[music] I'm Alexander Heffner, your host on The Open Mind.

I'm truly honored to welcome our guests today, Calvin Duncan and Sophie Cull.

Calvin Duncan is founder and director of the Light of Justice program, which is focused on improving legal access for incarcerated individuals.

Sophie Cull is a criminal justice reform advocate who has published widely on the death penalty, life sentences and prosecutorial misconduct.

They have written a bestselling book and been traveling around the country, and the world, talking about the jailhouse lawyer.

And that, of course, is Calvin Duncan, who's wrongly imprisoned, incarcerated for many years.

And it turned out to be a fabulous lawyer to, folks who were system impacted, in prison with him and ultimately is not only, pursuing his freedom now outside of the system, but is running for office, for an office that deprived him rights.

Again, just so honored to be with you both today, Calvin and Sophie.

Thank you for your time.

Thanks for having us.

Thanks for having us, thanks.

Calvin, let me ask you, as you reflect on this journey, not only writing the book, but all the reaction from the public who saw your story, your advocacy for legal rights, for freedom and fairness, which you were denied.

What's been the most surprising takeaway from your journey all around the country talking about this book?

That people did not know that, in Louisiana, we are the incarceration capital of the world.

And that we are not entitled to a lawyer, that we don't have lawyers helping us once our appeal process has been exhausted.

That, to me, has been a surprising because, as you know, all your innocent cases where people was actually found to be innocent.

It happened at the post-conviction stage of the process.

And that is a stage of the process that a person like me is not entitled to a lawyer.

We don't have lawyers unless lawyers come actually to help us pro bono.

I think that is the most surprising thing.

Another thing is that Louisiana, the prison actually is a job by which you could apply for and obtain, to become a jailhouse lawyer to help people that can't afford lawyers, that don't have a lawyer.

And how did you discover that role?

What was the process of, assuming that mantle jailhouse lawyer?

Yeah.

So, when I got arrested, that was in 1982.

They put me on a unit with other guys that was telling me that I was going to get the death penalty, and I was telling them that I didn't commit the crime.

And they was telling me that, look, you have the same lawyer that I had, same judge, same prosecutor.

Your lawyer is not going to come see you.

And also that I was going to get found guilty.

So I asked them how can I help myself?

And he told me that I had to become a jailhouse.

I had to become a lawyer.

But I at that time I only had like a, between a eight and nineth grade education.

And so in order to save myself from the death penalty from being executed, I started doing exactly what the older guy was telling me that I needed to do is to start studying law, to become a lawyer.

Sophie, when did you meet Calvin for the first time?

Calvin, his reputation preceded him.

So when we found out he was coming home, everyone in the criminal defense community in Louisiana, knew who Calvin was and was very excited about that.

So we were delighted to learn that Calvin was going to come work in our office.

At the time, I was working with lawyers representing people on Louisiana's death row.

And Calvin wanted to continue the work he begun on the inside on behalf of those men and women, and came to work at my office.

So, within about a week of coming home, Calvin moved in across the hall.

And in the process of writing this book, the same question I asked Calvin.

Let me ask you, Sophie, when you've taken this book, roadshow around the country to share with people, the nature of the justice system, the failures.

What's been the most salient reaction in your mind from the audiences you've met with?

For me it's been the stories of how the men in prison helped each other.

I don't think prisons are places that, it's certainly in popular culture that are described as places where, disempowered people find ways to help each other against all odds.

But that's what Calvin story is about.

It's about him, but also about all the other people in the community that he and others created in Angola to support each other in impossible circumstances.

And, I think sharing those stories brings hope at a time when people are feeling quite disempowered themselves and hopeless themselves about some of the struggles we're facing in the world.

So it's been wonderful to see how Calvin's story has just brought hope to those conversations.

Now, Calvin, you're running for, as I mentioned, office.

This position that you're seeking to serve in, how are you hoping to manage that office in a way that it wasn't managed when it was addressing your case so many years ago and addressing people in your position?

Yeah.

So, while in prison, when I was trying to find out things that my lawyers would, if my lawyer was doing anything before I went to trial, I would write that court.

I would constantly write that court and ask them for copies of motions, documents, and just that, I never got to respond and then try to help other people with the similar situation, trying to help them get their records so that I could help them, throughout my incarceration.

Getting information from that court was always a problem.

But then I got out in 2011 and then went to the court, made several attempts to try to get some guys, some people records, and found out that the system just was totally inadequate, that the record wasn't scanned, it wasn't available.

And then I said, well, what I'm gonna do, I'ma prepare myself so when this position become open, I'm gonna run for office.

So what I had to do was, what I did, I want to make myself qualified.

