Moment of Truth (2021–…): Season 1, Episode 5 - Chapter Five - Can The Truth Set You Free - full transcript

I can still see them
putting him in that car.

I can still see him turning
all the way around, looking back

as they drove off
with my child in that car.

It goes through my mind every day,

every morning that I wake up,

every night before I go to bed.

This is not a one day.

This is every day of my life.

Someone needs to stop Clearway Law.
Public shouldn't leave reviews for lawyers.

A battered and vandalized car

turns up on a deserted
Cumberland County road.



The vehicle belonged
to Michael Jordan's dad.

The body located in Bennettsville,
South Carolina

has been positively identified

as the body of Mr. James Jordan.

The nationwide impact
of the alleged crime

hit home in rural Robeson County.

I don't want to know.

You don't?
-No.

Because it would probably
hurt me even more.

Well, let me explain
why you're scared,

since you want to explain it, right?

You're scared because
you're not telling us the truth.

Anything you want to say
to the Jordan family?

I didn't kill him.



When I first
went to prison,

they shipped me far away

to a place you could only
use the phone once a year.

So what they was doing is they was
isolating me and cutting me off.

So now all my communication is I write
my family to please call the lawyer,

and then maybe I get a response back
three or four months later.

First, I was just trying
to deal with it.

Just trying to accept it, 'cause I'm
kind of claustrophobic anyway.

Can't sleep,
stomach's sick all the time.

I think as journalists,
we are the voice for the voiceless.

The fact that we're doing this
right now is because

there are some inconsistencies

in the way this trial was investigated,

and so Daniel Green,
he's the voiceless right now,

and it's our job as the media
to report the voice of the voiceless.

The Department of Corrections
says Green has 12 serious infractions

on his prison record. He says that
comes from defending himself

against prisoners
who are Michael Jordan fans,

and the prison system.

I just got hit because somebody
wanted to be able to go home and say,

"Hey, I just roughed up the guy that
killed Michael Jordan's daddy today."

I'm just trying to survive.

But the man convicted
of killing Michael Jordan's father

claims he shouldn't be in prison.

No, sir, I did not kill him.

I mean this, and this...

It's cut and dry.
It's not like, well, you know...

I mean, I wasn't even there
when he was killed.

He says his codefendant,
Larry Demery,

is the man who killed James Jordan.

He said you did it,

so how do you feel
about Larry Demery?

I kind of feel like
with both of us,

we're kind of, like, pawns,
in a game.

Daniel Green has been in prison
for 17 years.

He says he's innocent.

You did not kill James Jordan?

No.

And you were not there
when James Jordan was killed?

No.

Green has been working on his case
from behind bars for years,

trying to prove his innocence.

It really doesn't change.

My approach has always been,
as you know,

every month, every year,

since I've been in prison,
I go up and fight my case.

Part of the evidence at trial
was a test by the SBI lab

that showed blood in Jordan's car.

In 2007, Green wrote to the SBI
asking for the test results.

They sent him a letter
refusing to release the file to him.

I mean, I've already been through
the whole anger stage,

the despair stage.

You know, I've been through that,

I'm not gonna go back now.
You know what I mean?

'Cause I mean, myself, I have to try
to stay as clearheaded as possible.

You know, I'm living in the moment
and I'm fighting for my freedom.

It's not like I'm fighting for something
that's not right.

I'm fighting for reality.

Daniel Green filed his first official
motion for appropriate relief

eighteen years ago, back in 2000.

That's how long he's been trying
to get this case back in front of a judge.

Today's hearing centered around
his attorney of nine years,

Scott Holmes, voluntarily
withdrew from the case

at Green's request.

Chris Mumma with the North Carolina
Center on Actual Innocence

is now his lead counsel.

Christine Mumma
is executive director

of the North Carolina Center
on Actual Innocence.

We're gonna need to put
some people on the stand.

There was failure on many fronts
in this case.

It is about getting to the truth.

Chris has successfully
helped nine people

who were wrongfully convicted
get out of prison.

The court finds Dwayne Dail
is innocent.

