Free Wrongfully Convicted Glenn Fritz
This petition had 142 supporters
This petition is a step towards sending an innocent man, Glenn Fritz, home to his family and his children. But it is also a step towards correcting the broken system that has placed so many innocent people in prisons across the country. We need to send a message that the system is broken and we as a people want to fix it. To stop sending innocent people to prison for crimes they didn't commit. To stop prosecutions that proceed only for the sake of a prosecutor's career, or for a law enforcement agency to conceal their deficiencies and mistakes and save face. Signing this petition is another step in stopping the lies, corruption and politics of a broken system. Towards taking back our rights to liberty and fairness within that system. So please. Take just a moment to read, to sign and to support an innocent man stripped of his family, his children and his freedom, and to support a change in the system and a return to truth and justice.
April 25th, 2014, Friday, April 25th, 2014, Terry Glenn Fritz was wrongfully convicted of 1st degree murder and armed criminal action. He has spent 4 years incarcerated fighting a crime he did not commit. A weeklong trial revealed much, but no evidence regarding the guilt of Mr. Fritz.
The State presented no evidence or facts that Mr. Fritz possessed or fired a gun. The State even presented firearm/tool mark expert, Evan Todd Garrison of the Missouri State Highway Patrol, who testified there was a list of 93 potential murder weapons. Garrison testified that the weapon was a .380 auto class hand gun. However, the list of 93 possible murder weapons contained 52, 9mm auto class hand guns, and 41, .380 auto class hand guns. The caliber is not even firmly established.
Evan Todd Garrison testified that out of 4 expended shell casings recovered, 3 were a match, under microscopic examination, as having been fired by one hand gun. 1 was not. He also testified that none of the 3 expended bullets recovered, under microscopic examination, could be attributed to one hand gun, nor testify that they were fired from the same hand gun. Garrison testified it was a possibility that more than 1 hand gun was used as well. He admitted the State has no idea and could not identify the murder weapon or weapons.
The State provided witness testimony from Dorothy Taylor and Scott Mertens, investigators, from the Missouri State Highway Patrol, D.D.C.C., to the fact that the State had no idea who fired any hand guns and had no evidence to that fact. Also, that the State had no evidence, facts or information regarding the number of, nor the identities of individuals in the victim’s presence or residence June 7th through June 10th, 2010. The same witnesses, Taylor and Mertens, also testified inconsistently to their assessment of the alleged crime scene at 39367 Maries County Road 216, Meta, Missouri. Both investigators testified to seeing a visible pattern of what appeared to be blood staining, immediately, upon entry into the bedroom of interest. No additional lighting needed. Both investigators also testified to their assertion and theory that 3 or more shots, from a hand gun, were fired at the alleged crime scene. However, during the depositions of both investigators, they both deferred answering questions, regarding the alleged crime scene, to senior investigator Henry J. Folsom. Stating, repeatedly, Henry Folsom handled all evidence collection. Henry J. Folsom was not called as a witness for the State. Henry J. Folsom did however testify for the defense. Henry J. Folsom was the most experienced and senior investigator, in charge of the examination of the alleged crime scene on July 2nd, 2010. Folsom testified that additional, extremely bright, lighting had to be brought in to see any pattern on the wall in question. There were no visible patterns without the additional lighting. Folsom also testified to the fact that he saw evidence of what he referred to as a single shot event resulting in a high velocity pattern. Even stating again, when asked under cross examination by the State, if it was possible for there to have been more than 1 shot fired, “No. 1 point of convergence, 1 pattern, 1 shot.” No other patterns in the bedroom or the residence. 1 shot. Not 3 or 4. A direct contradiction of the State’s assertions and theory, as well as the testimony of Taylor and Mertens. Folsom also testified to having no evidence or facts regarding who fired that 1 shot or when, nor to the number or identities of any individuals in the victim’s presence between June 7th and June 10th, 2010.
The State presented no evidence or facts that Mr. Fritz cleaned up a crime scene as they allege. The State, in fact, made false statements of fact in stating Mr. Fritz was responsible for cleaning a wall to the point of abrading the drywall. The State is fully aware of statements and previous testimony, on more than one occasion, that someone else claimed responsibility for cleaning the wall in question and making the abrasions prosecutors stated were due to Mr. Fritz’ efforts.
The State presented no evidence or facts that Mr. Fritz disposed of a body. State’s witness, DNA expert, Shena Latcham, of the Missouri Highway Patrol Crime Lab, testified that no human blood was found in any vehicle belonging to, or in Mr. Fritz’ possession.
