerees experience employment discrimination on levels similar to individuals actually guilty of the same offense.[8] Studies have shown that exonerees are still likely to experience a stigma surrounding their personal character.[9]
Incarceration alone is psychologically challenging, but reintegration presents a new set of obstacles. Those wrongfully convicted are unable to transition immediately back to normalcy once released from prison. They face similar struggles to parolees, but their problems are exacerbated by their innocence.
II. PSYCHOLOGICAL CHALLENGES POST-RELEASE
While there is an abundance of research on the psychological effects of criminals’ post-conviction, there is much less involving wrongfully convicted people and exonerees.[10] However, of the research available, it is apparent that the consequences are serious and remain long after the individual has been exonerated. These consequences can be separated into several different categories.
A. Mental Health Disorders
Research suggests that wrongfully convicted people typically develop at least one mental health disorder, but often suffer from more than one disorder. Many wrongfully convicted persons who have developed these symptoms and disorders do not have a history of mental health issues. This leads to the conclusion that these outcomes are likely a direct result of “the wrongful arrest, conviction or imprisonment.”
Depression, anxiety, and PTSD are among the most common disorders suffered by wrongfully convicted people. Several studies have also found that this population experiences incidents of suicidal ideation. A study completed by Ros Burnett and Carolyn Hoyle and their colleagues found that out of thirty individuals, twenty-three reported depression, eight reported suicidal thoughts, eighteen of reported anxiety and panic attacks, and seventeen reported PTSD.[11]Another study found that out of thirteen participants, forty-six percent experienced depression and anxiety, and forty-two percent experienced PTSD.[12] Many studies have found that wrongfully convicted people suffer from additional psychological symptoms in addition to specific disorders. Some individuals have reported feeling “worn down” after being wrongfully accused and often worry that others do not believe in their innocence. Wrongfully convicted people also often experience feelings of “bitterness, feelings of loss, hopelessness, emptiness, anger and aggression, helplessness, [and] chronic feelings of threat and fear when out in public.”
In 2005, Adrian Grounds, a psychiatry professor at the University of Cambridge, performed an impactful clinical study examining the mental health consequences of incarceration on eighteen exonerated men, all of whom had no history of mental health issues prior to incarceration.[13] He compared the mental health outcomes to that of “military veterans and torture survivors who suffer from extreme forms of trauma.”[14] Grounds found that of the eighteen men, most experienced significant mental health issues following their wrongful conviction. The majority of these men developed PTSD and depression. Further, fourteen of them displayed serious personality changes and many also developed panic disorder, paranoia, and substance abuse issues. Research such as this demonstrates the need for psychological services for those wrongfully convicted to ensure that they can cope with the lasting effects of a wrongful conviction.
B. Stigma
Another common obstacle those wrongfully convicted endure is the stigma associated with a conviction and incarceration. The stereotypes associated with each of these may lead others to believe that wrongfully convicted people are dangerous, despite their conviction being unjust. The difficulties associated with stigma can lead to difficulties in employment and personal relationships. In 2015, Kimberly Clow and Amy-May Leach, conducted a study to analyze the ways in which wrongfully convicted people are perceived in comparison to actual offenders and non-offenders.[15] The pair found that there was “contemptuous prejudice” against those wrongfully convicted in comparison to those with no criminal history. While participants reported feeling “pity” for those wrongfully convicted, participants still “held [this population] at a greater social distance” than they did in comparison to those without criminal records.[16] Adina Thompson and her colleagues conducted a similar study to determine how the general public perceived exonerees.[17] In this study, participants either read an article about an exoneree, an actual offender, or a non-offender. Here, the exoneree was perceived more negatively in terms of personal characteristics when compared to the person without a criminal history.
Additionally, research suggests that the cause behind the wrongful conviction alters the public’s perception of the exoneree. In another study, an exoneree who was convicted based on a mistaken eyewitness was compared to another whose conviction was based on a false confession. Participants considered the exoneree who falsely confessed to be “less intelligent, and therefore were more uncertain about the exonerated individual’s actual innocence.”[18] Furthermore, participants were less inclined to favor reintegration services when the exoneree falsely confessed. These studies demonstrate that the stigma associated with wrongful convictions can be pervasive and can seriously hinder an individual’s ability to successfully reintegrate back into society.
