False and Deceptive Statements in Sixth Circuit Order
Why was the Sixth Circuit Court Appeals Order not signed by any judge?  That is unusual and suggests no judge wanted his name attached to such a poorly written document filled with errors and deception.  The Court was uninterested in taking the time to review the full record and evidence of Freeman's case, listening only to the false and unsupported claims of St. Clair County.  The Court is also clearly not interested in justice but in protecting one of its own, Federal Judge Robert Cleland, who secured a false conviction not by evidence of Fredrick Freeman's guilt but through misconduct and wrongdoing (as documented in Chief Justice Denise Page Hood's 2010 habeas ruling).  Below is how the Court miss-states facts and diverts attention from the overwhelming evidence of Freeman's actual innocence.
Regarding Gobeyn, he claimed he saw Freeman in what he admitted was only "a few seconds glance" at a vehicle in motion leaving the parking lot with a driver who "had a hat down to his eyes, collar up to his chin, and his head down".  Gobeyn's "identification" was finally made only after illegal and improper hypnosis and after being shown a series of suggestive photos highlighting Freeman among the others presented. In the in-person line-up, Gobeyn admitted actually knowing two line-up members, meaning that Freeman was the only one left as the "brown-haired male" police were seeking.
The Court asks us to believe these two highly dubious witnesses and disregard at least nine alibi witnesses placing Freeman 450 miles away in Escanaba? (Recent investigation has found one more witness placing Freeman in Escanaba just a few hours before the murder in Port Huron, who was interviewed by the police - information regarding this key alibi witness was never revealed to the defense).
The jacket contained no gunshot residue (which it absolutely would have if being held during the firing of a 12-gauge shotgun!).  The police admitted it had clearly not been washed in quite some while. Moreover, green army style jackets were commonly worn by many at the time, though Freeman did not wear one.  None of his friends up north claimed he wore such a jacket nor did his girlfriend, Crystal Merrill, or Tom Forde. In fact, they noted Freeman always wore, leather jackets when riding his motorcycle or a "black wool peacoat" or a "duster" style jacket popular with young people who listened to "New Wave" music in the 80's.
The Court Order made the absurd and totally unsupported claim that, "In light of all of the evidence, we must agree with the district court that no reasonable jurist could find it debatable that Freeman has not proven by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found him guilty".  Yet, there is videotape where one juror, Richard Pelligren, states that "It was all circumstantial. We had no evidence", referring to Freeman chartering a plane to commit the murder, the only possible (and improbable) way he could have done this. The Court says they decided on the evidence. The jury says they had no evidence. Why the disconnect?  (For juror quote, begin viewing at 3:46 at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yauDbGmhtag&list=PL96569F939CF3F5A6&index=7
The real evidence is that nine alibi witnesses prove that it was physically impossible for Freeman to have committed the crime; that the prosecutor literally "invented" evidence by unethically suggesting to the jury that a man living through public assistance chartered an airplane to commit the murder; that the prosecution committed acts of misconduct by illegally coercing a jailhouse snitch to provide false testimony, and by doctoring a photo line-up board and hiding the original one from the jury and the defense. Had Prosecutor Cleland's misconduct and deception been revealed to the jury, how could any "reasonable factfinder" have found Freeman guilty?  The question answers itself and is not "debatable".