Joseph Sledge, innocent.

Gregory Taylor, innocent.

The mission
of the North Carolina Center

on Actual Innocence is twofold.

One is to investigate and when necessary
litigate claims of innocence

by North Carolina inmates.

The second part of our mission
is policy reform,

identifying improvements
to the criminal justice system

that can increase reliability
of convictions

without impacting
the conviction of the guilty.

I think that they are
really smart people,

and I think that the fact that they're
looking at that gives me some pause,

because they just don't take any case.

I also think they're incredibly competent,

and that at the end of the day,

if Daniel Green wasn't a participant
in the murder,

they'll be able to demonstrate that.

Yeah, you have cases where
you feel like mistakes were made.

Human error comes into play.

And then you have cases
where there's so much

that it has to be something
more than human error.

In this case,
I think it even goes beyond

the attempts at framing someone
they think is guilty.

I think the overriding theme in the case

is that the case was handled differently

because of the high-profile
nature of it.

When you're talking about ineffective
assistance of counsel,

when the state fabricates evidence
or puts on false evidence,

it's a whole different ballgame.

I think Daniel was pinned
as the person to go down for this.

And there were people involved
who did not want information revealed.

If the full truth came out
about what happened,

I think the whole trial
was rigged against him from the start.

Hubert Larry Deese
is the biological son

of Robeson County sheriff
Hubert Stone.

He was born out of wedlock
after an affair.

Hubert Larry Deese
is a known drug trafficker

in Robeson County at the time.

There historically has always
been a large drug trade here,

partly because of our location,

with I-95 dissecting the county
from south to north.

Interstate 95,

known by drug dealers
as Cocaine Alley.

Cocaine
really took root here,

powder cocaine, then crack cocaine.

We really are a major
distribution point,

not only for southeastern
North Carolina

but really the entire east coast.

Deese worked
for Crestline Mobile Homes,

and Demery worked
for Crestline Mobile Homes.

And Crestline Mobile Homes
was used for trafficking drugs.

Jordan's body is found
a mile from Crestline.

It's dumped in a location that Demery
would be familiar with

from working at Crestline.

There was a phone call
from the car, from the Lexus,

made to Hubert Larry Deese.

It was about a minute long,

and there was a question
as to why they were calling Deese.

And was it possible that Deese
had something to do with this case?

Daniel Green's attorneys
at the time wanted to present that call

as evidence at the trial,

but they were ultimately shot down
by the judge, Gregory Weeks,

who said that there was
no definitive proof

that there was a connection between
Hubert Larry Deese and Sheriff Stone.

The prosecution, however,
at the time,

knew that there was
a biological link

between Sheriff Stone
and Hubert Larry Deese.

And they stood there
and they listened

to Judge Weeks saying,
"We don't have the proof,"

when they knew they had the proof.

There are rules that we have
to follow in presenting evidence.

If you don't have a rule under which
to get something admitted,

it doesn't come in.

And so jurors never heard

about that potential connection
to this case.

They never were allowed
to get to the bottom

of why that call may have been made,

and why Hubert Larry Deese may
have been connected to this case.

The Federal Bureau
of Investigation

contacted the State Bureau
of Investigation

and said, "We've been investigating
Deese and Stone,

and it looks like this number
is connected,

and you need to be aware of this."

And the SBI says, "We got it.

We're gonna interview Deese.
We're gonna take care of it.

We got it."

It started out, we thought,

they just dropped it.
They didn't interview Deese.

They didn't investigate it at all.

Now that we have discovery
from the state,

we know for a fact
they did in fact interview Deese.

But there's no record of the interview.

There was 144 interviews
of witnesses,

and we have copies of 143.

So there's only one interview
that's missing,

and that's Hubert Larry Deese.

So either they didn't make a record,

or they didn't provide the record
to the defense.

Either way, that's a huge Constitutional
violation for Daniel.

So how can that not be a question of fact,

of where is that interview
and what did it say?

Because we know that Hubert Larry Deese
is a critical character in the story,

what we believe to be the real story

of what happened in the murder
of James Jordan.

