theblakehiggins

Journalism 100% Even his son is OK if turns out that the DNA actually proves his guilt. At this point everyone just wants answers and closure.

Absolutely. The evidence against him makes him look so, so guilty. But it's all circumstantial! There's no direct proof that he committed these crimes. And then I look at the explanations for the evidence and he starts to look very innocent. There's also a lot of facts that didn't come out in trial that raise some serious doubts about his guilt.

I'm not very emotionally invested with Ken himself, but I definitely feel a deep bond with his son, Thad. We've spent a lot of time working together on this and I feel for the guy. He has a dad in prison, a mom who was murdered and a brother who died in a motorcyle accident at the age of 37. He's had a rough go of it, but refuses to let it rule his life. Pretty powerful.

Excellent points, very well said. I certainly don't have the experienced perspective of someone who has studied law. I'll be more careful in the future, thanks.

Edit: I think the reason why I get a little carried away with the circumstantial aspect of it is that I know the explanations behind this evidence. I think I sometimes mix the concepts of "circumstantial" and "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is not a good thing to do in such a precise story.

I first heard of this story seven years ago when I was in my freshman year of college. I was in Ken's (the guy in prison) son Thad's ethics class that he was teaching. The topic of the week was whether or not the death penalty was ever ethical and Thad shared his own personal example of his dad's story.

It's been stuck in the back of my mind ever since until about 16 months ago when Thad posted on facebook. He was frustrated with the progress on the case and I just so happened to be getting into documentary filmmaking. I messaged him and have been working on the story ever since!

He's still in prison! I imagine he would react quite warmly, though.