IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
File No. ______________

JOSEPH SLEDGE, JR.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
PHILLIP LITTLE, in his individual
capacity; EARL STORMS, in his official
capacity; STEPHEN BUNN, in his official
capacity; PRENTIS BENSTON, in his
official capacity; JEFF SINGLETARY, in
his individual capacity; HENRY POOLE,
in his individual capacity; ESTATE OF
LINDA FAYE PROCTOR, in her official
capacity; SHEILA PRIDGEN, in her
official capacity; RITA BATCHELOR, in
her individual capacity; JOHN DOE
CORPORATION, in its capacity as Surety
on the Official Bond of the Sheriff of
Bladen County; and JACK DOE
CORPORATION, in its capacity as Surety
of the Official Bond of the Clerk of Court
for Columbus County,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)

Plaintiff Joseph Sledge, Jr., complaining of Defendants, alleges the following:
INTRODUCTION
1.

In August 1978, Plaintiff Joseph Sledge, Jr. (“Sledge”) was wrongfully convicted

and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murders of Josephine Davis and Aileen Davis in
Elizabethtown, North Carolina on September 6, 1976.
2.

Sledge served 37 years in prison for crimes he did not commit.

Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 1 of 44

 3.

The Bladen County Sheriff’s Office initially identified Sledge as a suspect

because he had escaped from White Lake Prison Camp, three to five miles from the Davis home,
the day before the murders. Sledge was quickly apprehended and returned to prison, where he
was serving a four-year term for non-violent offenses.
4.

Further investigation demonstrated that Sledge was not the perpetrator.

Investigating officers lifted 97 prints as part of their investigation and determined that none
matched Sledge. Investigating officers found two palm prints on the floor on either side of
Aileen Davis’ head and determined that they were not made by Sledge or the victims.
Investigating officers lifted the perpetrator’s shoe prints from the crime scene and determined
that they did not match the shoes Sledge was known to be wearing. In the absence of physical
evidence linking Sledge to the murder victims, no charges were brought against him initially.
5.

More than a year passed without anyone being charged for the murders. Public

pressure on local law enforcement mounted. Eventually, Deputy Sheriff Phillip Little and SBI
Special Agent Henry Poole procured statements from jailhouse informants Herman Baker and
Donnie Lee Sutton, who falsely claimed that Sledge had confessed to the murders. Based on
those false statements, Sledge was charged with the murders in February 1978.
6.

The case was tried in Columbus County Superior Court in August 1978. Based

primarily on the false testimony of Baker and Sutton, Sledge was convicted of the murders and
sentenced to two consecutive terms of life imprisonment. Law enforcement officials withheld
from Sledge’s trial counsel early versions of statements provided by Sutton that were markedly
inconsistent with the final version that was disclosed to trial counsel and with Sutton’s trial
testimony. In Sutton’s initial and undisclosed statements, Sutton stated that Sledge denied
committing the murders.

2
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 2 of 44

 7.

DNA testing first became available in the early 1990s. Beginning in 1993, Sledge

made repeated requests to the Columbus County Clerk of Court (“CCCO”), the Bladen County
Sheriff’s Office (“BCSO”), and the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (“SBI”) that the
evidence in his case be subjected to DNA testing. Sledge’s requests were ignored for a decade.
8.

From at least 1993 to 2013, CCCO, BCSO, and SBI had physical evidence in

their possession that would have proved Sledge’s innocence.
9.

In June 2003, the Honorable William C. Gore, Jr. (“Judge Gore”) granted

Sledge’s pro se “motion for DNA Testing.” Judge Gore ordered all agencies involved in the
investigation of the case to search for evidence from Sledge’s trial and submit any discovered
evidence for DNA testing.
10.

During the next nine years, in response to judicial inquiries and multiple requests

from Sledge and his representatives, CCCO, BCSO, and SBI repeatedly claimed they were
unable to find physical evidence from Sledge’s case.
11.

On August 20, 2012, Rita Batchelor, a CCCO employee, informed counsel for

Sledge that an envelope of evidence admitted during Sledge’s trial had been found on a shelf of
CCCO’s evidence vault. The envelope contained hairs of African-American origin that had been
recovered from the body of Aileen Davis, a white woman. The hairs had been left by the
perpetrator on Aileen Davis’naked torso and embedded in blood on her forehead. DNA testing
of the hairs confirmed that Sledge, who is black, was not the source.
12.

In August 2013, staff of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission (“the

Commission”) conducted a search of the offices of BCSO. They found evidence including the
97 latent prints, files that were reported as destroyed or missing, and a bloody piece of linoleum
taken from the crime scene. DNA testing of the evidence confirmed Sledge’s innocence.

3
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 3 of 44

 13.

In 2013, informant Herman Baker recanted his trial testimony.

14.

In December 2014, the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission referred

Sledge’s case to a hearing before a three-judge panel to determine his claim of innocence. On
January 23, 2015, with the State’s consent, the three-judge panel issued a unanimous decision
that Sledge had proved by clear and convincing evidence that he was innocent of the murders of
Josephine and Aileen Davis, and ordered his immediate release.
15.

This action seeks to compensate Joseph Sledge for the 37 years he spent in prison

as a result of Defendants’wrongful acts and omissions, and for the continuing effects of his
wrongful incarceration.
16.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligent, willful, wanton,

reckless, and deliberately indifferent acts and omissions, Sledge sustained injuries and damages,
including, among others, the following: personal injuries, physical injuries, physical pain and
mental suffering, severe emotional distress, loss of income, humiliation, indignities and
embarrassment, degradation, and restrictions on all facets of personal freedom including but not
limited to diet, sleep, personal contact, educational opportunity, vocational opportunity, personal
fulfillment, family relations, reading, enjoyment of life, and expression of his own desires and
interests.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
17.

Sledge brings this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for acts committed by

Defendants under color of state law which deprived Sledge of his liberty without due process of
law, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
18.

This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States.

4
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 4 of 44

 19.

This Court has original jurisdiction over Sledge’s federal claims pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3).
20.

This case also arises under the common law of the State of North Carolina. This

Court has pendent jurisdiction over Sledge’s state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
21.

All material events giving rise to this cause of action occurred in Bladen,

Columbus, and Wake counties, North Carolina.
22.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Phillip Little resides in Bladen County,

North Carolina.
23.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Earl Storms resides in Bladen County,

North Carolina.
24.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Stephen Bunn resides in Bladen County,

North Carolina.
25.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Prentis Benston resides in Bladen

County, North Carolina.
26.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Jeff Singletary resides in Bladen County,

North Carolina.
27.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Henry Poole resides in Wake County,

North Carolina.
28.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Linda Faye Proctor resided in Columbus

County, North Carolina until her death in 1998.
29.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Sheila Pridgen resides in Columbus

County, North Carolina.

5
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 5 of 44

 30.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Rita Batchelor resides in Columbus

County, North Carolina.
31.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue is proper in the United States District Court for

the Eastern District of North Carolina.
PARTIES
32.

Plaintiff Joseph Sledge, Jr. is a citizen and resident of Savannah, Georgia. Sledge

was born on June 17, 1944, and is now 71 years old. Before he was charged with the murders of
Josephine Davis and Aileen Davis, Sledge was a resident of Bladen County, North Carolina.
33.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Phillip Little was a Deputy Sheriff in the

Bladen County Sheriff’s Office (“BCSO”) from the early 1970s until 2010. Defendant Little
was chief investigator for BCSO of the murders of Josephine and Aileen Davis. Defendant Little
is sued in his individual capacity for acts taken under color of state law, within the course and
scope of his employment with BCSO.
34.

Defendant Earl Storms was Sheriff of Bladen County from 1978 to 1994 and

Interim Sheriff of Bladen County from July 2010 through November 2010. During that time,
Defendant Storms was the final policymaker for BCSO with respect to policing and law
enforcement investigations within that jurisdiction. As Sheriff of Bladen County, Defendant
Storms was vested with final policymaking authority for BCSO and Bladen County with respect
to maintenance, inventorying, storage, and safekeeping of crime scene evidence under the
custody of BCSO. Defendant Storms is sued in his official capacity.
35.

Defendant Stephen Bunn was Sheriff of Bladen County from 1994 to July 2010.

