MORGANTOWN, W.Va. — In 1979, a Kanawha County jury convicted Clyde Richey of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy. Richey was then a member of the House of Delegates from Monongalia County and his accuser was a legislative page.
Now, 35 years later, Richey has obtained DNA evidence that raises questions about the guilty verdict.
The jury convicted Richey of having anal sex with the boy in his Charleston motel room in February 1979, the night before the child was to serve as a page. The prosecution relied heavily on the boy’s testimony against Richey, but had no scientific evidence. Several pairs of the boy’s undershorts were introduced as evidence, though none linked Richey to the crime.
In July, Dr. Alan L. Friedman, a Milwaukee DNA consultant, determined that bodily fluids gathered during the investigation in 1979 were not Richey’s. The fluid specimens were obtained during a “rectal brushing” of Richey’s accuser and placed on a microscopic slide by WVU Hospital two days after the assault allegedly occurred.
Friedman said Richey’s DNA profile was not among “a mixture” from “at least three male contributors.” Freidman said one of the contributors could have been the accuser’s.
Richey, who is 79 and in poor health, believes this may be the piece of evidence that finally exonerates him.
“At last, after decades of trying, I finally have the solid evidence that seriously challenges the credibility of the untruthful allegations made against me in 1979,” he said.
Richey said he learned in 2005 that the slide used for the initial DNA testing still existed. It had been stored in a box in the garage of a WVU employee who retired in 1988. Though the slide’s re-emergence seemed like a major development in his fight to obtain evidence, Richey held off on seeking the DNA testing for personal reasons.
“My wife, who was in ill health at the time, convinced me that I would never get my conviction overturned, so rather than put her through more distress, I dropped the case,” Richey said.
After his wife passed away last year, Richey decided to try again. He asked Friedman to analyze the DNA test results performed earlier by GenQuest Laboratory in Nevada. Friedman agreed to take the case at no charge.
“(Richey) told me his story and I felt that the criminal justice system had gotten it wrong,” Friedman said in an email to MetroNews. “I wanted to participate in correcting a wrongful conviction.”
However, Friedman stopped short of claiming Richey is innocent. “Guilt or innocence is decided by the trier of facts in a court of law,” Friedman said. “The strongest statement I can make is that Clyde H. Richey is not a contributor” to the DNA found on the slide.
Richey believes he’s on the verge of his long-awaited absolution.
“It is my intention to put this new evidence before the state courts and, if necessary, before the federal courts, because there have been multiple violations of my right to due process and my constitutional rights,” Richey said.
But after more than three decades, will any court be willing to reopen the case?
Richey has turned to the WVU chapter of the Innocence Project for help. That organization, according to its website, “investigates potential cases and provides free legal representation to individuals with meritorious claims of innocence.”
“I have given the Innocence Project, for their review, the DNA report, the 1979 trial transcript, copies of past media accounts and numerous other documents. I expect to hear from them in the near future regarding handling my case,” Richey said.
However, the organization has not yet decided whether to take up Richey’s cause.
“Mr. Richey’s case is still in the investigative stage, therefore we are not currently representing him,” wrote WVU College of Law Associate Professor Valena Beety in an email to MetroNews. “It is only after we have completed our investigative stage that we take someone on as a client and file on his or her behalf.”
The case against Richey was always tenuous. The trial came down to the testimony of the 14-year-old alleged victim against Richey’s. The boy testified that Richey fondled him and then penetrated him anally. However, the doctor who examined him two days later testified that he saw no evidence of intercourse.
Richey’s long-held contentions, combined with the new DNA evidence, raise questions about the victim’s testimony. Was the boy telling the truth? Could he have been assaulted by someone else? Where did the other bodily fluids come from?
Richey’s goal is to get the victim, who would now be approximately 50 years old, back in court and under oath to address those issues. That individual’s name has never been released publicly because he was a juvenile at the time.
Some records indicate the man has spent time living in West Virginia and North Carolina. MetroNews made extensive inquiries to try to find the victim, to no avail.