In the last episode, you heard the prosecution story. Five teenagers accused of robbing and

murdering 61-year-old Nathaniel Jones. Five young men, one brutal crime, and a trail of

confessions the state said told it all. But what if the story you heard wasn't the whole truth?

In a courtroom, every defendant begins with one

powerful advantage, the presumption of innocence. But what happens when jurors hear the defendant's

own words admitting guilt? Not just one of them pointing fingers at the others, but all five

defendants and the friend who was

with them that night. Is it possible to convince a jury that six people confess to something

that isn't true? The confessions read aloud in court seemed to cause an invisible shift in the

burden of proof. According to the defense, those confessions, drawn out from teens who had spent hours in

cinderblock rooms, revealed that it wasn't guilt, but pure exhaustion, intimidation,

and the desperate hope of freedom that created the narratives that landed them in court.

The defense argued that false confessions aren't rare.

They're misunderstood.

They don't always come from violence or threats.

Sometimes they come from suggestions, isolation,

and being questioned for hours,

until the lines between truth and survival blur.

The question at the center of this case isn't just who killed Nathaniel Jones.

It's how five kids ended up confessing to it.

With their client's lives on the line, the defense was ready to fight back and show jurors a different story about what really happened and what didn't.

They had evidence, transcripts, and the courage to challenge the one thing juries are taught to trust above all else.

...