A journey of investigative reporting

Thumb1Investigative reporting is like taking a trip when you’re not sure of the destination.

It starts with a hint of what might come, and a trail of documents and interviews. But reporters never truly know where an investigation will take them.

We invite you to follow us on our journey, as we look into how a 2001 law meant to protect people from being wrongly imprisoned is working. That law allows Kansas inmates convicted of rape and murder, especially in older cases, to have biological evidence tested for DNA, which may prove their innocence.

The project started last fall, when I was approached by students at the Washburn Law School, who had been looking into these requests for a class studying wrongful convictions. Adjunct professor Rebecca Woodman, who also argues appeals as part of the public defenders office in Topeka, teaches the class.

One case particularly interested the students. It involved Ronald L. Rhodes, who had been convicted of murder in Wichita in 1981. He’s been in prison ever since.

Rhodes has maintained his innocence for three decades.

In April 2008, Rhodes filed a motion for DNA testing in his case. The law students thought they found some interesting inconsistencies in docket reports of his case. They wanted to look further.

I took the idea to my editors and we agreed to help. We thought there might be a good story at the end.

We will document our journey here, towards whatever story we may find.

This week, I’ll share the background of the last six months that has caused us to believe this is a story worth following. Then I’ll post updates as they happen, as we gather information and build our investigation.

Is Ronald Rhodes innocent? We don’t know.

But we hope to answer that and other questions about people imprisoned for crimes, and how state laws work for them, or maybe against them.

Read the next post in this series

See all posts in this series

  • tpgisgay

    42 disciplinary reports on KASPER, with 15 of them being of the most serious type. This is only since 1996. I will await more information from Ron before making a personal judgment on his guilt or innocence, but if found innocent and released I predict that he will be very dangerous on the streets.

  • rev

    Can’t help but wonder what you think is the “most serious type” of disciplinary report (DR). Would you care to comment? You’re also presuming–dare I say “assuming”–that when a staff member issues a DR, that it is always based on hard evidence and not simply “having a bad day” or having a particular dislike for an inmate. I would also venture to say that you assume staff is always right and the inmate is always wrong. I know enough about prisons to know that is hardly the case; do you?

  • Pingback: Presumed Guilty: Death of a transient | What the Judge Ate for Breakfast | Wichita Eagle Blogs

  • Pingback: Watchdog blog roundup for 7-8-10 | John Tedesco

  • tpgisgay

    rev, The ranking of “seriousness” of the DRs is given by the state, I just call them like I see them. I do not think the staff members were having a “bad day” the multiple times he was written up for Insubordination/Disrespect towards staff..nor do I think they were out for vengeance when he was caught with dangerous contraband numerous times.

    Nobody expects inmates to all be angels behind bars, but to have so many occurrences of bad behavior shows a trend towards criminality. If you or I received 42 traffic tickets in 14 years, one could assume that you or I cannot follow the rules, and had little respect for them.

    To allude that this inmate, a convicted murderer, is innocent of most of these DRs is ludicrous. I guess it is the system, just holding the man down.

    Next you will be saying that Rhodes is also innocent of the battery charge that sent him to prison the first time, lol.

  • tpgisgay

    rev, Something to add..the battery charge was from a guilty plea when Rhodes shot a man in the face over a pack of cigarettes. If he is innocent of the murder, my original thoughts stand. He is a violent, life long offender. He would be dangerous on the streets.

  • rev

    There are 34 disciplanary reports, not 42. As for their severity, are you aware that none of them–that number is 0–would be considered worthy of receiving a ticket if Mr. Rhodes were a member of society rather than an inmate in the DOC? That being the case, how can you say they represent a tendency toward “criminality” when none of them would even warrant a “ticket?”

  • rev

    By the way, “no contest” is not the same as a guilty plea. I hope courts of law aren’t as “loose” with the facts as you seem to be.

  • tpgisgay

    I apologize for getting the number of DRs wrong. Lol, it is a huge jump, all 8 of the ones I misrepresented. I say it shows a tendency towards criminality because he cannot follow the rules..as recently as March when he recieved yet another disrepect/insurbordnation towards staff. He is still maximum custody, my understanding is that those even with life sentences can go to a medium-minimum housing unit. Mr. Rhodes cannot even achieve that, what makes you think (besides your hug-a-thug spidey senses) that he would not offend once released? I say put your money where your mouth is, sponsor him and offer to have him parole to your home rev. I just home you do not smoke, he apparently really likes his cigarettes..even the parole board mentioned it. :)

    No contest <> guilty plea in the laws eyes. I imagine he plead no contest to escape a much more serious charge.

  • rev

    Gee, I think a 25% error is significant; I hope people don’t make similar errors against you! In any case, you seem to be a very angry person who has already predetermined who Mr. Rhodes is. I just hope you’re never on a jury; openness to evidence doesn’t seem to be your strong suit! In any case, I’m glad others are interested in justice and not simply retribution.