Category Archives: Prosecutorial conduct (good and bad)

Prosecutorial Misconduct – What’s to be Done? A Call to Action

pros-scale

                                                        (Graphic:  The Veritas Initiative,  link)

Let me begin this post with an apology to all the prosecutors out there who are personally committed to upholding the highest standards of ethics and the law.  That being said, you know what they say about “a few bad apples.”

Prosecutorial misconduct.  Well folks, this one is a hot button of mine.  Ask the average citizen, and they are totally unaware that such a thing ever happens.  After all, prosecutors are honorable people who are committed to ethics, justice, upholding the law, and to helping protect the public by ensuring that the  ”bad guys” are sternly dealt with, and if necessary, isolated from society, or even put to death.  At least this is what they tell us in their campaign speeches when they’re running for election or re-election.  But prosecutorial misconduct and misdeeds happen, and they happen more frequently than any normal citizen would imagine.  Let’s look at some data.  The National Registry of Exonerations has compiled detailed data for 873 exonerations (wrongful convictions) for the period 1989-2012.  You can see the full report here – exonerations_us_1989_2012_full_report.  Here is Table 13 from that report showing frequency of causes contributing to wrongful convictions:

Exoneration Table

The red box highlights the cause of “official misconduct.” (Note that the percentages for each type of case total to more than 100%.  This is because any wrongful conviction can have more than one contributing cause.)  The average for all 873 cases in which “official misconduct” was a contributing factor is 42%.  This figure includes both police misconduct and prosecutorial misconduct, and the table does not separate the data for the two.  However, if we assume a 50/50 split, this yields an occurrence of prosecutorial misconduct in 21% of wrongful convictions.  And keep in mind, this data set includes only data for known wrongful convictions.  Who knows how many more times this happens, and it doesn’t “get caught?”  I think we can safely say that prosecutorial misconduct is not an “ignoreably rare” phenomenon.

Continue reading

Open-discovery rules won’t necessarily stop prosecutors from cheating

Sunday’s New York Times hits the nail on the head in an editorial here in which it laments that violations of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 50-year-old Brady rule, which requires prosecutors to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense, remain ”widespread.” The Times might be overly optimistic, however, in its belief that open-files reforms like those adopted in North Carolina and Ohio that require full disclosure of law enforcement’s investigative files in a case will necessarily solve the problem.
 
Such rules will work only if prosecutors and law enforcement agencies follow them, and that’s far from guaranteed. In an Ohio case I am currently investigating, for example, information about the identification of an uncharged suspect was disclosed only after we learned from a witness that she had picked the man out of a photo lineup. The identity of a second suspect, which a co-defendant says she gave to both a detective and the prosecutor before she pleaded guilty, has still not been disclosed, nor has a summary of her statement that the only other person charged in the crime was not involved.
 
Defense attorneys and investigators should remain skeptical that prosecutors will always follow open-discovery rules any more than they always follow the Brady rule.
 
They should also be aware that another reform — the use of blindly administered sequential photo lineups — can still lead to misidentifications in the era of social media. In this same case, a witness admitted that she and others looked up the defendant’s photo on Facebook once they learned his name, which made picking out his photo later fairly easy. She now admits she was wrong.

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • David Onek named Executive Director of Northern California Innocence Project
  • In Washington state, a new law grants the wrongfully convicted $50,000 for each year spent behind bars, but an apology is harder to come by
  • In Canada, a man who spent decades behind bars on a wrongful murder conviction has lost his bid to sue the police involved.  In a recent decision, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed a $14-million lawsuit for damages filed by Romeo Phillion.  The defendants included two Ottawa police officers and Ontario’s attorney general.  In his suit, Phillion alleged “malicious, reckless and negligent conduct” led to conviction for the 1967 murder of an Ottawa firefighter.
  • A new advocacy group is launching a national advertising campaign calling for prosecutor accountability and the importance of conviction integrity.  The nonprofit group, Blind Justice, says it wants to “ensure that elected officials don’t turn a blind eye to prosecutors who trample on the rights of the accused to get a conviction.”  The television ads will feature an alleged wrongful conviction case involving local district attorneys and will begin airing Wednesday on television networks in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Houston, Texas.

With Only Hours to Go, MIssissippi Stays Execution of Man Who Has Been Denied DNA Testing..

