Picturing DNA
An Interview with Dona Ann McAdams

[Dona Ann McAdams is a photographer who is doing a long term study of the men who were exonerated through the efforts of the Innocence Project.]

McAdams: I am working on this project called "the Face of Innocence.

Q: Were you interested in DNA and all this before you hooked up with the Innocence Project?

McAdams: No, absolutely not. I became interested because I'm interested in social issues. And I thought that what was happening was really interesting in terms of incarceration and release [as a result] of science. There were no real guidelines for me – I'm not a journalist. I don't use my camera as a passport. In this particular situation with DNA, I said I'd like to do a series of portraits of these sixty-nine men [who, in light of DNA evidence, were exonerated for crimes for which they were convicted].

Q: What kind of camera do you use?

McAdams: I use a Leica M2 with a 35-millimeter lens. I use available light. I don't just take portraits; I'm not a portrait photographer. All my work, all of my documentary projects, are long-term. I started working on this in November of '98.

Q: Did you have any trouble making contact with the men and the DNA laboratories?

McAdams: [At first it was difficult]. Then I decided that I was just going to go to West Virginia [where there were many cases]. I got on the phone [to the attorney], and I said, "This is who I am: this is what I'm doing," and he said, "Fine. That's great. I'll help you." And he said, "OK. I'll talk to the public defender who has gotten most of these guys out. I'll be the conduit for you for all of this." I went to West Virginia and I did preliminary portrait series. So that's basically how the West Virginia series started. I've been down [there] about three or four times. There were a couple of cases. One was a guy who was in jail, I think, for fourteen years. His name is Larry Heldron. He had been convicted by a high school photograph the woman had seen. The assailant was blonde. He was a troublemaker in high school. It doesn't matter that he's going to be a marine biologist and is finishing up his undergraduate work and getting to do post-grad work somewhere and he's a A student and was in the library. No, none of that matters. They want to solve the crime.

[Then there's another case, Wilbur.] He was in the process of getting out of jail when I went down. Wilbur lives in Chicago. So now I'm going to fly Wilbur to Charleston, West Virginia. And then I'm going to have his two sons come. He's a photographer; I bought him a camera. I have a special spot in my heart [for Wilbur], because he is a photographer. I'm getting ready to do this portrait with him and his boys. And he's really excited about being able to photograph his twin sons, whom he hasn't seen. I think they were two [when he went to jail].

Q: What's your timetable for moving forward? Do you see this project as taking the rest of your life?

McAdams: Yes. [There are so many cases]; I know them pretty well. I mean, of the nine, I probably talk to four or five of them pretty regularly. For example, Jim's case. He was a classic case of manipulation by the police, whereby [he] came home late at night, saw a fire in the house behind his house, ran into the fire, heard a little girl screaming, got a blanket, picked her up, took her out of the burning house, called 911, and had the fire put out. The next day he's there and the police are asking him questions. They found a woman in the remains. She was pretty much cremated. And on the TV news they said, "A woman's body was found here." And when the police came back with Jim to go over the crime scene, he said, "Well, I guess that's where the body was." And based on the fact that they said that he was the only one that knew where the body was, he had to be the one that killed her, [although] it was on the news the night before. The horrific piece of information that they buried was that the little girl [said that] there were two men, the bad man and the good man. "The bad man came in and hit mommy, and mommy hit the bad man with a ball bat. And then the bad man hit mommy. And then the good man....." They completely suppressed the child's testimony. It was unbelievable. [Jim] went to the worst prison, with huge rats. Most of these guys that I've worked with from West Virginia have spent time there. But Jim was just put away. And what he did was save a child's life. It's unbelievable!

Q: Do you see in the faces of these men anything that is different from other people?

McAdams: Absolutely. What I see [in] these people that is different from other people is an amazing sense of serenity and calm, this sort of, "I'm alive and I'm happy and I'm out of jail." They don't have bitterness. It's almost like a religious thing. They are very, very tranquil. "I've surrendered. I've gotten out." It's consistent with all of them.

Q: Are any of them able to talk about it?

McAdams: Yes. I've talked to Wilbur at length about that. He's so glad that he has these two sons who are incredibly wonderful, young and happy to be alive in the world.

Q: It's interesting that they're not bitter.

McAdams: I notice that. I notice not a preacherly, or in-your-face, or thank-the-lord kind of thing, but definitely tranquillity, and a peace or a calm. It's almost like being somebody who meditates or does yoga or is religious – like the Dalai Lama or something.

Q: have any of them expressed any particular interest in the DNA process? It's such a small thing, and yet it was crucial to their exonerations.

McAdams: They know about how it all works, and they think it's amazing. And the other thing that's really interesting is that access to [DNA] testing is incredibly expensive. So for a lot of guys, unless they get help from the Innocence Project or something, it's really hard because it cost thousands of dollars. There are so many people who [should have testing available], and they can't afford it. If you talk to the attorneys – and I've talked to a couple now – you [learn] what's happened and how the tests occur. [For example, this one man,] they didn't do testing. [There was] a blood sample just lying around in a refrigerated cabinet somewhere. No one ever bothered to test it. And the public defender found it and sort of went, "What the heck is this?" And that's how [the man] got out. [The assumption of the law was], "OK. He looks like a perpetrator. He's African American." If he's got a prior record, if he's had any trouble, then – you know [their method] of solving crime. And then, what about the women [who identify them]? These poor women.

Q: The women who testify are really convinced.

McAdams: Of course they're convinced – they want to be convinced.

Q: Sure. They want to blame somebody, for which you can't blame them.

McAdams: There is one victim that I know of and that's a lousy term – there must be other language for this, who has actually had interaction with the person she convicted. I would like to tell you about her. She said that she's met the guy that she accused. They've had conversation. She feels bad. He feels bad. She's actually saying, "Look, this is how it happened. It's really wrong. Let's not have this happen anymore." In [another] case the victim is still sure she was right. She's convinced that the DNA is wrong. And you understand that, too. I mean, you convince yourself.

Q: You convince yourself that your memory is accurate.

McAdams: Of course you do. [The] eyewitness [is] often unreliable. Listen, I'm a photographer, and I notice things. But still I'd be a really unreliable witness.

Q: Do you have plans to do further work on this subject?

McAdams: I'm interested in working with these guys and seeing how their life unfolds and being part of their photographic life, if they're interested.

Return to TOC Return to Chapter Two Go to Next Chapter

Picturing DNA by Bettyann Holtzmann Kevles & Marilyn Nissenson
Copyright © 2000 Bettyann Holtzmann Kevles & Marilyn Nissenson
All Rights Reserved