#ChristopherDunn #innocence fight may continue. He won this latest round.

追加: 2026-05-25

[00:00:00]Shortly, for 3 months, a man who won his freedom has been wondering if he would be going back to prison. An appeals court ruled that for now he is still free.

[00:00:12]Today marks the anniversary of my original incarceration.

[00:00:18]And I'm just trying to live the rest of my little life at peace.

[00:00:23]>> [screaming] >> We were there when Christopher Dunn walked to freedom in 2024 after more than three decades in prison. A judge reviewing evidence of innocence vacating Dunn's 1991 conviction for the fatal shooting of a teen. Not so fast, said Missouri's attorney general's office.

[00:00:42]Their lawyers argued in February to an appeals court panel. Dunn should not have been released. The appellate judges disagreed. Dunn was sleeping when the decision came down.

[00:00:52]>> What was your reaction? They woke me up out of my sleep.

[00:00:55]>> Christopher and his wife Keisha zoomed with us from out of town. I can sit here and tell you how agonizing it is, how scary it is, how painful it it feels to think that somebody else has your life in their hands.

[00:01:12]But, regardless of what I'm going through, this is a fight that I feel like I can't stop fighting because if I give up on this fight, it's like giving up on everybody else including the victim. 36 years ago today was when Chris's freedom was first taken wrongfully. And he was just an 18-year-old kid and to have this ruling come down is yeah, huge to us.

[00:01:39]The decision says a reasonable person would quote conclude there was clear and convincing evidence of actual innocence.

[00:01:45]As it mentioned two reported witnesses who had ID'd Dunn as a shooter 36 years ago, then later admitted they lied.

[00:01:53]>> So, I'm curious, how is the attorney general's office responding to this?

[00:01:56]>> Very simply that they're reviewing what they could possibly do next. That's it.

[00:02:01]So, but what about the AG's office and it's biggest argument against the release? We were there when they argued to the appeals court that the two original witnesses who were 12 and 14 at the time, they say were telling the truth back then and possibly lying today. All right, Chris Hayes, thanks so much.