I have a son, Brent Parris, who was wrongfully convicted of attempted murder. Get this.

He was sitting in his

vehicle with his 10 week-old baby waiting for his girlfriend (mother of the baby) to come get in the Jeep.

A man named Randy told a jury in Etowah County at Gadsden that he just got to thinking, "I don't like the
way he treats his girlfriend. (For some weekends he and Brent had been watching TV together and they never
had a cross word.) "So I got up from my seat, walked through the house to my room, opened my knife
drawer, selected the knife I wanted to use, opened it, and carried it down by my side as I walked up to the
Jeep."

When he got there Brent rolled down the window to see what he wanted. Randy began stabbing him in the
face and on the arm, while trying to kidnap the 10 week old baby. Brent remembered he had a small handgun
and grabbed it and fired one shot to get Randy off him. Randy told the jury that, after being hit, he ran and
dived between two cars in the yard in case Brent shot again.

Katie jumped into the Jeep and they fled the scene. Her brother ran out on the front and fired two shots into
the Jeep from a SKS .762 high powered rifle. One shot went just under the baby, blowing the seat belt loose
from the vehicle; the other shot hit the drive shaft and deflected downward. Had it gone upward, it would
have killed Katie.

Officers arrived and filled out their reports (partially). [They never mentioned that Brent had been stabbed
and had to go to the hospital.] They went to Randy and told him to go ahead and sign the warrant. Randy
refused. He told them that he was the aggressor. He said that he was up there stabbing Brent and that Brent
shot him and that was that. He refused to sign a warrant so his sister did.

Somehow the DA turned it around and said that Brent was the aggressor (for sitting quietly in his Jeep) and
that Randy (who was unprovoked and was stabbing him) was the victim. That's the way it went to trial. To
our surprise, the jury came back with a guilty verdict and Judge Rhea sentenced him to 35 years. He is in his
8th year and we feel that is far too much. We are trying desperately to find help. Do you know of anyone who
can help in this situation? I would appreciate any information on where we might find assistance.

In the struggle,

Curtis Parris

from http://convictedwrongfully.com/

SELF- DEFENSE OR MURDER?

(A synopsis of the Brent André Parris criminal case)

This story represents a question of self-defense. It focuses on the case of Brent André Parris,
who is currently serving thirty-five (35) consecutive years in the Alabama prison system
simply because he caused serious injury when he tried to defend himself and his baby from
an unprovoked attack by a drug-crazed knife wielding madman. A synopsis of the case
follows:
 The INCIDENT

On the night of April 12, 1997, Parris was

spending time with his son in Gadsden, Alabama
when a man approached his vehicle with a knife. The man - high on drugs and alcohol-
reached through the driver's window and stabbed Parris in the face. For almost a minute,
Parris tried to wrestle the knife away from the man and was cut several times in the process.
The man then tried to open the rear door of the vehicle and grab Parris' ten-week old son
from his car seat. In the heat of the battle, Parris grabbed a pistol from the console and shot
the man one time in self-defense. The attack on Parris was unprovoked; and Parris had blood
in his eyes from being cut in the face. Within 3 to 5 seconds, Parris fired a single shot at the
silhouette of the man who had stabbed him. For this, Parris was sentenced to 35 years in
prison.

The man who attacked Parris, Randy Davidson, was the brother-in-law of the child's mother,
who was Parris' common law wife. Davidson admits that he attacked Parris with a knife, and
that he attempted to snatch Parris' baby out of the car seat. His motive was to get the child
and supposedly return it to its mother, but he never communicated this to Parris in any way.
Instead, he stabbed Parris through the driver's window without saying a word. Parris never
knew why he was being attacked nor why the man was trying to abduct his baby; thus, Parris
was forced to protect himself and his infant son.

At the time that he attacked Parris, Davidson was high on a number of drugs and alcohol.
Blood was drawn at the hospital immediately following the incident. Drug screen test results
show that Davidson tested positive for cocaine, marijuana, benzodiazapines (Valium), opoids
(Loricet), and alcohol. When asked by detectives at the hospital why he had attacked Parris,
Davidson said that he "just wasn't thinking straight." Davidson was paralyzed from the waist
down as a result of the shooting, but he refused to sign a warrant against Parris, saying he
knew Parris acted in self-defense. Despite all of this, Parris was charged with "Attempted
Murder" for shooting his attacker. Davidson was never charged for stabbing Parris.

Click here for more details on the Parris case, or read on . . .

The TRIAL of Brent Parris

The trial in this case wasn't held until August 28,

2000 -- almost 4 years later. The trial judge, William
H. Rhea, ruled almost from the beginning that all
admissible evidence would be limited to things
strictly beneficial to the prosecution. Among the
most devastating rulings was the suppression of
Davidson's medical records from the night of the
incident. The drug tests were proof of Parris' claim The Jury was never allowed to see
of self-defense, but the judge ruled them "immaterial up close the almost 9" long knife
to the facts." The jury never learned that Davidson which Davidson used on the night of
was under the influence of a drug cocktail, at the the incident to stab Parris,
time he attacked Parris.
The doctor who treated Davidson on the night of the incident was called as a witness by the
prosecution. He gave conflicting and confusing testimony about the nature of Davidson's
injuries. In his "Report of Operation", written on the night of the incident, the doctor wrote
that he removed the bullet and the "spinal cord regained its natural configuration."

