Fall 2000
Andrew Jarecki begins work on a film project which eventually becomes Capturing the Friedmans.
December 2001
After thirteen years, and being denied parole four times, Jesse Friedman is released from prison to five years of intensive parole supervision. Parole regulations include: 12 hour’s per-day curfew; electronic monitoring ankle bracelet; mandatory sex-offender therapy three times per week (at a out-of-pocket costs of $160/week for five years); among a list of rules and regulations eight pages long.
May 2003
Capturing the Friedmans premieres to audiences worldwide.
January 2004: Post-Conviction Newly Discovered Evidence Motion
After 16 years, Friedman filed what is known as a 440 Motion with the Nassau County District Court. A 90 page Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Vacate Conviction (pdf) with legal arguments, 13 affidavits in support of the motion, and 900 pages of annexed exhibits, fulfilled a long hoped for opportunity for Jesse to prove his innocence.
October 2004
After filing a judicial conduct complaint against Judge Abbey Boklan with the NYS Commission on Judicial Conduct, based upon violations of New York Criminal Procedure Law, New York State Rules Governing Judicial Conduct, as well as conduct unbecoming of a jurist, the complaint was dismissed with no reprimand admonished against the judge.
January 2006
Two years from the time of the initial filing of the appeal, a decision was finally handed down by the same judge in Nassau County who 18 years earlier had set Jesse’s bail at $500,000. The motion was denied in its entirety with a simple four page decision.
- The judge did not request any in-court appearances or testimony from Jesse Friedman, or any of the witnesses, for oral arguments or questioning.
- The judge denied all discovery requests for police and District Attorney files.
- The judge declined to even make a review the case-file in camera in private chambers of the police file to determine the manner and method of the police investigation.
Decision and Order Judge LaPera County Court Nassau County (Read PDF)
July 2006: Federal Habeas Corpus Petition
Attorney Ron Kuby filed a Habeas Corpus (pdf) petition with the federal judiciary arguing Jesse’s federal constitutional rights were violated at the time of his pending trial, and that the lower court’s ruling was contradictory to current federal case-law standards.
September 2006
Respondent’s Answer and Affirmation and Motion in Support to Dismiss Motion (Habeas Corpus) is filed.
December 2006
Jesse Friedman completes five years of onerous restrictive parole supervision, thereby completing his 18-year obligation to the Court for his criminal sentence.
September 2007
Memorandum and Order: Judge Joanna Seybert Federal District Court (Read PDF) issues a written decision granting a hearing in federal district court. Three primary issues had been raised, each relating to the withholding of information which should have been disclosed prior to trial regarding the nature of the evidence against Jesse.
- Perhaps 100 children were present during the computer classes (at the same time as the alleged abuse was going on). These children who were interviewed by the police reported, “I was there and nothing happened.” This information was never disclosed to the defense.
- There was a crucible of suggestion, intimidation, and falsification on the part of the police. The prosecution failed to disclose exculpatory evidence showing that the police utilized aggressive, suggestive and coercive interrogation techniques they knew, or should have known, would yield false allegations.
- The use of hypnosis during therapeutic sessions resulted in a situation of potential “implanted memory” or “repressed memory syndrome” and should have been disclosed to the defense at the time.
On the first two issues, Judge Seybert ruled the statute of limitations had expired and denied our petition. It is worthy to note that she did not rule however that the issues were merit-less, merely that they were time-barred. However, on the third issue, relating to hypnosis, Judge Seybert ordered a hearing to determine to what extent hypnosis was used when questioning children.
October 3, 2007
The first time all parties (the district attorney, defense council, and Jesse) appear in court together before an impartial judge in the 20 years since Jesse’s arrest. Read transcript here. (pdf)
August 2007
Respondent’s Papers submitted to Judge Seybert. (Read PDF)
January 4, 2008
Judge Seybert’s second Decision regarding the appeal was not in Jesse’s favor. The judge denied the motion for discovery, and sided with the prosecution regarding timeliness. The final ruling from the judge can be simplified as saying Jesse’s appeal papers were filed 13 days too late.
Memorandum and Order Judge Seybert Federal District Court (Read PDF)
At no point in either of the two written decisions from Judge Seybert did she ever indicate that the appeal was without merit, groundless, unfounded, or factually unsupported. Her decisions focused strictly on a technical matter relating to the counting of days on a calendar. There is a special statue of limitations under a 1996 law known as the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), “requires individuals in custody through a state court judgment to file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus within one year of the date that the judgment became final.”