Felony murder in North Carolina
has to be through agency,

which means you have
to be part of a crime

where you shot the victim or someone
you're with shot the victim.

So Demery's testimony was the key
to Daniel's conviction.

It's Demery's testimony that puts Daniel
as the one who's the shooter,

as the one who's the leader
in all of this.

But what's interesting when
you look at the jury verdict

is the jury did not unanimously find
that Daniel was the shooter.

We don't know who the trigger man was.

That was one of the biggest things
we deliberated on,

was who actually was the trigger man.

Do you feel--
feel good about this?

I feel good. I really do.

There's contradiction
in the jury verdict form.

The questions were,

"Do you unanimously find
from the evidence,

beyond a reasonable doubt,

that the defendant himself killed
or attempted to kill the victim?

The answer's no.

Intended to kill the victim.
The answer's no.

Intended that deadly force would be used
in the course of the underlying felony.

The answer is no.

The fact that the jurors
didn't conclusively find

that Daniel Green was the trigger man,

it raises those uncertainties

of what really happened
in this case and how,

and how anyone could be so certain.

What does that tell me,

that the jury believed that both
Larry Demery and Daniel Green

were the perpetrators of this crime?

All of them didn't necessarily believe
that Green was the trigger man.

They thought Demery was.

In a felony murder,

if you're a participant in the robbery

and somebody gets killed

by the other person,

you're hooked.

Obviously there's
a greater punishment here

for being the trigger man,

and that's what Daniel Green
and his attorneys are fighting for.

The jury
didn't believe Demery.

The jury did not find Demery's testimony
completely credible,

because they could not
unanimously find

that Daniel shot Jordan.

It was a compromise verdict

that should have been challenged
at the time of trial,

because you have to have some proof
that one of them was the shooter.

I thought they had this baby
right on the money

when the trial was over.

Some of the things
that have come up afterwards...

Is it possible they got it wrong?

It's possible.

Let's start with the testimony
from Dolores Sullivan

and Melinda Moore.

Do you have any feelings about whether
or not Mr. Green's guilty, or...?

He is.

Daniel talked to Melinda Moore.

She felt she was being pressured
to say bad things about him,

and that came out
during her cross-examination.

They took advantage
of those girls.

They used them to inflame the jury.

There had been a history
of law enforcement corruption

in Robeson County.

Everyone was suspicious
of law enforcement.

There had been several
murders of people,

Native Americans, drug dealers,

and in those cases, law enforcement
ended up being cleared,

but a lot of people
were suspicious and fearful

and felt like it was
an us against them situation.

I wrote the article
on the 25th anniversary

of James Jordan's murder
for The Chicago Tribune

exploring all the details in this case
and what went on with it.

I think the first thing
that surprised us the most

was the number of questions that
you still can't answer definitively.

That there is still so many lingering
mysteries to this case.

Is this what really happened,
and how could we really know?

James Jordan's body was discovered,

and the autopsy was performed
with him as a John Doe,

as an unidentified body.

And when the autopsy was performed,

they did not find a bullet hole
in the chest area of the shirt

where James Jordan was shot.

The coroner determined
that there were three holes

in a different area of the shirt

that would be consistent
with the shirt being pulled up

at the time that the shots
went through it.

I don't know how much
Dr. Sexton really looked

at the shirt in light
of the condition it was in.

It's not just a matter of, "Maybe
he didn't look for it and missed it."

He's looking for the hole,

and he's identifying other holes,

and he's specifically making notes

that there is no hole in the shirt.

But we know at the time of trial
the shirt is presented to the jury

and there's a hole
in the right upper chest

that corresponds with the wound
in the body.

And not only is there a hole
in the shirt,

but there's testimony
that there's gunshot residue,

which was surprising because the body
was in the water for almost two weeks.

Where did that bullet hole come from?

How was it not there when the coroner
did the initial autopsy on the John Doe,

and how is it suddenly there
when this case comes to trial?

