Herbert Landry Case Study

On February 6, 2006, Herbert Landry went to the police for they assumed that he had started the fire in the Shadow Wood Apartment Complex in Provo, Utah. The police had witnesses in the apartment complex who stated that they had seen Herbert Landry leaving the building shortly before the fire started. Forty-six-year-old Herbert Landry was then believed to be the culprit behind the fire even though the investigation was still in progress, and there was no substantial evidence linking Herbert Landry to the fire.
Before Mr. Landry was suspected of arson, he lived in New Orleans with his family. For reasons unknown, Mr. Landry sent his family to live with one of his relatives in Texas. Not long after, Hurricane Katrina hit Mr. Landry’s house. He
Cory Talbot: The science that was presented to the jury about arson was not factual. It was circumstantial, and if experts had been brought in, it would have all been disproven.
What compelled you to take the case?
Benjamin Machlis: I worked with the Rocky Mountain Innocence Center for a while, and they brought me the case. I thought it was a good case and thought that Herbert Landry deserved to be exonerated.
Cory Talbot: It was brought by the Rocky Mountain Innocence Center, and they take cases where there is proof that they (the convicted) are innocent. Usually, they take cases that have evidence, like DNA, to prove their innocence. But when I looked at this case, I saw that the evidence was circumstantial and chose to take the case to free an innocent man. I went to a CLE where they spoke about the innocent and standing up for the innocent. He (Herbert Landry) wanted to have his voice heard for he was saying he was innocent, and I wanted to help him in proving it.
What do you believe were the primary reasons for his