There are various ideas of what justice means from one person to another. It is nearly universal, however, that an innocent person being imprisoned is an injustice, especially when the imprisonment has lasted for nearly twenty years. Such is the case of Andrew Hayes.

Mr. Hayes was convicted of murdering Danny Harris in August of 2007. The theory was that Hayes, who lived in a nearby apartment with Tammy Vance and Sarah Lucas, assisted Vance in beating to death and robbing Harris.

Hayes, who has an IQ of about 70, was subjected to 27 hours of interrogation by police before finally confessing to a crime he did not commit. Key details in his confession did not match the crime, such as an admission that he killed Harris “upstairs” when Harris lived in a one-floor apartment. There was no physical evidence that tied Hayes to the killing.

Hayes was sentenced to 55 years in prison in 2010, and Tammy Vance confessed to the crime and was sentenced to life in prison. In a letter from Vance to Lucas, Vance admits to lying about the crime to keep Lucas from going to prison. And in a recorded call between the son of Danny Harris and Lucas, Lucas confesses to killing Harris with Vance alone.

In January, based on his office’s investigation, District Attorney Steve Mulroy announced that he believed Hayes was wrongly convicted and that Lucas was a co-conspirator. A warrant was issued for her arrest in Oklahoma, and she was set to appear in court. The day before her hearing, Lucas died. Vance, who wrote the letter, also died in prison.

In a hearing before Criminal Court Judge Lee Coffee, Coffee was not convinced and said Hayes would not be released and set another hearing date for October 9. Coffee also said that he did not believe the state had been adequately represented in the hearing, suggesting that the state Attorney General should have been a participant in the matter.

Mulroy issued the following statement:

“We disagree with the Court’s position. It is entirely appropriate for the prosecution to agree with the defense when the prosecution is convinced that the facts and the law justify that position. In fact, it would be unethical for a prosecutor to do otherwise. The case law is also clear that, at the trial-court level, the appropriate office is the District Attorney’s Office—not the Attorney General’s Office.

From a layperson’s perspective, this is not how I want my criminal justice system to operate. Most of us understand that the system is designed to be adversarial so that the interests of the state (the citizens) and the interests of the accused are fully represented. I also believe that most people desire judicial actions to reveal the truth – what actually happened and who is to blame. If prosecutors (the state), who have the power to accuse, indict, and influence conviction and sentencing decisions, believe the truth has been misrepresented, they have an obligation to intervene, even if it means being on the same side as the defense. That should be especially true when the erroneous outcome results in the seizure of one’s liberty, which we are all guaranteed.

Hayes’ confession, in my feeble mind, should never have been allowed since it was coerced over a period of 27 hours of interrogation of a man with an intellectual disability. No one appears to be disputing the authenticity of the letter from Vance or the phone call confession from Lucas. Each seems to corroborate the other, and neither had anything to gain by confessing other than a clearer conscience. And this is not a scenario in which the victims are uncertain or unconsidered. Danny Harris’ son initiated the call to Lucas, recorded the call, and then testified on behalf of Andrew Hayes at this week’s hearing.

As I see it, there will never be absolute justice in this sad case because Andrew Hayes has spent nearly 20 years in prison that he will never get back. But Judge Coffee should release Hayes immediately, so he can possess the measure of justice he has left.