The wrongful conviction of Murray Lawrence Jr cannot be separated from the power structure that controlled Baldwin County in 2005 and still controls it today.
The same officials who built this case, shaped the narrative and pushed a conviction without evidence have carried their influence forward into higher positions of authority. Their decisions then and their power now continue to block every path to justice.
Four key figures, each central to Murray’s conviction, still cast a long shadow over this case.
Robert Wilters, Baldwin County District Attorney
How can anyone believe Alabama’s justice system is fair when the very judge who oversaw Murray Lawrence Jr’s trial allowed so many violations to take place right in front of him
At the time of Murray’s prosecution, Robert Wilters served as the presiding Circuit Court Judge in Baldwin County. He was the person responsible for maintaining order in the courtroom and ensuring that the law was followed on both sides. Every objection, every motion, every piece of evidence, and every ruling passed through him. He held the power to stop the trial, to suppress improper evidence, and to demand that the State follow proper procedure. Instead, he allowed a case built on contradictions, coercion, and missing evidence to move forward.
Judge Wilters knew from the record that the death certificate listed the cause of death as strangulation, not a gunshot wound. He knew that the State of Alabama never performed its own autopsy. He knew that the prosecution’s theory of a gunshot killing did not match the forensic evidence presented by Dr. Paul McGarry, the pathologist who testified under oath that there was no bullet hole and no gunshot injury. That evidence alone should have forced the court to halt the proceedings and order a full review of the case before it ever reached a jury.
He also knew that multiple witnesses changed their statements only after pressure from law enforcement. Some were threatened, others promised leniency or immunity in exchange for testifying the way the State wanted. Those facts were in the courtroom, and Wilters had the authority to investigate or dismiss testimony that was clearly coerced. He did neither.
A fair judge is supposed to protect the rights of the accused. He is supposed to ensure that the trial is not driven by politics, bias, or pressure from law enforcement. In Murray’s case, that did not happen. Wilters allowed the prosecution to proceed with an indictment that was unsigned by the grand jury foreman, to introduce evidence that did not match the cause of death, and to block the defense from presenting critical information that would have exposed the truth.
The trial itself was filled with red flags. There was no physical evidence connecting Murray to the crime. There was no murder weapon, no DNA, no fingerprints, and five alibi witnesses who were ignored. Yet the case was pushed forward, and Wilters sat on the bench as though none of it mattered.
When a judge fails to act in the face of obvious injustice, it is not a mistake. It is a choice. Robert Wilters had the chance to stop this wrongful prosecution before it ever reached a verdict. He could have demanded an independent autopsy for the State of Alabama, or dismissed the charges when it became clear that the prosecution’s evidence did not support the indictment. He did not.
After the conviction, Wilters continued his career in the Alabama legal system, eventually becoming a senior figure of influence. The fact that he still holds authority in a state court system that refuses to correct its own errors says everything about why justice in Alabama remains out of reach.
The people of Baldwin County deserve to know that the judge who presided over one of the most flawed trials in county history is still a powerful voice in their court system. They deserve to know that he allowed a conviction to stand even though he knew the evidence was false and the process was tainted.
How can a court claim to stand for truth when the person who led it ignored every sign of corruption in his own courtroom
Until those who enabled this injustice are held accountable, there will be no faith in Alabama’s courts. The rule of law means nothing when those entrusted to protect it use their authority to bury the truth instead of uncovering it.
Hoss Mack, Executive Director of the Alabama Sheriffs Association
How can anyone look at this setup in Alabama and not see a conflict of interest
Before becoming sheriff, Hoss Mack was the Chief Deputy for Baldwin County. He was second in command and directly involved in the investigation that led to Murray Lawrence Jr’s arrest and conviction. Every major decision went through his chain of command. He oversaw the investigators, approved reports, and coordinated with the district attorney’s office that prosecuted the case.
