Netflix begins its latest stab at the true-crime documentary genre, The Innocent Man, with a telling quote from memoirist Anaïs Nin: "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." The line rings true over and over again as the series progresses, bringing to light new, painful truths about the cases of two murdered women from Ada, OK: Debbie Carter, a waitress at a bar, and Denice Haraway, a convenience store clerk.
The brutal killings, which took place a few years apart in the 1980s, shocked the residents of the small town and eventually gained national attention when John Grisham's sole nonfiction book, The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town, focused on the police investigation's glaring mishandling of both cases. Now Grisham has worked with director Clay Tweel to bring the stories to light via a docuseries, diving deep into the controversial sentencing of two sets of men (one pair were released after it was proven they didn't kill Carter, while the other men still languish in prison for Haraway's death).
If you want a clearer look at Netflix's six-part documentary series about the murders that shook Ada, or a comprehensive timeline of what happened, read on.
The real killer(s) of Haraway, whoever they are, are still out there, if you subscribe to the belief that Ward and Fontenot did not commit the crime. Two other key suspects in Haraway's murder are brought up over the course of the documentary — Billy Charlie and Floyd Degraw (who is now in jail for an unrelated crime) — but no legal action ever moved forward with either of them. If you watch The Innocent Man all the way through, though, it's hard to believe that either Ward or Fontenot could still be in prison given the glaring lack of evidence.
Fontenot, who's in the midst of trying to appeal his sentencing, was advised not to comment on the documentary, but Ward — who's still in prison, too — sat down for a number of interviews with the documentary team. Ward explained that although admitting guilt and regret over her murder to the appeals committee would increase his chances of release, he would rather stay in jail than confess to something he didn't do (again).
For the most part, it seems like the pair were the victims of the same corrupt police practices that originally landed Fritz and Williamson in prison, especially the case built against them by Peterson and the amount of evidence the district attorney withheld from the jury (he alleged it was not done on purpose). According to Grisham, their conviction was "all about winning," not about the truth, nabbing the real killer, or what was right. As it stands now, the state is set to review Ward's latest postconviction filing at some point in 2019 (reminder: he's been in prison for 34 years at this point). Fontenot is still awaiting a response to his federal appeal.