Source:

Hours before his scheduled execution at 6 p.m. today, the Mississippi Supreme Court hasissued a stay to Willie Jerome Manning, whose death sentence was upheld in a 5-4 court ruling last week even though the state refused to test available DNA evidence, and the FBIdeemed major pieces of evidence in the case “unscientific” and “invalid.” As a consequence, Manning will not be executed tonight and will have more time to continue arguing his case.

Late Tuesday afternoon, an 8-1 majority granted Manning’s last-ditch motion, which included new letters from the Department of Justicedescribing how crucial hair samples were improperly tested, and testimony improperly linked bullets near Manning’s home to bullets at the crime scene. Manning was convicted in the 1992 abduction and murder in part based on testimony that the hair samples were likely his because both he and the hair strands were African American. The trial also featured testimony from a jailhouse informant, which studies have shown is particularly unreliable.

 

Tuesday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • Statute of limitations issues may haunt prosecution of former prosecutor now judge Ken Anderson, charged with criminal offenses for his conduct leading to the wrongful conviction of Michael Morton.
  • After 24 years in prison, Wyoming man gets retrial, taste of freedom, and a cookie
  • Georgia needs a method to compensate the wrongfully convicted.
  • Yesterday, the Texas House voted on HB 166, a bill that would create the Timothy Cole Exoneration Review Commission.  This so-called innocence commission would investigate past exoneration cases to find out why the wrongful conviction happened in the first place. The group would not intervene in pending cases or open cases without an exoneration.

  • A Vancouver man suing for compensation for 27 years in prison for sex assaults he didn’t commit has won a preliminary round in court against the provincial government.  The government opposed Ivan Henry’s application in B.C. Supreme Court to change his legal claim that would spell out the circumstances where the province can be held liable for breaching his rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  The government claimed the rule of prosecutorial immunity only allows claims for charter breaches to succeed if they arose from malicious conduct by the prosecutor.  But Justice Richard Goepel ruled in Henry’s favour, finding “that a claim lies against the province for charter damages if the plaintiff can establish that Crown counsel acted in a marked and unacceptable departure from the reasonable standards expected of Crown counsel.”

  • Nice profile of Donna McKneelen of the Innocence Project at Cooley

Early reviews of Amanda Knox book starting to appear

Waiting to be Heard, Amanda Knox’s book about her wrongful murder conviction in Italy, subsequent acquittal and current legal limbo. isn’t due for release until April 30, but advance reviews are already starting to appear. According to this review in The New York Times, Knox does more than argue her innocence. She also shares how she survived being snared in the web of a Kafkaesqe high-profile case. ”I pulled myself out of the dark place into which I’d tumbled,” she writes. I promised myself I’d live in a way that I could respect. I would love myself. And I would live as fully as I could in confinement.”

Judge Issues Arrest Warrant for Former Prosecutor in Michael Morton Case

Judge Louis Sturns of Fort Worth today issued an arrest warrant for former Williamson County Prosecutor Ken Anderson, currently a Texas District judge, for his handling of the case of Michael Morton. According to the Wall Street Journal (here), following a weeklong Court of Inquiry earlier this year, Judge Sturns  has ruled that there was sufficient evidence that Anderson “was guilty of all three charges brought against him: criminal contempt of court, tampering with evidence and tampering with government records.” Continue reading

Texas Legislature is Addressing Wrongful Conviction

An opinion (here) in The Stateman (Austin) yesterday commended the Texas legislature for pending legislation aimed at reducing wrongful conviction. After some challenge by district attorneys and a resulting amendment that protects witnesses and victims, the Texas Senate unanimously passed Senate Bill 1611, known as the Michael Morton bill, which would create a uniform “open file” policy in the state, thus requiring the prosecution to share all files with defense attorneys.

According to the opinion piece, the Senate has also passed a bill “that would give exonerated Texans four years from the date of their release from prison to Continue reading

Jeramie R. Davis Freed After Nearly 6 Years in Prison

Congratulations to Jeramie R. Davis and to the Innocence Project Northwest!

From Spokane, Washington (The Spokesman-Review):

A man who spent nearly six years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit had one request today after a judge set him free: a double cheeseburger from Zips.

Jeramie R. Davis, 42, also looked forward to bonding with his 5-year-old son, Elijah, who was born shortly after his arrest in 2007.

“He really doesn’t know who I am,” Davis said of his son. “I want to get to know him.

Today’s release ended years of investigations, a conviction, DNA tests, a second trial that convicted a different man and scores of legal arguments stemming from the June 17, 2007, bludgeoning death of 74-year-old porn shop owner John G. “Jack” Allen.

