Michael Chapel was convicted for the 1993 Armed Robbery and Murder of a Sugar Hill Grandmother, Emogene Thompson.
Officer Chapel had been profiled by Internal Affairs due to a rash of dirty cops in south metro Atlanta shortly before the murder occurred.
Chapel was eventually cleared of any involvement related to the dirty cops and the circumstantial case against him literally fell apart. However, he had already been arrested and the District Attorney and Brass at PD had gone out and declared him a horrible murderer.
One of the dirty cops in his department, who was likely involved in the murder, killed himself immediately after an investigation was triggered by statements Michael Chapel and his Defense Attorney made in connection to his wrongdoings.
Another officer went into the suicide scene, to secure what the Chief Detective said was a suicide note, and others believed to be a confession. Instead he deleted the note, and what would later be described as two hard drives full of incriminating evidence against multiple officers.
An Open Records request has revealed that the Chief of Police and numerous other leaders in the Police Department were present when all this evidence was destroyed. Most of the same leaders, including the Chief and under Chief were present when the lead Investigator on the case wrote in his case notebook that “We may want to manufacture witnesses”.
The record proves that evidence was illegally withheld by the DA, and evidence was “lost,” destroyed, manipulated and manufactured to convict Officer Chapel.
Wrongly Convicted Group Website 
The case of Michael Harold Chapel needs to be adopted and this innocent man deserves to come home to his family. He has already served 28 years and justice needs to be served now!
Thank you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Whenever I hear people express their relief upon learning that someone has been charged with a reviled crime — ‘Did they catch him? They did? Well, that’s a load off the mind!’ — I mentally hear the phrase, ‘We’ll give ’im a fair trial, then we’ll hang ’im.’ If I point out the person may be wrongly accused and is being railroaded, I could receive the erroneous refrain, ‘Well if he’s truly innocent, he has nothing to worry about.’
It is why I strongly feel the news-media should refrain from publishing the identity of people charged with a crime — especially one of a repugnant nature, for which they are jailed pending trial (as is typically done) — until at least after they’ve been convicted.
Considering the serious flaws, even corruption, in the law-enforcement and justice system — thus great injustices are committed, including those that are forever hidden from public knowledge — no one should have their name permanently tarnished and life potentially ruined because the news-media insists upon immediately running a breaking story. I find that it epitomizes an unjust presumption of guilt.
LikeLike