During that time, Defendant Bunn was the final policymaker for BCSO with respect to policing
and law enforcement investigations within that jurisdiction.

As Sheriff of Bladen County,

6
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 6 of 44

 Defendant Bunn was vested with final policymaking authority for BCSO and Bladen County
with respect to maintenance, inventorying, storage, and safekeeping of crime scene evidence
under the custody of BCSO. Defendant Bunn is sued in his official capacity.
36.

Defendant Prentis Benston was Sheriff of Bladen County from November 2010 to

December 1, 2014. During that time, Defendant Benston was the final policymaker for the
BCSO with respect to policing and law enforcement investigations within that jurisdiction. As
Sheriff of Bladen County, Defendant Benston was vested with final policymaking authority for
BCSO and Bladen County with respect to maintenance, inventorying, storage, and safekeeping
of crime scene evidence under the custody of BCSO. Defendant Benston is sued in his official
capacity.
37.

Defendant Jeff Singletary was a Deputy Sheriff of Bladen County from 1991 to

the present.

During many of the years in which Sledge sought access to evidence in the

possession of BCSO, Defendant Singletary was the BCSO officer with primary responsibility for
evidence control. Defendant Singletary is sued in his individual capacity.
38.

Defendant John Doe Corporation is a fictitious name for the Surety on the official

bond of the Sheriff of Bladen County pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 162-8 and § 58-76-5, whose
identity is presently unknown to Plaintiff. The true name of the corporation will be substituted
for the fictitious name once the corporation’s identity is learned. Plaintiff is informed and
believes that Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston are protected by a bond issued by the
Surety, and that the Surety is a corporation authorized to conduct business in the State of North
Carolina. Plaintiff institutes this action individually and, with respect to the claims on the
official bond of Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston, also on behalf of the State of North
Carolina pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-76-5, et seq.

7
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 7 of 44

 39.

From approximately 1968 to 1998, Defendant Poole was employed by the North

Carolina State Bureau of Investigation (“SBI”). Special Agent Poole was chief investigator for
the SBI of the murders of Josephine and Aileen Davis. Defendant Poole is named as a defendant
in his individual capacity for acts taken under color of state law, within the course and scope of
his employment with the State of North Carolina.
40.

Defendant Linda Faye Proctor was Clerk of Court of Columbus County from

1992 to 1998. As Clerk of Court, Defendant Proctor was vested with final policymaking
authority for the Clerk’s Office (“CCCO”) and Columbus County with respect to maintenance,
inventorying, storage, and safekeeping of crime scene evidence under the custody of CCCO.
Defendant Proctor died in 1998. Her estate is sued in her official capacity.
41.

Defendant Sheila Pridgen was Clerk of Court of Columbus County from 1998 to

2014. As Clerk of Court, Defendant Pridgen was vested with final policymaking authority for
CCCO and Columbus County with respect to maintenance, inventorying, storage, and
safekeeping of crime scene evidence under the custody of CCCO. Defendant Pridgen is sued in
her official capacity.
42.

Upon information and belief, Defendant Rita Batchelor has been Deputy Clerk of

Court for Columbus County from before 2011 until the present. During that period, Defendant
Batchelor was assigned primary responsibility for maintenance, inventorying, storage and
safekeeping of crime scene evidence under the custody of CCCO. Defendant Batchelor is sued
in her individual capacity for acts taken under color of state law, within the course and scope of
her employment with the State of North Carolina.
43.

Defendant Jack Doe Corporation is a fictitious name for the Surety on the Official

Bond of Defendants Proctor and Pridgen as Clerk of Court pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-107,

8
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 8 of 44

 whose identity is presently unknown to Plaintiff. The true name of the corporation will be
substituted for the fictitious name once the corporation’s identity is learned. Plaintiff is informed
and believes that Defendants Proctor and Pridgen are protected by a bond issued by the Surety,
and that the Surety is a corporation authorized to conduct business in the State of North Carolina.
Plaintiff institutes this action individually and, with respect to the claims on the official bond of
Defendants Proctor and Pridgen, also on behalf of the State of North Carolina pursuant to N.C.
Gen. Stat. § 58-76-5, et seq.
44.

At all times relevant hereto, in committing the acts and omissions herein alleged,

each of the Defendants was acting within the scope of his or her employment and under color of
state law.
45.

Upon information and belief, Defendants are insured by one or more policies of

liability insurance purchased pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 153A-435 or other applicable state
law with respect to all acts and omissions complained of herein, or participate in a government
risk pool pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-23-5, or maintain a funded reserve and to such extent,
Defendants have waived any official, sovereign, qualified or governmental immunity to which
they might otherwise be entitled in their official capacities. To the extent that may be required
by law, Plaintiff hereby waives the right to a jury trial on all issues of law or fact relating to
insurance coverage.
FACTS
I.

Sledge Is Wrongfully Convicted of Murdering Josephine and Aileen Davis.
A.

Josephine and Aileen Davis Are Brutally Murdered.

46.

In September 1976, Josephine Davis (“Josephine”), age 74, and her daughter

Aileen Davis (“Aileen”), age 57, were murdered in their home in Elizabethtown, North Carolina.

9
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 9 of 44

 The Davises were last seen alive by Omega Hales, Josephine’s daughter and Aileen’s sister, on
September 5, 1976 at 10:30 p.m. Wanda Sue Hales (“Wanda”), Omega’s daughter, discovered
the bodies on September 6, 1976 at 4:30 p.m.
47.

Wanda arrived at her grandmother’s home and pushed open the front door.

Wanda saw her aunt lying on the floor with blood all over her face, her grandmother’s body
lying nearby, and blood on the side of the refrigerator. The dresses and slips of both victims
were lifted toward their heads, exposing their naked torsos and legs.
48.

Wanda returned to her own home, roughly 200 yards from the crime scene, and

informed her mother of what she had seen. Her mother called the Bladen County Sheriff’s Office
(“BCSO”).
49.

Sheriff John Allen and Defendant Earl Storms, then a Deputy Sheriff, came to the

crime scene shortly after 4:30 p.m. Sheriff Allen called Defendant Deputy Sheriff Phillip Little,
a BCSO detective, to come to the crime scene and begin the investigation.
50.

Defendant Little, assisted by Storms, entered the Davis home at approximately

5:15 p.m. to process the crime scene.
51.

Defendant Little collected hairs from the abdomen and forehead of Aileen’s body.

The hairs collected from her forehead were embedded in blood. BCSO officers determined that
the hairs came from the perpetrator and the perpetrator was not Caucasian.
52.

The crime scene was covered in blood. Latent fingerprints, bloody palm prints,

and shoe prints, all of which BCSO officers determined were from the perpetrator, were
collected throughout the Davis home. The victims were beaten and stabbed repeatedly. The
cause of death for both victims was hemorrhaging due to multiple stab wounds to the head and
neck.

10
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 10 of 44

 53.

The medical examiner who examined the bodies at the crime scene estimated the

time of death to be between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. on September 6. The presence of wet
blood when the officers arrived made it more likely that the time of death was after 10:00 a.m.
54.

An autopsy indicated that Aileen had been sexually assaulted. Handprints were

found on the floor on either side of Aileen’s head, as if the perpetrator was in a “push-up”
position.
55.

On September 6, 1976, Sheriff Allen told reporters, “This is the most brutal

murder I’ve seen since I have been sheriff in Bladen County, and I have been sheriff for 30
years.”
B.

Sledge Is Identified as a Suspect.

56.

In September 1976, Sledge, age 32, was serving a four-year prison sentence in

minimum custody for larceny and receiving stolen goods (clothing) convictions and a six-month
sentence for escape. He had less than a year left on his sentence.

All of Sledge’s prior

convictions were for non-violent, theft-related misdemeanors.
57.

In March 1976, Sledge was on a White Lake Prison Camp road crew with an

inmate named John Fowler. Fowler was in prison for murder and had a violent reputation.
Fowler hit Sledge while they were working, fracturing his skull. Sledge reported the assault,
which caused Fowler to be sent to another prison and to lose his honor grade for six months.
58.

In late August or early September 1976, Fowler returned to White Lake Prison

Camp and was placed back on work rotation with Sledge. Sledge, who was much smaller than
Fowler, feared that Fowler would retaliate by attacking him. Sledge decided he would be safer
outside of the prison.

11
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 11 of 44

 59.