I went got my paralegal certificate from Tulane University, an associate degree and a bachelor's degree in paralegal studies.

And then at the age of 57, I went to law school, Lewis and Clark.

And at the age of 60, I received my JD from Lewis and Clark.

And then I returned home 2023, and I continue to help the people in prison through the organization, The Light of Justice.

And then I found out the following day after the book launch, that the position was open, and I immediately started running for office.

Amazing.

So, you know, again, as Sophie identified, there's this hopeless climate we sometimes feel, but your story is one of resilience and empowerment.

To be able to correct a wrong in governing a position in public life, so that you can provide those materials and it seems maybe innocuous or marginal, but this justice system we have is evidence based.

So when we talk about being able to obtain a document -that is precious like, that -Yes, exactly.

makes or breaks whether someone can exonerate themselves.

Exactly.

So if you can't get your records, you can't support the allegations that you're innocent or that you wasn't afforded a fair trial.

And so what happened to me, I don't never want it to happen to nobody else.

And then Louisiana is the incarceration capital of the world, and most of the people end up in Louisiana prison, come from New Orleans, and we spend a tremendous amount of time in prison trying to get our records.

And then when we finally get them, if we actually, if we get them by accident, the court didn't say, well, it's too late.

You gotta die in prison because you're too late.

You should have discovered this evidence, all these records years ago.

And so what I want to do is make sure that that never happens to anybody else.

So looking at this tactically, Sophie, because again, you were interacting with audiences far and wide across what we consider liberal conservative states, purple states, states with Democratic governors, Republican governors.

And you've been in the throes in this, grassroots movement to, support the cause of justice, and to make the system fairer for people, again, on a granular level, what did the book tour elicit in you about the right way to approach this kind of pay for play, monetized prison industrial complex that, in so many places, in so many ways, incentivizes, recidivism and, not uncovering the truth about someone's case, like Calvin, the systemic problems are pronounced.

We've covered them, deeply over the last couple of years on The Open Mind.

But, in listening to people's reaction to the book, did you have any further direction in how you want to further correct the problems in the system?

Yeah, I mean, again, my answer sort of comes back to Calvin because I think he's a model for the answer in some ways.

To me it's about, it's less about that there's opposition to the changes that we need to make for a criminal justice system that works better for everyone.

I think people across the board, from victims to, people in prison, to defense attorneys, to prosecutors, agree that the one that we have is broken in so many ways.

I think it's about educating people who have the power to make changes to that system and then let them know that they actually do have that power, and there are concrete ways to use it.

What I mean by that is really ultimately criminal justice policy in our criminal justice system.

It's really made and carried out at the local level.

And at the state level, of course, with legislatures that there's so much that voters can actually do and effectuate in their own communities by knowing about the issues and then choosing to use the power of their vote.

So I think part of what I see Calvin doing and running for office is showing people that we all have the power to make a difference and whether that's running for office ourselves or just understanding that paying attention to elections at the local level can make a huge difference is really where, I found the energy in these past months, and I have to say that I've visited 4 or 5 states in the last month or two where people that I've spoken to, friends in the movement or people who were just have been plugging away at criminal justice work for decades, are actually deciding to run for office.

And I think that's a real, these are people who never saw themselves as political or as having political ambitions.

And I think to me that said a lot about, the opportunity we have right now, for people to realize that the path in their own hands.

Calvin, the same idea to you, the most immoral act of a government can be to wrongly incarcerate someone, or do the ultimate atrocity is what you were threatened with, death, of an innocent person.

How do you deal with it?

The natural empathy that people feel for someone in your shoes, as someone who did not commit the crime, did not, do what was alleged?

In many situations, we're talking about a system that's bloated.

Like I said, that incentivizes, further penalties for people because they can't pay a fee to a state.

They can't get a job.

Do you see your case, and those many cases of the Innocence Project and what has been exposed and wrongly convicted people, as related to the cases of people who wind up in the system for an act that they committed.

How do you contextualize that?

How do you talk about these two disparate things that may still be related in criminal justice reformers minds?

Is the question about innocence and those that are not innocent, but being entitled to that's the... I think so, but my question is deeper than that, because it's about your particular story, right?

That your particular story elicits a, from the vast majority of people, a natural, affinity empathy because of, the fact that what was alleged was wrong, did not occur.

That the broader movement of justice reform is dealing with systemic inequities, economic distress, why people might be in a position to be committing a crime, and then why they may, continue in the system.

And you've been exposed to a lot of these conversations.

You're involved in the case that people are most empathetic towards, that is someone who is innocent.

And I'm wondering just how you look at yourself relative to the cases of people who are in the system who may have committed crimes but, you know, are part of this bloated criminal justice, system that, is deeply embedded in social inequities.

