Forensic Files (1996–…): Season 7, Episode 41 - Plastic Fire - full transcript

Narrator: POLICE SAY
THAT THIS CAR CRASH,

WHICH KILLED AN ELDERLY WOMAN,
WAS MURDER AND ARSON.

THE DRIVER,
THE VICTIM'S DAUGHTER,

INSISTED IT WAS AN ACCIDENT.

TWO FIRE INVESTIGATORS

CAME TO TWO ENTIRELY
DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS.

WAS IT AN ACCIDENT OR MURDER?

YOU DECIDE.

Play one of the best new FPS shooters,
search Steam for PROJECT WARLOCK

OMEGA, GEORGIA, IS LITERALLY
A ONE STOPLIGHT TOWN...

SURROUNDED BY PEANUT FARMS
AND COTTON FIELDS.



ON AUGUST 18, 1996,
A HOT, QUIET SUNDAY,

A MAN DRIVING DOWN
A REMOTE COUNTRY ROAD

SAW A WOMAN STANDING ON A
SMALL BRIDGE WAVING FRANTICALLY.

THE WOMAN WAS SHEILA BRYAN.

Bryan: THIS GUY JUMPED OUT
OF THE CAR,

AND HE SAID, "WHAT'S THE MATTER?
WHAT'S THE MATTER?"

AND I SAID, "UM...MY MOTHER'S IN
THE CAR, AND THE CAR --

I THINK THE CAR'S ON FIRE."

Narrator: THE CAR WAS
DOWN IN A DITCH,

AND SHEILA'S 82-YEAR-OLD MOTHER
WAS TRAPPED INSIDE.

FROM THE BRIDGE, YOU COULD SEE
THE SMOKE COMING OUT OF THE CAR.

THE MAN RAN TO A NEARBY HOUSE
TO GET HELP.

BY THE TIME FIREFIGHTERS
ARRIVED, THE CAR WAS AN INFERNO.

WHEN THE FIRE WAS PUT OUT,



THEY FOUND FREDA WEEKS
DEAD INSIDE THE CAR.

SHE HAD BEEN
UNABLE TO GET OUT.

Bryan: I JUST REMEMBER GETTING
NAUSEATED, THROWING UP,

AND THE NEXT THING
I REMEMBER IS, UM...

JUST LOTS OF PEOPLE.

Narrator: SHEILA TOLD POLICE
THAT SHE AND HER MOTHER

WERE ON THEIR WAY
TO THE LOCAL CEMETERY

TO VISIT HER FATHER'S GRAVE.

SHE SAID SHE WAS MOMENTARILY
DISTRACTED,

AND ACCIDENTALLY DROVE OFF THE
ROAD INTO THE DITCH

JUST BEFORE
REACHING THE BRIDGE.

Bryan: IT WAS ABOUT
A 30-FOOT EMBANKMENT,

WHICH WAS VERY STEEP,

AND WHEN I GOT TO THE BOTTOM,
THERE WAS A BIG JOLT.

I WAS TRYING TO GET THE CAR
TURNED OFF,

AND IT WOULDN'T TURN OFF.

SOMEHOW I FINALLY GOT IT OFF,

AND THE KEYS -- THEY DROPPED OUT
OF MY HAND,

'CAUSE I JERKED THEM, AND THEY
DROPPED OUT OF MY HAND.

I KEPT TELLING HER, I SAID,

"I'LL BE RIGHT BACK.
I'LL BE RIGHT BACK."

Narrator: SHEILA RAN AROUND THE
CAR TO THE PASSENGER-SIDE DOOR

TO TRY TO GET HER MOTHER OUT,
BUT THE DOOR WAS LOCKED.

SHEILA SAID
SHE RAN UP THE EMBANKMENT

AND FLAGGED DOWN
A PASSING VEHICLE.

SHE SAID WHEN SHE LOOKED DOWN,

SHE SAW SMOKE COMING OUT OF
THE CAR FOR THE FIRST TIME.

WHEN POLICE ARRIVED, THEY
NOTICED SOME IRREGULARITIES.

Heinen: THAT CAR TRAVELED
ABOUT 60 FEET

DOWN THE GRASSY SHOULDER
OF THE ROAD

PRIOR TO MAKING
A RIGHT-HAND TURN

AND TRAVELING ABOUT 30 FEET DOWN
THIS EMBANKMENT,

WHERE IT CAME TO ITS FINAL
RESTING POINT

PERPENDICULAR TO THE ROAD
IN THE DITCH.