C. Relationships with Others
Many wrongfully convicted people and exonerees have also reported struggling in relationships. Many wrongfully convicted people isolate after they are wrongfully accused; this is often either because they feel alienated or they fear being a burden to others. Grounds reported that all of the exonerated men in his study struggled adjusting to being around others again. Many of the exonerated men “were so conditioned to take orders from prison officials that they found it difficult to function in the unstructured environment of home.”[19] In addition, all of them also reported struggling in family and other close relationships. Some men “described that their feelings of love for their families transformed into feelings of duty.”[20]
Furthermore, it is not uncommon for an individual’s social networks to deteriorate following a wrongful accusation. Of the thirty participants in Burnett and Hoyle’s study, twenty-seven of them disclosed “a fractured social network,” seventeen disclosed “a strain on intimate relationships,” and eight disclosed “a strain on relationships with children or grandchildren.”[21] Several participants also said they felt exiled from friendships. Relationships following a conviction sometimes become strained or are severed because family members and friends do not believe that their loved one is actually innocent. Other times, family and friends simply adapt to life without the individual while he or she is in prison.
D. Adjustment Difficulties
Wrongfully convicted people often struggle to adjust to normalcy once released from prison because their wrongful conviction has largely consumed their lives. Many individuals spend years in and out of court fighting their conviction and imprisonment. Those who were incarcerated particularly struggle because they adapt to the strict day-to-day living.
In Grounds’s study, several exonerees reported feeling “embarrassed by the practical difficulties of mundane tasks like crossing the street, using a microwave, or handling money.”[22] They categorized this experience as humiliating and shameful. In addition, many reported feeling “unsettled”—that they “could not find a sense of direction” and that they “struggled to reintegrate back into their families.”[23] They also had a hard time adjusting to the cultural changes that occurred while they were in prison. Every participant in this study said that “they felt psychologically the age they had been upon entering prison, as if time stopped in their head at that point” following their release.[24] Grounds described these adjustment issues “as being ‘dislocated in time,’ suggesting that participants were ‘developmentally frozen’ as they still felt the age they had been when they went to prison, whereas the world and their families had moved on without them.”[25] Another study completed by Jeffrey Chinn and Ashley Ratliff had similar findings.[26] Participants described feeling stuck in time; while they were in prison, those outside continued on with their lives. When released, they experienced a “culture shock” because they “felt behind in technology and knowledge.”
Wrongfully convicted people experience a large variety of psychological challenges that cross all facets of their lives following their release from prison. While those guilty of the same crimes experience similar issues when released, many of these issues and their magnitude are specific to wrongfully convicted people given their innocence. Despite this, parolees are provided with more reintegration support than are wrongfully convicted people.
III. LIFE AFTER A WRONGFUL CONVICTION
When wrongfully convicted people are released from prison, they are met with little support from the state and this lack of support exacerbates the psychological challenges associated with wrongful convictions. States often have re-entry assistance programs for parolees, but nothing of the sort is offered to exonerees. Lawyers and organizations, such as the Innocence Project, care deeply about these issues, but they are more so focused on the conviction and exoneration, not on the aftermath of the release.
A. The Government’s Failure to Successfully Assist Wrongfully Convicted People in Reintegrating
A wrongful conviction is a crime at the hands of the state, and to remedy that crime, the state should restore the lives of its victims. A starting point is through just compensation. Even if an individual is exonerated, reintegrating into society is incredibly difficult following a wrongful conviction. By failing to provide just compensation—by failing to remedy its crime—the state re-victimizes those wrongfully convicted all over again.
1. Compensation Statutes
Wrongfully convicted people deserve to be compensated for their irreversible loss of liberty and time. Compensation statutes serve as the main avenue for recovery for those wrongfully convicted. Compensation statutes are preferable because people can recover without, for example, filing a lawsuit or having to prove official misconduct. However, state compensation statutes often fall short in adequately compensating wrongfully convicted people. Further, it is often very difficult, if not impossible, for wrongfully convicted people to recover under some state statutes.
While most states have compensation statutes, a total of thirteen do not. The states that do have compensation statutes are insufficient. Missouri, for example, provides exonerees $50 a day. Wisconsin caps total compensation at $25,000 and Maine caps compensation at $300,000. Further, just because a state has a compensation statute does not mean that an exoneree can automatically recover under it. Usually, exonerees have to apply for compensation and will only receive it if they fit certain criteria, which varies by state.[27] Prior to the recent statutory reform in Maryland, for example, wrongfully convicted people could only recover if they received either a governor’s pardon or a prosecutor-approved writ of actual innocence.