Do you think that people ought to be as empathetic to people who are in the system, even if they committed an act, of violence, or a criminal act?

Because I think a lot of the reform movement in recent years has been directed towards those people.

And, you know, earlier on, maybe 25 years ago, the movement really began as a way to, bring about justice through, like your story.

Innocent people wrongly convicted, including people on death row.

I'm just wondering how you think about it, because in your case, you know, every single person ought to have empathy.

In other cases, because someone may have committed an act, misdemeanor, felony, whatever, there might not be that same empathy.

And how do you look at that?

First I'm gonna start off with, when this country was formulated, half of the Bill of Rights is directed to helping people accused of crimes.

The fourth for sure, fifth, sixth and eight for sure.

The first also because it provides the right to petition the government when you're being aggrieved and, right to access to the court.

So those people that created this whole, this this sense of government knew that the people that needed the most protection is the people that was accused of crimes.

Second of all, everybody's entitled to a fair trial no matter what, whether they guilty or innocent.

We believe the First Amendment, free speech, we believe in the Second Amendment, the same belief system, the strong belief system that we have in those two should also apply to the other one as well.

That we all entitled to a fair trial, no matter what you accuse of.

And I never separated myself from being those that are innocent and those that are not innocent.

I'm always arguing with that, we all is entitled to a fair trial.

And when we start making that distinction, then we get into trouble like what we got here in Louisiana.

That is per-capita, New Orleans is the highest, exoneration rate and we the highest incarceration rate, because we have a system that didn't believe that everybody was entitled to a fair trial.

We, as a system, has formulated in our mind that only one group of people is entitled to a fair trial, that is, people that could afford it.

And I don't think the people that created this form of government thought like that.

We all are entitled to whether we rich or poor.

Just because you don't have no money doesn't mean that you should be entitled to a fair trial.

And if we afford everybody a fair trial, then we won't have the distinction of who committed a crime and who didn't commit the crime, and make it so that the government carries burden of proof.

Also, the government provide comply with the obligation to make sure that if they have evidence that points to exculpatory evidence so on piece, with evidence that those the whole case in a different light, the credibility of the witnesses, if they have documents that show that a witness is not credible, then they should be turning those documents over so a person could actually be afforded a fair trial to an extent, you know, that the lawyer could effectively a cross-examine.

My third thing is lawyers have an obligation as well.

The United States Supreme Court has not said that lawyers cannot represent people that cannot afford a lawyer.

So lawyers should actually step up to the table and say, look, I'm going to step in and do just like the jailhouse lawyers.

I'm going to provide legal assistance to people that cannot afford lawyers.

Sophie, that same question to you about the distinction, from your experience, a lot of your work is focused on back end reforms of the system.

Some of that relates to wrongful conviction, but some of that relates to practices following a trial.

and I wanted to give you an opportunity to talk about that.

You say one of the crucial paths forward is running for office, as Calvin admirably is, and others are, what else?

What else do you think, on a granular level, is important to consider right now?

Yeah.

So there's just so much that happens in the life of a person who is accused of a crime and sentenced to prison and sent to prison that we don't see on the outside.

Once that person goes into the system.

And in Louisiana, like Calvin, is sentenced to something like life without parole, they're shut away from us for the rest of their lives, and, we're shut away from them.

So we really don't get to see what happens to that person from that point onward.

And I think what Calvin saw, as someone representing those folks from the inside is that people have, long lives and that they change over time and that they become contributing members to their community, whether that's in Angola or it could also be out with us.

And I think that's something we really need to address in the ways that we've been punishing people since the 80s and the 90s is recognizing that change that we might revisit somebodies case 10 or 20 or 30 years after they've been convicted and decide actually, that our community would benefit from having them home.

So, I'm a big proponent of, avenues that give people, in power a way to revisit those cases over time, whether that's in the courts or governors having clemency power or parole boards being able to evaluate cases.

It's just important that we have ways for people to find their way out of the system.

If they find their way in.

Those of you watching will notice Sophie has an accent.

She's an expert on the American justice system, but I can't resist, to ask, about Australia.

One of the things that was noteworthy, that I've come to learn about Australia is that, judges often dress in costume, on the street, so that they're not noticed so that they can really, deliver on impartial justice.

And also, we know, at a time when political assassinations and threats, have mightily increased.

That's also a security measure.

But our viewers may know something about the American justice system, but I am confident they know fairly little about the Australian justice system.

In life and in politics, I think, comparative analyzes are so important.

What can you tell us about the Australian system relative to the American system, which it's not a cliche or some kind of, banner advertisement is the most incarcerated per capita of any democracy, we can't speak for Russia, or North Korea, Australia is not.

