RICHMOND, Va. (WRIC) – A Richmond, Virginia, man who was wrongfully convicted of abduction, rape, and murder for the death of a 3-year-old in 1975 was exonerated on Tuesday after his innocence was proven through modern forensics nearly five decades later.
In 1976, Marvin Grimm of Richmond was convicted in the Richmond City Circuit Court of the abduction, first-degree murder and rape of a 3-year-old child, who was found dead in the James River on Nov. 26, 1975. He was sentenced to life in prison and served 44 of those years before being released on parole in 2019.
According to a press release from the Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, on Tuesday, June 18, Grimm was issued a writ of actual innocence – meaning he has been exonerated. This decision was made based on modern DNA and toxicology evidence presented by Grimm.
“Accordingly, Grimm’s petition presents material evidence that, when considered together and against the whole of the trial court’s evidence, is sufficient for this Court to reasonably believe that no rational fact finder would have convicted him,” the order reads. “Indeed, when considered as a whole, there remains no inculpatory evidence by which Grimm would be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
The order from the courts details the timeline of the murder, Grimm’s arrest and eventual conviction and what has come to light since that day nearly fifty years ago.
What happened in 1975 and how was Grimm convicted?
According to the order, the child – called “C.H” in all references – disappeared into the woods near his family’s apartment in Richmond the afternoon of Nov. 22, 1975.
Four days later, he was found face-up in the James River, fully clothed and with his arms folded across his chest.
Grimm, a neighbor, was soon identified as a suspect due to reported tension between himself and C.H.’s family. Following a nine-hour shift at work on Dec. 16, Grimm was arrested and taken in for questioning.
According to the order, after nine hours of interrogation, Grimm confessed to the abduction and murder of C.H., as well as his “forced sexual assault.” He provided a timeline of events that began with C.H.’s disappearance and ended at the James River – however, some details did not align and certain facts relevant to the case were not mentioned by Grimm.
Grimm would later agree to plead guilty to murder, sodomy by force and abduction with intent to defile, in exchange for the Commonwealth not seeking the death penalty.
“Importantly, Virginia law did not permit the death penalty for this type of offense at that
time,” the order reads.
Alongside this confession, the forensic evidence used to convict Grimm included:
- Hairs found in his coat, his car and on a child’s sock found inside of the car
- A stained towel found in his car
- Swabs taken from C.H.’s throat and mouth
What did modern forensics uncover about the evidence?
According to the order, at the time of the court proceedings, the hairs found were compared to hairs of C.H.’s. Three in Grimm’s car and all of those on Grimm’s coat were reportedly found to match. Additionally, while the sock “appeared to be smaller than the sock from C.H.,” the hair found inside was found to match C.H.’s.
In 2011 and 2023, all hairs thought to be C.H.’s were tested via DNA analysis and all were found to not belong to him.
The swabs taken from C.H.’s mouth, as well as the stain on the towel, were thought at the time of the court proceedings to be seminal fluid and to belong to Grimm, seemingly coinciding with his confession that he sexually assaulted the child.
According to the order, in 2002, Grimm was eliminated as the source of any of the genetic material found in C.H.’s mouth. Later, in 2017, a final test was done to determine whether or not seminal fluid was ever in C.H.’s mouth to begin with. Ultimately, this testing determined there was never sperm in C.H’s mouth.
In 2003, the same was found for the towel – according to the order, there was never seminal fluid on the towel. Additionally, DNA analysis revealed that, not only was Grimm’s DNA not on the towel, but there was no human DNA on it at all.
In his petition, Grimm also provided research on false confessions, presenting that his confession had been coerced by police into admitting guilt. Additionally, the order outlines several issues with Grimm’s confession which discredit its authenticity.
According to the order, the court chose not to consider these scholarly articles because, with all of the physical evidence proven false, the confession itself – true or false – would not have been enough to prove Grimm guilty in the first place.
“Indeed, the Commonwealth is left with a body and a man claiming responsibility without accurately describing any of this case’s facts,” the order reads. “Therefore, the confession by itself would not provide an adequate basis for a reasonable fact-finder to convict. Accordingly,
when Grimm’s confession is “considered with all of the other evidence in the current record, [it] prove[s] that no rational trier of fact would have found proof of guilt . . . beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Based on all of these findings presented in Grimm’s petition, the court decided to grant him his writ of actual innocence.