Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
Dennis
COUNTERMAN
New Trial for Alleged Arsonist Dennis
Counterman
Truthinjustice.org
August 27, 2001
The Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas has granted
Dennis Counterman a new trial. This is the 1st time in the history of
the Pennsylvania Post-Conviction Relief Act that the Court of Common
Pleas has granted a capital defendant a new trial.
Jim Moreno and Vic Abreu unravelled a web of
prosecutorial misconduct that so far has subjected this man, whom
Dunham believes is innocent, to 13 years on death row. The PCRA court
granted relief on Brady v. Maryland (withholding exculpatory evidence),
ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to investigate
exculpatory evidence; ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to
present character evidence; and then granted a new sentencing hearing
(just in case) on the grounds that counsel was ineffective for failing
to investigate and present mitigating evidence.
Dennis Counterman was convicted of arson and murder
for a house fire in which 3 of his children died. It now turns out,
Dunham says, that not only is Dennis innocent of murder, but that no
crime even occurred. Dennis' 3 kids died in a Saturday morning house
fire in 1988.
Neighbors reported seeing Dennis in his back yard
in his underwear screaming for help because his kids were inside. The
fire was actually accidentally started, most likely by Dennis' son
Christopher, one of the children who died in the fire.
So, Dunham says, Dennis Counterman not only lost
his 3 kids in the fire, but he suffered the additional nightmare of
being wrongly sent to death row as a result. This gross miscarriage
of justice stole Dennis' life away from him and caged him in 23-hour/day
confinement for something he didn't do, even after the fire had
already taken his children.
The fire department believed that the fire was set
and accelerants must have been used because of the speed with which
the fire spread through the house. Jim and Victor presented highly
reliable expert testimony (including a stunning fire safety videotape)
that demonstrated that the type of sofa that was in the Counterman's
house acts as its own accelerant, and proved that the fire theories
relied upon by the local fire department to declare the fire an arson
were outdated and have long since been repudiated. There was no arson;
the fire was an accident. They also showed that once the police and
prosecution determined that an arson had occurred, they focused their
attention on the most likely suspect and went about framing him by
suppressing all sorts of exculpatory evidence. This included
everything from withholding evidence documenting that one of the kids
had a history of firestartin and in fact had burn scars from a prior
accidental fire that he had started to evidence that that their lead
witness -- Counterman's mentally retarded wife told investigators at
the time of the fire that Dennis was asleep when the fire started (he
had worked the night shift the evening before) and that she had
awakened him to alert him that the house was on fire.
Under the joint influence of police interrogation
and heavy medication for severe burns, she subsequently gave a
statement that Dennis had set the fire. But a neuropharmacologist
recently established that the drugs used to treat her burns left her
particularly susceptible to implanted memories and that her mental
retardation substantially compounded the risk that she would have a
confabulated memory based upon leading questions and intimidation by
the police.
When the prosecution eventually provided the
defense with the statement "given" by Counterman's wife, it whited
out the portion of the statement that said she had woken up Dennis to
tell him the house was on fire.
The 1st set of PCRA hearings was in January. After
those proceedings, Jim and Victor obtained from the police files a
statement from Children & Youth Services concerning Christopher's
history of starting fires -- something the police & prosecution denied
as recently as January 2001 that they had ever received. The defense
at trial was that the fire was an accident, and this exculpatory
evidence from a neutral source obviously would have been tremendously
valuable.
The Court wrote: "This Court notes that the
District Attorney is a constitutional officer and is charged to act
under the highest ethical duty. He acts not just as an advocate for
one side. His is the responsibility to disclose freely and willingly
any evidence favorable to the Defendant and to prosecute vigorously to
a fair and just disposition." It then held that the prosecution has
an ethical, not just constitutional duty, to avoid trial by ambush."
Dunham says that this case -- like that of William
Nieves -- highlights the grave dangers of the death penalty, and our
incomplete responses to those dangers. Dennis' case is significant
not just because he is innocent, but because the public still holds to
the misperception that the question of executing the innocent can be
solved by making DNA testing available. Dennis Counterman is innocent
but DNA would not have proven it. William Nieves is innocent but DNA
would not have proven it either. The other 2 men released from
Pennsylvania's death row -- Neil Ferber and Jay Smith -- also won
their freedom only because of the discovery (well after the fact) of
police and prosecutorial misconduct -- not DNA testing.