So, could you do a little bit of comparison of the US and Australia?

I think our viewers would be interested in that.

Yeah, you know, it is interesting because I think that Australia, the United States, many European countries are really on the same track around criminal justice policy for a lot of its early history.

It wasn't really until the 70s, really the 80s, that the US diverged and took this, fairly unique path, to ramp up incarceration, in the use of incarceration the way that it did.

In Australia, one defining feature that I notice, is that we don't elect, elect the positions that play such a central role in the criminal justice system.

So our judges, our prosecutors are appointed and they're appointed by bodies that are really asking about those people's qualifications.

And fitness for their role, and not about how they would appeal to voters for political reasons.

So, as you mentioned, with the robes and, the wig, which is also a vestige, obviously of British colonialism, but it's also part of a recognition that the work of doing justice is to be taken very seriously.

And it's to remove personal identity and politics from the system.

So, that really the question is like, what would benefit the community?

And I think that that's lost in a system in the states where there's so many of those positions end up being about winning votes, because as we know and what Calvin was pointing out earlier, people convicted of crimes are not the popular ones.

And so when we have a system where the people who are in charge of deciding what happens to them are politically motivated, you start to inject, I think the possibility of more extreme outcomes, in an effort to win votes.

That's helpful.

Calvin, in your campaign, what are you hoping to deliver on?

Besides the promise of timely and transparent sharing of information with people who are seeking it to defend themselves?

Were there any more commitments that you were making, in the spirit of what Sophie was saying, for the purpose of impartiality, and how does, the office that you're seeking to serve in, how does it relate to the whole system and how you can hopefully effectuate some change?

So, I wanted to help three people understand.

I wanted to at first educate the people as to the role, of the the important role of the clerk of court.

I wanted to educate people about that, and at the same time, I wanted to help families that has tried to get access to that office and couldn't and felt as though they had failed that their loved ones in prison because they couldn't get their records.

I also wanted to let the people on the inside got individuals in prison, know that their families didn't fail them because their families was trying to get the records, but just couldn't.

And I wanted victims to know the answer, why does it take so long for them, for the system to realize that they had the wrong person 20, 30, 40, 50 years?

And I wanted to educate the people about that, and I wanted that so that they know this is how it happened.

Educating people was my, was one of my main focus as to the role of this court and how that it contributes to mass incarceration and a continuance if imprisonment of people that should not be there, it would because of that court, that's being dysfunctional, not providing the access that it was supposed to provide.

And when you say people who shouldn't be there, are you referring specifically to innocent people or people who... No, I'm referring to people that wasn't afforded a fair trial.

Right.

We had a prosecutor named Harry Connick that never felt as though he should comply with the United States Supreme Court mandate that he has to turn over favorable evidence, exculpatory evidence in criminal cases.

As a result of that, there was one prosecutor, his name with Jim Whigham.

He prosecuted and sent the Louisiana death row, six individuals, and he created a trophy in every last one of those pictures on that trophy was exonerated, released from death row, except one that went to trial.

-It was found guilty.

-Amazing.

So, I wanted to shed light because, people need to know people trust.

First of all, we convince people to trust our leaders, but we don't tell them the outside world when our leaders are not fulfilling that obligation, living up to that expectation.

So, doing what I'm doing is actually educating people about the role of that court.

And I'll also explain how Louisiana became the incarceration capital of the world.

And how it continuously keep people in prison.

That is because first we you're not entitled to a lawyer.

Second, you cannot get your records.

And it goes on and on and on.

So I wanted to educate people about that role, the role of the clerk of court.

It's really a testament to your, I said, resilience, perseverance, character, selflessness, conscience, extraordinary personal fortitude and courage that you're running.

The system, the state, the state of Louisiana, the United States took something away from you that is precious, sacrosanct, irreplaceable.

And you are still wanting to ensure that fairness and investing your time, energy and intelligence in the system to deliver a fairer outcome for your fellow Americans.

Calvin, I salute you.

Sophie, thank you for the good work you do, too.

Which, is an equal measure.

Thank you both for your time.

I urge everyone to follow Calvin's campaign and also to read Sophie and Calvin's book, The Jailhouse Lawyer.

Thank you both for your time and what you do.

-Thank you.

-Thanks, Alex.

[music] Please visit The Open Mind website at thirteen.org/openmind.

Download the podcast on Apple and Spotify.

And check us out on X, Instagram, and Facebook.

Continuing production of The Open Mind has been made possible by grants from Vital Projects Fund, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Ploughshares Fund, Angelson Family Foundation, Robert and Kate Niehaus Foundation, Grateful American Foundation, and Draper Foundation.