If exonerees are eligible and apply under a state compensation statute, it can take years for them to receive an award. Only about a third of all exonerees have actually received some sort of statutory award. This low percentage can be attributed to several factors. First, some non-filing is likely due to statutory bars that preclude claims. Florida and Maine, for example, have high non-filing rates, which is likely due to their statutory bars.[28] In Florida, individuals who committed a felony prior to their wrongful conviction cannot recover. In Maine, only individuals who have been pardoned by the governor can recover. Second, some non-filing may be related to statutory restrictions in what exactly the exoneree can recover. Montana, for example, only provides exonerees free tuition for schooling. Montana citizens cannot receive anything beyond free tuition. In many of these states, it is difficult for wrongfully convicted people to recover a monetary award. If a person is eligible and able to obtain an award under a compensation statute, the award will likely be disproportionate to what they lost and insufficient to assist them in reintegrating into society.
2. Nonmonetary Compensation
Some states, such as Texas, have taken steps to support exonerees in ways beyond financial compensation. In 2015, Governor Abbott signed the Tim Cole Act into law.[29] The Tim Cole Act is a holistic approach that encompasses both monetary and nonmonetary awards. The Tim Cole Act offers exonerees $80,000 for every year they were wrongfully imprisoned. If the exoneree was wrongfully on death row, then exoneree is awarded an additional $25,000 per year. Outside of the financial award, all exonerees are paired with a case manager who assists the exoneree in obtaining services necessary for successful reintegration. Under the statute, “[a]n exoneree is entitled to receive the benefits of any program that is supposed to assist with entering back into society.”[30] Exonerees are also provided with medical, dental, and psychological care as well as assistance in completing paperwork necessary for federal entitlement programs.
Texas’s approach is unfortunately very rare. In fact, Texas is the only state that expressly grants free psychological care. Other states, such as Vermont and Louisiana, explicitly account for psychological care together with the financial award. Vermont law awards $60,000 at most for each year the individual was wrongfully incarcerated and the award can only include “[c]ompensation for any reasonable reintegrative services and mental and physical health care costs.” Louisiana law provides that those wrongfully convicted can seek payment for medical and counseling services, but the claimant must first seek public services and can only seek payment for three years.[31] While both states account for psychological services, they do not guarantee it. In fact, Vermont’s low statutory cap of $60,000 per year may inhibit individuals from seeking psychological care if they are unable to afford it while paying for other necessities.
B. Compensation Reform
Almost all state compensation statutes are simply insufficient in their current forms to properly compensate those wrongfully convicted for all they have lost. States should adopt holistic statutes that encompass monetary and nonmonetary awards to best compensate those wrongfully convicted.
1. Financial Reform
Notwithstanding other needs, financial compensation should remain a central piece of compensation statutes. Financial compensation in part serves to remedy what the exoneree lost while in prison, including both lost opportunities and wages. Calculating damages for these types of losses is not particularly difficult, but calculating damages for the loss of time is far more challenging. Should an exoneree who wrongfully served thirty years receive more compensation than someone who served five? Should an exoneree whose wrongful conviction was based on police and prosecutorial misconduct receive more than someone whose conviction was based on an honest eyewitness misidentification? The former can arguably be answered in the affirmative, but the latter poses a more complex dilemma. Either way, those wrongfully convicted cannot always be treated the same. Financial compensation awards should be determined on a case-by-case-basis where the various injuries suffered by the person are carefully considered.
Statutes that cap compensation serve as a barrier to successful reintegration for those wrongfully convicted. Compensation statutes serve as an opportunity for states to right their wrongs, and by restricting compensation to an amount far less than the time served in prison, states only re-victimize those wrongfully convicted. There is no justification for states to cap recovery—especially at amounts as low as $25,000 as Wisconsin does. It is estimated that between two and ten percent of all convictions are wrongful.[32] This demonstrates that payouts are rare. Further, advances in DNA testing suggest that with time, the prevalence of wrongful convictions may decrease. DNA testing is now commonly used in many criminal cases and can easily be used to exclude perpetrators. DNA capabilities shouldreduce the likelihood of a wrongful conviction occurring. In addition, contributing factors of wrongful convictions are now known and understood in the legal field. Reform in wrongful conviction cases should reduce the likelihood of a wrongful conviction occurring. Nevertheless, these advancements are not to be used as arguments against reform. First, while DNA capabilities have improved, wrongful convictions will always occur. DNA evidence is not available in every case, and even when it is, there is no guarantee that it will be tested without error—whether that be on accident or purpose. Second, even though society now has evidence suggesting what factors contribute to wrongful convictions, does not mean that society is actively thinking about these risk factors or moving toward their elimination. These advances do suggest, though, that payouts to those wrongfully convicted should be rare. Therefore, states can afford to provide wrongfully convicted people with large awards—statutory caps serve no legitimate purpose.
