Michael Hannon was accused of sexual assault by a 10 year old neighbour, in 1997. He was convicted and yet in 2006, his accuser came forward and retracted her statement, confessing that she had made a false allegation. Despite this, the Ministry of Justice ‘lost’ Hannon’s case files. It was not until 2009 that he was able to have his case certified as a miscarriage of justice. The Ministry and Hannon have now reached an out-of-court settlement after his claim for compensation went to the High Court. The case is a stark example of what can happen when police pursue allegations in spite of a total lack of evidence. This failure was compounded by incompetence on behalf of the prosecutors and Ministry of Justice staff who not only ‘lost’ his file for 15 months, but continued to protest against his case being declared a miscarriage of justice.
Mr Hannon has thanked his family and supporters but spoke of the need for an inquiry into the actions of the Ministry, and why the retraction by the complainant was not forwarded to him or his legal team. He said that it is ‘impossible to summarise the impact of a wrongful conviction upon a person.”
Read more here:
Two Decades On…. Closure for Connemarra Neighbour falsely convicted of child sex abuse
A man who spent six years in prison has successfully sued the England and Wales Crown Prosecution Service after their failure to disclose police surveillance tapes that proved his innocence. Wrongly convicted of perverting the course of justice in 2007 (after 2 failed trials), Conrad Jones was freed in 2014 when he won an appeal. He was on trial for bribing a witness in a murder trial, but police surveillance tapes proved he could not have been present. While the Judge at his appeal called the failure to disclose the exculpatory evidence ‘lamentable’, Jones’s solicitor said: “It is clear that the CPS and prosecution counsel had in their possession, both while my client remained on remand in prison awaiting trial and at the time of my client’s trial, surveillance material which showed he could not realistically have met with and bribed [the witness] not to give evidence. They knew it was relevant, they knew it undermined the prosecution case and strengthened Mr Jones’s defence and they knew that the law required them to disclose it. To discover years after the event that the CPS, on the advice of highly experienced lawyers, has knowingly and repeatedly failed to comply with the criminal law on disclosure is shocking, and raises very serious questions which go right to the heart of public confidence in the criminal justice system and the legal profession.”
It is interesting however to note that Jones had to sue the CPS for their failure through the civil courts for ‘damages’, rather than attempt to win ‘compensation’ through the Government scheme that compensates miscarriage of justice victims. This scheme has proven almost impossible to win any compensation through – and the settlement reached – of over £100,000 – is far more than he would have been eligible for through the compensation scheme. While the CPS have remained silent and said the terms of the settlement are ‘confidential’, they have not admitted liability despite paying the damages. Could this perhaps be an interesting route for victims of miscarriages of justice who can pinpoint failures on the part of the CPS that saw them wrongly convicted? Could victims try suing the police? With the compensation scheme set up to prevent almost all claims succeeding, perhaps we should pursue this alternative route?
Read more here:
CPS to pay six-figure sum to man over wrongful conviction
CPS pays ‘significant sum’ over ‘lamentable’ failures to disclose critical evidence
Well ….. it’s about time!
This is a “biggy” – a significant step in establishing prosecutorial accountability and exposure to sanctions.
California has just enacted a law that exposes prosecutors who withhold or tamper with exculpatory evidence to felony charges, with up to three years imprisonment.
Please see the LA Times story here.
Now we just need to have this migrate to all the rest of the states and the Department of Justice.
On Friday, a Travis County (TX) jury found Mark Norwood, 62, guilty of the 1988 bludgeoning murder of Debra Baker. Norwood was at liberty to commit Debra’s murder, because he escaped justice in the similar murder of Christine Morton two years earlier. Both victims lived in the Austin area.
Christine’s husband, Michael, was wrongfully convicted of his wife’s murder and spent nearly 25 years in prison. Among the many sad outcomes of this wrongful conviction was that the Morton’s three-year-old son Eric lost both his mother and, for 25 years, a normal relationship with his father.
If evidence supporting Michael Morton’s innocence had been shared with the defense, which is required of prosecutors, it is less likely he would have been convicted. The jury did not know that a bloody bandana was found the day after Christine’s murder outside the Morton home along a likely escape route from the property.
The jury didn’t know that little Eric was present during his mother’s murder. He told his grandmother his father wasn’t home and “a monster” was hurting his mommy. Continue reading
This from a recent story on Slate by Mark Joseph Stern: “The Arizona Supreme Court issued a stunning and horrifying decision on Tuesday, interpreting a state law to criminalize any contact between an adult and a child’s genitals. According to the court, the law’s sweep encompasses wholly innocent conduct, such as changing a diaper or bathing a baby.”
Not only that, but this law places the burden upon the accused to prove that there was no sexual intent. This throws presumption of innocence (innocent until proven guilty) out the window!
“Arizona prosecutors can now dangle the threat of a probable child molestation conviction to coerce any parent of a young child into taking a plea deal on unrelated charges. With the state Supreme Court’s help, Arizona’s child molestation laws have been weaponized into a tool for prosecutorial harassment, allowing the state to target any parent or caregiver—out of spite or malice, or simply to boost their conviction rates.”
Arizona has, once again, proven that the inmates are truly running the asylum. This is so absurd, it would be laughable – if it weren’t so tragic.
Please see the full story on Slate by Mark Joseph Stern here.