AND THEN WE STARTED LOOKING
AT -- THERE WERE NO SKID MARKS,

THERE WERE NO SIGNS IN THE
GRASSY SHOULDER

THAT THERE WAS
AN ABRUPT TURN OF ANY TYPE.

Narrator:
AND THE FRONT OF THE VEHICLE

SHOWED NO SIGNS OF DAMAGE

CONSISTENT WITH RUNNING DOWN
AN EMBANKMENT.

Heinen: THERE WERE NO SCRAPE
MARKS UNDER THE BUMPER,

UNDER THE UNDERCARRIAGE.

THE PLASTIC COWLING
UNDER THE BUMPER

HAD NO DAMAGE TO IT WHATSOEVER.

ALL SIGNS
THAT WERE INDICATIVE

THAT THIS CAR TRAVELED DOWN
THAT EMBANKMENT VERY SLOWLY.

Narrator: ALSO SUSPICIOUS --

THE DOOR TO THE GAS TANK
WAS OPEN,

AND THE GAS CAP WAS MISSING.

NO AUTOPSY WAS PERFORMED ON
FREDA WEEKS,

BUT THE TOXICOLOGY RESULTS
WERE PUZZLING.

MOST PEOPLE WHO DIE
FROM SMOKE INHALATION

HAVE CARBON MONOXIDE LEVELS IN
THEIR BLOOD OF 45% TO 85%...

BUT THE CARBON MONOXIDE
LEVEL IN FREDA'S BLOOD WAS ZERO.

Heinen: LAB RESULTS SHOW

THAT THERE WAS NO CARBON
MONOXIDE IN THE VICTIM'S BLOOD,

WHICH COULD BE INDICATIVE THAT
SHE WAS NOT ALIVE

AT THE TIME OF THE FIRE.

Narrator: IF FREDA WEEKS WAS
DEAD BEFORE THE FIRE STARTED,

HOW DID SHE DIE?

Narrator: THE LOCAL SHERIFF'S
DEPARTMENT BROUGHT IN

OUTSIDE EXPERTS TO HELP
INVESTIGATE

THE CAR ACCIDENT AND FIRE
WHICH KILLED FREDA WEEKS.

THE ENGINE AND EXHAUST SYSTEM
SHOWED LITTLE FIRE DAMAGE,

BUT THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT
WAS DESTROYED.

IT APPEARED THAT THE FIRE
STARTED ON THE FLOOR

OF THE DRIVER'S SIDE,

BECAUSE INVESTIGATORS FOUND
BURN PATTERNS

CONSISTENT WITH THE USE
OF AN ACCELERANT.

Heinen: THERE WERE ALSO BURN
PATTERNS THAT PROTRUDED THROUGH

OR OVER THE DRIVER'S DOOR
THRESHOLD,

WHICH COULD BE INDICATIVE THAT
THE DOOR WAS OPEN

AT SOME POINT DURING
THE TIME OF THE FIRE.

Narrator: THE DEBRIS INSIDE THE
CAR WAS TESTED FOR ACCELERANTS,

BUT TESTS CAME BACK NEGATIVE.

Heinen: IT'S NOT UNCOMMON IN
ARSON CASES,

ESPECIALLY WHERE FIRE
DEPARTMENTS HAVE RESPONDED,

PUT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF
WATER ON THE ACTUAL FIRE SCENE.

Narrator: THE ONLY PERSONAL
ITEMS FOUND IN THE CAR

WERE A WALLET AND THE CHARRED
REMAINS OF A CLAW HAMMER.

THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE HAMMER

MIGHT HAVE BEEN
THE MURDER WEAPON

LED INVESTIGATORS TO EXHUME
FREDA WEEKS' BODY

FOR AN AUTOPSY.

Bryan: THAT'S WHEN I HEARD THAT
THEY WERE -- SUSPICION OF ARSON.

YOU COULD HAVE KNOCKED ME OVER
WITH A FEATHER.

I MEAN, I JUST COULD NOT
EVEN BELIEVE

WHERE THEY COULD EVEN COME UP
WITH THAT.

Narrator: AND THE INVESTIGATION
ANGERED SHEILA'S HUSBAND, TOO.