This is the Pennsylvania Capital Representation
Project's 30th win.
(source: Defender's Association of Phil., Fed.
Habeas Unit)
In 1972, the United
States Supreme Court invalidated all existing death sentences in its
decision Furman v Georgia. Since then, 38 States have
reinstituted death penalties that conform to the constitutional
standards set forth in Furman. 1011 people have been executed in the
United States between 1977, when Gary Gilmore was shot before a Utah
firing sqad, and February 8, 2005, when Robert Neville, a native
american from Texas, was given a lethal injection.
Since Furman, 122
people convicted of murder have been released from death row through
evidence of innocence, exonerated. Six if those have been from
Pennsylvania, which has executed three in these post-Furman years,
from a death row that now numbers 231. Here is the story of Dennis
Counterman, a Pennsylvanian who was sentenced to die, who is proven
innocent, yet remains imprisoned.
On July 25, 1988, a
fire consumed 436 Chestnut Street, Allentown, Pennsylvania. Chestnut
Street is a narrow, sunless alley just a couple of blocks from the
Lehigh County Courthouse and prison, located between Penn Street and
4th Street. 436 is part of a row of two story houses sharing common
side walls, each home 9 wide feet by 50 feet long, with a narrow,
steep set of steps leading up to a front porch.
The tenants who
squeezed into 436 were the Counterman family; Dennis, 28 and Janet,
26, husband and wife, children Christopher, 6, James, 4, and Scott,
ten weeks. Dennis worked at HAB Industries, a local textile plant,
with a salary that allowed him to take home about $160 a week. Dennis
had a 9th grade education, with learning disabilities that were either
caused or exacerbated by beatings in his early years, before his
father left his family when he was 9. He was unable to obtain a
driver's license because he could not pass the written portion of the
test. Janet has an IQ under 70. The house had a history of fires, one
several years earlier, and another just weeks earlier, when
Christopher set fire to curtains with a lighter. In that case, Dennis
had managed to put out the fire.
The fire of July 25,
1988, started on the first floor. Dennis, again, tried to put out the
fire. He was driven out of the living room by smoke, climbed on the
back roof and tried to enter to save his family. He was not able to
get back in the house, and broke his heel jumping off the roof. He was
screaming and crying, and had to be restrained from entering the house.
The children died in
the smoke and heat of the fire. Janet escaped off the front roof. The
initial account given by Janet Counterman on July 25 to Sergeant
Kochan of the Allentown Police Department is as follows: "I also
interviewed the wife, Janet Counterman. She stated the oldest son,
Christopher, woke her up and told her there was a fire downstairs. She
woke her husband up. That was all she remembered." Janet was severely
burned, with 2nd and 3rd degree burns over 50% of her body, and was
placed in a burn unit, in critical condition.
Dennis was also taken
to the hospital, treated for smoke inhalation and his broken heel.
Here is his statement of the events of that night, as related to
Sergeant Kochan on the day of the fire: "En route to Lehigh Valley
Hospital, I got the husband's name, Dennis Counterman. I spoke to him
briefly in the car, but I interviewed him at the hospital. Dennis
stated he was sleeping in the front bedroom, second floor, with his
wife and baby Scott. He said his son Christopher woke him up and told
him there was a fire downstairs. His other son James was with
Christopher. He went down to try to put the fire out. The fire was in
the sofa in the living room. He was trying to put it out with water
from the kitchen sink with a bucket. The smoke pushed him out the door.
He climbed on the roof to try to get the children out but couldn't. He
jumped off the roof. He also stated the when he was trying to put the
fire out he was calling to his wife but she did't answer. I asked him
if he knew how the fire started. He said the children must have had
matches or a lighter. They did that before. I also interviewed the
wife Janet Counterman. She stated the oldest son, Christopher, woke
her up and told her there was a fire downstairs. She woke her husband
up. That was all she remembered."