In the four-month period from June to September 1976, there were 15 escapes

from White Lake Prison Camp.
60.

Sledge left White Lake Prison Camp by foot on September 5, 1976. That night he

walked to Elizabethtown. At about 2:00 a.m. on September 6, he noticed a car with keys in it,
stole the car, and headed to Fayetteville. He was in Fayetteville by 3:15 a.m. –at least five hours
before the medical examiner’s estimated time of murder.
61.

After the victims were found on September 6, Sledge was immediately considered

the prime suspect in the case, based only on his recent escape.
62.

Sledge was apprehended by law enforcement in Dillon, South Carolina on

September 9, 1976. He was returned to North Carolina and placed in the Cumberland County
Jail.
C.

Further Investigation Reveals that Sledge Is Not the Perpetrator.

63.

Defendant Little interviewed Sledge and brought him to the scene of the crime.

Sledge denied any involvement in the murders. He described in detail the route he took after he
left White Lake Prison Camp. He consented to give samples of his blood and pubic hair.
64.

BCSO investigators collected fingerprints from the scene of the crime, many of

which they determined were left by the perpetrator. None of the fingerprints matched Sledge.
65.

BCSO investigators collected the perpetrator’s shoe prints from inside and outside

the Davis’home. None of the shoe prints matched the shoes Sledge was known to be wearing.
66.

BCSO investigators collected palm prints from either side of Aileen Davis’head.

One of the prints was a bloody palm print, with ridge lines that were visibly left in blood. The
palm prints were in “push-up position”consistent with sexual assault. The palm prints did not
match Sledge.

12
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 12 of 44

 67.

BCSO’s investigation failed to produce any evidence linking Sledge to the

murders.
D.

Pressure Mounts to Solve the Case.

68.

On October 1, 1976, Sheriff Allen formally requested investigative assistance

from the SBI and specifically asked that SBI agents be assigned to assist Defendant Little with
the investigation.
69.

Defendant Little lived less than a mile from the Davis home and had known the

two victims almost all his life.
70.

On October 6, 1976, Governor James E. Holshouser, Jr. offered a $2,500 reward

“to be paid to any person or persons who shall furnish information to the Sheriff of Bladen
County or the Director of the State Bureau of Investigation, leading to the arrest and conviction
of the person or persons responsible for participating in, or conspiring to commit the abovedescribed murders.”
71.

In August 1977, Josephine’s son Lonnie Davis wrote the SBI requesting a status

update on the case. The SBI Director wrote back on August 12, 1977, saying the “investigation
to date has failed to produce sufficient evidence to justify an arrest.”
72.

On September 12, 1977, SBI Agent Defendant Henry Poole was assigned to assist

Defendant Little with the investigation.
73.

In September 1977, the case was profiled in the North Carolina Crime Digest as

one of the “major”unsolved homicides in North Carolina.
74.

On December 15, 1977, Governor James B. Hunt doubled the reward to $5,000

after a family member of the victims contacted the SBI and asked why there had been no
advances in the case.

13
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 13 of 44

 75.

The crime was profiled in an article in the Wilmington Morning Star in January

1978. The article discussed six unsolved homicides that occurred locally between September
1976 and January 1978 –an unusually high number in a rural area in such a short period of time.
76.

In early 1978, residents of Bladen County were becoming vocal about their lack

of confidence in the BCSO. Quotes in the local newspaper indicated people were becoming
afraid due to the unusually high number of murders in the area –many still unsolved. Residents
formed a 24-hour “armed guard patrolling north of the Cape Fear River”and stated that is was
“getting to the point where people will have to enforce the law themselves to be safe.”
77.

In late 1977 and early 1978, the BCSO and the SBI were under intense pressure to

solve the case.
E.

Defendants Little and Poole Procure False Testimony to Secure Sledge’s
Indictment.

78.

Two investigators had primary responsibility for the case: BCSO Deputy Sheriff

Philip Little and SBI Special Agent Henry Poole.
79.

In late 1977 and early 1978, Defendant Little and Defendant Poole interviewed

numerous inmates who had been incarcerated with Sledge to try to elicit testimony that Sledge
had acknowledged committing the Davis murders.
80.

Defendants Little and Poole interviewed Herman Baker, who was incarcerated

with Sledge at the Moore County Prison Camp in Carthage in June and July 1977 and transferred
to White Lake Prison Camp later in 1977.
81.

Baker was provided with detailed information about the murders, including facts

that had not been publicly reported, such as the fact that Josephine’s jaw had been broken. Baker
agreed to testify that Sledge had confessed to the murders, even though Sledge had made no
confession.
14
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 14 of 44

 82.

Although Defendants Little and Poole gave polygraph tests to prisoners who

denied that Mr. Sledge ever implicated himself in the Davis murders, they did not administer a
polygraph test to Baker to evaluate his truthfulness.
83.

After Baker testified for the State at Sledge’s trial, the State of North Carolina

paid him $3,000 as a reward for his testimony.
F.

Defendants Little and Poole Deliberately Conceal Exculpatory Evidence
from Sledge.

84.

Donnie Lee Sutton, who had been convicted of murder and other violent crimes,

was in the Cumberland County Jail with Sledge after Sledge was recaptured.
85.

In 1977 and 1978, Defendants Poole and Little conducted a series of interviews

with Sutton in an effort to obtain testimony that Sledge had confessed to the murders.
86.

Defendants Poole and Little first interviewed Sutton on November 4, 1977. In

that interview, Sutton reported that Sledge told him that law enforcement authorities suspected
Sledge of killing two women, but denied he had committed the murders.
87.

Defendants Poole and Little interviewed Sutton again on February 8, 1978.

During this interview, Sutton purportedly claimed that Sledge told him the Davis women were
supposed to die and he was glad they were dead. Sutton said Sledge hated white women and
called them “she-devils.”Sutton said he remembered Sledge talking about a lot of blood, but he
could not recall exactly what was said about the blood. The interview concluded with Sutton
saying it had been a long time since he had spoken with Sledge and he needed time to think
about it and “put their conversation together.”
88.

Defendants Poole and Little, along with White Lake Prison Camp Assistant

Supervisor Gene Stewart, interviewed Sutton a third time on February 10, 1978. As in his first
interview, Sutton stated that Sledge said he was not involved in the murders. However, Sutton
15
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 15 of 44

 claimed Sledge said, “They should be dead,”and mentioned a lot of blood. The agents noted at
the bottom of the interview that “Sutton stated that he needed to think about their conversation
and would probably be able to recall more of what he and Sledge talked about.”
89.

At trial, Defendant Poole testified that he interviewed Sutton on February 15,

1978, but did not disclose the previous three interviews.
90.

In the February 15 interview, Sutton changed his story and claimed for the first

time that Sledge told him he had committed the murders. Sutton’s statement was false.
91.

In their investigation of the Davis murders, Defendants Little and Poole

conducted polygraph examinations of 11 people, including several prisoners who said that
Sledge did not confess to the crimes. After Sutton falsely told them that Sledge had confessed,
Defendants Little and Poole chose not to polygraph Sutton because they expected the polygraph
to indicate that Sutton was lying.
92.

Sutton’s trial testimony was far different than his previous statements. At trial,

Sutton testified that when he was in the Cumberland County Jail with Sledge in September 1976,
Sledge told him that he had killed the two women in Bladen County.
93.

Three months after testifying for the State, Sutton received $2,000 from the State

of North Carolina as a reward for his testimony.
94.

Although Sutton had only served nine years of an active sentence of 28 to 30

years, he was released from prison less than three years after he testified at Sledge’s trial.
95.

At the time of the murders, Sutton had also been an escapee from White Lake

Prison Camp. When Sutton testified at Sledge’s trial, he had a case pending against him for that
escape, but there is no record of that charge being pursued after he testified against Sledge.

16
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 16 of 44

 96.

Defendant Little and Defendant Poole documented their first three interviews with

Sutton, but deliberately did not provide those interview records to the prosecutor or Sledge’s trial
counsel. The three interview records, if disclosed, would have destroyed Sutton’s credibility
because they were internally inconsistent and contradicted Sutton’s testimony at trial.
G.

Based on the False Testimony of Jailhouse Informants, Sledge Is Convicted
and Sentenced to Life Imprisonment.

97.

