From AP:
GEORGETOWN, Texas (AP) — A Texas judge whose prosecution led to an innocent man spending 25 years in prison for his wife’s death said he couldn’t remember if he had evidence that could have cleared the man, including statements from the couple’s young son that indicated his father wasn’t the killer, according to a videotaped deposition played in court Tuesday.
A special hearing is being held to examine whether Williamson County Judge Ken Anderson acted improperly in 1987 when, as district attorney, he prosecuted Michael Morton. Morton’s lawyers have accused Anderson of intentionally hiding evidence, though Anderson has denied any wrongdoing.
Morton, 58, was released from prison in October 2011 after new DNA tests showed that he didn’t fatally beat his wife, Christine, in their north Austin home. Another man has been arrested for the murder.
The special prosecutor in the case, Houston defense attorney Rusty Hardin, has focused on whether Anderson failed to give Morton’s trial lawyers a transcript and a report about statements made by Morton’s then 3-year-old son, Eric. They boy said he witnessed the 1986 slaying and indicated it was a “monster” and not his father who committed the crime.
During the eight-hour deposition, Anderson said he couldn’t recall if at the time of the trial he had any documents about statements by Morton’s son.
“There’s no way in God’s green earth that, if that was in my file, I wouldn’t have told” Morton’s attorneys about the boy’s statements, Anderson said in the October 2011 deposition. He was being questioned by Barry Scheck, an attorney with the Innocence Project, a nonprofit that helped secure the new DNA testing.
Anderson, who has apologized to Morton but denied any wrongdoing, said when allegations were made he had suppressed evidence, he wasn’t worried because he believed Morton was guilty.
He also said he never had a problem as a prosecutor disclosing evidence that could point to a defendant’s innocence, adding: “It’s your worst nightmare to have anybody you convicted be innocent,” Anderson said.
Scheck repeatedly asked Anderson whether the ex-district attorney had complied with an order by the trial judge to turn over all evidence that could have been favorable to the accused. Morton’s attorneys have contended the order included the statements made by Morton’s son. Anderson, continuing to say he can’t remember if he had any documents related to such statements, believed the judge’s order only meant he needed to turn over reports related to interviews investigators had done with Morton.
Later Tuesday, during a break from the playing of the videotaped affidavit, Kimberly Gardner, a former prosecutor who had worked for Anderson, testified that before Morton’s trial, she had heard Anderson discuss Eric Morton’s claims that a monster had killed his mother.
“It’s very hard to do this because I don’t want to be here but I know what I heard,” said Gardner, who added that she likes Anderson and feels grateful to him.
Gardner said she asked if the boy’s statement could be used at trial and was told no because the boy was not a competent witness because of his age.
The video was played during a court of inquiry, a rarely used hearing that is held when officials or public servants are accused of wrongdoing. District Judge Louis Sturns is hearing the evidence and could refer the case for possible prosecution if he determines Anderson committed a crime. Anderson, whose courtroom is just down the hall, has been a judge in the county since 2002.
The court of inquiry was to continue Wednesday with testimony from more witnesses.
The new DNA tests, which were conducted on a bloody bandanna found near the Mortons’ home, pointed to another suspect, Mark Alan Norwood, who was arrested for the murder in November 2011. He is set to be tried in March for capital murder. Norwood also has been indicted in a separate 1988 slaying of another Austin woman who lived near the Mortons.
Anderson also is being sued by the State Bar of Texas for his conduct in the Morton case.
Clarence Elkins, who spent seven and a half years incarcerated for crimes DNA proved he did not commit, is having a sickening sense of déjà vu. His letter to the editor published in the Akron Beacon Journal (here) draws parallels between his wrongful conviction and the case of former Akron police captain Douglas Prade.
In both cases the Summit County Prosecutor resisted considering a wrongful conviction even after DNA testing of crucial crime scene evidence did not match the convicted men. Continue reading
From Cleveland.com:
Soon after Summit County Common Pleas Judge Judy Hunter exonerated Douglas Prade last week in the slaying of his former wife, prosecutors announced they would appeal.
At the same time, Cuyahoga County prosecutors said they would continue to appealJoseph D’Ambrosio’s case — days after a judge ruled that he was wrongfully imprisoned for a slaying that put him on death row for about 21 years.
The cases highlight a mindset under which some prosecutors have continued their legal assaults on defendants after judges — following thorough, articulated reviews — attacked government attorneys as lacking even the basics needed to take their cases to trial.