And if there are questions about that,

doesn't that lead you
to have some suspicion

about how this case was investigated?

The options are the
medical examiner was that sloppy

that he missed something
he was looking for,

which calls into question
other things about the case,

or the shirt was tampered with
and the hole was added later

because it needed to match
with the theory

that James Jordan was shot in the car.

Part of our ineffective assistance
of counsel claims

is that there are things that should have
been looked into by experts.

I think it would have been important
to put on a blood expert.

I think it would have been important
to put on someone to talk about

the trajectory of the bullet.

We believe that Daniel was not there
when James Jordan was shot,

and could use scientific evidence
to prove his innocence.

What we did was found a car
that's the same model, same year

as the Lexus that James Jordan
was driving.

And we hired a ballistics expert
to look at the car,

look at where the car was,

look at the testimony,
the trajectory,

and determine whether
Demery's testimony can hold up.

"I was closest to the fender,
the back tire of the car.

I wasn't far from the door,
but Daniel was closer to the front

back there at the door,

and there was like two feet between us."

Based on Demery's testimony,

there was only about
a six-inch portion of the car

if Demery could see
what he said he could see.

If you were sleeping and now you hear
some noise and you're like,

and you wake up and say,
"What? What? What's going on?"

How would you sit up?
-How would you sit up?

Right. That's what I said.

So you look at where
the body could have been

based on whether James Jordan
is reclined this much,

or this much, or this much.

Is he pulling up with this arm?
Is he pulling up with this arm?

See, the other angle looks more like
if you're twisted like that

that would be coming from this angle.

So there's different scenarios,

and you try and find a scenario

that matches the trajectory of the bullet.

The ME said that the angle through
the body was about 10 to 15 degrees,

and so I'm trying to mimic that angle

and see if it could line up.

-How important?
Yeah.

Oh, it's-- I mean, it's critical.

If we want to prove anything
about the trajectory of the bullet

and that Demery's testimony
wasn't possible,

and that the attorneys were ineffective
and not challenging this.

What the ballistics expert found

is based on Demery's testimony
on where Daniel was,

and the way the shooting happened,

and where James Jordan was,

and the entry wound, it couldn't
have happened as described.

I'll bet you any amount of money

this is more analysis
than the SBI ever did.

So I would consider that new evidence

in that our ballistics expert
says it couldn't have happened.

But I also consider it
ineffective assistance of counsel

because that determination could
have conclusively been made

twenty-five years ago
in the actual spot.

Daniel just called
and the call got dropped.

Oh, really?

He calls a lot.

I am in the sweltering heat

with an expert trying to figure out

how impossible it was
for the shooting to happen.

I've never had a client like this before,

where the phone calls
are all hours of the day.

So the other thing is, you know,
Larry testifies that

the front seat was all the way down,
the driver's seat,

and that he got in the car behind you.
It's not possible.

Impossible.

So we’ve been out here for a couple
hours, and it is hot as hell.

I know, I know, I know, I'm sorry.
I shouldn't complain to you.

Yep. Yep. You're right. Sorry.

Daniel is a very smart guy.

And since he's been in prison,

he has become a jailhouse lawyer.

He has written briefs for other people.
He has written briefs for himself.

Daniel is always at the books,

always reviewing his case.

He is completely absorbed
in what happened to him

and the injustice,

and embarrassed for the way
he's been portrayed,

embarrassed that people think
he's a killer,

and wants to prove that he is not.

Daniel wrote me a letter

after he had been
put in solitary confinement

at Central Prison
for telling an inmate

of Muslim faith that Jell-O has pork,

and that they put him
in solitary confinement.

He said, "The reason
I am turning to you

is that I was deeply impressed by you
when you testified on my behalf

during the sentencing phase
of my trial.

Before I met you,
my only role models were rappers,

but seeing y'all made me realize

that a Black man
has more than one way out.

If you do get out,
what would be next for you?

Um...

I wasn't gonna say it, but yeah.

Law school, okay. Okay.
-Yeah. Yeah.

You've learned a lot
about the law.

Yeah.