Janet Counterman was
sedated with morphine and anti-anxiety medications due to the extreme
pain caused by her injuries. She was intubated. Detective James
Stephens visited her during the period of her stay in the hospital,
and conducted various interviews. The first, on July 31, was a series
of questions that could only be answered with nods, or written "yes"
or "no", as Janet was still on a a breathing tube. He elicited
statements that she feared Dennis, that Dennis was physically violent
and that Dennis started the fire. Stephens followed with other
interviews in August. On August 8, 1988, Janet gave this statement to
Stephens: "Now wait a minute, there was one more, ah, his oldest boy
Christopher had, was, I don't know, he either got hold of a lighter or
matches or, and caught the curtains on fire, but Dennis put that one
out."
Dennis became aware
that he was a suspect. He went to the hospital on August 22 and 23,
and had angry words with his wife. On August 23, he was arrested for
three counts of murder by arson for the deaths of his sons, 1 count of
attempted murder by arson for the injuries to his wife, 2 counts of
arson, and 2 counts of intimidating a witness, for his encounters with
his wife on the 22nd and 23rd. The District Attorney, William Platt,
sought the death penalty.
At his trial from
January 22 to February 9, 1990, Dennis was represented by public
defenders Robert Long, who had tried one murder case, and Karen
Schular, who had passed the bar examination in 1989. The prosecution
case was brought by Assistant District Attorney Richard Tomsho. The
prosecution theory was that Dennis had set the fire to get rid of his
family, because he no longer wanted a family life. There was evidence
presented that he had made remarks to the effect that he was "sick" of
his children. There was testimony about his pot smoking. There was
supposition that he stood to gain from the rental insurance. Here is a
description of Tomsho's final summation before the jury;
"Counterman may have
decided he no longer wanted to be a husband and father, Tomsho said,
and gotten to the point where he said, 'I can't take it anymore, I
don't want it anymore.'
For the average
person, those may not be reasons enough to kill, the prosector said. "But
doesn't the evidence suggest they may be reason enough for the
defendant?" Tomsho asked the jury. "Preposterous as it may seem, and
maybe, for the reason I suggested, strange. But they are valid reasons,
and they are the reasons in this case." Tomsho told the jury. (Allentown
Morning Call, 2/9/90, Debbie Garlicki)
Dennis has always
denied that he set the fire that killed his children, burned his wife
and destroyed his life. His defense team tried to rebut the
prosecution's case with the theory that Christopher started the fire,
as was stated by both Janet and Dennis on the night of the fire. Their
statements were further buttressed by statements of Madeline Rothermel
to the police, on July 25, 1988, in a statement to Officer John
Kerrigan: "She knows the mother of the children 436Chestnut Street.
States the mother told her the older boy, "Chris" had lit the curtains
in the children bedroom with a cigaretter lighter approximately one
month ago. The family had been able to put it out. Rothermel states
that she saw the boys fingers and they appeared to have minor burns.
She knows not if this was due to the fire or possible punishment. She
felt this should be reported to the Children's Bureau. For all the
good this will do now."
There were numerous
other similar statements given to the police and authorities during
the investigation in the days after the fire, to the police and the
County Children and Youth Services. The reason that Dennis was unable
to establish to the jury that Christopher in all probability started
the fire was that Richard Tomsho, the police and trial Judge
Mellenberg did not allow these documents into the hands of the defense.
The initial statement by Janet was whited out by Richard Tomsho before
the rest of the statement was given to the defense. The statement
above by Madeline Rothermel was not discovered until February 16,
2001. All exculpatory statements were released either in the middle of
the trial, which did not allow a clearly overwhelmed defense team to
properly present the testimony, or never revealed.
Officer James
Stephens testified at trial that Janet Counterman never made
statements about prior fire starting behaviour of Christopher. He read
into the record, to the jury, a denial by Janet from the hospital
interviews that Christopher had ever set a fire or played with matches.
Janet testified at trial that her children did not have a history of
fire starting behaviour. She was an "eyewitness" to Dennis' guilt at
trial, and the prosecution based their case on the testimony developed
in the hospital interviews, while Janet was drugged and intubated.
The defense never
brought out her lack of capacity while in the hospital. The defense
never told the jury that Dennis had never had one conviction, even for
a parking fine. The Judge did not allow a psychiatric examination of
Janet for the record. The police never came forward with the evidence
they had collected that could have backed the idea that Christopher
started the fire. The Chief of the Allentown Fire Department, Joseph
D'Annibale, testified that the fire was set with an accelerant,
although no evidence of an accelerant was discovered.
