CONSTANTINE, Mich. (WOOD) — Whether Raymond McCann’s perjury conviction in the Jodi Parrack murder case can be overturned could come down to video captured on a surveillance camera at a creamery.
The video, taken from the Constantine Creamery on the night Jodi was killed in 2007, is dark and grainy with a view obscured by parked vehicles.
McCann, who was the lead suspect in the murder until last year’s arrest of Daniel Furlong, was accused of lying when he told detectives that he’d parked near the Tumble Dam about 9 p.m.
He told police he planned to check near the dam for Jodi because it was an area that kids liked to hang out. The dam is a few hundred yards down a path from the creamery. He said he parked there, but never got out of his car.
>>RELATED: Jodi’s murder: Making a monster
St. Joseph County Prosecutor John McDonough said the video clearly shows he was not there and that he lied.
McCann and his new attorney, Steven Drizin, of Northwestern University in Chicago, watched the video for the first time on Wednesday after Target 8 used the Freedom of Information act to get a copy from the prosecutor.
They were confused about what the video showed.
“I think the reality is, is the area where we believe Ray was is not captured on this video,” Drizin said while watching the video.
“The other important thing is that he never saw that video. This was never shown to Ray, this video.”
In an email, the prosecutor on Thursday said the video “disproved” that McCann was in the Tumble Dam area, though he acknowledged never watching the video himself. He said the video was not a bluff to get McCann to confess. He also said it would have been available to McCann and his attorney before the no contest plea, though he didn’t know if they’d seen it.
He referred any other questions about the video to the Michigan State Police.
McDonough said he stands by the perjury prosecution.
“As for Ray’s push to have the conviction overturned, I really don’t have a comment at this time,” he said in an email.
“He is welcome to try under the constraints of the law, and if motions are filed, we will respond accordingly. He certainly can seek an expungement five years after his supervision concludes as well.”