Release of funds should also be immediate. The Innocence Project estimates that it takes an average of three years for exonerees to obtain compensation from the state following their release. This delay is unacceptable because people need access to these funds as soon as they leave prison. People need housing, clothing, food, and transportation immediately. They also need access to dental and medical care. Without immediate access to funds, they are likely unable to access these necessities. Moreover, wrongfully convicted people should not have to wait long periods of time for compensation simply because it is unjust. These people have spent years—sometimes decades—wrongly incarcerated and fighting their conviction. They should not have to spend more time fighting for compensation that is rightfully theirs.
While financial compensation is a necessary reward, monetary relief alone cannot make the wrongfully convicted person whole again. Financial compensation fails to remedy many of the other problems faced by wrongfully convicted people. Money cannot make up for a person’s lack of employment skills or education. It cannot repair a person’s damaged reputation or relationships, mend their ailing physical or mental health, or help them adjust to life outside of prison. Following their release, exonerees need insurance, housing, and a job, along with medical and psychological care.. Money, to an extent, can assist in some of these needs, but states have an obligation to provide services.
2. Holistic Reform
It is essential that states take a holistic approach to compensation that includes both monetary and non-monetary rewards. Upon release, exonerees often go without necessities such as medical and dental care, job training, and education, but yet these needs are not considered in most statutes. These necessities should be provided by the state. In addition, states can also provide other benefits to make those wrongfully convicted whole again. States should provide, for example, for the automatic expungement of a person’s conviction. This would allow for wrongfully convicted people to more easily obtain both employment and housing. This would also minimize the stigma endured by wrongfully convicted people because of their criminal conviction. In addition, states should issue a formal apology to wrongfully convicted people. This, too, would help remedy housing and employment issues as well as minimize stigma. It would also serve as an acknowledgement of wrongdoing on part of the state.
Holistic compensation should account for psychological treatment and care. Research conveys that wrongfully convicted people experience a host of psychological challenges as a result of being wrongfully accused and convicted. Therefore, counseling services are needed to mitigate the short- and long-term mental health challenges associated with wrongful convictions. One exoneree stated, “[t]he person I had to become to survive eighteen years of incarceration is not the person I wanted to be, and it’s not the person that I am. It became a part of me because I had to survive in prison.”[33]Psychological services are necessary to ensure that wrongfully convicted people can adjust to life outside of prison and successfully reintegrate back into society.
States should provide wrongfully convicted people with access to these services indefinitely so they can utilize these services as long as they feel necessary. States should either coordinate with professionals to provide these services directly or allow individuals to coordinate this care themselves and instead provide direct payment or vouchers. If states elect the latter, states should ensure that individuals have the resources to coordinate with professionals. Regardless of what route states elect, it is essential that states provide these services directly instead of granting a large award that encompasses psychological care. When states do this, wrongfully convicted people may not be able to access or afford this care after paying for other essentials. States have an obligation to ensure that individuals know how psychological care works and how it can benefit them and what professionals they should contact and how. In addition, states should not draw a distinction between public and private services; nor should they first require the individual to seek state provided services as Louisiana does. States should allow for the wrongfully convicted individual to choose between public and private services.
The awards provided to wrongfully convicted people under current compensation statutes do not come close to making up for the time they spent in prison or for all they lost because of their wrongful conviction. The awards—if granted—are also insufficient in assisting wrongfully convicted people in reintegrating. This lack of support exacerbates the psychological challenges faced by wrongfully convicted people; holistic and comprehensive reform to compensation statutes that includes both monetary and nonmonetary awards would alleviate some of the harms.