“I’m grateful,” Davis said of years of legal battles by defense attorneys Anna Tolin, Kevin Curtis and others who labored on his behalf. Continue reading

Update on Knoops Innocence Project….the Netherlands…

knoopslogoHere is an update on a new case of interest handled by the Knoops Innocence Project in the Netherlands:

Knoops’ lawyers request re-opening in the case of the “Hilversum showbiz murder”

A Knoops’ lawyers defense team acting on behalf of Martien Meijer-Hunnik requested the Supreme Court to open the case of the “Hilversum showbiz murder.”

Mr. Hunnik was convicted by the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam for manslaughter on Bart van de Laar, a producer from Hilversum, the Netherlands, on November 10, 1981.

The conviction was mainly based on the “confession” of Mr. Hunnik on November 17, 1983. At that time, there was no other direct evidence linking Mr. Hunnik to the crime. Mr. Hunnik withdrew his confession on April 14, 1983, but the judicial authorities did not give credibility to his withdrawal.  A clear motive for the manslaughter was lacking. From 2002 onwards, after he had been detained from 1983 to 1990, Mr. Hunnik tried to obtain his case file, however, to no avail. In 2011 he requested Knoops’ lawyers to investigate his case regarding a revision procedure.

A specialized team of Knoops’ lawyers conducted their own research into the case (2011-2013). Early 2013 the team took notice of “new” material. It turned out that this material was already known to the public prosecution service since 2002 and had resulted in a 2004-police analysis that exculpated Mr. Hunnik.

All these new facts justify the conclusion that Mr. Hunnik was wrongfully convicted in 1984 for the murder on producer Bart van de Laar. The new material shows that Mr. Hunnik is factually innocent to the manslaughter he was convicted for. Also, a not previously known police analysis concludes that it is unlikely that Mr. Hunnik shot Mr. Van de Laar on Tuesday November 10, 1981.

The request to review this case is based on six new facts that are outlined in new pieces of evidence proving that Mr. Hunnik cannot have committed the crime in question. The new material includes a convincing alibi, a new time reconstruction of the events, evidence indicating that his confession was false and a new witness statement.

The defense has urged the Attorney-General of the Dutch Supreme Court to decide speedily on the review request, since the prosecution – as has been shown – was already in the possession of the exculpatory material since 2002.

Mr. Hunnik prays that his conviction will be overturned and that he will be rehabilitated, since he is severely damaged, both mentally and physically, through his conviction by the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam. It had and continues to have a great impact on his personal and family life.

The defense and Mr. Hunnik are – despite the fact that (new) exculpatory material was already known to the judicial authorities since 2002 – very grateful for the efforts made by Mr. Van Straelen, the chief Attorney General of the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam, to reconstruct the course of events and to establish the truth in this case.

Defense counsel: Mr. Geert-Jan Knoops, Ms. Lizette Vosman, Ms. Carry Knoops-Hamburger

Monday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • Prosecutors across Northeast Texas expressed concerns last week about a Texas senator’s proposal to require DNA testing of all biological evidence before trials in state death penalty cases.
  • The Oklahoma Innocence Project ranks the state among the top 10 for wrongful convictions, which a report issued Friday said could be lowered by law enforcement officers, attorneys and judges.  The Oklahoma Justice Commission, formed by the Oklahoma Bar Association, unveiled its recommendations following a two-year study into convictions of people for crimes they didn’t commit. The 33-member group’s suggestions follow each step of the wrongful conviction process, from arrest to release.
  • Nearly nine years after being freed from prison, where he served 17 years for a double murder in the central Illinois city of Paris before being freed for lack of evidence, Gordon “Randy” Steidl has won a second multimillion-dollar judgment in his case against the people who put him behind bars.  A federal judge on Wednesday entered a $3.5 million agreed-upon judgment in a long-running wrongful conviction and malicious prosecution case against former Paris police Chief Gene Ray, former lead detective James Parrish and former Edgar County State’s Attorney Michael McFatridge.
  • Law enforcement in Buffalo, NY believe prisoner Josue Ortiz is innocent

Amanda Knox – Trial by Website

Knox3Numerous times on this blog we have bemoaned the inappropriateness of “trial by media.”  The press/media cannot possibly have an intimate understanding of all the evidence, facts, affidavits, and testimony in a criminal trial.  But to gain readership, they piece together whatever bits of information they can gather, and publish stories that tend to appeal to the sensationalistic interest of the general public.  This is no surprise.  That’s what they do.  It’s unfortunate, however, because this stuff can and does have an influence, both during and, perhaps even more so, after trial.