And in the case of Prade, the judge went so far as to declare him innocent.
It has raised a growing concern about whether prosecutors are out to seek justice, as they are sworn to do, or to win cases at all costs.
“There is a litany of cases where some prosecutors have fought to keep convictions rather than work to find justice,” said Michael Benza, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University who also represented Brett Hartman. The state executed Hartman in November for the slaying of a woman in Summit County.
“It’s very difficult for some prosecutors to admit that they have made a mistake,” Benza said. “If you make a mistake in this case, how many other mistakes have you made?”
Defense attorney Terry Gilbert, who has represented D’Ambrosio in civil cases, agreed: “They hate to lose, and sometimes it’s difficult for them to accept responsibility when they are wrong.
“That’s a bad rap and a misconception,” said Ronald O’Brien, the Franklin County prosecutor and the president of the Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association. He said he welcomes any piece of evidence in any case his office prosecutes to be tested. “Prosecutors have a different role. They have to seek justice, not win cases.”
O’Brien has been hailed as a model for his open-mindedness and cooperation in dealing with defense attorneys seeking to have evidence tested.
“He’s what a prosecutor should be,” said Michele Berry, a defense attorney in Cincinnati, who has dealt with O’Brien’s office in the past. “Believe it or not, there are prosecutors who are not open-minded to the fact that mistakes can be made.”
So why do some prosecutors keep pushing cases after judges ruled so decisively against them?
“Because the judge might be wrong,” said John Murphy, the executive director of the prosecuting attorney association. “That’s why we have appellate courts. If we believe there is a genuine issue, we have to take it to the appeals courts.”
But some prosecutors don’t wait for appeals courts.
In an unprecedented move, then-U.S. Attorney Greg White asked judges to release more than a dozen people from prison after a botched drug case. In 2008, White made the move based on lies and phony drug deals by an informant who worked a Mansfield drug investigation.
DNA convinced judge Geoffrey Mearns is the president of Northern Kentucky University, the former provost of Cleveland State University and a former federal prosecutor. He said prosecutors persisting in a case in light of a judge’s decision raises some concern of whether they are out to win cases or seek justice.
But he stressed that each case must be judged on its own facts, as opposed to making categorical judgments about prosecutors as a group.
“Are there cases where that criticism is valid? Yes,” Mearns said. “But there are a lot of cases, many more, I believe, where prosecutors have consented to or initiated dismissals in light of new DNA evidence.”
On Tuesday, Hunter, the Summit County Common Pleas judge, exonerated Prade, 66, of Akron, enabling him to leave prison after spending 15 years there. In 1998, a jury convicted Prade of aggravated murder in the slaying of Margo Prade, his former wife. A judge sentenced him to life in prison.
Hunter said in her 26-page ruling that conclusive new DNA test results, as well as evidence from the trial, convinced her that responsible jurors could not convict Douglas Prade.
Based on that, she said, “the outcome of the deliberation of these offenses would be different,” Hunter wrote. “The verdict forms would be completed with a finding of not guilty.”
Summit County Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh quickly announced that her office will appeal the decision. She said in a statement that DNA experts from the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation interpreted the test results as “insufficient and unreliable and most likely proof of contamination or mistakes.”
While Summit County prosecutors are planning the appeals in Prade’s case, the appellate process marches on for D’Ambrosio.
Cuyahoga County County Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Russo ruled Jan. 11 that D’Ambrosio, 51, of North Royalton, was wrongfully imprisoned for the slaying of Anthony Klann. The decision means he can seek reimbursement from the state for his 21 years of imprisonment.
Days after Russo’s decision, prosecutors said they would appeal.
Money for D’Ambrosio If successful in obtaining the reimbursement, D’Ambrosio could receive more than $1 million from the Ohio Court of Claims. The court hears civil cases filed by residents against Ohio and its agencies.
Prosecutors have appealed several decisions involving D’Ambrosio since a federal judge overturned his conviction in 2006, ruling that prosecutors withheld evidence that might have exonerated him at 1989 trial. Four years later, Judge Kate O’Malley barred prosecutors from trying him again because they failed to disclose the death of a key witness.
A three-judge panel had found him guilty of killing Klann, whose body was found floating in Doan Brook in Cleveland’s Rockefeller Park.