Australia is viewed by many as an idyllic continent, where people can feel safe, and the rule of law prevails. Yet despite being a first world nation, policing can often be outdated and primitive. The use of paid-informants, and the reliance upon supposed ‘jail-house’ confessions has been known to cause wrongful convictions for decades. Yet as recently as 2009, the police of New South Wales used a paid informant to secure a confession from a young vulnerable Sudanese refugee. This supposed confession was obtained while the young man believed the informant had been brought to him to offer support during questioning by the police.
Such tactics not only smack of the worst kind of trickery, they also provide the flimsiest of evidence upon which to base a prosecution. However, this is exactly what the prosecution in the murder case against JB – a Sudanese refugee aged 15 at the time – did. Not only did they rely upon this evidence, they then proceeded to cover it up. It was not disclosed at trial, nor at a subsequent appeal, that the man known as A107 was a police informant, who then avoided his own criminal charges after this assistance with the case against JB.
There is now – belatedly – an inquiry into the police – including the ‘editing’ of contemporaneous notes – and the prosecution (for non-disclosure). This comes 7 years after the jailing of an innocent teenager. The inquiry should be asking why the police, as recently as 2009, were using such methods to try and obtain confessions, and then conspiring to cover their methods up.
Read more here:
Probe launched into wrongful conviction of Sudanese refugee jailed over Edward Spowart murder
Anyone who has followed my stuff on this site knows that prosecutors are not my favorite people. This is not because they are inherently bad, evil people, but it’s because of what the structures and incentives of the justice system turn them into – personally ambitious and politically motivated inquisitors with practically ultimate power and little regard for true justice.
As I’ve studied prosecutorial abuses of the justice system over the last eight and a half years, there are two prosecutors that emerged as what I would term the “most vicious.” Those would be Anita Alvarez (Cook County, IL – Chicago) and Angela Corey (Florida 4th Judicial Circuit).
Anita Alvarez was defeated in her primary re-election bid last March. See our previous story on this here.
I can now also report that Angela Corey has lost her primary re-election bid to a challenger by a margin of 64% to 26%. Corey’s most infamous cases include the failure to convict George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and the unfortunately successful and ugly conviction of Marissa Alexander for firing a warning shot at her abusive boyfriend. Please see the USA Today story here.
Johnson, Wheatt, Glover – this was the very first case I worked on with the Ohio Innocence Project eight and a half years ago. At the time, it was a GSR case (gunshot residue). The GSR evidence was always highly questionable, but it was a major factor in their conviction. As it turns out, not only was the GSR evidence bogus, but the case is also an example of egregious prosecutorial misconduct.
Please see the story by Maurice Possley on the National Registry of Exonerations website here.
I hope that by now, everybody knows that Debra Milke, previously convicted and inprisoned in Maricopa County, AZ, for contracting the murder of her young son, has been exonerated.
We’ve posted about the Debra Milke case on this blog several times previously. In chronological order – here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. (The red link is particularly germane to the subject of this post.)
Pursuant to her wrongful conviction, wrongful imprisonment (22 years on death row), and eventual exoneration, Debra filed suit with five claims against four defendants, including two former Phoenix police officers and the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (Bill Montgomery), stating that that she was denied a fair trial and due process of law. The two police officers and the Maricopa County Attorney filed a motion with the court to dismiss the suit. Judge Roslyn O. Silver of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona has denied the motion to dismiss, and is allowing the suit to go forward.
See the story from azcentral here.
You can read the decision by Senior United States District Judge Roslyn O. Silver here: 97-OrderreMotionstoDismiss
We have previously written about the Jack McCullough case here, here, and here.
Jack was convicted in 2012 of the 1957 abduction and murder of 7-year-old Maria Ridulph in Sycamore, IL. Jack was a neighbor of the Ridulph’s at the time. This used to be called the coldest case ever “solved.”
The current DeKalb County prosecutor, Richard Schmack, felt ethically compelled to review the case, and determined that evidence proved Jack could not be guilty. Consequently, he filed a motion with the court to dismiss charges. Just this past April, Judge William Brady did dismiss the charges, but declined to do so “with prejudice.” This now leaves Jack vulnerable to being re-charged and re-tried. Maria Ridulph’s brother is continuing to seek appointment of a special prosecutor to re-open the case against Jack.
Now, a witness for the prosecution, who was incentivized to testify at Jack’s trial, has come forward to claim the the state did not live up to its part of the deal they made with him.
Well, if you’ve ever doubted the politically-driven and self-serving nature of the justice system, please see the recent CNN story HERE.
“Culture and law conspire to make prosecutors hostile to constitutional rights.”
Ken White is a former prosecutor who now practices criminal defense law. Consequently, he has unique insight into what causes prosecutors to act the way they do. As we have posited on this blog before, it’s not because prosecutors are inherently unethical or evil people (although the position does tend to attract people who seek power). It is the inescapable end result of how the justice system is set up and administered, and how the motivational incentives of the position are structured.
Mr. White has authored an article titled “Confessions of an Ex-Prosecutor,” and you can see that article by Ken White on reason.com here.
This quote from the early section of the article:
“…. nobody taught me to think that way, and nobody had to. I learned it by watching how the system ground up clients indifferently and mercilessly. I learned it by watching prosecutors make the sorts of arguments and decisions I had made, and seeing how they actually impacted human lives. I learned it by watching prosecutorial suspicion—and even paranoia—from the wrong end. I learned it by watching how the system crushed indigent clients, and by how it could destroy the lives of even wealthy clients with minimal effort or cause.”
Until the day that prosecutors are rendered subject to meaningful oversight and sanctions for wrongdoing, and until the day that state-level prosecutors are no longer politically elected, we’re going to be stuck with this problem.