After his arrest in 1986, Donald Reynolds was so adamant that he was innocent of the rape and robbery of two University of Chicago students that he asked a judge to order DNA testing.
It seemed like a futile gesture at the time. Prosecutors believed they had a solid case: One of the two women involved had identified Reynolds, right down to the scratches on his neck and face that she said were inflicted during the struggle.
As Reynolds’ case neared trial in February 1988, Judge Arthur Cieslik turned him down, ruling that DNA testing was an unproven science.
The Illinois Appellate Court upheld the ruling in an opinion affirming the conviction of Reynolds and a co-defendant, Billy Wardell, for the attack.
On Monday, more than nine years later, Reynolds and Wardell, both of whom have been serving 55-year prison terms for their convictions, were ordered released because DNA tests proved that Reynolds was right all along.
The tests showed that one of the women had been sexually assaulted by two men. However, neither the DNA of Reynolds nor the DNA of Wardell matched that found in the semen retrieved from the victim.
The two men are the 11th and 12th defendants in Illinois who have been wrongly convicted but later absolved through DNA testing.
Tom Lundregan, a research associate for the Institute for Law and Justice in Alexandria, Va., and a co-author of a study titled “Convicted by Juries, Exonerated by Science,” said no other state has used DNA to uncover more wrongly convicted defendants than Illinois.
“There are more than 40 such cases in the country,” he said. “I don’t know what it means that there are so many in Illinois. It could mean that Illinois has no more wrongly convicted people than anywhere else but is simply doing a better job at uncovering the cases.”
At the time the study was published, in 1996, Lundregan said 28 cases were documented, including 5 in Illinois.New York was next with four cases. Since then, Illinois has added seven cases. New York and Virginia currently have had four cases, he said.
At the time Reynolds made his initial request for DNA testing, the procedure only had been available in the U.S. since October 1987.
The use of evidence obtained from a new scientific technique is governed by a standard established by a court ruling in 1923. Under that ruling, scientific evidence is not allowed in court unless the technique has gained acceptance within the scientific community.
That determination is a matter of judicial discretion and, at the time, Cieslik ruled DNA testing had not been generally recognized among scientists.
The ruling was upheld by later courts.
The new tests were conducted after lawyers for Reynolds and Wardell obtained court orders.
The retesting eliminated both men as the source of the semen, Assistant State’s Atty. Thomas Gainer announced in Cook County Criminal Court on Monday.
As a result, Judge Daniel Kelley vacated the convictions of both defendants and granted a new trial.
Gainer then said the state would drop the charges, paving the way for the release of Reynolds and Wardell.
Martha Akins, 33, Reynolds’ sister, was overwhelmed by the decision.
Outside the courtroom, tears streamed down her cheeks as she declared: “I’m just happy that it’s all over. I’ve tried to be supportive for him for 11 years.
“It’s going to be a good Christmas present,” she added. “I’ve always believed he didn’t do it. . . . My Thanksgiving dinner is going to be cooked tomorrow.”
Gainer said the two victims, who now live out of state, were “shocked” when informed of the test results.
David Gleicher, attorney for Reynolds, said he expected both men would be released by state prison officials on Tuesday. Reynolds has been serving his term in the prison in Galesburg, and Wardell was assigned to the facility in Danville.
Absent the test results, neither man would have been eligible for release until 2013 under the terms of their sentences, according to prison officials.
The attack occurred shortly after 10 p.m. on May 3, 1986, when three men confronted the two women as they walked near their dormitory.
The assailants shoved the victims to their knees, demanded money and said they had a gun. One woman later said she saw the gun and testified that she told them she had no money.
The other woman gave $6 to one of the three and then both women were forced to alternately walk and crawl on their hands and knees to an empty lot. There, according to the victims, they were separated.
One woman told police she was assaulted three times by one man and once by another man wearing a light-blue hooded sweatshirt. She told police she scratched the face and neck of the man who assaulted her three times.
The other woman, after a desperate struggle, managed to avoid being sexually assaulted, according to testimony at the 1988 trial.
Three days later, Chicago police detectives spotted Reynolds on the street and stopped to question him because he fit the description of one of the assailants, right down to the scratches.
While the two women were being driven to a police station to help investigators prepare a composite sketch of their attackers, they saw Reynolds being questioned by the police detectives and identified him.
At the time, Reynolds contended the scratches were the result of a recent fight with his girlfriend, Gleicher said.
About a month after the attack, the two victims were shown police mug shots and tentatively picked out the photograph of Wardell.
Wardell was put in a lineup in which all members wore hooded sweatshirts and were asked to say a phrase–“Are you trying to play dead?”–that had been spoken during the attack.
The woman who was sexually assaulted could not make a positive identification, but the other victim picked out Wardell, saying: “That is the man, yes, that is the man.”
A third suspect never was arrested.
Kathleen Zellner, attorney for Wardell, said she planned to seek a pardon and expungement of the conviction and then file a claim in the Illinois Court of Claim for damages of $140,000.