Heinen:
MR. BRYAN BECAME MORE UPSET

AND MADE THE STATEMENT THAT,

"WELL, YOU GUYS NEED TO DO
WHATEVER YOU NEED TO DO,

"AND YOU NEED TO DO IT

"BECAUSE THERE'S $100,000
AT STAKE,

"AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY'S
NOT GOING TO PAY

UNTIL YOU GET DONE WITH YOUR
INVESTIGATION."

Narrator: SHEILA'S HUSBAND
WAS REFERRING TO

THE LIABILITY COVERAGE OF HIS
CAR INSURANCE,

WHICH HE BELIEVED WOULD PAY
THEM $100,000 FOR FREDA'S DEATH.

Heinen: WHICH KIND OF
CORRESPONDED WITH THE AMOUNT

HE TOLD US THERE
IN HIS DRIVEWAY.

Narrator: THE AUTOPSY FOUND NO
INJURIES CONSISTENT

WITH THE USE
OF A CLAW HAMMER.

THE SURPRISING NEWS WAS THAT
FREDA'S LUNGS AND NASAL PASSAGES

DID NOT HAVE ANY SOOT,

WHICH USUALLY HAPPENS WHEN
SOMEONE IS ALIVE

AND BREATHES SMOKE
DURING A FIRE.

THE MEDICAL EXAMINER
FOUND EVIDENCE

OF SEVERE CORONARY
ARTERY DISEASE

AND LISTED THE PROBABLE CAUSE OF
FREDA'S DEATH

AS CARDIAC STANDSTILL.

Heinen: DR. CLARK SAID

THAT SHE WAS PROBABLY ALIVE
AT THE TIME OF THE FIRE

AND MAY HAVE TAKEN
ONE OR TWO GASPS

AFTER THAT FIRE WAS STARTED
AND THEN DIED.

Narrator: THE MEDICAL EXAMINER
DID NOT RULE THE DEATH

A HOMICIDE.

NEVERTHELESS,
PROSECUTORS BELIEVED THAT

THE FIRE WAS DELIBERATELY SET

AND CHARGED SHEILA BRYAN WITH
ARSON AND MURDER.

SHEILA PLED NOT GUILTY.

AT THE TRIAL,

PROSECUTORS SAID THE MOTIVE FOR
THE CRIME WAS MONEY,

THAT SHEILA KILLED HER MOTHER

AND STAGED THE CRIME SCENE TO
COLLECT A DEATH BENEFIT

FROM HER CAR INSURANCE.

Bryan: I SAID,
"THAT'S RIDICULOUS."

I SAID, "THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE BY LAW

TO BE ABLE
TO DRIVE A VEHICLE."

AND TWO, THERE WAS NO WAY FOR ME
TO EVEN COLLECT

ANY MONEY FROM THEM.

Narrator: PROSECUTORS KNEW THAT
THE CAR INSURANCE

WOULDN'T HAVE PAID ANYTHING
AFTER FREDA'S DEATH,

BUT BELIEVE THAT SHEILA AND HER
HUSBAND WERE UNAWARE OF THAT

AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT.

TO PROVE IT, PROSECUTORS POINTED
TO THE STATEMENT

SHEILA'S HUSBAND ALLEGEDLY MADE
TO INVESTIGATORS.

Cone: IT'S THE STATE'S POSITION

THAT THEY INTENDED TO COLLECT ON
THAT INSURANCE MONEY,

AND THE REASON THE STATE THOUGHT
THAT IS, FIRST,

BECAUSE OF WHAT KARLAS BRYAN
TOLD THEM --

THAT THAT WAS
THEIR INTENTION --

AND, SECONDLY, BECAUSE THEY HAD
HIRED AN ATTORNEY

TO COLLECT THE MONEY.

Narrator: AT THE TRIAL,

SHEILA TOOK THE STAND
IN HER OWN DEFENSE.

HER TESTIMONY, HOWEVER,
DIFFERED IN SOME RESPECTS

FROM THE STATEMENT
SHE GAVE TO POLICE

IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ACCIDENT.

Cone: WHEN SHE GOT ON THE STAND,
SHE TOLD THIS STORY ABOUT

STOPPING ON THE EDGE OF THE
EMBANKMENT AND TEETERING.

Bryan: I WAS SITTING THERE,
AND I SAID,

"I WAS GOING TO TRY AND GET OUT.

"I OPENED THE CAR DOOR -- AND I
STILL HAD MY SEAT BELT ON --

AND WHEN I DID, THE CAR DOOR
COME BACK AND HIT MY ARM."