The jury, in six
hours, found Dennis guilty on all counts, of three first degree
murders, attempted murder, arson and intimidating a witness. The next
day, August 9, they returned a death penalty, after a four hour
deliberation. Detective James Stephens was quoted, "I feel justice has
been served."
On November 22, 1996,
post-trial motions were denied by the Lehigh County Court, sitting en
banc. Dennis' death sentence was finalized by Lehigh County Judge
Lawrence Brenner on December 6, 1996. Collateral relief counsel was
provided by Allentown Attorney Wallace Worth, who provided no relief
for Dennis.
Governor Tom Ridge
signed a death warrant on October 13, 1999, for a December 9, 1999
execution, which was stayed by a writ filed in November. In 2000,
Dennis' case was accepted by Attorneys James Moreno and Victor J.
Abreu, of the Defender Association of Philadelphia. They hired a fire
investigator, Richard L. P. Custer, who found that the fire is "unlikely
to have started with ignitable liquid spread on the stairs, dining
room carpet, out to the kitchen", and "the scenario of a fire starting
on the sofa and extending to the rest of the structure is consistent
with the damage seen", and further, "there is no fire scene evidence
to support the use of an ignitable liquid in this fire."
Moreno and Abreu
looked at the prosecution files of the case, and found extensive
prosecutorial misconduct. They state in a Court Petition, "In this
case, the Commonwealth's behavior was nothing short of unethical,
unconstitutional and clearly intended to deprive Petitioner of a fair
trial.
The Commonwealth also presented evidence it knew to be false and
misleading, such as the testimony of Detective Stephens and Mrs.
Counterman that there was no evidence of prior fire setting behavior
on the part of Christopher testimony directly contradicted by
evidence sitting in the prosecutor's file at the time of trial and by
Detective Stephen's investigation, including his contact with the
Lehigh County Office of Children and Youth Services concerning this
case. In short, every piece of evidence that fell into their hands
indicating Petitioner was innocent was suppressed. A more deliberate
denial of a capital defendant's right to a fair trial has never been
presented to the courts of this Commonwealth."
Moreno and Abreu
brought a Petition for Post Trial Relief to the Lehigh County Court.
It was heard by Judge Brenner, and on August 27, 2001, this same Judge
who signed the death sentences of Dennis Counterman granted him a new
trial. His convictions were vacated, he was once again innocent until
proven guilty. Judge Brenner stated, "Finally, it is beyond reproach
that the Assistant District Attorney responsible for the numerous
Brady violations detailed above engaged in a pattern of conduct that
at best, was misguided, and at worst, deceitful."
The current Lehigh
County District Attorney, James Martin, immediately decided to retry
Dennis for capital murder. However, he is pursuing a case without
basis. The witness key to the prosecution, Janet Counterman, made this
statement in 2003: "My name is Janet Counterman. This statement is
being handwritten by Attorney James Moreno, one of Dennis' lawyers who
along with Victor Abreu interviewed me at my home. They asked me what
I remember about the fire and my stay in the hospital. I told them it
has been so long that I do not remember what happened. Last year I
told Detective Stephens the same thing when he talked to me at my home.
It has been so long I don't know how the fire started."
Here is a report
about the testimony of the prosecution's new fire expert, George
Umberger: "Umberger said that some of D'Annibale's and Wenzler's
opinions and those of a defense expert were speculation. Indications
of other fires at the house and reports that the children played with
matches 'certainly has to add some credence to the possibility that
this fire may have been a juvenile act'By today's fire investigation
standards, he said, the prosecution's experts do not have 'truly
provable' theories of how and where the fire started." (Allentown
Morning Call, 10/2/2004, Debbie Garlicki)
Since his key witness
can no longer testify, District Attorney Martin tried to get Judge
Brenner to allow transcript testimony of Janet Counterman before a new
jury, testimony that was not able to be fully cross- examined at the
1990 trial due to prosecutorial misconduct. When Brenner said no,
Martin appealed to the Superior Court. In August of 2004, the Superior
Court agreed with Judge Brenner. Lehigh County District Attorney
Martin is now before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, asking for the
right to use the discredited 1990 transcript testimony of Janet
Counterman to convict Dennis Counterman of capital murder for the
deaths of his children.