I want to be in a position
to advocate for people

that's from my community.

You know, for people
who don't have a voice.

And so I think that a combination
of having, you know,

the expertise the law gives you

combined with just, I think,
what I've gained the most from this

is just a spiritual awareness.

I think to combine those two things,
if I could do that,

I would be extremely thankful.

It's now been 25 years since one
of the most high-profile murders

in North Carolina history.

Daniel Green was convicted
in this case

and now says he deserves a new trial.

Every time I have spoken
to Daniel Green,

in person on three occasions

and many times over the phone
in the past few years,

he has maintained his innocence.

This is no small feat in a case
where there was so much pressure

to hold someone responsible
for the crime.

Now his attorney is trying
to get him a new trial.

He has a hearing next week.

The DA who sent him to prison
says he doesn't deserve one.

Did Daniel Green get a fair trial? Yes.

Is Daniel Green guilty of this? Yes.

Daniel Green is living a pipe dream

that somehow he's gonna convince
people he didn't do this.

I have a high regard
for Johnson Britt.

A friend of mine from childhood.

He's a man of high integrity.

Johnson is adamant
that Green pulled the trigger.

But, I mean,
I believe if you gave Johnson,

you know, a truth pill,

you know, that he might cop to this,

that maybe he didn't.

Johnson Britt's memory
of this case is very, very...

To say "blurry"
would be putting it kindly.

It is completely distorted.

We're on our way
into the Lee County Courthouse

to present oral arguments
before Judge Gilchrist.

One of the most high-profile cases
in the country

will be decided right here
within these walls.

We believe there's enough
evidence for a dismissal.

But at a minimum,

we believe he's entitled
to a full evidentiary hearing.

Daniel's claim should never have
taken 20 years to be heard.

We have six affidavits from people
who say Daniel was not there

when James Jordan was shot.

We have all of this evidence.

We have the blood issue,
the trajectory of the bullet,

the call to Hubert Larry Deese,

the hole in the shirt.

There's just no denying there's a question
about what really happened.

He didn't do it. He wasn't there.

He's completely innocent of the charges
he was convicted of.

I know without a shadow of a doubt

that my brother did not murder
James Jordan.

Hopefully the right thing will be done
and justice will be done.

The best-case scenario
is they offer him time served

for the crimes he actually did commit.

Best-case scenario is

plead guilty to accessory
after the fact,

possession of stolen goods,
possession of the vehicle,

and participation in one
of the robberies, and you're done.

He's willing to take responsibility
for what he did.

He's just unwilling to continue
to take responsibility

for something he didn't do.

Daniel Green,
he's the voiceless right now.

But the other voice
that is forever silent is James Jordan.

James Jordan will never come back,

and I don't think that Michael Jordan and
his family cares who pulled the trigger.

When I saw the boys in the paper,

I wanted to confront them
and ask them why they did it,

and I wondered if you wanted
to do the same.

Well, I haven't gotten
to that stage yet.

You know, it's been a very tough time
for me to deal with it, and...

I don't really have any feelings
against them yet.

You know, I guess because
it hasn't really sunk in yet, but...

There's a lot of sadness out there
with people who do these things,

for whatever reasons that
they choose to do that, but...

I just really hadn't quite understood
the reasoning for that, and...

-I know it's--
-You say it hasn't sunk in yet?

-No.
-No.

-I still think about it a lot.
-Mm-hm.

Would you want to ever say
to them, "Why?"

No, because I don't want to know.

-You don't?
-No.

Because it probably
would hurt me even more

just to know their reasons,

because if it is it's gonna be
just totally meaningless.

-Yeah.
-For the reason, and...

It's better that I don't know, you know.

What I have here are letters
that Daniel wrote to me

over a five-year period.

"Where does hope come from?"

"I'm not responsible
for the outcome of this."

"My only obligation
is to struggle for my freedom,

for justice,

until I leave this body."

These letters are anywhere
from two pages to 20 pages.

They talk about everything
from prison life to his case

to personal things
to books to music

to philosophers to poetry.