His father, Huey A. Mack Sr., owned Mack Funeral Home in Robertsdale and was also the Baldwin County Coroner. During the Murray Lawrence case, the victim’s body was taken to that same funeral home instead of to an independent coroner in Alabama. The question that no one in authority ever asked is this. How is it possible that the family of the chief deputy in charge of the investigation could take custody of the victim’s body and evidence tied to an active homicide case that his own department was investigating
As Chief Deputy, would it have been Hoss Mack’s duty to ensure that an autopsy was ordered for the State of Alabama? The answer appears to be yes. When a death occurs under suspicious or violent circumstances, the sheriff’s department has the legal responsibility to report it to the coroner and coordinate with the state medical examiner to order an autopsy. That means the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office, under Mack’s command, should have made sure a proper Alabama autopsy was performed. But it never happened. Mississippi completed its own examination, and Alabama never followed through with its own. If Mack had a role in that decision, then he was part of the reason the state failed to do what the law required. That alone should have been grounds for a review or investigation.
Instead, the same office that led the investigation also allowed the body to go to the funeral home owned by the family of the man overseeing the case. That connection should have stopped everything in its tracks. The potential for bias or evidence manipulation is undeniable. When you add to that the fact that the cause of death was changed from strangulation to gunshot during the prosecution, it becomes clear how deeply compromised the process was.
After the conviction, Hoss Mack ran for sheriff and won in 2006. He remained sheriff for 17 years. During those years, Mack Funeral Home stayed in his family and still operates today. So even as sheriff, he was tied to a private business that handled remains from cases his own department investigated. No one questioned it, and no one stopped it.
Now that he has retired as sheriff, Hoss Mack is the Executive Director of the Alabama Sheriffs Association. This group lobbies for and helps shape law enforcement policy across the state. On top of that, credible sources say he is being considered for a leadership position within the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency, the state agency that investigates officer involved deaths. If that appointment takes place, it would mean that the same man who helped oversee Murray Lawrence Jr’s wrongful prosecution could soon be in charge of reviewing officer conduct and deaths statewide. That is beyond inappropriate. It is a direct conflict of interest.
How can that possibly be fair or impartial The same small circle of people continues to control law enforcement policy, internal investigations, and even oversight of officer involved deaths.
The conflict does not stop there. Alabama law makes the sheriff one of three officials in every county who appoint poll workers, supervise local election processes, and certify vote totals. The sheriff sits on the same board that signs off on election results, even in races where the sheriff himself is on the ballot. The sheriff’s office is also responsible for storing the ballots after the election. That means the same person running for office is also part of the team that appoints those who count the votes, certifies the results, and then keeps custody of the ballots.
How can anyone argue that this is not a conflict of interest How can a system that allows a law enforcement official to help run elections, control evidence in homicide cases, and now potentially oversee all state investigations be trusted to deliver equal justice
This is the reality in Alabama. The people deserve to know how power is consolidated within the same group of officials, and they deserve to demand accountability. Until these conflicts are addressed honestly and openly, the state will continue to protect those in power instead of protecting truth and justice.
Anthony Lowery, Appointed Baldwin County Sherriff (Running for Sherriff in 2025)
How can anyone in Alabama look at this and not see the same pattern repeating itself
Anthony Lowery worked under Hoss Mack for years inside the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office. During the Murray Lawrence Jr. investigation, Lowery served directly beneath Mack as part of the command structure that oversaw the case. He was one of the lead investigators responsible for collecting and processing evidence and for coordinating with the District Attorney’s Office during the prosecution. In other words, he was not a bystander. He was part of the same chain of command that controlled the investigation and helped drive the case that sent an innocent man to prison.
Lowery continued to climb through the ranks of the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office even as questions about that case and others went unanswered. His loyalty to the system that convicted Murray never changed, and his career success depended on that system remaining intact. When Hoss Mack announced his retirement in 2024, Governor Kay Ivey appointed Anthony Lowery to take over as Sheriff of Baldwin County. He will now be running for a full term in 2026.
Think about that. The man who helped run the investigation that put Murray Lawrence Jr. behind bars has now been placed in charge of the same office that carried out the wrongful prosecution. It is the same circle of people protecting one another, just trading seats at the table.