Also last month, in a less noticed filing, prosecutors urged Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Cassandra Collier-Williams to throw out a ruling by her predecessor to have D’Ambrosio’s case sealed. Judge Joan Synenberg, on her last day in office last month, ordered the case sealed. Prosecutors argued it would interfere with pending civil suits D’Ambrosio filed.
“Even with a no-brainer like an expungement, they can’t seem to let it go,” said Gilbert, who has represented D’Ambrosio in civil cases.
Matthew Meyer, an assistant county prosecutor, said in a statement: “We are appealing the wrongful imprisonment and expungement rulings. We are confident that we have the evidence to win both.”
D’Ambrosio isn’t alone in fights with prosecutors. Consider:
Darrell Houston, 44, of Cleveland who was awarded nearly $380,000 from the Ohio Court of Claims last month. That’s about half of the amount he is expected to be compensated for spending 16 years in prison for a 1991 slaying of a deli owner that he didn’t commit. He can obtain more money for lost wages and other expenses, an amount that must be litigated.
Last year, Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Carolyn Friedland ruled that Houston was wrongfully convicted in a case built on the word of a witness, who said the killer of Said Ali looked like Houston. A jury convicted Houston in 1992, and he was sentenced to 33 years to life. The witness identified another man and said Houston was not involved.
In 2007, a judge ordered a new trial based on the witness, who said he feared for his life that the real robber would kill him and his family. At a second trial, the witness’ testimony prompted prosecutors to seek a dismissal of charges.
Houston later filed suit against the state, citing the fact that he was wrongfully imprisoned. Friedland handled the case and ruled in his favor. Prosecutors appealed the decision and brought up issues that linked Houston to the store.
The 8th District Court of Appeals upheld the decision last year, saying Houston had “demonstrated his innocence by a preponderance of the evidence.” Houston then took his case to the Ohio Court of Claims. The Ohio attorney general’s office is litigating how much Houston is to be paid.
Raymond Towler, 55, of Cleveland who was awarded $2.5 million in a settlement with the state after spending 29 years in prison for a rape of an 11-year-old girl at the Rocky River Reservation of the Cleveland Metroparks. A Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court jury convicted him in 1981, and a judge sentenced him to life in prison.
In 2004, Towler, through the Ohio Innocence Project, pushed for DNA testing of the victim’s underwear. Towler was excluded. Then-Cuyahoga County Prosecutor William Mason’s office fought efforts to give Towler a new trial, claiming the testing was inconclusive.
Further testing excluded Towler, and his conviction was thrown out in 2010. He sued for wrongful imprisonment within days of his release from prison. A year later, his attorneys and government lawyers agreed to the settlement.
From gantdaily.com:
New York, NY, United States (4E) – Three men imprisoned for almost 18 years for two murders they long claimed they did not commit were released Wednesday night in Bronx, New York.
According to reports, a judge granted the prosecution’s request to vacate the last remaining convictions, allowing Michael Cosme, Devon Ayers and Carlos Perez to walk free without bail.
The men were convicted for the slayings of a taxi driver and a Federal Express executive in 1995 but almost two decades later, two former gang members confessed to the murder of the cab driver, although the conviction on the Federal Express executive’s murder remained.
But because the murder of the cab driver, Baithe Diop, and the executive, Denise Raymond, happened in the area only three days apart, the conviction for the executive’s murder has become questionable.
The New York Times reported that assistant district attorney, Nicole Keary, addressing Justice Denis J. Boyle of State Supreme Court on Wednesday said that problems with some of the evidence that had been used against the men determine that “the convictions then must be vacated.”
At the prosecution’s request, the indictment was not dismissed and a hearing was scheduled in 90 days to check if the prosecutors would have new evidence to justify a second trial.
From The Atlantic:
There are four hard truths in Tyrone Noling‘s unenviable life. The first three form a part of his past that he can never get back: bad choices and decisions he made, or that were made for him, which have put him where he is today. The fourth truth is the biggest part of his present, and will surely determine his future — or whether he even has a future. Noling is on Ohio’s death row, and has been since 1996, for a crime he says he didn’t commit; a crime to which he is linked by so little reliable evidence that a federal appeals court last year went out of its way to express “concern” about the accuracy of Noling’s conviction.
The first truth in Tyrone Noling’s life is that an elderly couple named Cora and Bearnhardt Hartig were murdered in their home in 1990. The second is that Noling, then a teenager, was convicted of the murders despite passing a lie detector test — even though there was no physical evidence linking him to the Hartigs and the witnesses against him, co-defendants, were so unreliable that prosecutors initially dropped the charges against him. The third truth about Noling is that Ohio won’t allow his attorneys to DNA test a cigarette found at the scene, evidence, the defense suggests, which might determine who might have killed the couple.