Daniel talks about the fact
that early on in prison,

it really broke him.
It really broke his spirit.

And then he made a choice that
he was going to get beyond that.

So he started reading. He started writing.
He started studying.

"I taught myself how to play guitar
and read music.

That has also led to me studying art."

He reads about the law all the time.

He's written a lot of his motions
for appropriate relief by himself.

Daniel Green, in my estimation,
in my interactions with him,

is one of the smartest kids
I've ever encountered,

and I've done something like 60
of those cases in my lifetime.

He was just an incredibly smart guy.

Daniel, I think,
in a different environment

could have been probably
incredibly successful in life.

Yeah, this is this--
December 2010.

"I was searching for understanding
about how I could end up convicted

of first-degree murder."

"That search has led me all over the world
and billions of years in the past,

and the only answer I can come up with

is that I was built to go through this,

that this was my destiny for this life."

I have the expectation
that I've always had of the law.

I mean, this is not
a discretionary matter.

I have the expectation
that it will be handled.

I can't say how it will be handled.

Right now I'm, like,
living on a prayer.

This is an e-mail dated
March 6th of 2019,

from the Superior Court trial coordinator
for Judge Gilchrist.

"The following is Judge Gilchrists's
ruling in the above referenced matter."

Which is Daniel Green.

"Defendant's motion for
an evidentiary hearing is denied."

And ironically, at the bottom
it says "Justice for all".

The man convicted
of killing Michael Jordan's father

will not get a new trial.

And that's the decision
handed down this week

by a Superior Court judge.

He denied Daniel Green's request
to have the case heard again.

I was shocked, really shocked.

Daniel is really giving me a hard time,

because I basically said,

"There's no way you're not getting
an evidentiary hearing

in at least some of these claims."

And I would have bet anything
that that was the case.

Well, we immediately filed a motion
for reconsideration,

because when the judge denied all the
claims that we had previously raised,

he did not know that I had gone
to see Larry Demery in prison.

In Scotland Correctional,
where Larry Demery is held,

you cannot meet with an inmate
unless they give permission.

I had to write him a letter and ask
for him to put me on his visitation list

so I could interview him,
and he wrote me

and said, "I will talk to you.

Don't try and use guilt trips on me
because guilt trips won't work with me.

Don't play those games with me.

Come here and be honest
and I'll meet with you."

It was a last-ditch effort
to talk to Larry.

I was really surprised
that he talked to me freely.

We talked about a lot of things,
including his mother

and how I had seen his mother
at the house.

I don't know if that impacted
his willingness to talk to me or not.

He was a little hesitant at first,

and he gave me hypotheticals.

"Well, let's say that this happened
or let's say that this happened.

What would that mean?"

And we talked about whether
what he said at trial was true.

He eventually admitted to me
that it was not.

His testimony at trial
was not truthful.

He was coached by law enforcement.

Daniel says he didn't have nothing
to do with the killing.

You did the killing.
You come over to his house.

He helped you dump the body.

He was being threatened
with the death penalty.

It's time now to tell your story.

Start out again from where you were at

when you came into contact
with that car.

His first statement was
that he was off in the distance

when he heard the gunshot.

If he's the shooter,
you got to tell me.

Then they said,
"No, no, we need you there."

The same people that put the gun
in his hand, not your hand.

Put the gun in his hand, not yours.

We need you
seeing James Jordan sleeping.

Give me something
that's believable.

And we need you seeing him
shoot James Jordan.

Tell me a story
that I can believe.

Larry Demery lied on the stand.

He lied about the details of that night.

He never saw Daniel Green
shoot James Jordan.

I was surprised.

I was surprised that he said it.

I wasn't surprised what he said.

I have always believed that he never saw
Daniel Green shoot James Jordan.

Larry told me
exactly what happened.

He said he went out there,

was supposed to be meeting somebody
who had a car

that had drugs in it.

Him and another guy
were supposed to go.

The other guy,
they ended up not going.

Larry said that he met this guy
at the hotel,

that the guy basically said,
"Listen, do you party?"

