If there were ever a classic example of the lengths to which a prosecutor will go to preserve the “sanctity” of what they have to know is a wrongful conviction, this case is one of those examples.
See details of that case here from the Colorado Independent. There’s even an itemized list of the scummy, less-than-ethical things the police and the prosecution did to preserve this wrongful conviction for 28 years.
Posted in Compensation/Exoneree compensation, Eyewitness identification, False confessions, New Evidence, Police conduct (good and bad), Post-conviction relief, Uncategorized, wrongful conviction
Tagged compensation, compensation legislation, compensation; reintegration; post-exoneration issues, criminal justice legislation, eyewitness identification, eyewitness reliability, false confession, police misconduct, Post-conviction relief, reform legislation, texas, Vietnam, wrongful conviction
From the Marshall Project:
The case of Lamont McKoy.
Lamont’s case is currently being handled by the Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic at Duke University. I am very familiar with this case, as I have substantial time in on it, and I can tell you there is even more exculpatory evidence than what is cited in the above article.
Alex Kozinski is a judge on the U.S. Ninth Circuit. He has recently authored an article for the Georgetown Law Journal, which he simply titles “Criminal Law 2.0.” It is a comprehensive review and critique of the flaws and shortcomings of the current US justice system. My opinion is that this article is a masterpiece, a classic. Here is an experienced, seasoned, knowledgable justice system “insider” who has “figured it out.” And not only has he figured it out, but he also has some very good ideas about fixing the problems, or at least some of them. You can see the full text here: Kozinski, Criminal Law 2. I strongly encourage reading the full article.
Here is a topical summary: (Please see the full article for Judge Kozinski’s discussion of each point.)
A. The myths that cause us to think that the justice system is fair and just, when it’s really not.
B. Recommendations for reform – Juries
C. Recommendations for reform – Prosecutors
D. Recommendations for reform – Judges
E. Recommendations for reform – General
I would add two more to the General category:
• Have all trial counsel, prosecution and defense, sworn in at the beginning of every trial.
• Abandon political election of prosecutors.
The Connecticut Supreme Court upholds Judges decision to bar expert testimony on eyewitness unreliability…
Maine High Court denies Dennis Dechaine’s request for a new trial…
Kansas University Innocence Project client Kimberly Sharp wins 10th Circuit appeal…
200,000 pages of “Central Park Five” documents to be released…
In North Carolina, Damian Mills and Teddy Isbell Sr. have reached a tentative settlement agreement with Buncombe County officials while their criminal convictions are still pending review…
I’ve been doing “innocence work” for seven years now. So …. just what is it that I do? I am Science & Technology Advisor to the Ohio Innocence Project at the University of Cincinnati College of Law and to the Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic at Duke University. This means I advise on cases that include factors involving science and/or technology – usually forensics. I will also advise any innocence organization or agent that requests my input, and I do this pro bono. I do some other stuff too, like write for this blog, but those are the roles in which I get involved in case work.
During this seven year period, I’ve had personal involvement – meaning I’ve actually done work – in 63 cases in eight states and two foreign countries; and have had exposure to the details of probably 100 more cases on top of that. I’ve been privileged to be a small piece of the puzzle in five exonerations; and, in four cases, my work has contributed to confirming that the defendant was actually guilty. We consider confirming guilt to be a good outcome, because it means that justice has been properly served. We’re not trying to get everybody out of prison – only the people who are actually innocent.
We relish talking about the successes, the exonerations, but nobody ever hears about the failures. I count a failed case as one in which, based upon careful and intensive study of all the facts, testimony and evidence, we (I) are absolutely confident that the defendant is actually innocent; but our efforts to exonerate have not succeeded, and there’s really nothing more we can do. Sadly, the failures occur much, much more frequently than the successes. There are no good data for this, but in my experience, an exoneration takes years of time (average about 7), thousands of hours of total effort by a great many people, and, in some cases, thousands of dollars. And the failures can take just as much as the successes, if not more.
Most of the cases I’ve worked remain “open,” at least technically, but there are some for which we have seemingly come to the end of the legal road, and there’s little, if anything, that can still be done. There are five of these cases, in particular, that keep me awake at night, because I get so outraged and frustrated by the injustice. I thought I would share them with you, so you might get some idea of what the people doing innocence work have to deal with on a daily basis. Since these cases are unresolved, I will not reveal any names, dates, or places, and will provide only sketchy details of the incidents involved, but you’ll get the idea.