Sledge was indicted in February 1978, a year and a half after the murders were

committed.
98.

Although the crimes occurred in Bladen County, the trial was moved to

neighboring Columbus County because of extensive pre-trial publicity.
99.

On May 1, 1978, Sledge was tried in Columbus County Superior Court. District

Attorney Lee Greer and Assistant Attorney General Lester Chalmers represented the State.
Sledge was represented by appointed counsel Reuben Moore.

After a day and a half of

deliberations, the jury foreman reported that the jury remained “hopelessly deadlocked,” and
Judge Herring declared a mistrial.
100.

A second trial was held in August 1978. The Honorable Giles R. Clark presided.

Assistant District Attorney Mike Easley and Assistant Attorney General Lester Chalmers
represented the State, and Sledge was again represented by Reuben Moore.
101.

Baker falsely testified that, while they were both incarcerated at the Carthage

Prison Unit in 1977, Sledge told him he had stabbed and killed two women in Bladen County
after he escaped from White Lake Prison Camp.
102.

Baker testified that he had no knowledge of the reward in the Davis case until he

saw it posted on the bulletin board as he was coming out of the office after speaking with law

17
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 17 of 44

 enforcement. The jury was never told that Baker would be receiving $3,000 from the State of
North Carolina as a reward for his testimony.
103.

Sutton testified that he was in the Cumberland County Jail with Sledge in

September 1976. He testified that Sledge confessed he had killed two women in Bladen County,
saying “the women were cut up . . . they were stabbed, and there was a lot of blood.”
104.

Sutton testified that Sledge told him “he was put in a position where he had to”

kill the women. As Sutton and Sledge were eating breakfast, Sutton said Sledge commented,
“[T]hey [are] two bitches that [will] never eat breakfast again.”
105.

Sutton testified that Sledge would often speak to him about “white women out to

possess the black man’s mind.” He said Sledge referred to white women as “she devils”and said
“they were bad for the black man out to get their minds.” According to Sutton, Sledge believed
that white women were “sort of like a crutch for the white man to rule the black man.” He
claimed Sledge went on to tell him that “the black man should rebel over this here and should
kill every one that really should cross their path.”
106.

Sledge truthfully testified at trial. He consistently maintained his innocence of the

murders throughout the direct and cross-examinations, as he did before trial and has done since
his conviction.
107.

Sledge explained to the jury the circumstances of his escape and detailed the route

he took from White Lake Prison Camp to Dillon, South Carolina where he was arrested a few
days later.
108.

Sledge denied ever going to the Davis residence or passing by it.

109.

The Davis home was between three and five miles from White Lake Prison Camp,

depending whether one traveled on the highway or through the woods.

18
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 18 of 44

 110.

Sledge acknowledged that he was placed in a cellblock with Sutton but denied

ever making any incriminating statements to anyone –including Sutton.
111.

Contrary to Baker’s testimony, Sledge testified that he never spoke with Baker

about the murders.
112.

The testimony of Baker and Sutton, coupled with the coincidental timing of

Sledge’s escape from White Lake Prison Camp, was impossible for Sledge to overcome. On
August 31, 1978, Sledge was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder and was
sentenced to consecutive life sentences in prison.
113.

In a memorandum requesting that Baker and Sutton be given payment for their

testimony, the SBI stated: “As a result of this information and testimony by both Baker and
Sutton, Sledge was convicted of two (2) counts of murder during August 1978 and received two
(2) life sentences.”
114.

The North Carolina Supreme Court denied Sledge’s direct appeal on May 17,

1979. State v. Sledge, 297 N.C. 227, 254 S.E.2d 579 (1979).
II.

From 1993 to 2013, Sledge Is Wrongfully Denied Access to DNA Testing of the
Evidence.
115.

In the late 1970s, DNA testing was still a decade away from being used as a tool

in criminal investigations.
116.

At various points throughout the investigation of the Davis murder, Defendants

collected fingerprints and blood samples from the crime scene.
117.

Hair microscopy, which was used to link the “Negroid” pubic hairs recovered

from Aileen Davis’body to Sledge, is no longer used as evidence of identity in North Carolina
prosecutions and is only used as a screening tool by the North Carolina State Crime Lab before
evidence undergoes DNA testing.
19
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 19 of 44

 118.

On September 6, 1976, Defendant Little collected several African-American hairs

from the body of Aileen Davis.
119.

The African-American hairs, determined to be “microscopically consistent”with

Sledge, were removed from the canister that stored them after collection and were placed on a
slide labeled “Q4”for analysis, which was sealed within an envelope admitted at trial as Exhibit
12-A. The canister in which the hairs were originally secured was admitted at trial as Exhibit 12C.
120.

In the early 1990s, DNA testing first became available in North Carolina.

121.

Between 1980 and 2002, Sledge filed more than 25 pro se post-conviction

motions proclaiming his innocence in state and federal court.
122.

On June 15, 1993 Sledge wrote the SBI and requested copies of the hair and blood

evidence in his case so that DNA testing could be performed. Harold Elliott of the SBI referred
Sledge to the Columbus County Clerk of Court.
123.

On October 3, 1993, Sledge wrote the Columbus County Clerk of Court

(“CCCO”) and requested copies of the hair and blood evidence in his case so that DNA testing
could be performed. Sledge explained that he had already written the SBI to obtain the same
information and that Harold Elliott of the SBI referred him to the Clerk’s Office.
124.

From 1993 to 2003, Sledge and organizations acting on his behalf made multiple

written requests for DNA testing of evidence to CCCO. Although CCCO retained evidence that
had been introduced in Sledge’s trial, including hair and blood samples suitable for DNA testing,
it told Sledge that it no longer had such evidence in its possession.
125.

There were multiple gross deficiencies in CCCO’s practices for inventorying,

storing, and safekeeping evidence.

20
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 20 of 44

 126.

CCCO failed to adequately inventory and store evidence.

Evidence was

haphazardly stored in the CCCO’s evidence vault. Evidence from a single case could be spread
across multiple locations within the vault, with no system in place to ensure that any attempt to
recover evidence would be comprehensive or effective.

Because of the CCCO’s deficient

evidence storage system, CCCO knew that extensive searches were required to locate evidence
related to any case. The CCCO conducted only cursory searches before responding to requests
for evidence.
127.

From 1993 to 2003, Sledge made multiple written requests for DNA testing of

evidence to the Bladen County Sheriff’s Office. Although BCSO retained evidence from
Sledge’s case, including physical evidence suitable for DNA testing, it claimed it had no such
evidence in its possession.
128.

On June 4, 2003, Sledge filed a pro se “Motion for DNA Testing,” which was

granted on June 11, 2003 by the Honorable William C. Gore, Jr. (“Judge Gore”). The Order
stated in pertinent part:
The court having reviewed [the Motion for DNA Testing]
generally finds the defendant is entitled to the DNA testing he is
requesting if the evidence is available.
It is therefore ordered that any agency that was involved in the
investigation of this case is to attempt to locate said evidence
referred to in the attached motion. If said evidence is located the
testing requested by the defendant is hereby ordered.
129.

At the time the Order was issued, CCCO possessed evidence admitted at trial,

including the victims’clothing and the African-American hairs removed from Aileen Davis’
torso and head. At the time the Order was issued, either the BCSO or the SBI possessed
biological evidence that had not been admitted at trial, including victim and suspect elimination
prints and the bloody palm print lifted from the floor beside Aileen Davis’head. Although the
21
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 21 of 44

 agencies were aware of Judge Gore’s Order, none notified the Court that they possessed
evidence covered by the Order, and none complied with the Order.
130.

In October 2004, the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence agreed to

represent Sledge.
131.

On December 8, 2004, Judge Gore responded to a letter from Sledge asking

whether the various government agencies had complied with his Court Order. Judge Gore wrote:
“As a Superior Court judge I am not in a position to make any further investigation into your
claims . . . [u]nless there is some reason to believe that Law Enforcement Officials, Prosecutors
or other witnesses are willfully disobeying this court’s order to produce the evidence you have
sought I will not take any further action in this matter.”
132.

On December 20, 2004, Sledge wrote Judge Gore a letter proclaiming his

innocence and asking why no affidavits had been filed by the investigating agencies explaining
why the evidence could not be located.
133.