The fourth truth is unfolding now. Last Tuesday, for about half an hour, the Supreme Court of Ohio heard oral argument in the Noling case. His lawyers are asking the justices to recognize a broad application of a new state law designed to encourage DNA testing in cases like these. Prosecutors, claiming the butt is Continue reading
Yesterday Missouri’s high court in a unanimous decision overturned the murder conviction and life sentence of Mark Woodworth, 37, in connection with the fatally shooting of Catherine Robertson and the wounding of her husband, Lyndel, as they slept in their home near Chillicothe, a town of less than 10,000 in northern Missouri. The court ruled that prosecutors had withheld evidence that would have been beneficial to Woodworth’s defense and ordered his release within 60 days of the finalized ruling, unless prosecutors file documents to retry him.
Attorney General Chris Koster indicated through a spokesperson later in the day that his office would retry Woodworth. Continue reading
Posted in Editorials/Opinion, Prosecutorial conduct (good and bad), Uncategorized
Tagged Mark Woodworth
Tyrone Noling
Good luck to Ohio Innocence Project attorney Carrie Wood, who is arguing a death row case in the Ohio Supreme Court Tuesday morning, on behalf of Tyrone Noling. The State of Ohio has thus far denied Tyrone the right to DNA testing to prove his innocence, despite the fact that another person, with an M.O. for committing similar murders, subsequently confessed to committing this crime. It was also discovered (but not revealed to the defense before trial) that this person who later confessed had been a police suspect before trial. The State did serology testing (a primitive test before DNA testing existed) and this alternate suspect COULD NOT BE EXCLUDED as the source of biological material collected from the crime scene. But this was not turned over to defense and was only discovered years later through a public records request.
Also, all 3 cooperating witnesses against Tyrone have subsequently said Tyrone is innocent and they were pressured to testify falsely against him. All of this, and the State of Ohio will still not simply grant Tyrone a simple DNA test to see if the alternative suspect can be conclusively linked to the crime scene.
The Atlantic.com called Carrie’s argument Tuesday one of the 10 most significant legal events of 2013 in the U.S.
I mooted Carrie today and she was amazing. Tyrone couldn’t have a better attorney representing him in this important case. Prayers, thoughts and fingers crossed for Tyrone and Carrie.
The Ohio Public Defenders’ Office is representing Tyrone on all non-DNA issues, as they have for years.
You can watch the oral argument at about 10am EST here.
Michael Hash, who served nearly 12 years in prison before U.S. District Court Judge James C. Turk granted his release on a Habeas Corpus ruling, has filed a lawsuit in federal district court in which he is seeking damages to be awarded—as reported in The Free Lance-Star of Fredricksburg (here)—“in such amounts as the Court and jury find fair and reasonably supported by the evidence and that will deter such conduct by defendants in the future.” Hash has asked for a jury trial.
The defendants named in the lawsuit are former Culpeper (VA) County Commonwealth’s Attorney Gary Close; three Culpeper Sheriff Continue reading
Posted in Editorials/Opinion, Exonerations, Prosecutorial conduct (good and bad)
Tagged Michael Hash
Why do innocent people confess to the crimes they did not commit? Here’s an article on the cause of false confessions in Japan by Mariko Oi (BBC). Watch the story online here.
Related articles about the Japanese Criminal Justice System: False Confessions as Major Cause of Wrongful Convictions in Japan, Audio and Visual Recording of Interrogations, Fukawa Case, and Compensation for the Wrongfully Convicted.
2 January 2013 Last updated at 00:29 GMT
By Mariko Oi BBC World Service, Tokyo
Japan has a conviction rate of more than 99%. But in recent months there has been a public outcry over a number of wrongful arrests where innocent people confessed to crimes.
It started with a threat posted on the city of Yokohama’s website in late June: “I’ll attack a primary school and kill all the children before the summer.”
In the months that followed, there were a number of similar threats posted on the internet – some threatening famous people, including the Emperor’s grandchildren.
After a police investigation, four people were arrested. Two, including a 19-year-old student, confessed whilst in custody.
But on 9 October, the real perpetrator sent an email to a lawyer – Yoji Ochiai – and local media, explaining how he or she made those threats by taking control of innocent internet users’ computers with a virus.