But nowadays, there is a new internet-age version of trial by media.  I call it “trial by website.”  This happens when someone becomes personally dedicated to the guilt or innocence of a particular defendant, and sets up a website to proffer their one-sided views.  There are both innocence-based websites and guilt-based websites.  However, my observation is that the guilt-based websites are much more vitriolic, and generally based upon much unsubstantiated, or downright false, information.

There’s been much recent discussion due to the overturning of the Amanda Knox acquittal, and the websites run by people who have dedicated themselves to her guilt are going great guns.  Two of these are the Perugia Murder File (PMF) and True Justice for Meredith Kercher (TJMK).

Nina Burleigh is a journalist who actually went to Perugia, and studied all aspects of the case for over a month.  She has recently published an article in TIME in which she talks about these “Knox Hater” websites.  And in opining about what the outcome of any new trial will be she states, “In my opinion, the new panel will agree with the last one that the case against the students is fatally flawed.”

You can read Nina Burleigh’s article here.

New Scholarship Spotlight: Prosecution (Is) Complex

 

Alafair S. Burke

Alafair S. Burke

Alafair S. Burke has posted the above titled-article, a book review of Prosecution Complex, on SSRN.  Download here.  The abstract says:

Post-conviction DNA testing has led to the exoneration of nearly three hundred defendants. As the number of exonerations grows, we are in an era where the once unthinkable is now undeniable. We convict the innocent. We imprison the innocent. We place the innocent on death row. Daniel Medwed brings this reality to life in his captivating book, Prosecution Complex, which carefully documents the myriad ways that prosecutors can contribute to wrongful convictions at every stage of a criminal case. From the charging decision to plea bargaining to trial to post-conviction, Medwed argues, prosecutors face an “ongoing schizophrenia” as they seek to balance dual roles in the criminal justice system, trying to serve both as zealous advocates for the government and as neutral ministers of justice.

This book essay offers three lessons that can be gleaned from Medwed’s central thesis that prosecutors must struggle to balance their dual roles as advocates and ministers of justice. Two of these lessons are for prosecutors: 1) that the protection of justice means not only the protection of the innocent, but also the fostering of a fair process, and 2) that prosecutors can mitigate the possibility that they will contribute to a wrongful conviction by seeking out contrary voices that foster neutral decision-making. The third lesson, aimed at the wrongful convictions movement, is to avoid a language of fault, which has a tendency to focus reform efforts on intentional misconduct and to signal to virtuous prosecutors that they need not worry that they may contribute to a wrongful conviction. Prosecution Complex is a significant book that should be read by any scholar, lawyer, or layperson who cares about criminal justice. But its most essential audience is prosecutors themselves, who hold the key to the most feasible and important reforms in the prevention of erroneous convictions.

 

Trial of Man Accused of Killing Christine Morton Begins, After Husband’s Exoneration

The Houston Chronicle reported yesterday (here) that in opening statements in the trial of Mark Alan Norwood, on trial for the 1986 bludgeoning death of Christine Morton, prosecutor Lisa Tanner told jurors that the state will present new evidence connecting Norwood to the crime. Tanner, representing the Texas Attorney General’s Office, said that a .45 Colt pistol that was missing from the Morton home after the murder was located by prosecutors.  Norwood allegedly sold the gun, registered to Christine’s husband Michael Morton, to a man who had hired Norwood to work on a home remodeling project. Continue reading

Police, Prosecutors: Costs Are High When Misconduct Contributes to Wrongful Conviction

According to a report in the Coloradoan (here), on Saturday Lt. Jim Broderick, 56, resigned from the Fort Collins (Colorado) Police Services where he had worked for 33 years. His career had a dramatic reversal when he was indicted on charges of felony perjury in June 2010 in connection with the grand jury indictment and trial of Tim Masters. Masters, who was fifteen at the time of the 1987 murder of Peggy Hettrick, was convicted and spent ten years in prison before DNA testing of crime scene evidence prompted the vacation of his murder conviction. Broderick had been the investigator in the case. Continue reading

New Scholarship: The Erosion of Brady and How It Might Work Better

Two informative and interesting recent articles discuss the erosion of the Brady rule via the “due diligence” standard (could the defense have obtained the exculpatory evidence on its own?) and how discovery could be improved if the due diligence rule could be reconsidered and both prosecution and defense could, at least in the discovery phase, adopt one aspect of the continental/inquisitorial system:  collaborate in a search for the truth with respect to discovery.  Such collaboration is not without challenges for both prosecution and defense.  These two articles, taken together, do an excellent job of examining the issues.  Here are the citations: “Discovery from the Trenches: The Future of Brady” (UCLA Law Review Discourse 74 (2013) by noted scholar and commentator Laurie Levinson and “Prosecutors Hide, Defendants Seek: The Erosion of Brady Through the Defendant Due Diligence Rule (UCLA Law Review 138 (2012) by Kate Weisburd.

