in fact, you've known paul ebert 42 years. what went wrong? >> the problem is that prosecutors start cases with the presumption that the defendant is guilty. if they didn't have that presumption, they wouldn't be prosecutors, but that's not the presumption in the eyes of the law. the presumption is the presumption of innocence and so when they try to manipulate evidence or don't disclose evidence tending to help the defendant escape punishment, they don't see a problem with that and that's the problem. >> and the judge said this case was irrevocably tampered because of essentially what he called prosecutorial misconduct. ebert was caught on tape going in to talk to barber basically saying if you change your testimony, here are the consequences. >> well, if you don't change your testimony. his last testimony was that wolfe was innocent and paul obviously believed that that was perjured testimony because he believes wolfe is guilty, same with the current special prosecutor and so what he was trying to do is to get him to get off of the perjury a