Commuted Doesn’t Mean Innocent: The Truth Behind Sentence Reductions and Misleading Narratives
June 17, 2025
Across Illinois and beyond, a troubling trend is unfolding: individuals whose prison sentences have been commuted—often by executive order from state governors—are reentering society not only as returning citizens, but as public figures. Some are now regular speakers at schools, mentors in youth programs, and voices in criminal justice reform conversations.
But many of them are also presenting a false or misleading narrative about their release—suggesting, or outright claiming, that they were wrongfully convicted or that the governor’s act of clemency proves their innocence.
This is simply not true.
What a Commutation Really Means
In the State of Illinois—as in every state—a commutation is an act of executive clemency. It does not vacate a conviction, nor does it say the person is innocent. It simply reduces a criminal sentence. The legal record still shows the person was convicted and found guilty by a jury of their peers.
Governors have wide discretion to commute sentences, and often do so in cases involving:
Harsh or outdated sentencing laws
Youthful offenders showing rehabilitation
Medical concerns
Public safety emergencies (such as pandemics)
But again: a commuted sentence is still a criminal sentence. The person remains a convicted felon.
The COVID-19 Clemency Surge
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor J.B. Pritzker joined other governors around the country in granting emergency sentence commutations, citing health risks in overcrowded prisons.
Dozens of Illinois prisoners were released under this policy—many for nonviolent offenses, but some for serious crimes, including murder, attempted murder, and aggravated battery.
This wave of clemency was based on humanitarian and safety factors, not legal innocence.
From Cell Block to Classroom
In the years since, a number of these individuals have emerged as public speakers, especially in youth outreach efforts. They appear in schools, churches, and community programs, sharing “redemption” stories and cautionary tales.
While some are transparent, others mislead—claiming that the governor released them “because they were innocent” or implying that they helped “create the clemency program” itself.
This is not only misleading—it’s dangerous.
When these individuals present themselves as exonerated, they distort public understanding of justice. When they stand before classrooms and imply that the system “got it wrong,” they do so despite being legally guilty of violent crimes.
Real-World Examples
Darnell Cherry Jr. (North Carolina)
Granted commutation in 2023 by Governor Roy Cooper after serving time for second-degree murder. Cherry now participates in youth programs, often presenting himself as a symbol of justice reform—yet he was not exonerated, and the conviction stands.
Esteban Núñez (California)
Convicted in a 2008 manslaughter case, Núñez had his sentence commuted by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2011. The political connection to his father, then-Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, stirred public outrage. Today, Núñez works in advocacy circles, sometimes downplaying his original crime in public appearances.
Leo Frank (Georgia, 1915)
A historical example: convicted of murder and sentenced to death, Frank’s sentence was commuted by Governor John Slaton. The case remains infamous not only for its controversy but for how commutation was later framed as exoneration, even though Frank was never legally cleared.
Many Are Drawn to Youth Work
Although precise statistics are scarce, dozens of formerly incarcerated individuals with commuted sentences have joined reentry programs, advocacy networks, and youth mentoring efforts across the country. Making it their mission to use their past crimes & new found freedom to “Build a Brand” off the most impressionable, naive and distressed throughout our communities.
Their involvement is not inherently harmful—many are sincere, and their stories offer valuable lessons of what not to do and who to avoid becoming. But the line is crossed when the message delivered to the next generation twists facts, repackages guilt as innocence, or takes credit for reforms they didn’t create.
Truth Over Optics
The justice system must allow for mercy, reform, and second chances. But it must also insist on truth. A person convicted of shooting and killing another human being remains legally guilty, even if their sentence is later shortened.
Victims and their families deserve that truth. So do students and community members being asked to look up to these returning citizens as role models.
Let them lead—but let them lead with accountability and honesty.
— Fighting4Freeport