The State provided witness testimony from Maries County Sheriff Harold Chris Heitman, former Maries County deputy, Bradley J. Strope and Ed Kriska of the Eureka Fire Department, that through several searches of Mr. Fritz’ property, and properties surrounding Mr. Fritz’ residence, during July 2010, involving hundreds of volunteers and human remains recovery dogs, or cadaver dogs, nothing was discovered or recovered during any search. No alerts were signaled by the K-9 recovery teams, either, during the searches. Also, nothing was discovered or recovered through several subsequent searches of same properties during July and August 2010.
Ed Kriska testified to the fact that his K-9 human remains recovery team was lead and searched with no results, during July 2010, through an area within 30 to 40 feet of where the remains of Kinga Gilliband were finally discovered November 16th, 2010, by Darin Lackman, in the woods on Mr. Lackman’s property.
Darin Lackman testified to finding the remains on his property in the woods, on November 16th, 2010, after several previous searches by authorities and K-9 teams in July and August 2010. He also testified to having been able to see the sheet and bedding containing the remains clearly in the woods, from a road 40 to 50 yards away, while riding his 4-wheeler, in September and October of 2010, but not before then. Mr. Lackman also testified to there having been no animal activity on the remains or bedding. Also to a significant scavenger and carnivore population and presence on and around the property where the remains were discovered.
Osage County Sheriff Michael Dixon Jr., testified, for the defense, to having organized and coordinated the search for the victim’s remains on behalf of the Maries County Sheriff’s Office. Sheriff Dixon also testified to making the statement to State investigators and other deputies that he believed the victim’s remains were placed sometime after the searches in July and August 2010, after Mr. Fritz was already incarcerated, due to the numerous searches with hundreds of volunteers and human remains recovery dogs, with no results.
The victim’s remains are alleged to have lain in a secluded section of woods, in rural Maries County, June 2010 through November 2010, for more than 5 months, with no animal or scavenger activity, while being visible from a road through the wooded properties.
No proof of firing a weapon of any kind. No proof of cleaning up a crime scene. No proof of disposing of a body. The three major elements of the crimes with which he was charged, and no evidence or facts to Mr. Fritz’ involvement nor connecting him to any crime. The State provided only stories, lies and conjecture. The State asked for the assumption of facts not in evidence. The State asked the jury to assume facts never proven. The State asked for the presumption of guilt.
The investigation beginning June 14th, 2010, was conducted by former Maries County Sheriff’s deputy, Bradley J. Strope. The fist murder investigation he has ever conducted. Bradley J. Strope is no longer in law enforcement. He was fired from the Osage County Sheriff’s Department for integrity issues, lying, theft and dereliction of duty. He was asked to resign or be fired from the Maries County Sheriff’s Office in 2011, for the exact same reasons, integrity issues, lying, theft and dereliction of duty. Brad Strope admitted to those facts under cross examination during the trial.
Bradley Strope contaminated eye witness identifications by Wilford Gann and Curtis Mann by showing the witnesses photographs of Terry Glenn Fritz prior to a line-up. Showing both witnesses photographs of an SUV, containing the full license plate number, prior to any photo array or line-up. Also, personally showing both witnesses 2 different photo array line-ups, both containing Terry Glenn Fritz’ photo, to both witnesses.
Bradley Strope lied to witnesses, telling horrific lies attempting to incite fear and irrational statements. He told witnesses that Terry Glenn Fritz had killed other ex-girlfriends in the past, going so far as to include to Mr. Fritz’ fiancé’ at the time, that she was next. He told witnesses that Mr. Fritz never knew his mother or family. He told witnesses that Mr. Fritz has never been employed. He told witnesses that Mr. Fritz made money as a thief and a con man. Yet under cross examination at trial, Mr. Strope testified he was aware of Mr. Fritz’ business, Zanterre Enterprises and the tax i.d. number for the business, and that Mr. Fritz made a living teaching martial arts and also doing remodeling. He told witnesses many horrible lies and confused issues, while never conducting a simple background check, never viewing banking records or tax records of Terry Glenn Fritz, and never interviewing a single person who knew Terry Glenn Fritz for more than a year or through more than a brief introduction.
