based on the eyewitness testimony of a 6-year-old girl, clarence elkins was convicted of killing his mother-in-law and for the sexual assault and attempted murder of his niece. >> the police that very morning searched clarence's car for blood, for hair fibers, for different things. not a trace. the car was fine. they searched his house, even to the point of searching the drains of his shower for blood and particles and that sort of thing and came up completely clean. >> clarence rence's wife melinda was sure that her niece, brooke, was mistaken when she identified clarence as the man who attacked her. after all, she was only a child at the time, and the house was dark. >> shocked, i mean, to think that you can convict someone on i.d. testimony, let alone a 6-year-old child with no physical evidence to back it up, how can this happen?