Previously on Bearbrook Season 2, a true crime story.

I could point out how Jason's statements were so inconsistent with the undisputed forensic

evidence in this case that it was more probable that he was guessing in response to interrogation

questions than that he had any actual knowledge.

In fact, looking at these inconsistencies, it is shocking that Jason was ever even a credible

suspect let alone convicted.

I do remember being yelled and screamed at.

In any time I answered the wrong way, like nope, nope, nope, nope.

I remember being so wiped out I tried to go to sleep under the table they wouldn't let me.

But ultimately did you find where you convinced that Jason was guilty of the crime?

Oh yeah, he admitted to, if I recall correctly, he admitted to stabbing or at least once.

This is horrible crime.

I mean, that's...

I would just say that if he didn't do it.

The first known wrongful conviction in the United States was based on a false confession.

Actually, two false confessions, one from each of the two co-defendants.

They were farmers in Vermont in 1812, Jesse and Stephen Bourne.

It didn't like their brother-in-law, thought it was lazy, reloading off the family.

So when the brother-in-law disappeared, the Bourne brothers were easy suspects.

Witnesses said they'd heard the Bourne brothers threatened to kill the brother-in-law.

The brother-in-law's personal items were found in the Bourne's cellar.

Bones were found buried in their field.

...