Brad Strope collected and inventoried evidence, during the service of warrants, then disposed of the evidence. He disposed of several receipts, from the dates in question, regarding Mr. Fritz’ whereabouts during June 2010. He then claimed to have only signed a blank, evidence inventory/return form, and an investigator from the Missouri State Highway Patrol actually collected, inventoried the evidence and disposed of it.
Brad Strope committed perjury on at least 2 occasions. He testified at 2 previous motion hearings, and at the preliminary hearing as well, that he had never possessed, nor read the CAD report from the Rolla Police Department, regarding the purse recovered from a dumpster in Rolla, the witness descriptions of a male individual with hair and the black 4 door passenger car seen at the dumpster between 2:45 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. on June 8th, 2010. Yet, at trial, under cross examination, Brad Strope revealed that he had possessed the CAD report, and read it before ever contacting either witness in June of 2010.
The State provided witness testimony from Wilford Gann. Mr. Gann alleged that he witnessed an unaccompanied male individual with short, black, salt and pepper hair, throw trash bags containing the victim’s purse into the dumpster at his place of residence, Budget Apartments, at 10:00 a.m. on June 8th, 2010 in Rolla, Missouri. Mr. Gann testified that he saw the male individual place the trash bags in the dumpster, and within the hour, he and Curtis Mann had the purse and called the Rolla Police Department and reported the purse and the incident. The documented time of Mr. Gann’s call to the Rolla Police was 16:45, 3:45 p.m. Mr. Gann originally stated to Rolla Police officer, Jessie Hoyt, who took his report on June, 8th, 2010, that he saw a man with hair, driving a black, 4 door passenger car, pull to the dumpster and throw in the trash bags approximately an hour before calling Rolla Police. That Curtis Mann brought him the purse from the trash bags and he, Gann, then called the police within an hour of seeing the man dispose of the trash bags containing the purse. Officer Hoyt testified Mr. Gann specifically stated to her, it was a black, passenger car, not a truck or SUV, and that he did not see the license plate number or any of the letters or digits. She asked these specific details and questions in case the purse became a reported burglary or robbery. Mr. Gann confirmed this with his own testimony.
In his first conversation with former deputy Brad Strope on June 15th, 2010, 8 days after the incident, Mr. Gann recited the same information given to officer Jessie Hoyt, also describing the man’s hair as “short but not buzzed”, comb-able and stylable, and also that the man was wearing a blue t-shirt and blue jeans. Mr. Gann still maintained that he called the Rolla Police within an hour of seeing the man at the dumpster to report the purse.
In his second conversation with former deputy Brad Strope on June 16th, 2010, after viewing photographs of a Toyota 4-runner with the license plate in full view, Mr. Gann changed his story, to having seen a black Toyota 4-runner, having most of the license plate number, and changing his statement to having seen the man at 10 a.m. the morning of June 8th, 2010. Mr. Gann still maintained that he called the Rolla Police within an hour of seeing the man at the dumpster to report the purse.
In another meeting with former deputy Brad Strope, Mr. Gann also allegedly identified Terry Glenn Fritz in a 6 picture, photo array line-up. The photograph used was a 15 year old photo, when Mr. Fritz had hair, was nearly 60 pounds lighter in weight, and did not resemble his current appearance on June 8th, 2010. There is no video recording of the witness identification, or the process, which is encouraged and preferred by law enforcement agencies and prosecutors nationwide, and even required by some states.
Terry Glenn Fritz is 6 feet 1 inch tall and weighed 250 pounds on June 8th, 2010. Also, as verified by Wal-Mart security video from that day, Mr. Fritz was wearing a black t-shirt with multi-colored super heroes on it, olive drab cargo shorts and sandals and was in the company of his, then, nearly 4 year old son. Mr. Fritz was, and is also bald. The shine from overhead lighting on his scalp could be seen in the same video.
Mr. Gann testified, under cross examination, that if he called the Rolla Police at 3:45 p.m., that would change the time he saw the male individual at the dumpster throwing in the trash bags containing the purse. He saw the male individual, with hair that could be combed and styled, at 2:45 to 3:00 p.m. Terry Glenn Fritz is documented in Illinois during that period of time, and could not possibly have been the man Wilford Gann saw. The State also presented evidence, State’s Exhibit 10; photocopies of receipts, showing Mr. Fritz in Illinois purchasing gas at 2:45 p.m. Other witnesses also testified to Mr. Fritz’ being present in Normal, Illinois at 4:00 p.m. as well. Witness testimony from Danielle Beaumont Smith, stated Mr. Fritz, arrived in Normal, Illinois wearing the same black t-shirt with multi-colored super heroes, olive drab cargo shorts and sandals and in the company of his, then, nearly 4 year old son. Just as was seen on the video shown at trial of Terry Glenn Fritz on the morning of June 8th, 2010. This has been the same reported information and statement from Danielle Beaumont Smith, consistently, since June 16th, 2010. There are phone/SMS messaging records also show the time of Mr. Fritz’ arrival at her residence. There is no way Terry Glenn Fritz could have been the male individual seen by Wilford Gann, at the dumpster in Rolla. Wilford Gann also admitted this fact.