CONCLUSION
Research makes clear that wrongfully convicted people suffer unique harms and at higher levels in comparison to those convicted and guilty of the same crime. Wrongful convictions can “be characterized as a state crime that results from the illegal actions of state actors or the misapplication of their authority” and those wrongfully convicted are the state’s victims.[34] These individuals are only re-victimized following their release when state officials “refuse to apologize, accept responsibility, acknowledge exonerees’ factual innocence, or provide meaningful redress for their wrongful acts.”[35] States have an obligation to remedy their crimes and should adopt comprehensive, holistic compensation statutes that sufficiently meet the needs of the wrongfully convicted.
Lauren Legner (‘22) is a Juris Doctor candidate at Michigan State University College of Law. She is a Notes Editor on the Michigan State Law Review and serves as the Co-Editor on the inaugural volume of the MSLR Forum. Lauren graduated from Saginaw Valley State University with a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology and a minor in Legal Philosophy. She is primarily interested in corporate law, and would specifically like to focus on private equity and mergers and acquisitions.
[1]Virginia Lefever, The Nat’l Registry of Exonerations, https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3378 (last updated Sept. 28, 2014).
[2]What Is Posttraumatic Stress Disorder?, Am. Psychiatric Ass’n, https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/ptsd/what-is-ptsd (last visited Nov. 6, 2021) (explaining that PTSD symptoms fall into four categories: intrusion, avoidance, alternations in cognition and mood, and alterations in arousal and reactivity) (“People with PTSD have intense, disturbing thoughts and feelings related to their experience that last long after the traumatic event has ended. They may relive the event through flashbacks or nightmares; they may feel sadness, fear or anger; and they may feel detached or estranged from other people.”).
[3] Christing Kregg, Right to Counsel: Mental Health Approaches to Support the Exonerated, The Univ. of Chicago: Crown Family Sch. Of Social Work, Pol’y, and Practice (2016), https://crownschool.uchicago.edu/right-counsel-mental-health-approaches-support-exonerated (“According to Haney (2001), prisoners faced with punitive, overcrowded institutions, isolation, neglect, and abuse can develop psychological adaptations that lead to negative outcomes, including diminished self efficacy and self-worth, hypervigilance, emotional suppression, social withdrawal, exploitative and/or violent behavior, and post-traumatic stress responses.”).
[4] Lily Goldberg, Obstacles and Barriers After Exoneration, 83 Alb. L. Rev. 829, 842 (2020).
[5] Leslie Scott, “It Never, Ever Ends”: The Psychological Impact of Wrongful Conviction, 5 Am. Univ. Criminal L. Brief 10, 13 (2010).
[6] Id. Wilson maintains that these feelings of injustice lead to “permanent psychological injury to the exoneree.” Id.
[7] Id. (“Wilson divulges that the ‘reality of one’s true identity becomes blurred, obscured and foggy in the isolated ‘inside’ world of prison.’”).
[8] Goldberg, supra note 6, at 846 (explaining that in an employment study with a job applicant who had no criminal history, an individual who had been convicted of a crime and released from prison, and an exoneree, the applicant with no criminal history was preferred).
[9] Kregg, supra note 3 (“In their research investigating the stigma of wrongful imprisonment, Thompson, Molina, and Levett (2011) found that exonerees are likely to experience the most significant stigma regarding others’ evaluations of their personal character.”).
[10] Samantha K. Brooks & Neil Greenberg, Psychological Impact of Being Wrongfully Accused of Criminal Offences: A Systematic Literature Review, Med., Sci. and the L., 2021, at 44, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0025802420949069.
[11] Id. at 47; see generally Ros Burnett et al., The Context and Impact of Being Wrongly Accused of Abuse in Occupations of Trust, 56 The Howard J. of Crime and Justice 176 (2017); see generally Carolyn Hoyle et al., The Impact of Being Wrongly Accused of Abuse in Occupations of Trust: Victims’ Voices, Univ. of Oxford: Ctr. For Criminology (
2016), https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/the_impact_of_being_wrongly_accused_of_abuse_hoyle_speechley_burnett_final_26_may.pdf.
[12] Brooks & Greenberg, supra note 14, at 47; see generally Benjamin Alexander-Bloch et al., Mental Health Characteristics of Exonerees: A Preliminary Exploration, 26 Psych., Crime & L. 768 (2020).
[13] Goldberg, supra note 6, at 843; see generally Adrian Grounds, Psychological Consequences of Wrongful Conviction and Imprisonment, 46 Canadian J. of Criminology and Criminal Justice 165 (2004).
