In their view, a miscarriage of justice has occurred. They say his conviction was based not on evidence but on a false confession elicited from an easily intimidated man with significant brain damage who could not understand his rights. He concludes that Lapointe is innocent. During the remainder of the year, The Friends of Richard Lapointe attempt to raise public and media awareness about the case but with little success. They are frustrated by the length of time required for typing the transcripts of court proceedings that are necessary for preparation of the appeal brief to the Connecticut Supreme Court.
Transcripts are finally available.
Attorney John R. Williams agrees to represent Lapointe without charge for the appeal. The citizens group gains new members and professional assistance as Lapointe's story wins greater press attention. Playwright Arthur Miller, a key figure in correcting the famous Peter Reilly wrongful conviction in the 1970s, speaks of the Lapointe case as another apparent miscarriage of justice in an address at the Connecticut Bar Association's annual dinner. Filing of Lapointe's appeal brief by attorneys John Williams and Norman Pattis to the Connecticut Supreme Court. It seeks new law requiring recording of interrogations that produce confessions.