The State presented a conflicting, inconsistent picture by alleging several contradictory theories in statement, brief and through testimony presented at trial.
The State alleged that Terry Glenn Fritz had a motive to murder Kinga Gillibrand because she was pregnant and interfering in his pursuit of a relationship with Danielle Beaumont Smith. Alleging Mr. Fritz wanted to conceal the pregnancy. The State provided witness testimony from Danielle Beaumont Smith that in 2010, she was married and the victim had no bearing on any relationship with Mr. Fritz. The State also provided evidence, in the form of an email from Danielle Beaumont Smith to Mr. Fritz, stating the exact same fact. The State provided witness testimony from the victim’s own father, Mihaly Jakab, stating the victim was pregnant, but not by Terry Glenn Fritz. How and why does the pregnancy have any impact on Mr. Fritz?
The State offered no other evidence or facts to the paternity of the victim’s pregnancy. The State offered no other evidence or facts Mr. Fritz attempted to conceal or had any reason to conceal the victim’s pregnancy. Medical records well document Mr. Fritz as the father of the son born in 2006, shared with the victim. Yet not a single fact, no proof, no evidence or mention of Mr. Fritz anywhere in the victim’s medical records in relation to the pregnancy the State alleges in 2010. The State provided no evidence or facts to a relationship between Mr. Fritz and the victim beyond friendship. The State in fact presented a brief, as well as testimony from Carol Leick, to the fact that Mr. Fritz had informed her personally of the pregnancy of the victim, that the victim’s unborn child was not his, and that she knew there was no relationship between the victim and Mr. Fritz or any intention of pursuing a relationship. Stating the victim and Mr. Fritz were, in fact, both in relationships with other people. The victim had further expressed to Mrs. Leick, her intentions to move out of the region. This is documented in reports, statements, brief and testimony on more than one occasion. Mrs. Leick also testified to the fact and her own knowledge the victim had left several times before and that Mr. Fritz had always been the primary caregiver for his son with the victim, and the victim had never been a consistent or active parental figure to the child. It should also be noted that Mrs. Carol Leick also testified Glenn Fritz's 4 year old son made consistent statements, upon returning from Illinois in June 2010 and the time of the investigation that followed, to the fact he saw his mother, the victim, alive and getting into a black car with another man, when he and Glenn Fritz left on their trip to Illinois. Statements the child has made consistently for the last 4 years.
The State provided testimony from Maries County Sheriff, Harold Chris Heitman and former deputy Bradley J. Strope; stating Mr. Fritz also informed both of them of the victim’s pregnancy.
There was no attempt to conceal the pregnancy. The alleged pregnancy had no impact whatsoever on Terry Glenn Fritz.
The State also alleged Mr. Fritz concealed a 3 year long relationship with Danielle Beaumont Smith from the victim.
The State provided witness testimony from Danielle Beaumont Smith to the fact that she had been in a very open, public relationship with Terry Glenn Fritz. She and Mr. Fritz have a daughter together, born on August 19th, 2009. Her family, friends and co-workers knew and associated with Mr. Fritz on a regular basis. She visited Mr. Fritz’ home, nearly daily, for almost 3years. She had a key to the home and had been told she was welcome any time. She was never hidden or asked to hide or conceal herself from neighbors. She was never asked to park her car out of sight or conceal her vehicle. She never saw the victim or any sign the victim was living there. She interacted daily with Mr. Fritz and his son for 3 years. She and Mr. Fritz frequently went to public places together throughout the relationship. Grocery stores, restaurants, stores, dates, and she was never hidden or asked to hide or conceal herself. She testified that Mr. Fritz was openly affectionate and never hid his feelings. She also testified that Mr. Fritz assisted her financially frequently. Groceries, bills, gas for her cars, and rent. Also that Mr. Fritz did so without question or hesitation. They became publicly engaged in November 2008.
