n 1981, police placed Charles Chatman’s picture in a photo lineup after a woman in his Dallas County neighborhood was sexually assaulted. The victim told police that she remembered her attacker as a neighbor. That same day she identified Chatman from a photo lineup and a live lineup. The victim did not mention Chatman’s most distinguishing characteristic in her initial description of the perpetrator-Chatman was missing his front teeth.
At trial, the state’s case consisted of little more than the victim’s previous identifications and her in-court identification of Chatman. The state also presented forensic results showing the assailant’s blood type characteristics were consistent with those of Chatman. These characteristics were also consistent with forty percent of all black males. Chatman’s defense presented alibi testimony that he was at work, employed as a custodian, during the attack. Chatman’s sister, who also worked at the custodial service, corroborated his alibi. Nevertheless, Chatman was convicted of aggravated sexual assault and sentenced to ninety-nine years in prison.
Chatman applied for post-conviction DNA testing. After two inconclusive results, a more advanced DNA test proved that he did not commit the rape. Chatman was released from prison on January 3, 2008, and a formal exoneration followed on February 26, 2008. Chatman missed three chances at parole because he refused to admit to the crime or apologize for it.
Because of one mistaken eyewitness identification, Charles Chatman spent twenty-seven years in prison for a crime he did not commit.