His or her purpose, as stated in the email to Ochiai, was “to expose the police and prosecutors’ abomination”.
And in a way, it did. It raised the question – why did the innocent people confess to a crime that they didn’t commit? What kind of pressure were they put under? Continue reading
From ChicagoTribune.com:
Innocence Project co-director Peter Neufeld has emailed me his response to the open letterCook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez sent to complain about a report on last Sunday’s broadcast about false confessions in Chicago:
What I am most concerned with is not Ms. Alvarez’s individual comments which can and will be easily refuted. Rather, it is the fact that her letter reveals that she is simply stuck in denial of the magnitude of the catastrophic consequences suffered by nine young African American men who were stone cold innocent but lost the best years of their lives.
The first step to improving a situation where mistakes and misconduct occurred in the past is to admit that errors were made. The admission of error is a fundamental first step whether a shuttle crashes, a hospital mishandles a patient or an innocent person languishes in prison for a crime he did not commit. If you can’t first admit error, there is no hope for meaningful improvement or change.
The most serious aspect of the manner in which Ms. Alvarez has handled these cases, is her utter unwillingness to admit that the Continue reading
From the Pennsylvania Innocence Project Blog:
After being universally drubbed for her comments during a recent 60 Minutes segment on false confessions in Chicago, Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez wrote to the head of CBS to complain of what she viewed as one-sided and unfair coverage on the broadcast. You can read her letter here. Among the points she raised,
While these are interesting points, they just indicate that, for all the progress Ms. Alvarez has made in her office to investigate wrongful convictions, she just doesn’t get it when it comes to false confessions. We know beyond a doubt that people plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit, and they often testify against other “co-defendants” as part of the deal they receive.
Moreover, the fact that some of the statements were secured with a prosecutor present who saw no “coercion” misses the point. The techniques used to obtain a false confession do not always involve overt coercion; furthermore, police generally have already been talking to suspects long before the prosecutors arrive. Mr. Milan was quite clear in his statement to 60 Minutes: he’s haunted at having played a role in these tragedies.
The Chicago police had a more productive response to the segment. Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy pointed out that the department has undertaken major reforms since those cases were prosecuted. For instance, he noted the state has required videotaping of all homicide interrogations and confessions for years, to document whether proper procedures were followed.
“You know, there’s been so many other things; upgrading supervision in the department, better training for our detectives, and looking at the methods that we’re doing lineups, for instance,” he said.
McCarthy said all police procedures are under review, even now.
“We’ve got nine separate committees that are working on revamping everything that we do,” McCarthy said.
We learn more daily about how to prevent wrongful convictions. As we do, police departments nationwide are working to improve their investigation techniques; a development we applaud and support.
From Wboy.com:
They’re just four words. But those four words have become synonymous with the American justice system: “innocent until proven guilty.”
A man in Harrison County (West Virginia) is challenging that, years after he was sent to prison.
Joseph Buffey was accused of the rape and robbery of an elderly woman in Harrison County back in 2001.
“A break-in robbery rape of an elderly woman who was the mother of a police officer here in Clarksburg,” said Barry Scheck, Co-Director of the Innocence Project.
Buffey pleaded guilty to those charges, but later recanted his plea.
“Before DNA test results came back, he was strongly recommended by his lawyers. His lawyers, on the record, said to take a guilty plea. So he did take a guilty plea,” Scheck said.
Buffey was sentenced to 40 years in prison for those charges.
A status conference for Buffey’s challenge was held on Thursday in front of Harrison County Circuit Judge Thomas Bedell.
The Innocence Project said DNA sperm results indicate Buffey is not guilty and argued Buffey should be allowed to recant his plea and be released from prison.
But Assistant Harrison County Prosecuting Attorney David Romano said it will take much more than DNA results to get Buffey out of prison.
Romano said Buffey will need “a compelling reason for why he pleaded guilty.”
Romano added it is extremely difficult for a person to retract sworn statements in a guilty plea and said the burden is now on Buffey and his lawyers. He said for Buffey’s plea to be overturned, Buffey and his lawyers would have to show “innocence without a doubt.”
Romano added in court that Buffey waived his right to challenge “error, if there was any, when he plead guilty.”
Buffey’s team said there’s “scientific evidence” and “irrefutable facts” that now exclude Buffey from those crimes. It said the state could re-prosecute Buffey if it felt it had enough evidence to do so.