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • State of Washington considers exoneree compensation bill
  • On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard two habeas cases with relevance to innocence work
  • Exoneree Bill Dillon to speak at the University of North Carolina
  • Wyoming waits to finally find the answer, innocent or guilty, as DNA testing begins in its first post-conviction DNA testing case.
  • Citing Michael Morton’s wrongful murder conviction, Texas state Sen. John Whitmire filed a bill Tuesday that would reset the statute of limitations for exonerated Texans who allege that a prosecutor improperly hid evidence or information favorable to the defense.  Senate Bill 825 would give exonerees four years from the date of their release from prison to file a grievance with the State Bar of Texas, which oversees attorney discipline. The statute of limitations currently begins at the time a violation occurs, though it allows time to be extended if a violation could not be discovered earlier because of “fraud or concealment.”

In North Carolina, Kalvin Michael Smith wants request for new trial restored

50c7ec383663f.preview-300From journalnow.com:

Attorneys for Kalvin Michael Smith are accusing Forsyth County prosecutors of using what they say was a false 2008 affidavit by a former Winston-Salem police officer to undercut Smith’s claims of innocence.

In a motion filed Friday, David Pishko, Smith’s attorney, and Theresa Newman, co-director of the Wrongful Conviction Clinic at Duke University School of Law, say the affidavit by Arnita Miles is “plainly and demonstra-bly false.”

Miles, one of the first police officers to talk to Jill Marker on the night of her 1995 attack at the Silk Plant Forest store, says that Marker identified her attacker as a black male. But Miles never mentions that in her incident report, instead describing Marker as incoherent and unable to give a description of her attacker.

The affidavit is significant because Winston-Salem police detectives initially focused their investigation on Kenneth Lamoureux, a white man with a history of violence who witnesses say was in the store on the night of the attack on Dec. 9, 1995. The affidavit was never used in any court proceeding involving Smith, and Lamoureux died in March 2011.

Smith was convicted in 1997 in connection with Marker’s assault and is serving 23 to 29 years in prison. The at-tack left Marker with severe brain injuries and needing 24-hour care. She was pregnant at the time of the attack and delivered a son while in a coma.

Miles, who could not be reached for comment Monday, told an SBI agent that she was “100 percent” certain that Marker had identified her assailant as a black male. When she talked with a detective assisting the Silk Plant Forest Citizens Review Committee, she said that her memory might not be correct and that committee members should rely on her written police reports. She said she could not explain why she did not include Marker’s descrip-tion of her assailant in her police reports. She said if Marker had told her that the assailant was a black male, she would have included that in her written reports.

Pishko and Newman argue in the motion that Forsyth County prosecutors obtained the affidavit as they were preparing to fight Smith’s appeal in Forsyth Superior Court and continued to intervene in the Smith case even after they had declared a conflict of interest and had the N.C. Attorney General’s Office handle Smith’s appeal.

Smith’s attorneys are not only asking for an evidentiary hearing but are also seeking discovery, including tele-phone records from the Forsyth County District Attorney’s Office and email correspondence between local prose-cutors and the N.C. Attorney General’s Office.

The motion filed Friday includes emails from former Assistant District Attorney David Hall, who is now a For-syth Superior Court judge, Tom Keith, former Forsyth County district attorney, and O’Neill. The emails all show, Pishko and Newman argue, that prosecutors used the affidavit as a way to bolster their argument that Smith was guilty and that Marker had identified her attacker consistently as a black male.

In a 2012 email to Mark Rabil, director of Wake Forest Law School’s Innocence and Justice Clinic, and Chris Swecker, a former FBI assistant director, O’Neill accuses the Duke Innocence Project of withholding Miles’ affi-davit. Swecker had recently released a report that concluded the police investigation into Marker’s beating was botched and that Smith deserved a new trial.

