Thomas Overton has maintained his innocence for 30 years, alleging that police planted the evidence used to convict him — evidence that was handled by a veterinarian who stored it in his home refrigerator and even took it to a psychic — while fingerprints from a possible murder weapon did not match him and critical DNA that could identify the actual perpetrators remains untested.

Thomas Mitchell Overton, a survivor of Florida’s infamous Dozier School for Boys, is scheduled to be executed on November 19, 2026, for the 1991 murders of Michael and Susan “Missy” MacIvor in Monroe County, Florida. He was also convicted in the death of their unborn son. He has maintained his innocence for more than three decades.

On October 28, Overton’s attorneys filed a new motion challenging his convictions and death sentences, documenting extraordinary failures in the original investigation, physical evidence pointing to other possible perpetrators, and serious questions about the DNA evidence that became central to his conviction.

The October 28 filing raises several particularly troubling issues:

1. Fingerprints and palm prints recovered from critical evidence did not match Overton. Investigators recovered fingerprints and palm prints from two significant pieces of evidence: a pipe consistent with the injuries inflicted on Michael MacIvor and an address book with a missing page. The prints did not match Overton. The defense argues that these prints could help identify another perpetrator, yet their source remains unresolved. The pipe was subsequently handled by a psychic consulted by the sheriff’s department during the investigation, further compromising important physical evidence.
2. Investigators initially suspected multiple attackers, and evidence suggests the murders may have been related to international drug smuggling. The crime scene suggested a violent struggle involving multiple perpetrators. Investigators discovered gunshot holes and shell casings, indicating that at least one attacker may have possessed a firearm. The weapon was never recovered. The investigation also uncovered evidence that Michael MacIvor was involved in international narcotics smuggling, owed money to Latin American smugglers, and had been under surveillance. Investigators examined aircraft transactions potentially connected to drug trafficking on a private airstrip adjacent to the MacIvors home. Overton’s attorneys subsequently sought federal Drug Enforcement Administration records that could identify individuals with a motive to commit the murders. Although the Department of Justice directed the DEA to search for certain records, it remains unclear whether potentially relevant information was ever produced.
3. DNA evidence that could identify the actual perpetrators has never been tested. Investigators recovered hair from the tape used to bind the victims. The hairs were visually excluded as belonging to Overton or the victims, but they have never undergone DNA testing. Courts previously denied requests to examine this evidence. Other biological evidence, including crime-scene swabs, fingernail scrapings, and portions of the sexual assault kit, was either never fully tested or yielded inconclusive results. Modern DNA technology could potentially identify unknown contributors and establish whether other people participated in the murders. Overton’s attorneys have repeatedly sought additional testing over the years.
4. Biological evidence was mishandled under extraordinary circumstances. Dr. Donald Pope, the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office’s chief serologist, was a veterinarian with no formal forensic science education when he assumed the position. He took biological evidence from the murder scene to his home, conducted testing in his spare bedroom, and stored samples in his personal refrigerator. Some evidence remained in his possession for years. Dr. Pope also brought physical evidence to a psychic who handled the items without gloves. Other failures included:
   1. Investigators reportedly worked at the crime scene without gloves or protective shoe coverings.
   2. Biological evidence was transported and stored in unsealed bags.
   3. Signatures on evidence seals were falsified, according to trial testimony.
   4. Evidence was lost, mislabeled, and improperly documented, including bedding clippings that went undocumented for more than 600 days.
   5. Expert FDLE crime-scene assistance was turned away despite the lead investigator’s acknowledgment that he felt unprepared to process the scene.
5. The prosecution relied on jailhouse informants whose credibility has been challenged. In addition to the disputed DNA evidence, prosecutors relied on testimony from jailhouse informants. One witness, Guy William Green, reportedly told a defense investigator that authorities pressured him to cooperate, threatened him with possible criminal charges, and coached his testimony. Overton’s attorneys have also challenged whether the prosecution disclosed information relevant to the credibility of its witnesses.
6. The DNA evidence used to convict Overton may have been planted. The prosecution’s most important physical evidence was semen recovered from the victims’ bedding. But the circumstances surrounding that evidence raise serious questions about how it arrived there. Sperm cells attributed to Overton were found on a mattress pad beneath a fitted sheet that remained in place. His attorneys argue that the sperm cells could not have passed through the sheet as the prosecution suggested. Instead, someone would have needed to remove the sheet, deposit the biological material directly onto the mattress pad, and replace the sheet. Testing also identified a chemical associated with spermicidal condoms on the bedding. The defense argues that this finding supports the possibility that semen was transferred from a condom and deliberately deposited at the scene, although the precise chemical was never conclusively identified. Meanwhile, the sexual assault examination found no sperm cells on Susan MacIvor’s body and no injuries conclusively establishing sexual assault. Overton’s attorneys argue that these inconsistencies support his longstanding allegation that his semen was planted to manufacture a connection to the murders.

For more than three decades, Thomas Overton has maintained that he was wrongfully convicted. His attorneys have identified fingerprints that did not match him, DNA evidence that could implicate other perpetrators, extraordinary failures in the handling of forensic evidence, and a credible alternative theory of the murders.

Most importantly, the biological evidence used to convict Overton was handled under circumstances that raise serious questions about its integrity, and his allegation that law enforcement planted that evidence has never been fully resolved.

Florida’s 30 death row exonerations demonstrate that even convictions upheld through years of appeals can be catastrophically wrong. Modern forensic technology offers an opportunity to examine evidence that could help establish whether Overton is innocent.