On June 7, 2005, after prompting by Sledge’s representatives, D.A. Rex Gore

filed an affidavit stating that he had contacted BCSO and CCCO to determine if any evidence
still existed. According to the affidavit, Defendant Chief Deputy Sheriff Little informed D.A.
Gore that “he had no such material and that his contact with other agencies did not yield any
such material.” In his affidavit, D.A. Gore stated that CCCO indicated that it still had in its
possession items entered into evidence in Sledge’s trial.
134.

CCCO indicated that it had in its possession Trial Exhibits 12-B, 12-C, and 12-D.

Despite Judge Gore’s Order, CCCO did not produce the evidence for analysis. CCCO did not
indicate that it possessed additional evidence, including the victims’clothing and Trial Exhibit
12-A, which included the Q4 slide containing the hairs collected from Aileen Davis’torso.

22
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 22 of 44

 135.

On June 8, 2006, Judge Gore issued another Consent Order directing that the

CCCO “submit the biological evidence to the North Carolina Bureau of Investigation Crime
Laboratory for STR and/or nuclear DNA analysis.” Judge Gore directed that “[t]he testing be
completed as soon as possible.” CCCO again did not comply with Judge Gore’s Order.
136.

In June 2007, Sledge wrote the SBI Crime Laboratory to inquire about its

compliance with Judge Gore’s Order. The letter included his criminal case number, and noted
that Judge Gore “issued a Consent Order to perform DNA testing on the forensic evidence
recovered in this case[.]”
137.

In August 2007, the SBI Crime Laboratory mailed BCSO an envelope containing

evidence from Sledge’s case. The envelope included victim and suspect elimination prints; shoe
prints; crime scene latent prints, including the bloody palm print lifted from the floor beside
Aileen Davis’head; and a piece of linoleum from the crime scene with a bloodstain. The SBI
did not notify Sledge, Sledge’s counsel, or any court that it had possessed this evidence or that it
mailed the evidence to BCSO. BCSO did not notify Sledge, Sledge’s counsel, or any court that
it received this evidence and now had it in its possession. Before 2007, the envelope of evidence
was either in the custody of BCSO or was in the custody of the SBI, which BCSO knew or
should have known.
138.

In November 2007, the SBI Crime Laboratory replied to Sledge’s letter from June

2007, stating that “[b]ased on the information provided in your letter we have no record of the
evidence being submitted to the SBI Crime Laboratory.”
139.

In 2008, Senior Resident Court Judge Douglas B. Sasser contacted the CCCO to

request an update on its compliance with Judge Gore’s Consent Order. Defendant Pridgen

23
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 23 of 44

 responded by requesting “some guidance on how we should proceed with sending evidence to
the SBI so that chain of custody can be maintained.”
140.

On September 17, 2008, Judge Sasser issued a Consent Order directing BCSO to

obtain the evidence from CCCO and submit it for testing.

Judge Sasser ordered that any

evidence “remaining after testing be preserved and returned to the [CCCO].”
141.

Later in September 2008, CCCO produced some but not all the evidence that was

admitted at trial. It produced exhibits 12-C and 12-D, along with additional evidence it found in
the years after D.A. Gore first contacted it in 2005. It had since lost Exhibit 12-B, and therefore
did not produce it. Despite the numerous court orders to produce all case-related evidence,
CCCO claimed that it did not possess any additional evidence, even though it also possessed the
hair evidence admitted in Sledge’s trial.
142.

In 2009, the SBI Crime Laboratory released its analysis of the evidence produced

by CCCO. All analysis conducted supported Sledge’s claim of innocence. However, Sledge
was unable to definitively prove his innocence without the hair evidence.
143.

On March 5, 2010, Judge Sasser issued another Consent Order requiring BCSO to

submit the evidence to LabCorp for further testing. Judge Sasser ordered CCCO and BCSO to
submit “sworn affidavits that all evidence associated with the investigation of the murders of
Aileen Davis and Josephine Davis and/or the conviction of Defendant has been included in the
packaging for transfer to LabCorp.”
144.

Despite Judge Sasser’s Order, CCCO did not submit the hair evidence it

possessed, and falsely stated that it did not possess that evidence. Despite Judge Sasser’s Order,
BCSO submitted none of the evidence in its possession, and falsely stated that it did not possess
that evidence.

24
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 24 of 44

 145.

LabCorp’s analysis of the evidence that was produced also supported Sledge’s

innocence but was insufficient to prove his innocence.
146.

In each year from 2003 to 2012, individuals including Sledge, Sledge’s

representatives, and government officials repeatedly contacted BCSO, CCCO, and the SBI
requesting that they comply with Judge Gore and Judge Sasser’s orders and produce all evidence
related to Sledge’s trial and conviction. CCCO repeatedly and inaccurately stated that it had
produced all evidence in its possession. The SBI and BCSO repeatedly and inaccurately stated
that they did not possess any evidence.
III.

Sledge is Exonerated.
A.

In 2012, Evidence Misplaced by CCCO Proves Sledge’s Innocence.

147.

On August 20, 2012, Assistant Clerk Rita Batchelor contacted defense counsel

Christine Mumma to inform her that an additional envelope of evidence admitted into evidence
in Sledge’s trial had been located on a shelf in a CCCO evidence vault. The evidence in the
envelope included Slide Q4, the missing hair evidence.
148.

Counsel for Sledge requested that the evidence immediately be sent to a

laboratory for DNA testing, pursuant to the prior court order.
149.

On November 5, 2012, the slides with the hair evidence were transferred to

Mitotyping Technologies in State College, Pennsylvania for DNA analysis.
150.

On December 13, 2012, Mitotyping Technologies reported that its DNA testing of

an African-American head hair and an African-American pubic hair mounted on the Q4 slides
definitively exclude Sledge as the source of those hairs.
151.

In August 2013, at the request of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry

Commission, Mitotyping Technologies completed testing of all nine hairs that Defendant Little

25
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 25 of 44

 collected from the naked torso of Aileen Davis on September 6, 1976, mounted on the Q4
microscope slide.
152.

DNA testing of the nine hairs on the Q4 slide confirmed that all the hairs are of

African-American origin and all come from the same maternal lineage, and that Joseph Sledge,
Herman Baker, and the victims are excluded as contributors.
153.

DNA testing in 2012 and 2013 excluded Sledge as the perpetrator.

154.

Not a single piece of physical evidence ties Sledge to the crime.

B.

Herman Baker Recants his Trial Testimony.

155.

Baker and Sutton were the primary witnesses against Sledge. Baker testified at

trial that Sledge confessed to him while the two men were imprisoned at Moore County Prison
Camp in Carthage in the summer of 1977. Baker testified about details of the murders that he
only could have known if 1) he was the perpetrator; 2) he had spoken to the true perpetrator, or
3) he was given the information by law enforcement.
156.

On March 7, 2013, the SBI interviewed Mike Easley, the lead prosecutor in the

case. Easley told the SBI that “the testimony of the inmates against Sledge was the most critical
part of the prosecution.”
157.

Baker testified before the Commission in December 2014. There he stated under

oath that Sledge never confessed to committing the murders, hurting anyone, or attacking
anyone.
158.

Baker testified at the Commission hearing about his reason for giving false

testimony at Sledge’s trial:
Because I was in the hole for possession of marijuana and heroin,
and they came and talked to me, took me to the warden’s office
and talked to me. And they told me they’d give me a deal if I say,
you know, say that Joe Sledge told it, told me that.
26
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 26 of 44

 159.

Donnie Lee Sutton, the other jailhouse informant who testified for the State, died

in 1991.
C.

In 2013 -- Twenty Years After Sledge’s First Request for DNA Testing -BCSO Produces Evidence that Confirms His Innocence.

160.

On May 20, 2013, the North Carolina Center on Actual Innocence formally

referred Sledge’s case to the Commission and transferred its complete file to the Commission. In
the referral letter, Chris Mumma, the Center’s Executive Director, explained:
Although we have been told there are no longer any prosecution or
law enforcement files and that the other physical evidence is
missing, we believe it is possible that the Commission staff will be
able to uncover additional evidence, whether physical or
documentary, through its own investigation. Specifically, we
believe it would be beneficial to locate the rape kit, the latent prints
taken from the crime scene, and any law enforcement or
prosecution files that still exist.
161.