“Then the Innocence Project got involved. We got another set of tests done that we thought definitively excluded him,” Scheck said.
Scheck said DNA sperm results show Buffey’s innocence and another man’s guilt.
“The reason we are here in court is it can now be said in public that, just the other day, there was a hit to a young man,” Scheck said.
The name was brought up in court but it’s against 12 News’ policy to identify suspects until they’ve been formally charged.
The Innocence Project called out the prosecuting attorney’s office for not making those charges, and said the state should be doing more to “prosecute the man who really did this, so the person responsible doesn’t get back on the streets.”
As of Thursday, that man was not charged, but Romano said he is being investigated, and the investigation is ongoing.
Judge Bedell stated in court that he would not make a decision to release Buffey without evidence in front of him.
Another status conference is scheduled for Jan. 16 at 1:15 p.m. in Harrison County Circuit Court. The court also scheduled a status conference for Feb. 15 at 10 a.m.
A hearing for Buffey’s request to be released from prison is set to start on March 27.
Exoneree David Bain
Exoneree David Bain’s compensation case in NZ has gotten quite controversial. A retired Canadian judge was hired to review the case and decide whether Bain should be compensated. A Canadian judge was selected for neutrality and because the compensation scheme in Canada is similar to that in New Zealand. But after the judge reviewed the case and recommended in favor of compensation, the Justice Minister Judith Collins has refused to accept the results and gone on a sort of political campaign to avoid paying compensation. The debate has been very public and has gotten quite heated. Story here. Justice Minister’s attack on the ruling detailed here. Justice Ian Binnie’s response here.
From the Pennsylvania Innocence Project Blog:
Stories about people confessing to crimes they know nothing about seem to be all over the news. This Sunday, 60 minutes ran a segment on a group of men from Chicago, one of whom provided a “confession” to a horrific crime, yet all of whom were completely innocent. What struck us was the intransigence of the current State’s Attorney to accept that the 4 men had been imprisoned for a crime committed by another; even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Which led us to wonder: why do prosecutors fail to acknowledge innocence when it is in front of them?
Terrill Swift, Michael Saunders, Vincent Thames, and Harold Richardson were convicted in one rape and murder of a 30 year old woman. Terrill Swift, then 17, was implicated by another in the crime. After an interrogation lasting over 12 hours, Terrill ‘confessed’ to the crime. Told he could leave if he confessed, Terrill did as he was told. He signed a 21-page confession giving specific details to how he and his co-defendants committed the crime. He was sentenced to over 30 years, as were his co-defendants.
But last year, the Innocence Project retested the one DNA sample recovered inside the victim. It not only excluded the boys, it showed a match: to Johnny Continue reading
From Slate.com:
The best magazine piece I’ve read this year is by Pamela Colloff, in the Texas Monthly, about the murder conviction of Michael Morton and the 25 years he spent in a Texas prison as prosecutors insisted he’d killed his wife, despite the mounting proof that he hadn’t. You really have to read this story for yourself—it’s movie material; it’s that riveting. I want to pull on one thread of Colloff’s narrative, because I’ve seen it in the weave of many other wrongful conviction cases. I’m talking about tunnel vision: the tendency of investigators to seize on an early piece of evidence that appears to implicate the defendant, and to hold on to their belief in his guilt even as other evidence points to his innocence. It’s a problem that by definition emerges in hindsight. What’s scary is how tenaciously police and prosecutors cling to their initial assumptions—and how much this reflects basic human tendencies.
On an August afternoon in 1986, Christine Morton was found lying on her bed, bludgeoned to death. A neighbor had seen her 3-year-old son Eric walking around the family’s front yard by himself; she searched the house and called the police.
When Sheriff Jim Boutwell arrived, he found this note, signed “I L Y,” for I love you, and “M,” for Michael, who was Christine’s husband.
Chris, I know you didn’t mean to, but you made me feel really unwanted last night. After a good meal, we came home, you binged on the rest of the cookies. Then, with your nightgown around your waist and while I was rubbing your hands and arms, you farted and fell asleep. I’m not mad or expecting a big production. I just wanted you to know how I feel without us getting into another fight about sex. Just think how you might have felt if you were left hanging on your birthday.
Colloff explains that based on the note, which established Michael’s anger with his wife in the hours before she was killed, “Boutwell treated Michael not like a Continue reading
Order Here
Wrongful Convictions Blog 