Through June 2010, Mr. Fritz and his son were still visiting Danielle Beaumont Smith and their daughter monthly, for several days at a time. There were lengthy conversations and interactions between Danielle Beaumont Smith and Mr. Fritz’ son. There was never any attempt to conceal their relationship from Mr. Fritz’ son or to hide their daughter.
Danielle Beaumont Smith also testified that all plans discussed in 2010 for marriage and future cohabitation, were for a year to 2 years in the future.
Danielle Beaumont Smith is depicted in a 10 inch portrait tattoo on Mr. Fritz’ back, on the right side. He also has a portrait tattoo of both his children on the left side of his back. How was Mr. Fritz concealing either woman from the other?
There was never any attempt to conceal the relationship with Danielle Beaumont Smith. The State is fully aware that there was no concealment of either woman from the other.
Danielle Beaumont Smith testified she was told in 2009 and 2010, the victim had gone to Colorado with a male friend, a boyfriend. That she and Mr. Fritz didn’t discuss the subject much after that. She also testified that Mr. Fritz was the primary care giver for his son with the victim throughout their relationship and the victim was not an active parental figure to the child.
There was no statement from or made by Mr. Fritz that the victim had taken off to Colorado in June 2010 or any other time after 2009. He did make the statement the victim’s current boyfriend was from another state, and also the fact the victim had left at times before, so was probably leaving again. “Bouncing” was the phrase and word used. However, there was never any statement made about leaving the state. In fact Mr. Fritz made the statement to several individuals, verified through witnesses’ testimony; he believed the victim would be back due to financial issues.
The State also provided witness testimony, from Tommy Lee Wilcox, to the fact that Terry Glenn Fritz’ motive was that he desired to have a family and to build a home life with the victim. The same witness also testified Mr. Fritz hated the victim and made extremely derogatory statements about the victim, contradicting his previous testimony.
No facts or evidence of possessing or firing a weapon of any kind. No facts or evidence of cleaning up a crime scene. No facts or evidence of disposing of a body. The three major elements of the crimes with which he is charged, and no evidence, proof or facts to Mr. Fritz’ involvement nor connecting him to any crime. Only conflicting and contradictory theories on motive. No facts or evidence to motive. The State provided only stories, lies and conjecture. The State made false statements of facts. The State asked for the assumption of facts not in evidence. The State asked the jury to assume facts never proven. The State asked for the presumption of guilt. The State even went as far as to have an expert display a handgun having no relevance and not in evidence to the jury at trial. Creating unfair prejudice, planting an image of guilt in the jurors minds that can’t be removed. Grounds for a mistrial. Mr. Fritz’ motion was over ruled by the Judge, David Gregory Warren. The State unfairly prejudiced and biased the jury. They asked the jury to make their decision based on inflamed emotion and anger. Not facts, evidence and proof.
The State angered, inflamed, biased and unfairly prejudiced the jury. That’s all.
The State inflamed and unfairly prejudiced the jury from the very beginning, even during voir dire. Assistant Attorney General Lauren Barrett asked the jury pool; Who here today will have a problem hearing evidence of a pregnant victim and remaining impartial? Every potential juror raised their hand. Every single potential juror.
The State alleged a murdered young pregnant mother. A murdered unborn baby. A murdered fetus. Discovered fetal remains. The State did not provide adequate facts or evidence to that claim. The State alleges the victim’s remains lie in a secluded, wooded area of Maries County for 5 months. No animal activity, no scavenger or carnivore activity. Yet no fetal remains were recovered with the remains of the victim. 1 fetal bone, and 1 bone that is debatably, but possibly a fetal bone. No other remains whatsoever. The State’s expert, Mark Beary, is a forensic anthropologist who, in his experience, has only examined professionally, by his own approximation, 12 sets of remains in his career. Terry Glenn Fritz was not charged with the murder of an unborn child either. This alleged evidence has no relevance to the offenses Mr. Fritz is accused of. It does not show intent, deliberation, planning, action, motive, identity of the victim or the assailants, or the nature of the wounds to the victim. It does not assist in a cohesive presentation of events. No relevance whatsoever. It is however extremely prejudicial and inflammatory. It serves only to allege bad character and action in conformity with persons of bad character. It serves only to inflame emotion, distract, confuse and prevent rational, reasonable thinking and evaluation. The danger and risk of unfair prejudice and bias to the jury make this alleged evidence inadmissible, by federal and Missouri rules of evidence. The danger and risk of unfair prejudice and bias far outweighs any possible relevance or probative value.