On June 28, 2013, the Commission accepted Sledge’s case for Formal Inquiry,

pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-1467. The Commission sent notices to preserve and produce
evidence to the District Attorney’s Office, CCCO, BCSO and the SBI.
162.

On August 13-14, 2013, in preparation of a search of the premises by

Commission staff, BCSO located two files related to the Sledge case. The files were transferred
to the Commission, which provided digital copies to Mumma.
163.

On August 26-29, 2013, Commission staff members Sharon Stellato and Lindsey

Guice Smith conducted a search of the premises of BCSO.
164.

Before the search on August 26-29, 2013, Defendant Singletary and Defendant

Benston told Stellato and Smith that BCSO had previously conducted a diligent search to locate
all files and evidence in the Sledge case.

27
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 27 of 44

 165.

During their search on August 26-29, 2013, Stellato and Smith located additional

law enforcement investigative files, as well as physical evidence that BCSO and the SBI had
claimed no longer existed. Items found by Stellato and Smith included:

166.

(a)

A file labeled “Joseph Sledge” located in a BCSO gun vault in a box
labeled “Phillip Little Drug Cases.” The file contained letters to
Defendant Little from Sledge. In letters Sledge sent to Defendant Little in
2004, Sledge requested that Little locate the physical evidence in the case
so it could be tested to identify the actual perpetrator of the murders.

(b)

A sealed SBI envelope with the SBI report attached to the outside of the
envelope. It was located in a BCSO gun vault, and purported to contain a
“Ziploc bag of Joseph Sledge, Jr.” and a “canister from the body of A.
Davis” that was sent to the SBI in 2008 and subsequently returned to
BCSO.

(c)

An unsealed envelope also located in the BCSO gun vault that contained a
letter from Adrian Sellers to Phillip Little and two notebooks with
handwritten notes related to the Sledge investigation.

(d)

A sealed SBI envelope with a letter from the SBI attached to the outside,
also located in the BCSO gun vault. The letter was dated August 9, 2007,
and was addressed to the BCSO’s “Evidence Custodian.” The envelope
contained victim and suspect elimination prints; shoe prints; crime scene
latent prints, including a bloody palm print lifted from the floor beside of
Aileen Davis’head; and a piece of linoleum from the crime scene with
what appeared to be a bloodstain. The prints were returned to BCSO from
the SBI in 2007.

(e)

A sealed box returned to BCSO from LabCorp on October 11, 2010. The
box contained the victims’dresses and slips, the pepper can, and DNA
extracts, all of which BCSO had previously declared to be missing.

The Commission’s discovery of the prints and other evidence collected from the

original investigation provided further proof of Sledge’s innocence.
167.

DNA testing of the bloodstained piece of linoleum revealed that the blood came

from two different men, but excluded Sledge as a possible source. The DNA profile from the
linoleum was consistent with the partial profile obtained from the victims’ dress and slip.
Testing did not exclude a number of alternative suspects as possible sources.
28
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 28 of 44

 168.

The Commission retained an expert to analyze fingerprints and palm prints found

at the scene of the crime, including the bloody palm print found beside the head of Aileen Davis.
The expert’s ridge analysis excluded Sledge from all identifiable prints. The expert’s DNA
analysis excluded Sledge from all prints that were suitable for testing. DNA tests conducted on
the bloody palm print left by the perpetrator excluded both Sledge and the victims as possible
contributors.
169.

None of the prints or the DNA tested from any piece of crime scene evidence was

consistent with Sledge.
170.

In the course of its search for evidence in the custody of BCSO, Commission staff

identified multiple gross deficiencies in BCSO’s practices for inventorying, storing and
safekeeping evidence.
171.

In the course of its search for evidence in the custody of BCSO, Commission staff

identified multiple instances in which BCSO misplaced or “lost” evidence related to Sledge’s
case.
172.

In 2008 or 2009, BCSO sent evidence in the case to the SBI for testing. After the

SBI returned the evidence to BCSO in October 2010, BCSO claimed to have “lost”the evidence.
173.

As of August 2013, BCSO stored physical evidence from old cases in multiple

locations, with no system for inventorying or locating the evidence.
174.

As of August 2013, eight people had keys to the BCSO evidence room,

jeopardizing the security of the evidence.
175.

As of August 2013, some evidence in BCSO custody was stored in locations

unknown to Lieutenant Jeff Singletary, the BCSO officer who had primary responsibility for
evidence control.

29
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 29 of 44

 176.

In its search of BCSO in August 2013, Commission staff found padlocked

evidence lockers that BCSO had not opened despite Sledge’s multiple requests for production
and testing of evidence. Although the lockers were in BCSO’s control, BCSO officers claimed
they had no keys to any of the locks. To provide access to Commission staff, BCSO officers had
to cut off the locks. When the lockers were opened, Commission staff determined that each
locker contained physical evidence, and several contained evidence in Sledge’s case.
177.

In one of the lockers, Commission staff found a package labeled “Sledge.” The

package included 97 latent fingerprint lifts, a piece of blood-stained linoleum, and a white paper
bag, all collected from the Davis crime scene. Documentation inside the package indicated that
the SBI had returned the evidence to BCSO in 2007.
178.

In a second locker, Commission staff found another envelope related to the

Sledge case, including lab reports, an empty Ziploc bag, and a canister that had been sent to the
SBI in 2008.
179.

In a third locker, Commission staff found a box containing a letter from Adrian

Sellers to Defendant Little as well as two handwritten notebooks related to the Sledge
investigation.
180.

The Commission’s search of BCSO in August 2013 included eight large metal

containers, referred to as a “conexes.” The conexes were not in a climate-controlled area,
jeopardizing the integrity of the evidence.
181.

In one conex, Stellato and Smith found a box that LabCorp had returned to BCSO

in 2010, including dresses and slips of the Davis victims, and a pepper can collected at the crime
scene.

30
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 30 of 44

 182.

Immediately after Stellato and Smith completed their search of BCSO in August

2013, they met with Defendant Sheriff Benston to report on what they had found, including
multiple deficiencies in BCSO’s practices for inventorying, storing and safeguarding evidence.
183.

The BCSO was ignorant of the facilities in which evidence was stored and

maintained a pervasive practice of failing to inventory evidence, improperly storing biological
evidence, disregarding requests to locate evidence, and responding inaccurately to inquiries
about the presence of evidence.
184.

On September 5, 2013, Stellato and Smith wrote a memorandum to Defendant

Benston, District Attorney Jon David and SBI Special Agent Chad Barefoot describing their
search of BCSO and noting numerous deficiencies in BCSO’s practices for evidence storage and
control.
D.

In January 2015, Sledge Is Exonerated and Released.

185.

Sledge’s claim of innocence was heard before the North Carolina Innocence

Inquiry Commission on December 3-5, 2014 pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1460, et seq.
186.

Following presentation of evidence during a three-day evidentiary hearing, the

Commission concluded by a unanimous decision that there was sufficient evidence of factual
innocence to merit further judicial review. That decision was memorialized in an Opinion filed
on December 8, 2014.
187.

Sledge’s case then proceeded to a hearing before a three-judge panel pursuant to

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1469. At the January 23, 2015 hearing, the State agreed Sledge had met
his burden and proved by clear and convincing evidence that he is innocent. District Attorney
Jon David stated: “Let me just be first on behalf of the State of North Carolina to apologize to
Mr. Sledge for that . . .. The word ‘sorry’ is imperfect to convey the magnitude of what

31
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 31 of 44

 happened with respect to this man’s life over the last many years. The system, I believe, has
made a mistake.”
188.

On January 23, 2015, the three-judge panel issued a Decision finding that “Joseph

Sledge, Jr., the convicted person, has proven by clear and convincing evidence that he is
innocent of the murders of Josephine and Aileen Davis in Bladen County on September 6,
1976.”
189.

Sledge was released from prison on January 23, 2015.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983 –Withholding Exculpatory Evidence in 1977 and 1978 –Little, Poole)
190.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

191.

Defendants Little and Poole intentionally and in bad faith withheld material

exculpatory evidence in 1977 and 1978, thereby violating Sledge’s Fourteenth Amendment right
not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law and to a fair criminal trial.
192.

