https://www.facebook.com/100010696817305/posts/1527340284299184/

Edmond Oklahoma, OK. – It is a story that mirrors that of far too many Black men: being convicted of crimes that they did not commit. On January 29th, 2020 Elton Rhoades was wrongly convicted of first degree rape in the state of Oklahoma. The state offered Rhoades a 25 year plea deal in 2018. Rhoades declined, and stood in front of a jury in 2020 with attorney Steve Nash on his side. Nash stated and deemed himself “ineffective counsel,” admitting that he was not prepared to represent Rhoades. Despite having supporting evidence proving the innocence of Rhoades, Nash failed to present any physical evidence at trial. He also failed: to address the two male black jurors that were abruptly removed after jury selection, to properly communicate with one of the sole witnesses in the case (Affidavit 1), to exclaim the civil attorney that sat directly next to the alleged victim instructing her responses as she answered questions from the DA and Nash himself, and lastly, he failed to expose the judges rebuttal of victim whom previously faced identical allegations from the alleged victim. The victim attended trial willing to testify on behalf of Rhoades, but was denied his opportunity to share the experiences that he had with the alleged victim.
 
The alleged victim has made several false allegations against black employees that she had interest in and alleged she had sexual encounters with. Each of the accused were consistent with their stories that she made sexual advances and asked for money. Revealing her ultimate motive with the $100,000 civil lawsuit that she filed against Rhoades. Her employee file displayed countless documented incidents where the alleged victim demonstrated predatory behavior. Stalking and making claims to co-workers that she was having sexual encounters with many current male and female employees.
 
Despite the alleged victim not showing up to the first preliminary hearing, and the second hearing being delayed due to the alleged victim refusing to testify. The DA painted the picture of a mentally ill victim with the mind of a six year old, that lived in a mental health facility that Rhoades was aware and had knowledge of. At the time of the alleged incident, the alleged victim was 25 years old and lived in a residential home that was owned by the company she worked for. She lived a daily life significantly similar to those her age - no primary guardian, no supervision, resided with other adult roommates, maintained her own bank account, and had the ability to leave and return to the property at her own discretion. She was a resident that was considered as the “highest functioning client present at the agency.” Former employees noting that “she displayed no mental or physical disability.” Rhoades was employed by Res Care as the Program Director, where he worked for six weeks. He did not work directly with her department, and had no direct contact with the alleged victim other than entering the building and passing by her office. The alleged victim worked as the receptionist for Res Care. Her daily duties consist of: outgoing and incoming phone calls, reading, writing, and filing paperwork.
 
She operated and maintained several social media accounts including: Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, Twitter, Tinder, and LinkedIn. She used Facebook to harass Rhoades: sending several friend request from different accounts, messaging him, and calling him. Her consistent pursuit continued on for 8 weeks, with no response or interactions with Rhoades. Before the alleged incident occurred, Rhoades made a public post on his Facebook about a rental property that he was seeking to get occupied. The alleged victim commented on the post, claiming that she and her friends were interested in renting out the property, and that she would like to schedule a tour.
 
She messaged Rhoades offering her number, then attempted to persuade him to attend the movies with her. Rhoades declined the offer, and did not attend the movies with the alleged victim. He offered to give her a tour of the rental property and she requested his transportation to and from the viewing of the home. On the day of the tour, Rhoades picked up the alleged victim up at 12:10pm, they arrived at the rental property at 12:45pm, they left the rental property at 1:15pm, she returned to her home at 1:45pm. These times provided by Rhoades during his testimony at trial, were consistent with the testimonies given by the alleged victim and her therapist. With the alleged victim testifying that she was picked up at 12:00pm, and her therapist testifying that she returned home at 1:45pm before arriving to her appointment at 2pm. Phone records from AT&T indicate that Rhoades was on the phone with several different personnel 23 minutes out of the 30 minutes, and held various conversations via text during the time the two were located on the property. The alleged victim testified that she was a virgin before the alleged incident and that she was violently raped for the full duration of 30 minutes.
 
The alleged victim testified that when Rhoades was done, that he “quickly removed the condom and ejaculated all over her chest.” She went on to say, “she did not shower or change her clothes, and that she and her mother went to get the rape kit performed immediately after the alleged incident occurred.” Upon their arrival, the doctor swabbed all the places the alleged victim mentioned Rhoades kissed her and sent them in for testing. The four areas that were swabbed were: her neck, her ear, her leg, and her vagina. In addition, she was examined under the ultraviolet blue light to assist in detecting any present semen.
 
At trial, the doctor testified that all labs were sent in for testing and came back negative for the DNA of Rhoades. She also stated on the stand that she used the ultraviolent blue light on the entire body of the alleged victim, and was unable to detect any semen of Rhoades at the time of the exam. She closed her testimony stating that the only DNA found at the time of the exam was, “a tiny spec of DNA located on the top left shoulder of the alleged victim that could not be seen without a microscope.”
 
Rhoades family hired appeal attorney Jaye Mendros, and the appeal was denied by the state. The state claimed, “the new evidence that has been presented would have had no bearing on the decision made by that of the jury.” To be clear, there was no physical evidence presented at trial. The affidavits, the phone records directly from AT&T, the Facebook messages, the text messages, the testimony of prior victim accused of raping the alleged victim, the social media activity/accounts, etc., Is all newly discovered evidence that was not found until after the guilty verdict was given at trial. None of the information provided in this article was seen or heard by the jury. 
 
Rhoades is now currently serving the minimum sentence, 10 years, at a state prison for a crime that he did not commit. In Rhoades case, he was given the least amount of time possible without any supporting evidence. His attorney, family, and friends believe that with the newly discovered evidence that Rhoades would not currently be in prison.
 
Please help us with getting Rhoades exonerated.
 
Thank you.