Author Archives: Phil Locke

The Center for Prosecutor Integrity, in December 2013, published a white paper titled An Epidemic of Prosecutor Misconduct.

Appendix B from that paper is a table listing documented cases of prosecutorial misconduct and in how many of those cases sanctions were imposed.

(For the sources footnoted, please refer to the paper.)

Out of 3,625 documented cases of prosecutorial misconduct, sanctions were imposed in only 63 of them – 1.7%.

Isn’t it about time for some prosecutorial accountability and sanctions for misconduct?

This (in my opinion) is huge.  By now, you’re probably familiar with the National Registry of Exonerations which has established a mechanism for collecting and documenting data about wrongful convictions across the US.  To date, it has logged data on 1,250 exonerations.  The registry will be a very powerful tool for justice system reform and improvement, because it provides incontrovertible, hard data that can be used to make known and describe the errors that can, and do, happen in this very imperfect system of ours.

Data from the National Registry of Exonerations has already revealed that “official misconduct” (by both police and prosecutors) is a contributing factor in 42% of wrongful convictions.  In a previous WCB post, Prosecutorial Misconduct – What’s to be Done?  A Call to Action, it was pointed out that one of the very first things needed to begin addressing the prosecutorial misconduct cause of wrongful convictions is DATA.  We know that prosecutorial misconduct happens, but our understanding of the problem, and its extent, has been only anecdotal up until now.  This new Registry of Prosecutorial Misconduct is a significant step forward in building a base of data that can be used by legislators, policy makers, and advocates in defining and implementing necessary changes to the laws and rules that govern prosecutorial behavior.

The press release from the Center for Prosecutor Integrity follows:

Continue reading →

Former Texas prosecutor, Ken Anderson, sentenced to 10 days jail time for criminal contempt in his prosecution of the Michael Morton case has been released after only 5 days.  See previous WCB post here.

Read the story here.

And the irony is – he was released early for “good behavior.”

Please tell me this is not rubbing salt in the wounds of the wrongfully convicted.

We’ve read much recently about former Texas prosecutor Ken Anderson being sentenced to jail time for his conduct in the Michael Morton case.  You can read Mark Godsey’s excellent editorial on the subject here.

The NY Times Editorial Board recently published a commentary on the sanctions against Ken Anderson – read that NY Times editorial here.  One of the points made in the opening paragraph of the editorial is, “the 10-day jail sentence for the prosecutor, Ken Anderson, is insultingly short.”  After all, Michael Morton spent 25 years in prison as a result of the wrongful conviction by Anderson.  I’m sure most would agree that this punishment certainly doesn’t come close to fitting the crime. Continue reading →

Michael Kiefer covers courts and the death penalty for The Arizona Republic.  He has recently written a four-part series of articles about prosecutorial misconduct in the Arizona courts titled “The Gray Area of Courtroom Conduct.”

Here is an excerpt from the opening section of the Part 1 article:

“There seldom are consequences for prosecutors, regardless of whether the miscarriage of justice occurred because of ineptness or misconduct.  In fact, they are often congratulated.  Since 1990, six different prosecutors who were named prosecutor of the year by the Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys Advisory Committee also were later found by appeals courts to have engaged in misconduct or inappropriate behavior during death-penalty trials, according to The Republic’s examination of court documents.”

You can read Michael Kiefer’s four-part series here.

In editorial fairness, a group of Arizona prosecutors wrote a response to Mr. Kiefer’s articles, which was posted on azcentral.com, and you can read their letter here.  Now, exercising editorial privilege, I will have to say this letter could be one of the biggest crocks of BS I have ever read.  I particularly like this sentence from the prosecutors’ letter: “The system is designed for the defense in that there are ethical rules that apply only to prosecutors.”  So … never mind that prosecutors often pay no attention to those “ethical rules.”   The position of prosecutor is endowed with more power of discretion than almost any other elected position.  There are things prosecutors can decide and do that even governors cannot decide and do.  Additionally, the prosecution has the police, the crime labs, a staff of attorneys, and they are funded by the taxpayers; while the defendant has to pay for his own investigators, forensic testing, and attorneys.

In Mr. Kiefer’s articles, you’ll find frequent mention of Maricopa County.  You know, the place where Joe Arpaio is sheriff.  More about Maricopa County in future posts.

The case of Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen of Lorain, OH is a tragic tale of a badly broken justice system gone haywire.  Their story has been reported on this blog here and here.  And the fact that this sordid tale involves the Ohio Supreme Court makes it even worse.  They both spent almost 15 years in prison until a judge confirmed the charges against them were bogus, and had them released.  But the prosecution wouldn’t acknowledge this, and wouldn’t give up.  The Ohio Supreme Court ruled that the judge didn’t have jurisdiction, and another judge was assigned to the case.  The outcome was that “deals” were struck by the defense and the prosecution, and the results of those “deals” are reported below.

Any rational person who examines the facts of this case will conclude that Nancy and Joseph are absolutely innocent.  However, to avoid being sent back to prison after initial release, Nancy had to plead to a lesser charge and was given credit for time served, but had to give up any future possibility of exoneration.  Unfortunately, Joseph did not have even this option.  He is being sent back to prison and has to give up his right to further appeals.

You can read the story by Bob Chatelle here.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is shining example of the fact that for (most) prosecutors, it’s not about justice, it’s just about winning; and doesn’t that just suck.