Cone: AND THEN THE CAR ROLLED
DOWN THE DITCH BANK,

WHICH WAS...NOT ANYTHING
THAT SHE HAD SAID

AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT.

Narrator: SHEILA FIRST TOLD
INVESTIGATORS

THAT HER MOTHER SHOWED NO SIGNS
OF DISTRESS AFTER THE ACCIDENT.

ON THE WITNESS STAND, SHE SAID
HER MOTHER WASN'T RESPONSIVE.

Bryan: I TOLD MAMA -- I SAID,
"I'LL BE BACK IN JUST A MINUTE."

SHE DIDN'T RESPOND.

WELL, I THOUGHT
SHE HAD PASSED OUT.

Cone: WHEN SHE GOT ON
THE WITNESS STAND,

THAT STORY
HAD CHANGED REMARKABLY,

AND I THINK IT DIDN'T
RING TRUE TO THOSE JURORS.

BUT IT WAS TESTIMONY ABOUT THE
BURN PATTERNS THAT, I THINK,

SEALED HER FATE.

Narrator: THE PROSECUTION'S
ARSON EXPERT SAID

THOSE BURN PATTERNS

WERE CONSISTENT WITH A FIRE
STARTED WITH AN ACCELERANT.

THE JURY FOUND SHEILA BRYAN
GUILTY OF ARSON AND MURDER.

SHE WAS SENTENCED
TO LIFE IN PRISON.

Bryan: I COULD NOT BELIEVE THAT
THIS HAD ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

I SAID, "WHY? WHY AM I HERE?
I DON'T UNDERSTAND."

I EVEN LOOKED AROUND FOR A RUSTY
SCREW TO CUT MY WRIST.

I SAID, "I CANNOT LET MY
CHILDREN BE...

EXPOSED TO SOMETHING LIKE THIS
THE REST OF THEIR LIFE."

AND THEN, ALL OF A SUDDEN,
SOMETHING COME OVER ME,

AND I SAID, "GOD, IF I'M HERE TO
HELP SOMEBODY,

THEN YOU SHOW ME WHAT YOU WANT
ME TO DO."

AND...

AND I HAD A PEACE ABOUT ME
AFTER THAT.

Narrator: SHEILA'S FRIENDS
AND SUPPORTERS

BELIEVED IN HER INNOCENCE

AND RAISED FUNDS TO HIRE AN
INDEPENDENT FIRE INVESTIGATOR

TO LOOK INTO THE CASE.

AND THE PERSON THEY FOUND
ALSO HAPPENED TO BE

AN OUTSPOKEN CRITIC
OF ARSON INVESTIGATIONS,

DR. GERALD HURST.

Dr. Hurst: YOU HAD A WOMAN

WHO HAD A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP
WITH HER MOTHER

AND PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO KNEW
ABOUT THIS RELATIONSHIP.

THEY SAID THAT THE REASON THAT
SHE HAD TORCHED HER MOTHER WAS

BECAUSE THE MOTHER WAS GETTING
OLD, WEARING A DIAPER,

AND SHE WAS
JUST TOO MUCH TROUBLE.

YOU SEE, IT JUST DOESN'T FIT.

Cone: IT WAS REAL CLEAR TO ME
THAT THIS CASE HAD

DIVIDED THAT COMMUNITY
IN THIS AREA --

HALF BELIEVING
SHE WAS GUILTY

AND HALF BELIEVING
THAT SHE WAS INNOCENT.

Narrator: AFTER SHEILA BRYAN
WAS CONVICTED

OF MURDERING HER MOTHER
IN A CAR FIRE,

SHEILA'S FRIENDS AND FAMILY
HIRED DR. GERALD HURST

TO CONDUCT AN INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATION.

Dr. Hurst: I READ THE ORIGINAL
INVESTIGATION REPORTS

AND ALL OF THE POLICE WORK DONE
IN CONNECTION WITH THE FIRE,

AND THEN I READ
THE TRIAL TESTIMONY,

AND I FOUND THAT THERE WAS
A LOT OF BUNCO

INVOLVED IN THE PROSECUTION.

Narrator:
SHEILA'S CAR WAS A FORD.

HURST AND HIS COLLEAGUE,
CHRIS BLOOM, QUICKLY DISCOVERED

THAT THERE HAD BEEN A NUMBER OF
SUSPICIOUS FIRES

IN SIMILAR FORD VEHICLES.