January 24, 2008
DA Opposition to Certificate of Appealability (Read PDF)
July 22, 2008
Certificate of Appealability (pdf) is granted by Judge Seybert saying, “Although the Court denied Petitioner’s application as time-barred, the Court found that reasonable jurists could have found the issue of timeliness to be debatable. Because the Court finds that Petitioner has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, the Court grants Petitioner a certificate of appealability.” thereby opening the door for Jesse Friedman to have his case heard by an extraordinary panel of federal judges.
November 2008
Memorandum of Law filed with the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Order of Writ of Habeas Corpus. (pdf)
July 8, 2009
Plaintiff and Respondent parties appear in court for oral arguments before Federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in NYC. Transcript (pdf) The judges openly express doubt as to the quality of the evidence and the District Attorney’s position. Judge Korman asked the ADA to waive the statute of limitations and allow an evidentiary hearing stating, “this case raises a lot of troublesome issues. One would think you would have an interest in seeing what ultimately happened here.” The ADA openly laughed before the Court.
The Court concludes their questioning by requesting the submission of a supplemental motion arguing an “Actual Innocence” claim.
July 20, 2009
Supplemental Motion: Actual Innocence petition to Second Circuit. (Click to read)
August 16, 2010
Second Circuit Court of Appeals denied motion relating to Brady material, but issued a scathing rebuke (pdf) of the manner in which the case was handled stating, “The record here suggests a reasonable likelihood that Jesse Friedman was wrongfully convicted.” And, “While the law may require us to deny relief in this case, it does not compel us to do so without voicing some concern regarding the process by which the petitioner’s conviction was obtained.”
The Second Circuit concluded with a strong recommendation to the current Nassau County District Attorney saying, “Only a re-investigation of the underlying case or a development of a complete record in a collateral proceeding can provide a basis for determining whether petitioner’s conviction should be set aside.” Shortly thereafter District Attorney Kathleen Rice announced the commencement of a re-investigation of the conviction of Jesse Friedman. Second Circuit Decision
August 2010: Conviction Integrity Review
DA Kathleen Rice announces her consent to the Opinion of the Circuit Court and agrees to organize a conviction review.
November 2010
District Attorney Kathleen Rice announced appointment to the Friedman Review Panel; a “distinguished panel of experts” in conjunction with internal re-investigation. (Press Release)
March 2012
“Submission of Jesse Friedman in the Matter of an Inquiry into the Criminal Conviction of Jesse Friedman, Amicus Brief” submitted to Review Panel questioning the legal standard forming the basis of the conviction review committee. Friedman’s Brief (pdf) All efforts to encourage the Advisory Panel to insist upon “best practices” for conviction review processes, transparency of process, and an dialogue regarding evidence went unheeded by the district attorney. (press release)
May 2012
Jesse appeared before the Review Panel of experts advising the D.A. with regards to the re-investigation, read a prepared statement and answered all questions.
Fall 2012
Film makers Andrew Jarecki and Marc Smerling present their findings of newly discovered evidence of police, prosecutorial and judicial misconduct along with recantations and statements from former computer students proclaiming never having witnessed any sexual abuse during computer classes.
Spring 2013
Friedman defense team files a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) filing for access to “any and all documents which were made available to the “advisory committee”. Additional information regarding the FOIL litigation.
June 24, 2013
After three years Nassau County District Attorney Madeleine Singas releases “The Rice Report” concluding, “the integrity of Jesse Friedman’s conviction has not been undermined by allegations of an overzealous investigation and prosecution, or by any new information. After a three-year investigation of the facts and circumstances surrounding Jesse Friedman’s guilty plea, the District Attorney concludes that Jesse Friedman was not wrongfully convicted.” That conclusion was proclaimed while burying such exonerating testimony as:
- Five of the 13 people who accused Friedman of sexual abuse back in 1988 stated as adults that they were never sexually abused.
- Perhaps two dozen other former students stated they never witnessed anything untoward during the computer classes. These were people who were students alongside others who made claims of being sexually abused in a public group-abuse scenario during the computer classes.
- Friedman’s co-defendant who provided false testimony incriminating himself, two of his best friends, and Jesse, came forward to explain how he was tortured by the police and the DA’s office into perjuring himself in order to avoid decades in prison.
June 28, 2013
Court appearance before Judge F. Dana Winslow where the DA accused Ron Kuby of presenting a perjured document in rebuttal to a documents leaked by the DA’s office to the NY Post. Court Transcript (pdf)
August 7, 2013
Petitioner’s Reply Memorandum of Law regarding FOIL document disclosure (Click here to read)
August 2013
- Leading Authorities Assail D.A. Report as Misleading (press release)
- Letter to judge from mother of “victim” (statement)
August 23, 2013: Freedom of Information Law Petition
Judge F. Dana Winslow finds in favor of Friedman and orders DA to turn over “all 17,365 pages … every aspect, every part, every piece of paper that has been generated in the matter of People against Jesse Friedman”. Judge Winslow’s Decision court transcript (pdf)
“The Court, after reading numerous witnesses’ statements, none of which were written by the witness him or herself, all of which were written by someone else, finds that even the people — who took the position that they did not want their name disclosed, had some glaring discrepancies in parts of the statements given. Most particularly what comes to mind is a statement given at one point in time and then — to one detective and then later given to another detective thereafter. There was a rather substantial difference.”