In 1977 and 1978, Defendants Little and Poole deliberately did not disclose

exculpatory evidence to Sledge, his trial counsel, or the prosecutor. In particular, Defendants
Little and Poole did not disclose that they had conducted multiple interviews with Donnie Lee
Sutton, that Sutton provided a series of inconsistent versions of what Sledge allegedly told him
about the crimes, and that Sutton’s trial testimony -- that Sledge had confessed to the murders -directly conflicted with what Sutton had told them about Sledge’s statements in earlier
interviews. Defendants Little and Poole deliberately did not disclose to Sledge, his trial counsel
or the prosecutor the reports documenting their interviews with Sutton.
193.

In withholding exculpatory evidence, Defendants Little and Poole acted with

deliberate and/or reckless indifference to Sledge’s constitutional rights.

When Defendants

32
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 32 of 44

 withheld exculpatory evidence, they could reasonably foresee that the failure to disclose the
evidence would result in Sledge’s conviction.
194.

The withholding of exculpatory evidence by Defendants Little and Poole was a

direct and proximate cause of Sledge’s conviction and imprisonment.

If Defendants had

disclosed the exculpatory evidence so that Sledge’s trial counsel could have made use of the
evidence at trial, Sledge would not have been convicted.
195.

The withholding of exculpatory evidence by Defendants Little and Poole deprived

Sledge of his liberty without due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
196.

Because Defendants Little and Poole wrongfully withheld exculpatory evidence,

they are liable to Sledge for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983 –Withholding Exculpatory Evidence - 1993 to 2013 –Little)
197.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

198.

Defendant Little intentionally and in bad faith withheld material exculpatory

evidence from 1993 to 2013, thereby violating Sledge’s Fourteenth Amendment right not to be
deprived of liberty without due process of law and to a fair criminal trial.
199.

Beginning in 1993 and continuing until 2013, including 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997,

1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and
2013, Sledge and his representatives repeatedly requested Defendant Little to produce evidence
and files related to Sledge’s case, and requested that the physical evidence be subjected to DNA
testing.

33
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 33 of 44

 200.

From 1993 to 2013, Defendant Little deliberately concealed the fact that he had

files and evidence related to Sledge’s case in his possession, custody and control, including
physical evidence that could be subjected to DNA testing.
201.

From 1993 to 2013, Defendant Little falsely claimed that he had no files and

evidence related to Sledge’s case in his possession, custody or control.
202.

In 2013, staff from the Innocence Inquiry Commission discovered Defendant

Little’s files related to Sledge’s case. The files contained documents and physical evidence that
established Sledge’s innocence.
203.

In concealing and withholding exculpatory evidence from 1993 to 2013,

Defendant Little acted in violation of and with deliberate and/or reckless indifference to Sledge’s
constitutional rights.
204.

Defendant Little had in his possession evidence that would have proved Sledge’s

innocence of the crimes for which he was convicted and imprisoned.
205.

Because of Defendant Little’s concealment and withholding of exculpatory

evidence, Sledge could not file a Motion for Appropriate Relief based on new evidence under
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1415(c). Such a motion based on the DNA testing of crime scene
evidence or other scientific testing would have been successful, and would have freed Sledge
from prison. Defendants’misconduct thus violated Sledge’s rights to due process and to access
the courts under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
206.

The concealment and withholding of exculpatory evidence by Defendant Little

from 1993 to 2013 deprived Sledge of his liberty without due process of law and deprived Sledge
access to the courts in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

34
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 34 of 44

 207.

As a direct result Defendant Little’s concealment and withholding of exculpatory

evidence from 1993 to 2013, Plaintiff Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for more than 21 years,
and suffered physical, emotional, and pecuniary damages. Defendant Little is thus liable to
Sledge for damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983 Monell Claim –Due Process –1993 to 2013 –Storms, Bunn, Benston)
208.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

209.

During the years in which Defendants Earl Storms, Stephen Bunn and Prentis

Benston held the positions of Sheriff of Bladen County, they were the final policymakers with
respect to law enforcement activities for BCSO. Their actions constituted policy decisions that
had the “stamp of approval”of BCSO.
210.

As final policymaker for BCSO, Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston created,

promulgated, and maintained the following policies which deprived Sledge of his constitutional
rights, including but not limited to, his due process rights and the right to not be subject to
improper deprivations of liberty and the pursuit of happiness:
(a)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to properly and reasonably inventory, organize, and safekeep
evidence;

(b)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
not maintaining, storing, and safekeeping evidence used to subject persons
to life sentences;

(c)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to make DNA evidence available to individuals upon request as
required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-269;

(d)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to make evidence available for scientific testing and analysis;

(e)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to provide accurate and prompt responses to reasonable requests
35

Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 35 of 44

 regarding the existence of evidence under Defendants’ possession,
custody, or control; and
(f)
211.

in other respects to be proved through discovery and at trial.

As a direct result of the deficient policies and practices set forth above, although

Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston had in their possession evidence that would have proved
Sledge’s innocence of the crimes for which he was convicted and imprisoned, they failed to
provide the evidence to Sledge despite his repeated requests from 1993 to 2013.
212.

Because of the misconduct of Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston, Sledge

could not file a Motion for Appropriate Relief based on new evidence under N.C. Gen. Stat. §
15A-1415(c). Such a motion based on the DNA testing of crime scene evidence or other
scientific testing would have been successful, and would have freed Sledge from prison.
Defendants’misconduct thus violated Sledge’s rights to due process and to access the courts
under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
213.

As a direct result of the unconstitutional policies and/or practices of Defendants

Storms, Bunn and Benston from 1993 to 2013, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 21
years, and suffered physical, emotional, and pecuniary damages. Defendants Storms, Bunn and
Benston are thus liable to Sledge pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(42 U.S.C. § 1983 Monell Claim –Due Process –1993 to 2013 –Proctor, Pridgen)
214.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

215.

During the years in which Defendants Proctor and Pridgen held the position of

Clerk of Court of Columbus County, they were charged with performing the ministerial
functions of maintaining evidence admitted at trial in cases tried in Columbus County Superior
Court. Their ministerial duties included tracking, storing, and properly maintaining evidence.

36
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 36 of 44

 216.

As final policymaker for CCCO, Defendants Proctor and Pridgen created,

promulgated, and maintained the following policies which deprived Sledge of his constitutional
rights, including but not limited to, his due process rights and the right to not be subject to
improper deprivations of liberty and the pursuit of happiness:

217.

(a)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to properly and reasonably inventory, organize, and safekeep
evidence;

(b)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
not maintaining, storing, and safekeeping evidence used to subject persons
to life sentences;

(c)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to make DNA evidence available to individuals upon request as
required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-269;

(d)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to make evidence available for scientific testing and analysis;

(e)

Defendants created, promulgated, and maintained a policy or practice of
failing to provide accurate and prompt responses to reasonable requests
regarding the existence of evidence under Defendants’ possession,
custody, or control; and

(f)

in other respects to be proved through discovery and at trial.

As a direct result of the deficient policies and practices set forth above, although

Defendants Proctor and Pridgen had in their possession evidence that would have proved
Sledge’s innocence of the crimes for which he was convicted and imprisoned, they failed to
provide the evidence to Sledge despite his repeated requests from 1993 to 2012.
218.

Because of the misconduct of Defendants Proctor and Pridgen, Sledge could not

file a Motion for Appropriate Relief based on new evidence under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A1415(c). Such a motion based on the DNA testing of crime scene evidence or other scientific
testing would have been successful, and would have freed Sledge from prison. Defendants’

37
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 37 of 44

 misconduct thus violated Sledge’s rights to due process and to access the courts under the
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
219.

As a direct result of the unauthorized ministerial actions of Defendants Proctor

and Pridgen, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 21 years, and suffered physical,
emotional, and pecuniary damages. Defendants Proctor and Pridgen are thus liable to Plaintiff
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(State Law –Obstruction of Justice in 1977 and 1978 –Little, Poole)
220.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

221.

By their conduct in 1977 and 1978 described above, Defendants Little and Poole

deliberately prevented, obstructed, impeded, or hindered public or legal justice, i.e., the
exoneration of Sledge and the identification of the actual murderer.
222.

As a direct and proximate result of obstruction of justice by Defendants Little and

Poole in 1977 and 1978, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 37 years, and suffered
physical, emotional, and pecuniary damages.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(State Law –Negligence from 1993 to 2013 –Little, Storms, Bunn, Benston, Singletary,
Proctor, Pridgen, Batchelor)
223.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

224.

