Yeah.

That's just an entirely different story.

And you're right.

To answer that question, to learn that answer, the why, is not to excuse.

There is a difference between an excuse and an explanation, right? One absolves, an excuse absolves, the other accounts.

That's what it is in accounting.

It tells us who they are.

What are your thoughts there?

It is exceedingly

important.

It is exceedingly important.

I mean, it's a whole separate conversation that we could have sometime.

My reservations about the innocence movement and the innocence movement is important and many of my friends are involved in it.

And so I'm not being critical of it.

But one consequence of it, an unintended consequence, is that it distills the question of the circle of people about whom we should have moral concern to those who are, quote, innocent, right? And it says those who are outside that circle are beyond our care, beyond—we don't have to care about them as a moral concern.

What are some of the challenges that you face as a civil rights lawyer when you're trying to bring challenges to what happens inside?

With that, Joe, uh, why don't you just tell everyone a little bit about yourself and about your new book, and let's just go right into it.

Thanks.

Jon, I'm really happy to be back here, and I always love hearing you reminisce about my dad.

I, and I want to tell you, I'm sure if you chatted with him late in his life and told him how, uh, much his mentorship meant to you, I'm sure that meant a lot to him, and I'm grateful to you for having that conversation with you, 'cause you're right.

Those kind of conversations mean a lot.

That's, that's a really kind thing that you did.

I'm glad.

Uh, but, um, what made you seek out Lucas and, um, I take it that, uh, you're, you're convinced that he did have a meta- he, he was metamorphosized against, uh, racism, and how did that happen?

By a stepfather.

Repeatedly, consistently, yeah.

By a stepfather.

By a stepfather 40 years her senior.

And as horrific as it was...

Lisa, what children sometimes do, two things happen.

One is when they are subjected to this kind of life-threatening trauma, they begin to dissociate.

and this book is part of that, Are you imagining a world where we could send them off to Australia like the British did? No, I imagine a world in which

Wow, yeah.

So I don't think that environment is destiny, right? If we believed that, we would have a hard time explaining why the great majority of folks who are raised in horrific circumstances do not become embroiled and ensnared in the criminal legal system and do not commit acts of violence.

So when you are trying to account, again, not excuse, but account for the path that a person has followed, you have to look deeper than the fact that They grew up in a very poor, very violent, blood-soaked neighborhood, right? So I write about Eric Matthews, for instance, and he's the first story in the book, first chapter in the book.

And Eric has become a very good friend.

He's a remarkable guy.

and spent 30 years in Angola, the Louisiana State Prison at Angola.

Eric grew up in the St. Thomas homes before they were torn down when it was literally one of the most violent, dangerous neighborhoods in the country, a really rough time.

If that is the trend, then why would the journey be difficult?

So what did he do? And then how, and what happened to him?

So Lucas, Lucas is a friend now.

He served 25 years.

went in when he was 17, or he was 17 when he was arrested.

I think he was 18 by the time he was convicted.

So he was a juvenile when he was arrested.

Crime was horrible.

Can you talk a little bit about like if that's something you've seen? And I think you've been that person, not to flatter you, for a lot of these guys, like you've said of like, wait, you actually believe in me? You think I can you think I'm worth something?

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

It literally met him twice between when he was sentenced and when he was convicted.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

Um, I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm, I'm, I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

Absolutely.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

It literally met him twice between when he was sentenced and when he was convicted.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

It literally met him twice between when he was sentenced and when he was convicted.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

Um, I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm, I'm, I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

Absolutely.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

Um, I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm, I'm, I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

Absolutely.

Can you tell us more, please?

Sure.

I loved working on that chapter, getting to know Eric.

He's a wonderful, wonderful human being.

I'm so glad that I got to be present on the day that the charges against him were finally resolved.

He is now out of custody.

He served 30 years in Angola.

It literally met him twice between when he was sentenced and when he was convicted.

And I think that when I read your piece and I agreed emphatically with it, I found myself slightly sticking on the point of How are we ever going to come to some kind of consensus or scientific agreement about what is moral? And how should we think about the fact that what is moral today is egregiously immoral in 10 years?

So I think that is exactly the right critique.

And of course, I'm with you on that.

But I have a couple of responses.

And, you know, they're not sufficient.

But in the interest of getting this conversation, because what really matters is that we have these conversations, right? One, I agree with you.

I love the way you describe it as, you know, the church of the Constitution.

And if you are comfortable hearing in theater, if you are comfortable hearing domestic terrorist, if you are comfortable hearing enemy of the people, then you are really, really quietly sanctioning a one-way ratchet into this othering.

And I think that when I read your piece, and I agreed emphatically with it, I found myself slightly sticking on the point [chuckles] of how are we ever going to come to some kind of consensus or scientific agreement about what is moral? And how should we think about the fact that what is moral today is egregiously immoral in ten years?

So I think that is exactly the right critique, and of course, I'm with you on that, but I have a couple of responses.

And, and, and, you know, could be they're not sufficient, uh, but in the interest of getting this conversation, 'cause what really matters is, is that we have these conversations, right? One, I agree with you.

I, I love the way you describe it as, you know, the Church of the Constitution.

So it's not a matter of whether we're going to have a kind of-... quasi-religious worship of a thing, a body of principles.

It's whether it's gonna be something we call law and written down in the Constitution, or whether it's gonna be something, uh, what I call the moral voice, that is worked out by the people in, you know, contestations over what society does, right? So we're gonna do that.

The myth is that by writing it down in a constitution, we will achieve some consensus, and the myth is that that consensus will be desirable.

And if you are comfortable hearing in theater, if you are comfortable hearing domestic terrorist, if you are comfortable hearing enemy of the people, then you are really quietly sanctioning a one-way ratchet [chuckles] into this othering.

And I think that when I read your piece and I agreed emphatically with it, I found myself slightly sticking on the point of How are we ever going to come to some kind of consensus or scientific agreement about what is moral? And how should we think about the fact that what is moral today is egregiously immoral in 10 years?

So I think that is exactly the right critique.

And of course, I'm with you on that.

But I have a couple of responses.

And, you know, could be they're not sufficient.

But in the interest of getting this conversation, because what really matters is that we have these conversations, right? One, I agree with you.

I love the way you describe it as, you know, the church of the Constitution.

And if you are comfortable hearing in theater, if you are comfortable hearing domestic terrorist, if you are comfortable hearing enemy of the people, then you are really, really quietly sanctioning a one-way ratchet into this othering.