“Despite this evidence, the Duke Innocence Project continued to parade the name of Kenneth Lamoureux as the person who likely committed this crime, knowing full well that Jill Marker said her attacker was a black man,” O’Neill says in the email, according to the motion.

O’Neill said Monday that the rules of professional responsibility prevent him from commenting on pending liti-gation. But he has said in the past that his office did nothing wrong and that it would be nefarious to suggest oth-erwise. Hall could not be reached for comment. Keith said that he had not read the motion but noted that the Attor-ney General’s Office never used the affidavit in Smith’s appeal. He said he does not see how the affidavit is rele-vant.

The motion also cites a 2008 email that Hall sent to Pishko, vouching for Miles and saying that the record clearly demonstrated that “Jill Marker has consistently identified her assailant as a black male.”

The motion also cites a letter that Keith, who retired as district attorney in 2009, sent to Guy Blynn, the chair-man of the Silk Plant Forest Citizens Review Committee, which eventually concluded that it had no confidence in the police investigation.

“While the strictures of Ethical Rules 3.6 and 3.8 prohibit me from disclosing the import of her information in this letter, both Lt. (Joseph) Ferrelli and Sgt. (Chuck) Byrom know the significance of her observations,” he said in the letter.

 

Tuesday’s Quick Clicks…

click

Why I Think the US Justice System is Broken – and Why It’s Not Getting Fixed

broken column 3I was recently made aware of a quote from the ancient Greek playwright, Euripides. “Ours is a universe in which justice is accidental, and innocence no protection.”  I often feel like this describes our current justice system exactly, but it’s not supposed to be that way, and it doesn’t HAVE to be that way.  As with any system established and run by “humans,” the justice system, including those who run it, is exposed to the entire gamut of human frailties – pride, ego, ambition, greed, envy, passion, deceit, prejudice, hate, intolerance, power, influence, and on and on.  The situation hasn’t really changed since ancient Greece, and I don’t see the nature of humanity changing radically any time in the next  few thousand years, but there are things that can be done to at least mitigate the effect of these human shortcomings on the justice system.  This post will be comprehensive and quite long – so, buckle up, and here we go.  I hope that those of  you who have the patience to read through to the end may find it interesting, enlightening, and hopefully thought provoking.

As you might guess from the title, this post will be “editorial” in nature.  I’ve been doing innocence work for five years now, and have worked with seven different Innocence Projects from across the US and one foreign country.  Over that time, I’ve been exposed to the fine details of over 40 different cases.  These are all post-conviction cases in which there is a belief by the associated Innocence Project in the actual innocence of the defendant, and thus belief of a “wrongful conviction” on the part of the justice system.  In addition, my research in these cases has exposed me to many other additional cases in which a wrongful conviction occurred.  Consequently, I’ve seen a lot of the things that can go wrong in the justice system, and have been able to make judgments about how they happen.  This post will coalesce my observations into statements about why I think the US justice system is broken.  I’m going to be painting a pretty dark picture, so keep in mind that my exposure has been to cases in which the justice system failed, but there are lots of them.  There really isn’t any substantiated data for how many wrongful convictions occur in the US every year, but recent data says it’s between 5,000 and 10,000 per year.  One is too many.  At the end of the post, we’ll talk about why it’s not getting fixed.

I’m not an attorney, and some may accuse me of being a naive, optimistic idealist (which I am) or of tracking muddy footprints through the hallowed halls of justice; but I am only reporting what I have observed.  And if you think I’m making some of this stuff up, I strongly recommend you read the book False Justice: Eight Myths That Convict the Innocent by Jim and Nancy Petro.  (It’s available from amazon.com for $16.)  Jim is a former Attorney General for the state of Ohio, and Nancy, in addition to being an author and advocate, is also a contributing editor to this blog.  Now, are there good and dedicated prosecutors and police out there who are absolutely committed to seeing that true justice is served?  Of course.  Are there qualified and capable attorneys who will do their utmost on behalf of their clients?  Of course.  Unfortunately, there are also “others.”

All that being said  ……..

Why I Think the US Justice System is Broken

(As a preview, we’ll touch upon Bad Lawyers, Prosecutors, Judges, Police, Juries, Junk Science Forensics, False Confessions, Shoddy Work by Medical Examiners, Testimony from Experts Who Aren’t Really Experts, Finality of Judgement, Highly Restrictive Rules for New Evidence, Eyewitness Identification, and Recantations.)

Continue reading