Defendants Little, Storms, Bunn, Benston, Singletary, Proctor, Pridgen and

Batchelor had the following duties:
(a)

to disclose exculpatory material to criminal defendants and to ensure such
material is disclosed;

(b)

to properly maintain, store, inventory, and safekeep evidence used in
criminal prosecutions;

(c)

to accurately respond to requests for evidence held in their possession; and
38

Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 38 of 44

 (d)
225.

in other respects to be proved through discovery and at trial.

Defendants Little, Storms, Bunn, Benston, Singletary, Proctor, Pridgen and

Batchelor were negligent and breached duties owed to Sledge in the following respects:

226.

(a)

Defendants failed to preserve, maintain, inventory, and safekeep evidence;

(b)

Defendants failed to honor reasonable requests that they search for, locate,
and produce evidence for DNA and other scientific testing;

(c)

Defendants failed to respond to Judge Gore’s June 2003 order to locate
and produce evidence in Sledge’s case;

(d)

Defendants failed to disclose exculpatory evidence to Sledge or his trial
attorney; and

(e)

in other respects to be proved through discovery and at trial.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligence, Sledge was

wrongfully imprisoned for over 37 years and suffered physical, emotional, and pecuniary
damages.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(State Law –Obstruction of Justice from 1993 to 2013 –Little)
227.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

228.

By his conduct from 1993 to 2013 described above, Defendant Little deliberately

prevented, obstructed, impeded, or hindered public or legal justice, i.e., the exoneration of Sledge
and the identification of the actual murderer.
229.

As a direct and proximate result of the obstruction of justice by Defendant Little

from 1993 to 2013, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 21 years, and suffered physical,
emotional, and pecuniary damages.

39
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 39 of 44

 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(North Carolina Constitutional Claim for Failing to Disclose Exculpatory Evidence Before
Trial in 1977 and 1978 –Little, Poole)
230.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

231.

In committing the foregoing acts and omissions in 1977 and 1978, Defendants

Little and Poole violated Sledge’s constitutional rights under the North Carolina Constitution,
including but not limited to his rights under Article I, Sections 18, 19, and 21.
232.

The misconduct of Defendants Little and Poole was a direct and proximate cause

of Sledge’s indictment, conviction, and imprisonment. Defendants Little and Poole were acting
under color of state law and their acts were undertaken with deliberate and/or reckless
indifference to Sledge’s constitutional rights.
233.

As a direct and proximate result of the unconstitutional acts and omissions of

Defendants Little and Poole in 1977 and 1978, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 37
years, and suffered physical, emotional, and pecuniary damages.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(North Carolina Constitutional Claim for Failing to Produce Exculpatory Evidence from
1993 to 2013 –Little, Storms, Bunn, Benston, Singletary, Proctor, Pridgen, Batchelor)
234.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

235.

In committing the foregoing acts and omissions from 1993 to 2013, Defendants

Little, Storms, Bunn, Benston, Singletary, Proctor and Batchelor violated Sledge’s constitutional
rights under the North Carolina Constitution, including but not limited to his rights under Article
I, Sections 18, 19, and 21.
236.

Defendants had in their possession evidence that would have proved Sledge’s

innocence of the crimes for which he was convicted and wrongfully imprisoned. Sledge and his
agents repeatedly requested that he be provided access to the evidence, so that it could be

40
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 40 of 44

 subjected to DNA and other scientific testing.

Defendants, through their deliberate and/or

reckless misconduct, and/or due to their adherence to unconstitutional policies, customs and
practices, failed to provide Sledge the evidence he requested, preventing Sledge from having
access to evidence that would have exonerated him.
237.

Because of Defendants’misconduct, which occurred while they were acting under

color of state law, Sledge could not file a Motion for Appropriate Relief based on new evidence
under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1415(c). Such a motion based on DNA testing of crime scene
evidence would have been successful, and would have freed Sledge from prison.
238.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unconstitutional acts and

omissions, Sledge was wrongfully imprisoned for over 37 years, and suffered physical,
emotional, and pecuniary damages.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Liability on Official Bond –Storms, Bunn, Benston)
239.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

240.

Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston, as

required by statute, have furnished a bond or bonds payable to the State of North Carolina (upon
whose relation Plaintiff sues) conditioned upon the faithful exercise of the duties of his office.
241.

Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant John Doe Corporation was, at all

times relevant to this action, the Surety on the official bond of Defendant Storms, Defendant
Bunn, and Defendant Benston as Sheriff of Bladen County, North Carolina.
242.

Plaintiff has been injured by the neglect, misconduct, and misbehavior of

Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston, each acting in his capacity as Sheriff of Bladen County.

41
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 41 of 44

 243.

Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-76-5, Defendants and the Surety on their bond

are liable to Plaintiff for all acts done by Defendants Storms, Bunn and Benston, or their deputies
or employees by virtue of or under color of their office.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Liability on Official Bond –Proctor, Pridgen)
244.

The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference.

245.

Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendants Proctor and Pridgen, as

required by statute, have furnished a bond or bonds payable to the State of North Carolina (upon
whose relation Plaintiff sues) conditioned upon the faithful exercise of the duties of their office.
246.

Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Jack Doe Corporation was, at all

times relevant to this action, the Surety on the official bond of these Defendants as Clerk of
Court of Columbus County, North Carolina.
247.

Plaintiff has been injured by the neglect, misconduct, and failure to properly

perform ministerial acts of Defendants Proctor and Pridgen, acting in capacity as Clerk of Court
of Columbus County.
248.

Pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 58-76-5, Defendants and the Surety on their bond

are liable to Plaintiff for all acts done by these Defendants by virtue of or under color of their
office.
DAMAGES
249.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’violation of Sledge’s civil and

constitutional rights, obstruction of justice, and negligence, Sledge was arrested, deprived of a
fair trial, wrongfully convicted, and imprisoned for more than 37 years for crimes he did not
commit.

42
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 42 of 44

 250.

As a result of Sledge’s wrongful conviction and imprisonment, Sledge sustained

physical injuries and sicknesses and other personal injuries, entitling him to recover
compensatory damages. Those injuries include but are not limited to:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)

(l)
251.

inadequate medical care;
poor nutrition;
physical pain and suffering;
severe emotional distress;
depression;
humiliation, indignities and embarrassment;
damage to reputation;
damage to family relationships;
loss of employment, wages and benefits;
diminished earning capacity;
restrictions on all forms of personal freedom including but not limited to
diet, sleep, human contact, educational opportunity, employment, athletic
opportunity, physical activity, personal fulfillment, parental
responsibilities, family relations, sexual relations, access to media and
technology, reading, travel, enjoyment, and expression; and
such other injuries as may be shown by the evidence.

Defendants are jointly and severally liable to Sledge for compensatory and

punitive damages resulting from the violation of his civil rights, obstruction of justice,
negligence, and wrongful conduct as described herein.
252.

Sledge is entitled to recover his reasonable attorneys’fees and litigation expenses

from Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
1.

Compensatory damages from Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to

be determined at trial;
2.

Punitive damages from Defendants, jointly and severally, in an amount to be

determined at trial;

43
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 43 of 44

 3.

Reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses from Defendants under 42

U.S.C. § 1988;
4.

Costs of court and interest as allowed by law;

5.

A trial by jury on all contested issues of fact; and

6.

Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

This the 20th day of August, 2015.
MARTIN & JONES, PLLC

BY:/s/G. Christopher Olson
H. Forest Horne, NCSB 16678
hfh@m-j.com
G. Christopher Olson, NCSB 21223
gco@m-j.com
410 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 200
Raleigh, North Carolina 2760
(919) 821-0005
PATTERSON HARKAVY, LLP

BY:/s/Burton Craige
Burton Craige, NCSB 9180
bcraige@pathlaw.com
Narendra K. Ghosh, NCSB 37649
nghosh@pathlaw.com
Paul E. Smith, NCSB 45014
psmith@pathlaw.com
1312 Annapolis Drive, Suite 103
Raleigh, North Carolina 27608
(919) 755-1812
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
JOSEPH SLEDGE, JR.

44
Case 7:15-cv-00180-D Document 1 Filed 08/20/15 Page 44 of 44