THE PROBLEM WAS
THE IGNITION SWITCH,

A BOX OF ELECTRICAL CONTACTS ON
THE STEERING COLUMN.

[ ENGINE TURNS OVER ]

BY TURNING THE KEY,

DIFFERENT CONTACTS IN THE SWITCH
START THE CAR

AND TURNS ON
THE ELECTRICAL SYSTEM.

Bloom: AND IT'S
A SMALL LITTLE COMPONENT,

AND YOU DON'T NORMALLY WOULD
EVEN THINK ABOUT IT,

BUT THAT LITTLE COMPONENT HAS
BEEN THE SOURCE OF AT LEAST,

ALLEGED, 8,000 FIRES.

Narrator: MANY OF THESE CARS
CAUGHT FIRE

WHILE SITTING IN GARAGES AND
PARKING LOTS,

AND SOME WHILE BEING DRIVEN
DOWN THE ROAD.

IN 1996, FORD ISSUED ONE OF THE
LARGEST CAR RECALLS

IN HISTORY.

A LEAD IN THE IGNITION SWITCH

HAD ELECTRICITY FLOWING
THROUGH IT CONSTANTLY.

A PLASTIC BOX SEPARATED THE
LEADS, BUT IN SOME CASES,

CARBON BUILDUP CAUSED
THE CIRCUIT TO ARC.

Bloom:
IT'S CREATING A CIRCUIT

WHERE A CIRCUIT WAS NOT
DESIGNED, AND AS A RESULT,

THERE'S OVERHEATING
THAT'S OCCURRING,

AND THAT OVERHEATING WILL RESULT
IN IGNITION

OF THE SURROUNDING
COMBUSTIBLES --

THE PLASTICS AND SUCH.

Narrator:
DR. HURST AND CHRIS BLOOM

MADE ANOTHER
INTERESTING DISCOVERY.

THE TASK FORCE
AT THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY

THAT CONFIRMED
THE IGNITION SWITCH PROBLEM

WAS HEADED BY RALPH NEWELL.

MR. NEWELL WAS ALSO
A FIRE EXPERT

AND WAS THE STAR WITNESS FOR THE
PROSECUTION IN SHEILA'S TRIAL.

I'M NOT SAYING THAT HE DID
ANYTHING WRONG,

BUT I'M SAYING HE WAS UNDER
HEAVY INFLUENCE.

HE WAS GETTING, I THINK, ABOUT
$150,000 A YEAR,

OR AT LEAST THAT YEAR, AND
CERTAIN AMOUNTS IN OTHER YEARS

WORKING FOR
FORD MOTOR COMPANY.

THE KEY THING I NOTED WAS THAT
NOT A SINGLE PERSON

MENTIONED THE IGNITION SWITCH
IN THE CASE,

AND IT DIDN'T MATTER WHETHER
THEY SAID,

"I EXAMINED THE IGNITION SWITCH
AND ELIMINATED IT AS A CAUSE.

I LOOKED AT THE IGNITION SWITCH,
THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG."

THERE WAS NO MENTION OF IT.

Narrator: THIS WAS PARTICULARLY
INTERESTING,

SINCE SHEILA'S FIRST STATEMENT
TO POLICE

MENTIONED HER INABILITY TO
REMOVE HER CAR KEYS

AFTER THE ACCIDENT.

MISS BRYAN,
AFTER RUNNING OFF THE ROAD,

TRIED TO GET THE KEYS OUT
OF THE IGNITION

AND COULDN'T GET THE KEYS OUT.

THAT INDICATES THAT THEY HAVE
SOMETHING WRONG

WITH THE IGNITION LOCK
OR THE IGNITION SWITCH.

Narrator: SHEILA'S CAR WAS A
1987 FORD COUGAR,

BUT THE RECALL ONLY WENT BACK
TO 1988.

BLOOM AND DR. HURST SUSPECTED

THAT SHEILA'S CAR
HAD THE SAME IGNITION SWITCH.

THIS IS A RECALLED SWITCH FROM
AN '88 FORD ESCORT.

THE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS
THE MODEL NUMBER ON THE SWITCH.

WHEN I PULLED THE LARGE WIRING
LOOM OUT OF THE '87 COUGAR

AND EXAMINED THIS SWITCH...

YOU CAN SEE THE MODEL NUMBERS
ARE THE SAME.