This appointment means that Lowery now commands the department that holds the original case files, the evidence storage, and the internal records tied to Murray’s conviction. If an outside agency ever tries to reopen or re-examine the case, it would have to go through the same office run by one of the original investigators. How is that fair How can anyone expect transparency or accountability when the person who helped build the original case now controls all access to the evidence that could expose it
Lowery’s position also places him inside the same election structure that has already raised concerns. Like every Alabama sheriff, he is part of the three-member county board that appoints poll workers, supervises local elections, and certifies vote totals. That means when he runs for sheriff in 2026, he will be one of the officials who signs off on the certification of his own race and whose office holds the ballots afterward.
If this were happening in any other state, it would be headline news. In Alabama, it is simply how things are done. The same people who oversee law enforcement are tied to the same small group that manages elections, criminal investigations, and public policy. It is a cycle that keeps power concentrated and accountability out of reach.
The public deserves to know who Anthony Lowery is and what his record represents. He was part of the Baldwin County command staff during one of the most egregious wrongful prosecutions in the state. Now he has been handed the highest law enforcement position in that same county. He will soon be asking voters to trust him again in 2026.
That trust should not be given automatically. The people of Baldwin County should ask hard questions about his role in the Murray Lawrence Jr. case, his relationship with Hoss Mack, and whether he can separate himself from the same network that has kept the truth hidden for more than twenty years.
How can any system claim to deliver justice when the same people who helped create a miscarriage of justice are now the ones in charge of running the department and the elections that keep them there
Until these conflicts of interest are addressed openly, nothing in Baldwin County or in Alabama will ever truly change.
David Whetstone, Retired
John David Whetstone served as the District Attorney for Baldwin County during the prosecution of Murray Lawrence Jr. His office led the charge that produced one of the most troubling and unjust convictions in Alabama’s history. As the chief prosecutor, every decision made by his team reflected his direction and approval. He had full authority to stop the case once the evidence failed to support the charge, but instead he pushed it forward, ensuring that a flawed and misleading prosecution would lead to an innocent man’s conviction.
The prosecution also failed to produce a signed indictment by the grand jury foreman and introduced physical evidence that did not exist. There was no murder weapon, no fingerprints, and no DNA linking Murray to the crime. The forensic pathologist’s testimony, which should have ended the case, was buried beneath the prosecution’s false narrative. Whetstone allowed his office to disregard the truth and replace it with speculation, a move that stripped Murray of a fair trial.
A District Attorney’s first duty is not to win but to seek justice. Whetstone’s actions violated that duty. By continuing to prosecute a case that his own evidence disproved, he set a dangerous precedent that allowed political gain and courtroom theatrics to replace integrity. He had the power to correct the record, to acknowledge that the case was built on lies, and to prevent a wrongful conviction. He chose not to.
His silence in the years that followed speaks volumes. Whetstone never addressed the contradictions in the case, never acknowledged the absence of an Alabama autopsy, and never explained how his office claimed jurisdiction over a crime that occurred in Mississippi. Instead, he continued to move comfortably within the same Baldwin County network that rewards those who protect the system rather than challenge it.
The people of Alabama deserve to know that the wrongful conviction of Murray Lawrence Jr. did not happen by accident. It happened because officials like John David Whetstone allowed a case with no jurisdiction, no credible evidence, and no legitimate indictment to move forward. His leadership in this prosecution is a reminder of how deeply rooted the corruption runs in Baldwin County. Until those responsible are held accountable, the same system will continue to protect its own while innocent people remain behind bars.
The case under Whetstone’s supervision ignored the most basic rules of due process. The death certificate and forensic pathologist both confirmed the victim died by strangulation in Mississippi, not by gunshot in Alabama. Yet the indictment and the entire prosecution were built on the claim of a gunshot homicide within Alabama. His office never corrected that contradiction, even though it was visible in every document presented at trial. The prosecution knowingly used this false narrative to establish jurisdiction and to convince a jury that a murder occurred in Baldwin County when it did not.
Whetstone’s team also relied on coerced testimony. Several witnesses later admitted they were threatened or pressured into changing their statements to fit the State’s version of events. The record shows that the prosecution not only accepted those statements but built their case around them. Witness coercion is a direct violation of both state and federal law, yet under Whetstone’s leadership, it was treated as acceptable if it helped secure a conviction.