So that guy was James Jordan.

Yeah.

Larry said it evolved
into an altercation.

He said that he shot the guy
in self-defense.

And I clarified for him
if he was called to testify

on the stand, would he testify
to the fact that he lied under oath?

And he said he would.

When we interviewed
Elizabeth Green,

she tells us that she received a card
from Larry Demery from prison.

He sent me a postcard from prison.

He said, "You will never know
how sorry I am

for the way things are, but I didn't
have any choice in the matter.

Blood is thicker than water."

And she said the way she interpreted it

was that his family, his loved ones
had been threatened

that if he didn't tell this story,
this version of the story,

that something bad
was going to happen to them,

and that he felt forced into a corner
and had to tell the story that he told.

There are multiple affidavits
from prison inmates

who have said that over time
Larry Demery has told them,

at various points of his imprisonment,

that he was the one who committed
the murder of James Jordan,

that he was the trigger man.

You hear that an inmate
gives a statement

and doesn't have much credibility,

and people say, "Well, they're in prison,
so they're not believable."

But when you have this many,
they add up.

Larry Demery told a journalist,
Connee Brayboy, before trial.

In her affidavit she says
that Demery told her

that he killed Jordan,

that Daniel was not there.

An investigator
friend of mine said,

"The truth makes sense."

When you have somebody
as high-profile as Michael Jordan,

it was really easy
for conspiracy theorists

to spin these yarns,
these crazy ideas about this case.

And they just don't hold any water.
They just don't go anywhere.

At the end of the day,

sometimes the simplest answer
is the truth.

Larry has said
if he is given immunity

that he will cooperate
in giving a full statement.

Who can give him immunity?

The Attorney General
can give him immunity.

We filed a motion for reconsideration,

with my affidavit stating that
Larry Demery had admitted to me

that he lied on the stand.

And we filed that on the afternoon
of March 6th.

And on the afternoon of March 8th,

we received a second e-mail
from Ms. Munz stating,

"Judge Gilchrist has Mr. Green's motion
for reconsideration,

as well as the state's response.

Defendant's motion
for reconsideration is denied."

So that's it.

Green's attorney, Chris Mumma,

she received the official written order,
83 pages,

that basically adds up

Daniel Green has been denied
the shot at a new trial.

When I had to tell Daniel
that all the claims had been denied,

he had a combination of all the emotions
that you would expect.

It's almost like the repeat
of the stages of grief again.

He was surprised, he was...

He was angry with me.

He had every right
to be angry with me,

because I again was overconfident

in the fact that justice actually
comes from the justice system.

There are some claims in there
that are so strong

there's no way under the law that an
evidentiary hearing could be denied.

In his ruling,

Judge Winston Gilchrist wrote,

"Defendant has failed to show that the
co-defendant Demery's testimony is false

and that there is a reasonable
possibility that,

had the false testimony
not been admitted,

a different result would have
been reached at trial.

People need to understand,

the judge didn't say,
"Well, all this evidence

doesn't prove that Daniel
doesn't deserve a new trial."

The judge said,
"I'm not even gonna hear the evidence."

We will appeal to the North Carolina
Supreme Court,

and if that doesn't work,
then we will appeal

all the way to the United States
Supreme Court,

because our statute is very clear.

If there are questions of fact,

you shall have an evidentiary hearing.

And there's absolutely questions of fact
in this case.

I did not necessarily think,
after that oral argument hearing,

that I would walk out of there
a free man.

I didn't think that he would release me,

but I did think that, you know, that
there would be an evidentiary hearing.

Like, that's what I expected on the law.
That's what Chris was certain of.

I mean, it was just devastating
to me and my family.

It was just devastating.

This is WRAL News,

your number one source
for local news.

A major development
in a high-profile case today.

One of the two men convicted
of killing Michael Jordan's father

has been granted parole.

WRAL's Amanda Lamb
has covered this case

for more than a decade,
and she joins us live

with what she's learned about
Larry Demery's deal. Amanda?

Gerald, this is a big surprise
to a lot of people.

