His name escapes me. But not his face, especially the pools
of sadness in his eyes. As if he had given up. I remember how he kept to
himself. He mopped the hallway floors and cleaned the prison school bathrooms.
One day he disappeared, only to be replaced by another porter. A few days later
as I drank my morning coffee his face reappeared in my morning newspaper. He did eight
years in prison because of accusations that he had molested his kid,
accusations that came about through an ugly divorce. Apparently the molestation
never happened—still, it was easy to lock him up and harder to get him out,
even after his kid recanted.
He’s been a free man for about ten years now.
I’m sure he questioned the motives of those responsible for
putting him behind bars … at least for awhile … then he probably let go of his
anger, his sadness, and moved on with his life.
He’s in my thoughts due to last week’s Detroit Free Press
article on David Lee Gavitt, a man who did twenty-six years in the Michigan
prison system for killing his wife and children. Last week, thanks to the
University of Michigan Law School’s Innocence Clinic and the advancements in
fire science, he walked out of Carson City Correctional Facility a free man. Retired Michigan State
Police Sgt. John Fatchett still questions Gavitt’s motives, as if there’s a
specific procedure one should follow when a house is on fire. From what I
gather, Gavitt’s crucial mistake was having his wife round up the toddlers
while he busted the glass out of a bedroom window. What was he thinking? What
were his intentions? How long should he have waited for his wife to return with
the toddlers before saving himself?
The answers to “the things we do when we do them” can’t
always be explained logically, but there will always be those who rush to
judgment with absolute certainty that an obvious choice should’ve been made.
5 comments:
It is so wonderful when lawyers can argue two different sides of obvious and the one with the best power of persuasion is the one with the obvious answer. And even more wonderful when those who obviously refuse to accept the responsibility for their own professional mistakes adhere to their obviously wrong conclusions.
You're lucky if you get through life without having some decision to make in which there is no right choice.
I wonder what will happen to the mother who used her daughter to make the false claims? UM law school's Innocence Clinic has produced some good from what I have seen in the MDOC. Nice writing JR. MW
MW raises a good point. What happens to them trifiling scum bags who use their children as weapons in civil matters against their significant other only to have that child recant later?
Enjoyed the read. Huck
J.R.-what a very sad scenario. Who can guess who was in that child's ear. Horrible.
Post a Comment