“What the Court has seen also is that there are more recantations than there are affirmations of the statements previously made.”
September 13, 2013
Friedman Asks Appellate Court to Open Files of Police Investigation (Click here to read)
September 20, 2013
Jesse Friedman Files Notice of Intent to Sue Nassau County DA Kathleen Rice for Defamation. (Click to read full Notice of Claim, PDF) Seven pages, plus 30 pages of attached exhibits.
October 30, 2013
District Attorney brief appealing decision to open Friedman files (PDF)
December 20, 2013
Friedman’s brief, legal filing, requesting NY State Appellate Division to affirm Judge’s Decision to Order Friedman Files Opened (Click to read PDF)
January 2014
In the unrelated matter of People v. Hamilton (court decision link) a new door of opportunity creating a gate-way for defendants to have an “actual innocence” claim reviewed by the court. This is an excellent law review by Benjamin Rosenberg from the Fordham Law Review explaining the significance of the court decision.
June 19, 2014
Friedman Defense Team Sues Nassau County District Attorney Kathleen Rice for Defamation (press release). The complete Complaint (PDF) 16 pages (plus 84 pages of attached exhibits)
June 23, 2014
Jesse Friedman files a memorandum of law in support of “motion to overturn his conviction and dismiss the charges on the grounds of actual innocence and unlawfully coerced false testimony before the grand jury, and to overturn his plea of guilty based upon unlawful coercion”. (PDF) This is a second attempt at addressing a post-conviction motion to vacate the original charges. 140 pages of cumulative exculpatory evidence in support of Friedman’s innocence.
Affidavit of Barry Scheck (founder of The Innocence Project) decries the Nassau County DA’s Report.
October 24, 2014
Judge Corrigan Refuses Recusal (Read PDF)
December 23, 2014
Judge Orders Hearing But Denies Claims (Click to read Judge Corrigan’s Decision)
Judge Corrigan grants evidentiary hearing on the matter of “actual innocence”. In all practicality this grants Friedman a new trial — with a few adjustments to standard criminal procedure. 1) No jury, just a judicial review. 2) The burden of proof is upon the defendant, and not the prosecution, to prove that Friedman was wrongfully convicted. Otherwise, matters of discovery, and subpoena of witnesses, is schedule to proceed.
February, 2015
Judge Denies Friedman Defamation Suit (Click to read Court decision)
Appellate Division hears oral argument in court regarding FOIL document disclosure.
New York Times Editorial: Open the files in Jesse Friedman’s 27 year old case so he can prove his innocence.
March 9, 2015
Bruce Green’s Affirmation to Recuse Judge Corrigan (Click to read PDF)
Ron Kuby’s Affirmation to Recuse Judge Corrigan (Click to read PDF)
April 1, 2015
Friedman Files Appeal in Defamation Case (Click to read PDF) 17 pages.
April 29, 2015
DA opposes Friedman discovery (Click to read DA’s motion papers)
June 3, 2015
Judge Corrigan steps-aside and recuses herself to avoid the appearance of bias from Frieman’s Actual Innocence Hearing. Click here to read. The honorable Judge Terence Murphy assigned to the Friedman evidentiary hearing.
DA purports that in order for Friedman to be found “actually innocent” he must prove that he is innocent of “all crimes to which he was accused” which amounts to having to prove that the defendant is innocent of over 300 indictment charges.
District Attorney’s Office admits they “have no record” of which counts from which indictments Jesse Friedman stands convicted. With multiple similar charges — occurring over multiple similar time periods — across multiple similar complainants — the DA admits to being clueless as to what specific crimes Jesse Friedman is convicted. This leads to…
July 21, 2015
Motion to Reconstruct Record of Friedman Conviction (motion filing with the court regarding pending “Actual Innocence” hearing)
Judge Murphy eventually rules there is supporting sound legal standards that Friedman must prove he did not commit “the crimes to which he stands convicted”.
December 9, 2015
Two years after the initial filing of the FOIL matter. — and ten months after oral arguments were presented to the court — a Decision from the Appellate Division arrives. This is immediately appealed to the NYS Court of Appeals by the District Attorney. These proceedings stalled the entire process of Jesse Friedman’s evidentiary hearing for two years. Unfortunately the matter proceeds to the next round of appeals. More delays!