This is the letter confirming
that Larry Demery

will walk out of prison

if he complies with all the terms
of this program for this parole.

And I have no doubt
that Demery was told before the trial,

"If you testify
to what we want you to say,

we will sentence you
at a reduced level."

I'm not surprised at all.

In 30 years as a prosecutor,
I've seen a number of people

who were convicted of murder and
sentenced to life who were paroled.

I'm not surprised that it happened.
I knew it would eventually.

He's been paroled
because the law provides for it.

This is a major development
in this story.

Amanda, you actually spoke
with Daniel Green by phone today.

What was his reaction to this?

This is a Global
Tel Link prepaid call from...

Daniel Green.

...an inmate
at Tabor Correctional Institution.

This call will be monitored
and recorded.

There's two different things
going on here, you have to understand.

First of all, I know he lied,
and that's reality.

And I know that he lied on me
and I know that he killed James Jordan.

You know, there were other factors
that played a role in what he did.

When it comes to knowing
that his daughter

will get a chance to know her father,

that his mother, who I love...

and I know his mother is...
she's up in age.

So that's a blessing for her.

Love and hate can't exist
in the same place at the same time.

So if I allow myself
to be consumed by hate,

then that's gonna attract
more negative energy,

and so I'm just trying
to focus on the positive.

As a prisoner, I firmly believe

that a person who is not
gonna get out of prison

and commit crimes
deserves to be free.

Our country is the only country

of all the other civilized nations
in this world

where children, 16, 17, 18, 19 years old

receive life sentences
and can die in prison.

That is a crime against humanity.

I would love
to see Daniel find some peace.

And I don't know what that looks like
at this point,

because he is obsessed with his case,

and obsessed with trying to right
what he believes are the wrongs

that were done to him
by the criminal justice system.

You know, people say,
"Well, Daniel drove the car."

And we've had people
contact the center and say,

"He drove the car.
He wore the jewelry.

He deserves to be in prison
for the rest of his life."

Well, that's just ridiculous.

That's like saying that armed robbery

is the same thing
as possession of stolen goods.

You know, there's a reason
why we have the laws

and we punish things different ways,

because some things are more serious
than others.

Taking someone's life
is very different

than driving someone's car,
even if it's James Jordan.

He could be pardoned
by the governor.

He could have his case overturned
and be granted a new trial,

and be given the opportunity
to plead to a lesser charge.

And then he would walk, because he's
already spent so much time in prison.

So there are many different avenues
that could happen.

I mean, you never say never.

You know, I can't apologize
for a murder I didn't commit.

Only thing I can speak to
is that by my actions

I denied his family the right
to have a proper funeral,

a proper burial.

I mean, I would definitely say to them
that, you know, I'm sorry.

More than anything else,
I want for me and my family

the same justice I want for anybody.

I'm also looking for justice for you.

Everybody should have
the right to the truth.

I can't control somebody else's
perception.

I can't control the truth.
The truth is just what happened.

It's hard, and the hardest part

is watching the people
that you love suffer

because they know
that you're innocent.

In this country, you know,
as blessed as we are,

we have an expectation that freedom
is like a right, and it's not.

Freedom is a privilege.

We're all born and we should be free,

but we know that in the world

there's plenty of places
where you're not born free.

It just shows you that we have
high ideals in our society.

Our laws are aspirations.

There's a chasm, as always, between
our aspirations and the reality.

At least it gives us something
to work for.

Basketball was really only Michael's

second-favorite game growing up.

He loved baseball first.

And his father loved baseball.

That was something
they shared together.

And over time, Michael decided
to give professional baseball a try.

And I think that also was related
to the death of his father.

It's called Operation
Tarnished Badge,

and the charges against some
Robeson County Sheriff's deputies

have been dramatic.

It found that deputies were
stealing tens of thousands of dollars

during traffic stops,

charges of misusing federal funds
and lying to a grand jury,

and paying informants with drugs.

The investigation
revealed deputies

had committed money laundering,
perjury and kidnapping.

More than 20 from his office
already received their sentences.