In a just world, when a man is declared factually innocent by not one, but two judges, he walks free.

In Missouri, however, justice is less about truth than protecting reputations. Christopher Dunn has spent over three decades in prison for a crime he did not commit. Despite clear evidence of his innocence and judges affirming it, the state is still fighting to keep him incarcerated. Why? Because freeing him would mean admitting that the system failed badly.

The Missouri Supreme Court ruled this week that Attorney General Andrew Bailey has the authority to appeal the exoneration of Christopher Dunn, a man who spent 34 years in prison for a murder he says he didn’t commit.

This Court granted the State of Missouri’s transfer application and ordered the cause transferred prior to opinion by the court of appeals as to the issue raised in the court of appeals’ show cause order—whether the State of Missouri has the right to appeal a judgment vacating or setting aside a conviction under section 547.031.1 This Court holds the State of Missouri is an aggrieved party with a statutory right to appeal under section 512.020(5) and retransfers this cause to the court of appeals to overrule the circuit attorney’s motion to dismiss and proceed with the state’s appeal on the merits. <SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI (en banc) Opinion No. SC100878 issued April 15, 2025 >

A Flawed Case Built on Police and Prosecutorial Coercion

Christopher Dunn, a Missouri man, was wrongfully convicted of the 1990 murder of 15-year-old Ricco Rogers in St. Louis and spent 34 years in prison. At age 18, Dunn was sentenced to life without parole based on the testimony of two young eyewitnesses, aged 12 and 14, who later recanted, claiming coercion by police and prosecutors. No physical evidence ever linked Dunn to the crime, and he maintained his innocence throughout. The recantations and allegations of police and prosecutorial misconduct should have been enough to re-examine the case. But it wasn’t.

Judges Agree: He Is Innocent

In 2020, Judge William Hickle reviewed the evidence and found what many advocates had been saying for years: Christopher Dunn is “factually innocent.” A second judge reaffirmed this conclusion. These aren’t just legal technicalities; “factual innocence” means that, had this evidence been available at trial, no reasonable jury would have found Dunn guilty. It’s a damning indictment of the original case and a glaring call for an immediate statement of exoneration from Attorney General Andrew Bailey.

And yet, here we are.

Why Is He Still Being Prosecuted?

The Missouri Attorney General’s office has responded to Dunn’s exoneration not with action toward exoneration, but with resistance. Their reasoning? Under Missouri law, even actual innocence is not always enough to overturn a conviction unless the death penalty is involved. In other words, a living, innocent man can rot in prison because the system values procedure over truth.

Let that sink in.

Protecting the System at All Costs

The state is aggrieved by the circuit court’s amended judgment vacating the convictions because the state has an interest in the finality of its convictions, and the circuit court’s amended judgment vacated or set aside those convictions. <SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI (en banc) Opinion No. SC100878 issued April 15, 2025 >

What’s happening here is a desperate attempt by the State of Missouri to protect its institutions. Admitting Dunn’s wrongful conviction means confronting the uncomfortable truths of police misconduct, prosecutorial error, and judicial failure. It means acknowledging that the lives shattered by a flawed legal process are not outliers but warnings of a clear and present judicial danger to other defendants.

Rather than face this shameful episode, Missouri is doubling down on legal technicalities, preserving its reputation at the expense of a man’s freedom. Christopher Dunn is a casualty of a system that is more concerned with appearances than accountability.

Bottom line…

Christopher Dunn’s continued persecution is not just a personal tragedy; it’s a national disgrace. If the State of Missouri can hold on to an innocent man after two judges say “let him go,” what does that say about Missouri’s justice system? What does it say about those individuals supervising the judicial system?

The fight for Dunn’s freedom is not just about one man. It’s about whether we, as a society, are willing to demand integrity from our legal system, or if we’ll stand by and let it bury its mistakes.

Where is the notorious civil rights attorney Benjamin Crump and his media circus? Where are the “Justice for Christopher Dunn” marches? Where is the multi-million dollar admission of wrongdoing?

With these types of police and judicial bad actors, we are so screwed.

-- Steve