Midwest group that frees wrongfully convicted prisoners in Missouri and Kansas may close 47%

By Kavahn Mansouri59%

7/13/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Loss Aversion, Negativity Bias, and Framing Effect, with Appeal to Emotion as the most egregious example at 26.3% saturation with 144 hits. Analysis detected 981 faulty-reasoning hits from 547 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.4% and a BS Rank of 47% (11,444 of 21,230 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 53.90% of the article peer group.

An organization that freed St. 
Louisan Christopher Dunn after he was convicted of a murder he didn't commit, along with many other wrongly convicted individuals, could close its doors following last year's federal grant cutbacks. 
For the past 25 years, the Midwest Innocence Project has worked at no cost to free incarcerated individuals who believe they were wrongfully convicted of crimes in Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska and Iowa. 
"Right now we estimate roughly 4%  and that's a low estimate  of people incarcerated in the United States are wrongfully imprisoned," said Tahir Atwater, the project's executive director. 
"That accounts for about 4,000 people in the five-state region we serve that are currently in prison for a crime they didn't commit." 
Historically, the organization has operated through grant funding and donations. 
But Atwater said federal grant cuts from 2025 and other financial issues have led to the financial strain. 
Last year, the organization cut its staff by 25% and reduced executive pay to continue operating. 
Atwater said if things don't change by this October, the organization's board may have to decide whether to continue work with even fewer employees or close its doors. 
The organization currently employs nine lawyers. 
"We've got clients who are counting on us," Atwater said, noting that if the organization had to cut back any further, it might not be able to serve its clients. 
"Part of the reason that some of our clients are in prison right now is because they had attorneys that weren't doing the best job they could, and we never want to be a part of that story." 
The organization is currently investigating or litigating 14 cases. 
The project famously won the freedom of Dunn, who served 33 years in prison for a St. 
Louis County murder he did not commit. 
The group also freed Kevin Strickland, a Jackson County man wrongfully convicted of murder, and Lamar Johnson, who served 27 years for a St. 
Louis murder he did not commit. 
The group's lawyers work in habeas law, reviewing cases involving individuals who believe they were wrongly convicted. 
Atwater said the group currently has a backlog of 900 incarcerated individuals who have requested the Midwest Innocence Project review their cases. 
He said it often is a final effort for freedom for people like Dunn, Strickland and Jackson. 
"When we talk about an organization like MIP having to shrink itself to the point that it's not able to move forward with as many cases as it needs to, that means that the hundreds of people who are waiting to have their cases investigated likely don't have any other recourse to seek out that help," Atwater said. 
The group is seeking donations from the public to continue its work. 
Atwater said a group of donors is matching donations until the group raises $50,000. 
"Some of those people are facing decades, some of them are facing life, some of them are facing a death sentence," Atwater said. 
"When we talk about innocence, agencies like ours across this country that are facing these financial headwinds, we're not talking about just people possibly losing their jobs, we're talking about people losing their lifeline to freedom." 
Copyright 2026 St. 
Louis Public Radio 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 6.9%Kavahn Mansouri: 2.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias6.9%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 9.5%Kavahn Mansouri: 2.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic9.5%This article: 4.2%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic4.2%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 12.1%Kavahn Mansouri: 9.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect12.1%This article: 17.7%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion17.7%This article: 5.9%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias5.9%This article: 2.9%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect2.9%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 5.4%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 8.2%Kavahn Mansouri: 2.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias8.2%This article: 17.7%Kavahn Mansouri: 9.2%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias17.7%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.5%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect7.5%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 3.2%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 11.7%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma11.7%This article: 10.6%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope10.6%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 3.5%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 26.3%Kavahn Mansouri: 9.1%Columbia Missourian: 5.3%Appeal to Emotion26.3%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 8.8%Kavahn Mansouri: 2.2%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)8.8%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 10.6%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof10.6%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.8%Kavahn Mansouri: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal6.8%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 9.7%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote9.7%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.8%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 1.9%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 2.2%Kavahn Mansouri: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…2.2%

547 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker62%attributed speech210writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 30 words • 100.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 23 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 30 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 38 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 22 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 17 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 58 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 14 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 23 words • 0.0% coverageTahir Atwater • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tahir Atwater

100%flagged-word coverage
337 attributed words100% of attributed speech69% writer coverage
0%10.0%20.0%Unattributed Quote+15.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tahir Atwater: 15.7%15.7%Attempt to Sell a Product -5.7 ptsWriter: 5.7%Tahir Atwater: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.