At trial four years later, however , he testified that the spinal cord had been "severed
instantaneously." In broken English, the doctor also testified "the shorter the point from
where a bullet is shot, the big is the momentum, and the fast is the speed. As it loses
momentum, it loses the speed, but it reaches the distance . . . that indicates to me that the
bullet had lost at least fifty per cent of its momentum." The gun which Parris fired was a .380
semi-automatic pistol, and Davidson was approximately 6 to 8 feet from Parris when he was
shot. To say that a bullet loses fifty per cent of its velocity after traveling 8 feet is
preposterous.

Whatever the corroborating witness meant was essentially irrelevant; Parris has never denied
the fact that he shot Davidson. The only point in issue was why he fired that shot at
Davidson. Trajectory was the crux of the prosecution's case, saying that Parris prematurely
shot Davidson without giving him a chance to "waive off the attack" once he saw Parris had a
gun. The prosecution maintains that Davidson was finished with his attack on Parris, who
was therefore in no immediate danger. Parris has always maintained that Davidson was still
an active threat at the moment he was shot, and that Davidson never attempted to "waive off
the attack." To determine this point, the case hinged on eyewitness testimony.

Parris was convicted on the testimony of two alleged eyewitnesses, both of whom had reason
to lie -- both were related to the man who was shot. Parris has consistently held to his
statement over the years, but both these eyewitnesses have told at least three different
versions of the event.

Witness # 1 was Kate Conner-Parris, who was the victim's sister-in-law. On the night of the
incident, she gave a handwritten statement to the police saying that she heard a gunshot and
then saw Davidson fall to the ground several seconds later. At the preliminary hearing, held
less than 30 days later, she testified under oath that she did not see Parris shoot Davidson at
all. She also told several different stories to family and friends during the 4 year span
between incident and trial. Finally, at trial she testified that Davidson was turning to walk
away when Parris shot him. There have been at least 4 different stories given by this witness,
several given under oath.

Witness # 2 was Bernice Conner, the victim's sister. She has also told at least 3 different
stories over the years. On the night of the incident she gave a statement that Davidson was
"lying in a mud puddle" when Parris walked up to him and shot him. She told another
relative, (Michael Conner, her father-in-law) that she did not actually witness the incident,
but had lied and said she did anyway. At trial, she testified that Davidson was attempting to
walk away from Parris when he was shot. This witness also had charges for drugs and writing
bad checks pending against her, in the same prosecutor's office, which were later dismissed
following the trial. It appears that a deal may have been arranged in exchange for her
testimony against Parris.
 Pictures of the crime scene taken shortly after the incident.
The only two true eyewitnesses in this case were the combatants, Parris and Davidson, and
both of their stories mesh almost identically, except for a few minor discrepancies. Both
agree that Davidson was the aggressor, armed with a knife, who attacked Parris unprovoked.
Both also agree that within several seconds Parris shot Davidson from 6 to 8 feet away. The
two were also in agreement that the shooting was justified in an act of self-defense, which
was why Davidson refused to press charges against Parris. When Attorneys for Parris pointed
this out, the prosecutor objected and said that the victim in this case was "the peace and
dignity of the State of Alabama."

Attorneys representing Parris at the trial did not put forth any defense whatsoever. No
witnesses were called and no defense was given. The jury returned a verdict of "guilty" and
condemned Parris to prison. It was later discovered that at least 5 of the jurors (5 out of 12)
were related to each other by blood or marriage. The odds against this happening by
coincidence are astronomical in a county of over 100,000 residents from which to draw
jurors. You would have a better chance of winning the lottery than you would by drawing 12
names out of 100,000 and having 5 of them related to each other.

The trial judge sentenced Parris to serve 35 consecutive years in state prison, an enormous
amount of time, especially given the circumstances of the case. After all, the "victim" was the
attacker who stabbed Parris and instigated the shooting. Even the man who was shot,
Davidson, and most of his family, believe this sentence to be drastically excessive.

The AFTERMATH

The true victim in this case is, of course, Brent André Parris. At the time of this incident,
Parris was a 25 year old senior in college studying for a degree in Computer Technology. He
worked as a lab assistant at Jacksonville State University, tutoring other students on computer
networking skills. He had just celebrated the birth of his first child ten weeks earlier, and he
was only months away from college graduation. His entire future looked bright until the night
of April 12, 1997, when he was assaulted by a knife-wielding man on drugs. Parris was
attacked, stabbed, arrested, locked up, beaten, and essentially sentenced to die in prison. He
has depleted all of his resources on legal fees; his career is over; and his wife and friends
have abandoned him. He is a victim of a judicial system out of control.

Many people support Parris and feel that his actions were justified. At the sentencing hearing
in this case, there were 735 local people who requested leniency in sentencing. They did not
receive it. When the case was on appeal, over 6,700 petitions were sent to the Alabama
Supreme Court from citizens urging the Court to reverse the decision, but they refused to
even hear the case. Parris has only 2 more courts to which he may appeal before all his
appeals are exhausted. If those 2 courts do not overturn Parris' conviction, he will have to
serve the full 35 year sentence.

Parris has already served over 8 years in prison for defending himself, but the state of
Alabama says he must serve another 27 years. Enough is enough! We urge you to take a
moment to contact your local news media and officials to bring their attention to this issue.
Let them know that you believe a serious miscarriage of justice has been served in Parris'
case. Tell them you feel that citizens should have the right to defend themselves without fear
of being prosecuted for harming their attackers. Remember that this could happen to you!
Without public support, Parris will never be released from prison, so we urge you to help us
correct this injustice.