Dennis Counterman
remains in Lehigh County prison, about two blocks from 436 Chestnut
Street, Allentown, a city that calls itself "Pennsylvania's Park
Place". He has refused a deal from the Lehigh County District Attorney,
and will accept nothing less than his freedom. Attorney Richard Tomsho
is a member of the staff of the Pennsylvania Attorney General,
Environmental Crimes Division.
Joe DeRaymond,
of Freemansburg, Pennsylvania, member of Lehigh Valley Citizens
Against State Killing, (LV CASK), and Pennsylvania Abolitionists
Against the Death Penalty.
April 12, 2007
On October 18, 2006, Dennis
Counterman walked away from the Lehigh County Courthouse in
Allentown, Pennsylvania. He had served 18 years in prison, five of
them on death row, and had endured a death warrant, signed by then-Governor
Tom Ridge. Since 2001, he had been sitting in Lehigh County Prison,
waiting for a new trial as James Martin, the Lehigh County District
Attorney, thrashed through the Pennsylvania Appeals Courts with
hopeless attempts to introduce tainted evidence at trial.
He did not leave prison a free
man. In return for his release from prison, the Lehigh County justice
system demanded that he plead guilty to three counts of third degree
murder. He was sentenced by Judge Lawrence Brenner to 18 years in
prison and five years probation. Since he had already served his 18
years, he was released to probation.
Dennis was convicted of
setting a fire that killed his three children and severely injured his
wife, in a trial that was voided in 2001 due to prosecutorial
misconduct. He has always maintained his innocence, and refused to
admit guilt on the day of his sentencing. He was allowed by the Court
to take an "Alford Plea", by which he is allowed to profess his
innocence, while the Court is allowed to treat him as guilty of the
offense. His statement to the press on the day of his sentencing was:
"I'm more frustrated than angry. I spent all this time for something I
didn't even do."
The Alford plea originated
from a 1963 North Carolina prosecution of Henry Alford, for the murder
of Nathaniel Young in a dispute at a "drink house" (so described by
the Winston-Salem Journal), where Henry, a black man, was visiting a
white prostitute. Henry was facing the death penalty, and his attorney,
Fred Crumpler, advised him to plead guilty to avoid death. Henry
maintained his innocence before Judge Walter Johnston, stating, in
court, to his lawyer, "You told me to plead guilty, right? I'm not
guilty, but I plead guilty." The Judge allowed Henry to plead guilty
to second-degree murder and sentenced him to 30 years in prison.
Henry appealed the case on the
basis that his plea was coerced by the threat of the death penalty.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and overturned the verdict.
The Supreme Court in 1970 overruled the 4th Circuit. Judge Byron White
wrote for the majority in the 5-3 decision. He stated that a defendant
could plead guilty while professing innocence. Here is some language
from the decision, North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970); "the
Constitution does not bar imposition of a prison sentence upon an
accused who is unwilling expressly to admit his guilt but who, faced
with grim alternatives, is willing to waive his trial and accept the
sentence" and "Confronted with the choice between a trial for first-degree
murder, on the one hand, and a plea of guilty to second-degree murder,
on the other, Alford quite reasonably chose the latter and thereby
limited the maximum penalty to a 30-year term."
The Supreme Court based much
of their decision on the facts of the case, which the trial court
investigated. Hence, the validity of Mr. Alford's plea was based on a
non-jury determination of his guilt, despite his protestations of
innocence and his statements to the court that he was accepting the
sentence only to avoid the death penalty. As Justice White wrote, "In
view of the strong factual basis for the plea demonstrated by the
State and Alford's clearly expressed desire to enter it despite his
professed belief in his innocence, we hold that the trial judge did
not commit constitutional error in accepting it."
Since this determination, the
Alford plea has become common at all levels of the criminal justice
system. It has become a tool for prosecutors to avoid a trial with
defendants who believe themselves innocent, and can be offered
immediate freedom in exchange for this contradictory plea. The Death
Penalty Information Center lists numerous death row inmates who have
agreed to such terms, including one, Kerry Max Cook, who subsequently
was found innocent through DNA evidence.