Narrator: BUT WHAT CAUSED THE
BURN PATTERNS IN THE INTERIOR,

WHICH PROSECUTION EXPERTS SAID
WAS FROM AN ACCELERANT?

THIS STEERING COLUMN,
COVER, AND CARPET

ARE FROM THE SAME MODEL AND YEAR
CAR AS SHEILA BRYAN'S.

GERALD HURST BELIEVES

THE SWITCH INSIDE THE STEERING
COLUMN OVERHEATED,

AND THE PLASTIC COVER IGNITED,

MELTED, AND DRIPPED
LIKE THIS ONE,

BURNING DOWN THROUGH THE CARPET
LIKE A LIQUID ACCELERANT.

Dr. Hurst: NOW, IF THIS WERE IN
A REAL AUTOMOBILE,

YOU WOULD ALSO BEGIN DRIPPING
THE SAME MOLTEN, FLAMING PLASTIC

ON THE SEAT, WHICH CONTAINS
POLYURETHANE FOAM,

AND THAT WOULD TAKE OFF LIKE
THE PROVERBIAL HOUSE AFIRE.

ANY TIME A FIRE CONSUMES
THE INTERIOR OF A CAR,

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MASSES OF
FLAMMABLE PLASTICS

THAT MELT AND FLOW.

THEY THEMSELVES -- THE
PLASTICS -- BECOME, IN EFFECT,

LIQUID ACCELERANTS.

Narrator: HURST ALSO SAID
A GAP IN THE DOOR SEAL

ALLOWED MELTED PLASTIC FROM THE
SEATS, DOORS, AND DASHBOARD

TO FLOW UNDER THE DOOR
IN NOT ONE, BUT TWO SPOTS.

Dr. Hurst: IT WAS NOT A LIQUID
ACCELERANT THAT PRODUCED IT.

I AM QUITE CONFIDENT
IT WAS THE PLASTIC,

BUT THAT WAS OF
LESS IMPORTANCE TO ME

THAN THE FACT
THAT THE PROSECUTOR

AND ALL THE KING'S HORSES AND
ALL THE KING'S MEN

WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PRODUCE
THAT PATTERN WITH GASOLINE.

Bloom: THE INFORMATION SHOULD
HAVE BEEN PRESENTED TO THE JURY.

"HEY, THIS IS A KNOWN PROBLEM
THAT --

"IT'S A RARE PROBLEM, BUT IT'S
A KNOWN PROBLEM --

IT CATCHES FIRE."

Narrator:
AFTER 10 MONTHS IN PRISON,

THE GEORGIA SUPREME COURT
UNANIMOUSLY VOTED

TO OVERTURN
SHEILA'S CONVICTION.

THE COURT STATED,
"THE TESTIMONY THAT INFERRED

"THERE WAS AN INSURANCE MOTIVE
WAS IMPROPER,

AND ANY FINANCIAL MOTIVE
WAS TENUOUS AT BEST."

Bryan: I IMMEDIATELY GOT ON MY
KNEES AND PRAYED

AND THANKED GOD FOR THAT,

BECAUSE THAT JUST
DOES NOT HAPPEN.

IT DOES NOT HAPPEN IN
THE LENGTH OF TIME

FOR ME TO EVEN
GET AN APPEAL.

USUALLY, PEOPLE STAY IN THERE
FOR YEARS AND YEARS

BEFORE THEY EVEN GET AN APPEAL.

SO, I WAS VERY WELL-BLESSED
WITH THAT.

Narrator: JUST AS SHEILA WAS
RELEASED FROM PRISON,

SHE HAD ANOTHER SURPRISE.

PROSECUTORS FOR THE STATE
OF GEORGIA

SAID THEY WOULD TRY HER AGAIN
FOR MURDER AND ARSON.

DUE TO EXTENSIVE PUBLICITY, THE
SECOND TRIAL WOULD BE HELD

IN NEIGHBORING THOMAS COUNTY.

Heinen: AND IT WAS,

QUITE NATURALLY,
A BATTLE OF THE EXPERTS.

BUT WHICH EXPERTS
WOULD THE JURY BELIEVE?

Narrator: CONVERSE BRIGHT WAS
THE NEW DEFENSE ATTORNEY

REPRESENTING SHEILA BRYAN
AT HER SECOND MURDER TRIAL.