January 2016
Judge Murphy declines to rule of Motion for Discovery (pending appeal to the Court of Appeal)
Spring 2016
Ron Kuby continues to pressure Judge Murphy to make a decision, and commence discover to move forward on Friedman’s “Actual Innocence” hearing. Judge Murphy continues to stand by the position that a decision was going to “wait until the FOIL matter appeals are finalized”.
June 3, 2016
District Attorney files appeal with the New York State Court of Appeals regarding Friedman FOIL request to open case files. Friedman’s Actual Innocence hearing continues to be held in abeyance. Click to read.
Summer 2017
Oral arguments are heard by the NYS Court of Appeals in Albany. Video of the court proceedings posted to YouTube.
November 2017
Court of Appeals ruling and reversal of “confidential witness policy” error and orders Nassau DA to release files from the Friedman case. At the conclusion of four years and three months worth of litigation the original Court’s Order to turn over “every piece of paper that has been generated in the matter of People against Jesse Friedman” (Judge Winslow’s court transcript) is modified and returned to the lower Court to oversee disclosure of documents.
Therefore, after three years of delays waiting for the trial court to order discovery disclosure…
January 2018
Judge Murphy orders the DA to turn over FOIL documents to defendant. However, instead, the Nassau County DA commences a process of “going through one or two boxes a week” out of “approximately 35 files boxes” of documents in their possession. This results in a document dump every few weeks of assorted pages the DA determines to be “disclosable” and an enormous list of documents which the DA considers non-disclosable. This is mostly what is disclosed:
At no time to does Judge Murphy intervene to review the DA’s claimed exemptions for disclosure. At no time does Judge Murphy intervene to make a ruling on discovery. At no time does Judge Murphy even leave his chambers and appear in his own courtroom.
American judicial process leaves citizens to die in cages rather than take action to intervene!
June 2018
Three and one half years after an “Actual Innocence” hearing was granted…. in a completely unrelated legal matter… the NYS Court of Appeals publishes a Decision in People v. Tiger. The ruling announces that the right to a hearing under an “Actual innocence” claim is only valid “after a conviction at trial” (and does not include convictions obtained through coerced guilty pleas). This is the same court, the Chief Judge of New York State, who reviewed Jesse Friedman’s Freedom of Information Law request just one year earlier. This decision thereby ends a 14 year journey of motions, and appeals, and courts. The decision is so unambiguous that had Friedman’s hearing not been postponed for three and a half years, and had he been exonerated with the charges dismissed, the District Attorney could have filed to have the exoneration nullified, and the conviction reinstated, and that motion would likely have been granted.
August 2019
Appellate Division denies motion for appeal of two previously raised grounds from the June 2014 appeal motion which were dismissed in County Court.
November 2020: Successive Habeas Corpus Filing
In a last-ditch effort for intervention from the federal court, attorney Rhiya Trivedi, filed a motion (Memorandum of Law, PDF) with the Federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals petitioning for leave to file a successive Habeas Corpus application. Under current law permission is granted only within an extremely limited breath of condition.
Additionally:
Rhiya Trivedi filed a Declaration — a more readable (and laymen rendering) which covers nearly all the bullet points about the case and the appeal. This is a PDF if you’d prefer, but the FULL TEXT is HERE and I strongly recommend reviewing the full text which has active hyperlinks to documents rather than the PDF.
Plus: A Declaration of Grace Gill Submission of Facts outlining an exhaustive study of all the charges brought against Jesse Friedman; the extent to which Nassau County police interviewed witnesses repeatedly; the make-up of the computer classes with multiple witnesses attending regular weekly classes without any corroboration of alleged abuse.
December 2020
Circuit Court grants preliminary prema facie showing and sends matter to District Court for review.
August 2021
Federal District Court Judge Seybert denied the petition (Decision PDF) on the grounds that Jesse Friedman was no longer “in custody” of the state and therefore the Court has no jurisdiction over a fully-served criminal sentence.
October 2021
If you have read this far then you have reached a personal message from Jesse.
“It has been 34 years since I was arrested. It has been 20 years since I managed to get released from prison. I persevered through 13 years of prison, five years of parole, and 15 years of legal appeals, all with an appreciation that the truth is self-evident and the struggle contained virtue. Fortitude in the face of adversity. Conviction in the face of injustice.
“I wore a strong brave face before a hostile and bitter world for decades, but the government won. Irregardless of the evidence presented on this website and before the Courts. All the struggles; all the sacrifices; all the trauma and terrors; it was all for naught. The power of District Attorney’s are insurmountable. Their immunity is complete. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The cruel wild beast does not stand inside the cage, she stands outside looking in.
– fin