I met with Dennis Counterman
recently in his Allentown home. He is living with his niece Melissa
Borrero, and her family, which includes her three children, Andrew, 15
months, Cesario, 6 years, and Aixa, 10 years. Melissa is a stauch
supporter of Dennis, has known him all her life, and testified during
his 1988 trial when she was 12 years old. Their friendship and
connection were evident as we sat in the living room and talked about
his prison time, trial and life after release. Andrew watched and
listened calmly from his crib.
I asked about his Alford plea.
He said, "I am not guilty, but I could not take a chance, I don't know
how long I have left. It took 18 years to get this far, and who knows
what could happen in a new trial. I have nieces and nephews I want to
see. When I heard the guilty verdict (in 1988), I was just shocked, I
couldn't take a chance again."
Melissa talked about the
closeness of the family before the fire that took Dennis' three
children and 18 years of Dennis' life. "Dennis' house was like a
refuge. I was always over there, looking after his kids. We were a
close family, we would have problems like any other family, but on
Sundays, we would all get together and play baseball, even my
grandmother (Dennis' mother). We could fight with each other, but
don't let anyone get between us. Dennis' conviction really tore us
up."
Dennis said, "I just wish my
mother could have seen this, seen me get out. It really took a lot out
of my mother. It seemed like it drained her soul. How's a mother
supposed to feel with a son on death row for something he didn't do?
She lost weight, got skinny, had health problems." His mother died in
2006, before his release. He could not bear to attend her funeral, "It
would have broke me up too much, I really broke up at my sister's
(funeral), and I just couldn't stand my mother's"
Life after release has been
good for Dennis, living in a house with family, but it has not been
easy. Since Dennis is on probation, he was required as a matter of
routine to pay for weekly drug testing. A letter from the local
Amnesty International chapter to the presiding Judge, Lawrence Brenner,
brought relief from the drug tests. However, the Judge said Dennis is
still required to pay court costs of $1900. He has been unable to get
his identification papers from the authorities. As he stated, "I can't
get my ID's, my social security card, or anything. I have my birth
certificate, but no ID. It's like I have to prove I'm alive, you
know."
Melissa interjected, "It's
like that old joke about the man who was reported to be dead, and he
showed up at a government office, told them he was alive, and they
demanded ID to prove it."
Dennis said, "That's been the
toughest thing, to get my ID."
The payment of the fine has
been put on a $45 a month schedule, not a small expense for this
family of working people. Dennis said the Lehigh County collections
official told him, "'If you miss a payment, we'll bring you to Court'",
then he went on, "I even tried to get it less, you know what I mean,
but they set a certain price, and that was it."
Key prosecution players in the
first trial were richly rewarded. The First Assistant District
Attorney who prosecuted Dennis in 1988, Richard Tomsho, who whited out
evidence and committed serious misconduct, is today a staff attorney
in the Pennsylvania State Attorney General's office. The District
Attorney in 1988, William Platt, became the President Judge of Lehigh
County.
Dennis came within weeks of a
lethal injection.
This system is described by
Mumia Abu Jamal (who sits today in a death row cell near the cell that
once housed Dennis) as follows, "Once upon a time, a politician
promised jobs and benefits, like a chicken in every pot, to get
elected. It was a sure-fire vote getter. No longer. Today, the lowest
level politico up to the President uses another sure-fire gimmick to
guarantee victory. Death. Promise death, and the election is yours.
Guaranteed, frame on! A vote for hell in the land of liberty with its
over one million prisoners is the ticket to victory." (From "A Bright,
Shining Hell", on "Banned - Radio Commentaries by Mumia Abu Jamal")
Dennis has been released from
prison, but he is not free. He has been forced to make choices while "faced
with grim alternatives". For Henry Alford, it was looking at a North
Carolina trial in 1963 in which a guilty verdict meant death. For
Dennis Counterman, it was a Lehigh County, Pennsylvania trial in which
he would face another prosecution that would demonize him. Witnesses
would be coached. The current Lehigh County Prosecutor, James Martin,
and First Assistant Maria Dantos would have used all the power of the
State to keep him in prison till they could put him to death.
Dennis is out of prison, which
is a relief for him, for his family and supporters. We are all a long
way from justice.