The State stomped their feet. They yelled; “That man shot and murdered a young pregnant mother!” Murdered pregnant mother, murdered unborn child, murdered fetus, fetal remains. These phrases were repeated, over and over and over… vehemently. The State created anger, incensed emotion, bias and unfair prejudice in the jury. No fact, no proof or evidence supporting the claims and offenses, however, was ever presented. The State confused the issue, distracted the jury and clouded the truth and facts of the case with irrational emotion. The exact thing for which the Due Process Clause was written, to protect defendants from dubious, unjust, wrongful convictions without proof, facts or evidence.
A hearing was held December 9th, 2013, on the motion to exclude the evidence of the pregnancy and the fetal remains. Judge David Gregory Warren agreed with Mr. Fritz, the evidence was so overly prejudicial as to be unfair and prevent a fair trial. The judge however, over ruled Mr. Fritz’ motion in spite of clearly stated rules of evidence making the evidence inadmissible, allowing the State to present the evidence at trial, with the stipulation the State must prove motive beyond a reasonable doubt.
The State again, gave several conflicting contradictory theories on motive. The State did not meet the reasonable doubt standard. They proved no motive.
During the trial, Judge Warren again over ruled Mr. Fritz’ many objections to the use of this overly prejudicial and inflammatory evidence.
At the close of the State’s case, Judge Warren over ruled Mr. Fritz’ motion for a judgment of acquittal or a mistrial, despite clearly stated rules of evidence. Again, allowing the State to utilize the inadmissible evidence.
At the close of all evidence and the defense, Judge Warren again over ruled Mr. Fritz’ motion for a judgment of acquittal or a mistrial, despite clearly stated rules of evidence. Again, allowing the State to utilize the inadmissible evidence and the jury to consider the inadmissible evidence during deliberations.
The State presented only circumstantial evidence, not supported by facts. The Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, as well as the Missouri Constitution protects defendants in regard to circumstantial evidence. There is a rule governing circumstantial evidence. “If there be any fact or circumstance in this case susceptible to two interpretations, one favorable and the other unfavorable to the defendant, and when the jury has considered such facts with all of the other evidence, if there is a remaining reasonable doubt as to the correct interpretation, then you must resolve such doubt in favor of the defendant and place upon such fact or circumstance the interpretation that is favorable to the defendant.” Circumstantial evidence at trial must be viewed in the light most favorable to innocence of the defendant, to acquittal. The State presented no supporting facts, proof, or evidence of their claims.
Again, no facts or evidence of possessing or firing a weapon of any kind. No facts or evidence of cleaning up a crime scene. No facts or evidence of disposing of a body. The three major elements of the crimes with which he is charged, and no evidence, proof or facts to Mr. Fritz’ involvement nor connecting him to any crime. Only conflicting and contradictory theories on motive. No facts or evidence to motive. The State provided only stories, lies and conjecture. The State made false statements of facts. The State asked for the assumption of facts not in evidence. The State asked the jury to assume facts never proven. The State asked for the presumption of guilt. The State unfairly prejudiced and biased the jury. They asked the jury to make their decision based on inflamed emotion and anger. Not facts, evidence and proof.
On April 25th, 2014, due process was perverted. The Due Process Clause was subverted and cast aside. An innocent man’s civil rights were denied and violated. Terry Glenn Fritz has been added to the long list of wrongful convictions in the state of Missouri.
Once again signing this petition is a step towards sending an innocent man home to his 3 children. But it is also a step towards correcting the broken system that has placed so many innocent people in prisons across the country. We need to send a message that the system is broken and we as a people want to fix it. To stop sending innocent people to prison for crimes they didn't commit. To stop prosecutions that proceed only for the sake of a prosecutor's career, or for a law enforcement agency to conceal their deficiencies and mistakes. Signing this is another step in stopping the lies and corruption. Towards taking back our rights to liberty and fairness within the system. So please. Take just a moment to sign and to aid and support an innocent man stripped of his family, his children and his freedom, and to support a change in the system and a return to truth and justice.
Today: Free Glenn Fritz is counting on you
Free Glenn Fritz needs your help with “Jay Nixon: Free Wrongfully Convicted Glenn Fritz”. Join Free Glenn Fritz and 141 supporters today.