Bright:
THERE WAS NO TRAUMA INVOLVED,

AND THE BLOOD TESTS AND
THE AUTOPSY

SHOWED THAT THIS LADY WAS DEAD
BEFORE THE FIRE STARTED --

MOST LIKELY,
BY HEART ATTACK.

IF THE JURY ACCEPTED THAT,

THEN THAT WOULD'VE DEAD-ENDED
THE CASE RIGHT THERE.

Narrator: BUT THE CAUSE OF
THE FIRE WAS AGAIN

THE PROSECUTION'S FOCUS,

CLAIMING SHEILA BRYAN
HAD SET THE CAR FIRE

BY POURING AND LIGHTING SOME
TYPE OF LIQUID ACCELERANT.

Bright: IT EITHER CAME OUT OF
THE TANK,

OR SHE BROUGHT IT THERE.

THERE'S NO CONTAINER FOUND.

THERE'S NO INSTRUMENT,
LIKE A SIPHON OR WHATEVER.

Narrator: THIS TIME,

SHEILA'S DEFENSE RELIED ON
DR. HURST'S OPINION

FOR WHAT CAUSED THE DEADLY FIRE.

Bright: AN EXPERT WITNESS IN A
CASE PERFORMS SEVERAL FUNCTIONS.

OBVIOUSLY, HE TESTIFIES AND
GIVES EXPERT OPINION,

AND HE ALSO CAN HELP PREPARE
CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY POINTING OUT...
FALLACIES AND FOIBLES

IN THE OTHER SIDE'S POSITION.

Narrator: RALPH NEWELL,

THE PROSECUTION'S STAR WITNESS
IN THE FIRST TRIAL,

ADMITTED HE HAD WORKED FOR
THE FORD MOTOR COMPANY

ON THE TASK FORCE

INVESTIGATING FORD'S PAST
IGNITION SWITCH PROBLEMS,

BUT NEWELL INSISTED

HE ELIMINATED
THE SWITCH IN SHEILA'S CAR

AS THE CAUSE OF THE FIRE.

NEWELL ADMITTED, HOWEVER,
THAT HE DID NOT PHOTOGRAPH

OR DOCUMENT HIS ANALYSIS
OF THE SWITCH IN HIS REPORT.

WITHOUT THE INSURANCE MOTIVE,

THE PROSECUTION ARGUED
THAT SHEILA HAD GROWN TIRED

OF CARING FOR HER
82-YEAR-OLD MOTHER.

Bright: THEY WERE ALL ONE VERY
CLOSE-KNIT FAMILY.

THE TESTIMONY WAS...
UNANIMOUS ABOUT THAT.

THERE WAS NO DISSENT TO THAT.

Narrator:
AFTER A 4-DAY TRIAL,

THE JURY DELIBERATED FOR JUST
UNDER THREE HOURS

BEFORE FINDING SHEILA BRYAN
NOT GUILTY.

I JUST --
"THANK YOU, LORD."

WELL, YOU COULD CITE THIS CASE

AS AN EXAMPLE OF
THE SYSTEM FAILING,

IN THAT SHE DID 10 MONTHS
IN JAIL

FOR SOMETHING SHE DIDN'T DO,

OR YOU COULD CITE IT
AS AN EXAMPLE

OF THE SYSTEM SUCCEEDING...
BECAUSE IT CORRECTED ITSELF.

Narrator: TWO DIFFERENT TRIALS.

TWO DIFFERENT VERDICTS.

THE TOWN OF OMEGA
WILL NEVER BE THE SAME.

Cone:
THERE WERE HEATED DEBATES

ABOUT HER GUILT OR HER INNOCENT
UP UNTIL THE FIRST TRIAL,

AND THEY CONTINUED, OF COURSE,

AFTER SHE WAS CONVICTED
AND WENT TO PRISON,

AND THEY CONTINUE TO THIS DAY.

Narrator: BUT SHEILA BRYAN
IS A FREE WOMAN,

AND GIVES THE CREDIT
TO FORENSIC SCIENCE.

Bryan:
WHAT MADE THE DIFFERENCE?

HAVING A VERY CREDIBLE EXPERT

THAT BELIEVED IN WHAT HE WAS
DOING AND WHAT HE WAS SAYING.

THIS WAS A CASE
OF FORENSIC EVIDENCE,

WHETHER IT BE MEDICAL OR
AUTOMOBILE.

THIS WAS WHAT THIS CASE
WAS ALL ABOUT.

IT WAS FORENSIC EVIDENCE.