[14] Goldberg, supra note 6, at 843.
[15] Brooks & Greenberg, supra note 14, at 51; see generally Kimberley A. Clow & Amy-May Leach, After Innocence: Perceptions of Individuals Who Have Been Wrongfully Convicted, 20 Legal & Criminological Psych. 147 (2015).
[16] Goldberg, supra note 6, at 848.
[17] Id. at 849; Adina Thompson et al., After Exoneration: An Investigation of Stigma and Wrongfully Convicted Persons, 75 Alb. L. Rev. 1373, 1376 (2011).
[18] Goldberg, supra note 6, at 849.
[19] Kregg, supra note 3.
[20] Scott, supra note 7, at 15.
[21] Brooks & Greenberg, supra note 14, at 48.
[22] Kregg, supra note 3.
[23] Brooks & Greenberg, supra note 14, at 50.
[24] Scott, supra note 7, at 15.
[25] Brooks & Greenberg, supra note 14, at 50.
[26] Id.; see generally Jeffrey Chinn & Ashley Ratliff, “I Was Put Out the Door with Nothing”—Addressing the Needs of the Exonerated Under a Refugee Model, 45 Cal. W. L. Rev. 405 (2009).
[27] Compensation for Exonerees, Nat’l Registry of Exonerations (Sept. 11, 2017), https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Documents/Compensation%20for%20Exonerees%20Primer.pdf.
[28] Jeffrey S. Gutman, An Empirical Reexamination of State Statutory Compensation for the Wrongly Convicted, 82 Miss. L. Rev. 369, 395 (2017). (“Iowa, New Jersey, Oklahoma, Ohio, and, in certain cases, Virginia, preclude those who pled guilty from receiving compensation, even if that plea was coerced.”).
[29] Student Spotlight: Compensation for Exonerees Other Than Money, Tenn. Bar Ass’n, https://www.tba.org/?pg=compensationexonerees (last visited Nov. 20, 2021). This Act was named after Tim Cole, who was wrongfully convicted of rape and imprisoned in Texas in 1986. Id. In 1995, another prisoner sent letters to police and prosecutors confessing to the rape, but they were never acknowledged. Id. The prisoner’s letters were not taken seriously until a few years later when they reached. Id. The Innocence Project of Texas, who advocated for DNA testing. Id. Cole was cleared of the crime in 2008, but it came too late; Cole had unfortunately died in prison in 1990. Id.
[30] Alanna Trivelli, Compensating the Wrongfully Convicted: A Proposal to Make Victims of Wrongful Incarceration Whole Age, 19 Richmond J. of L. and the Pub. Interest 258, 261 (2016) (“The office shall develop a plan to use existing case management functions to assist wrongfully imprisoned persons . . . in . . . obtaining mental health treatment and related support services through the public mental health system for as long as the wrongfully imprisoned person requires assistance.”).
[31] Scott, supra note 7, at 17 (Louisiana law provides that along with the monetary award, “the court shall also review requests for payment and order payment, not to exceed forty thousand dollars, which the court finds reasonable and appropriate from the Innocence Compensation Fund to . . . [p]ay for appropriate medically necessary medical and counseling services for three years to the petitioner at a mutually agreed upon location at no charge to the petitioner, but only if such services are not available from a state or other public facility, clinic, or office that is reasonably accessible to the petitioner”).
[32] Andriana Moskovska, 33 Startling Wrongful Convictions Statistics [2021 Update], The High Court (Oct. 13, 2021), https://thehighcourt.co/wrongful-convictions-statistics/ (“According to the 2019 annual report by the National Registry of Exonerations, wrongful convictions statistics show that the percentage of wrongful convictions is somewhere between 2% and 10%.”).
[33] Courtney Smith, Unjust Conviction, Unjust Compensation: The Need for Better Legislation and Systemic Assistance for the Wrongfully Convicted, Chicago Kent L., Mar. 10, 2009, at 22, https://www.kentlaw.iit.edu/sites/ck/files/public/academics/jd/honors-scholars/2009/Courtney-Smith-paper.pdf.
[34] Kregg, supra note 3.
[35] Id.
Any reproduction of the Article, including, but not limited to its publication, posting, or excerption in print, or on the internet, shall give attribution to the Article’s original publication on the online MSLR Forum, using the following method of citation:
“Originally published on Apr. 26, 2022 Mich. St. L. Rev.: MSLR Forum.”