———————————————————————————————–
I come from a legal family, so even though I did not go into law, I’ve had a closeup view of the justice system my entire life, which is, I think, one of the reasons I decided to devote my post-corporate life to innocence work. I saw too many things happening that were not congruent with my view of what a fair and just system should, and must, be. For the past seven years, I’ve been deeply involved in innocence work, and have become knowledgeable about the details of many, many cases (100’s) of wrongful conviction and wrongful imprisonment. Consequently, I’ve seen many ways in which actually innocent people become tragic victims of what we call “justice.” There are just so many ways the justice system can get it wrong. This has caused me to think about what it is that an innocent person can (and should) do when accusatorially confronted by this thing we call the justice system. [You might want to also read my previous post Why I Think the US Justice System is Broken, and Why It’s Not Getting Fixed.]
If you think being wrongfully charged, indicted, convicted, and imprisoned can’t happen to you, think again. It can happen to anybody. Just ask Debra Milke. The ways this can happen are countless, and despite the system’s best efforts, there are just too many ways the system can possibly get it wrong. I could give you lots of examples, but we won’t try to detail them here – just take a look at the National Registry of Exonerations, and keep in mind these are only the ones that have been so far successfully overturned within the system – there are magnitudes more. This article will try to give you some “suggestions” for what you might do if you find you’re being wrongfully suspected or charged with a crime. For those of you who have had no close interaction with the justice system, you might well think that I’m being radical and that I must come from somewhere in outer space … and you can think that right up until you get scooped into the meat grinder. Let me me just say, “Forewarned is forearmed.”
This article will be in six sections:
I. Have a Lawyer You Can Call
II. Don’t Talk to the Police
III. The Plea Bargain
IV. Be Ready for Trial
V. Shaken Baby/Child Abuse (Abusive Head Trauma) [This requires special attention and treatment.]
VI. If You Are Wrongfully Convicted
DISCLAIMER: I am not an attorney, and so cannot give you legal advice. These suggestions are only my personal opinion, and are solely the result of my exposure to the justice system and wrongful convictions over a period of years. They come with no guarantee. Every situation is unique, and you must always exercise your own judgment given the circumstances. They are just intended to get you thinking about how you would handle the situation of being wrongfully accused, and to give you some information about how the system works. I am certain that they cannot cover every possible situation, but hopefully, they will provide an overall, general guide for how you might deal with this.
With eight exoncerations to its credit, the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission is living up to its goals when it was established in 2006. With official powers that others who investigate possible wrongful conictions don’t have, The Atlantic reports here, the commission has been able to crack cases that others might not have been be able to. That should make it a national model for how states could correct wrongful convictions, but it hasn’t been so far. Money is one reason. A lack of commitment may be another.
In case you haven’t been able to check in on the National Registry of Exonerations lately, here’s an excerpt from the most recent data. Note the total is now up to 1,512, and the trend line is definitely UP.
I won’t belabor you by pointing out some of the more obvious observations. Just a few minutes of study will (should) lead you to some very clear conclusions.
It has been reported that the folks at the Registry are hard at work trying to incorporate the exonerations being generated by the newly formed “conviction integrity units” (CIU’s). For these cases the prosecutors running the CIU’s may not be very motivated to have their exonerations logged into the Registry.
I can’t gush enough about how critical and important this data is. It is this kind of HARD DATA that will provide the foundation for much needed and long overdue justice system reform.
Bennie Starks was released from prison in 2006, after serving 20 years for a rape that DNA proved he did not commit. He was fully exonerated in 2013, and was granted a Certificate of Innocence by the court.
Starks is now suing the Waukegan, IL police department and the forensic experts who falsely testified against him. As a consequence of this law suit, the Waukegan police are trying to have Starks’ Certificate of Innocence revoked. Their fear is that the Certificate of Innocence will be a deciding factor in Starks’ civil law suit for compensation.
Dr. C. Michael (Mike) Bowers is a California dentist and enlightened forensic odontologist. He also edits a blog called Forensics in Focus. Dr. Bowers was involved in the exoneration of Bennie Starks, and has posted his comments about this on his blog here.
On Wednesday, November 19, Nancy Petro reported on this blog about the exoneration of Ricky Jackson after 39 years in prison. See that story here.
CNN has posted a great video of his release from prison. See the 2 minute CNN video here.
Posted in Events, Exonerations, Eyewitness identification
Order Here
Wrongful Convictions Blog 