Category Archives: Prosecutorial conduct (good and bad)

Prosecutors often challenge DNA evidence that could clear the convicted

From the ChicagoTribune.com:

When Terrill Swift was released from prison after serving 15 years for rape and murder, he sought DNAtesting because he wanted to prove his innocence. Cook County prosecutors opposed his efforts but relented last year after the Tribune made inquiries about Swift’s request.

After the DNA from semen in the victim’s body was matched to a convicted murderer and rapist, Swift went to court to get his conviction thrown out. But prosecutors opposed that effort, saying the DNA was meaningless, especially when considered against Swift’s confession.

A judge turned aside prosecutors’ arguments, saying the DNA was powerful evidence, and earlier this year the judge vacated Swift’s conviction.

And last month, when Swift went to court to obtain a certificate of innocence to expunge the record of his arrest and conviction and clear the way for him to seek Continue reading

Role of Prosecutors in Postconviction Proceedings

Lady Justice, in the Supreme Court of Japan

As I posted on Thursday, there was a decision by the Tokyo High Court to grant a retrial to Govinda Mainali. The High Court also ordered his release. He was finally released after 15 years of confinement. Since he has a conviction for visa violations, he is placed in immigration custody, and will be sent back home to Nepal, to his family.

However, the Tokyo High Public Prosecutor’s Office immediately filed an objection to the High Court. Even if the Court denies the objection, they can still file an appeal to the Supreme Court. Deputy chief prosecutor of the Tokyo High Public Prosecutor’s Office was quoted as saying that the Court’s decision to grant Mainali a retrial was “absolutely unacceptable”.

Meanwhile, Asahi Shimbun news reported on June 3rd that the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office will be holding the first meeting ever with the public prosecutors who deal with postconviction claims of innocence. They are apparently alarmed about the relatively high number of recent court decisions to retry cases. Of the eleven decisions (in death penalty or life sentence cases) to grant a retrial since the end of WWII, five  were handed down after 2009 (decisions in Ashikaga, Fukawa, Fukui, Higashi Sumiyoshi, and Mainali cases. Note that four of these involve false confessions).

The court decisions in these cases were made possible in part by the state-of-the-art DNA testing. As the exonerations all over the world have made it clear, DNA is a strong tool to prove innocence of the wrongfully convicted.

However an exoneration means the police and prosecutors who investigated, prosecuted, and helped to convict an innocent person will be criticized by the public. Thus, it was reported that the prosecutors are worried that these decisions to retry cases “will undermine the public’s trust to the investigation process, and therefore worrisome from the standpoint of public safety”. An executive prosecutor said that they “will do their best to battle these retrial claims by developping prosecution’s scientific knowledge.”

If the prosecutors truly believe what they said in these media reports, it is an evidence that the public prosecutors are worried more about “winning” postconviction cases than finding out the truth. Continue reading

Prosecutors Can Learn from John Bradley’s Defeat…

From the Star Telegram:

Although justice can move very slowly, it eventually tends to discover the truth and mete out the appropriate punishment or reward.

Sometimes, it even catches up with those charged with administering it, like the haughty district attorney of Williamson County near Austin.

John Bradley, first appointed Williamson County DA by Gov. Rick Perry in 2001 and subsequently elected to the position, was soundly defeated in his bid for re-election in the May 29 Republican primary. The victor in that race was County Attorney Jana Duty, who used the wrongful conviction of an innocent man to persuade voters that Bradley was unworthy of the office.

Bradley was not district attorney when Michael Morton was convicted in the 1986 murder of his wife and sentenced to life in prison without parole. But Bradley Continue reading

Knoops Innocence Project in the Netherlands Files For Exoneration for Multiple Defendants in Murder Case

By J.D. Schoone of the Knoops Innocence Project in Amsterdam:

According to the Attorney-General of the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, six people might have been wrongfully convicted in a murder case. The case centers on the murder of a Chinese woman in a Chinese restaurant in 1993. The six suspects, most of them teenagers at that time, were convicted in 1994 with sentences of 2 years imprisonment (for the three female suspects) and 10 years imprisonment (for the three male suspects).

Now, with so much information on the causes of wrongful convictions, the case has been re-examined. It became evident that the suspects have been pressured by the police to confess to the crime. They were also shown photos of the crime scene, which resulted in knowledge of the crime scene which was later used against the suspects. Furthermore, exculpatory testimonies of eyewitnesses were not submitted to the defense or to the court. Finally, forensic experts which have reexamined blood traces found at the crime scene have concluded that the DNA corresponds to an Asian male, whereas none of the six suspects are of Asian origin.

The Knoops’ Innocence Project, representing three of the six suspects, will file a supporting revision request with the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, in addition to the lengthy request (160 pages) of the Attorney-General. If revision is granted, then the six suspects will receive a retrial. The Knoops’ Innocence Project hopes that this case shows that wrongful convictions are not only an American phenomenon, but happens worldwide. So far, four wrongful convictions have been overturned in the Netherlands. With these six and other possible wrongful convictions currently being investigated, this number can rise drastically in the following years.

7th Circuit Court of Appeals Says Officials Not Immune

The federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week that police officers and prosecutors are not immune from being sued for alleged constitutional violations. Herb Whitlock and Gordon “Randy” Steidl spent 21 and 17 years respectively in prison before key witnesses recanted, important evidence was deemed unreliable, and they were released. According to the Chicago Tribune here, the ruling will permit Whitlock and Steidl to sue for what Steidl alleged was a “17-year conspiracy Continue reading

Friday’s Quick Clicks…

John Bradley’s Loss as Williamson County D.A. Was a Win for Craig Watkins and Innocence

From the Dallas Observer:

If Dallas District Attorney Craig Watkins has a direct foil in the state of Texas, it’s soon-to-be-former Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley.

Watkins, actively pursuing innocence claims and making Dallas the leading county for exonerations in Texas, is an outlier, albeit one who is gaining supporters around the country for his tough-but-nice-guy legal philosophies. Meanwhile, Bradley upholds a reputation for being relentlessly tough on crime — and innocence.

But in yesterday’s primaries, Bradley, a 10-year incumbent, lost to Jana Duty, the County Attorney, by 10 percentage points, after Duty harped on the fact that Bradley worked hard to prevent DNA testing for Michael Morton, who was found innocent of killing his wife and was released after 25 years in prison.

Lawyers defending Morton allege that he would not have been wrongfully convicted if prosecutor, Ken Anderson, had not deliberately withheld evidence that pointed to his innocence. Anderson faces a Court of Inquiry in September and has denied any wrongdoing, and Bradley has been portrayed as acting in support of his predecessor by fighting DNA testing on the bloody bandana, eventually the key to Morton’s freedom.

Bradley has told the Texas Tribune he was “deeply challenged” by what he had been through in the Morton case. It seemed the experience caused him to warm up to the idea of justice for the innocence in time for the election — but it wasn’t enough to tip the scales.

In an interview before Tuesday’s election, Gary Udashen, president of the Innocence Project of Texas, made it clear that voters in Williamson County were casting ballots that would have statewide implications for the innocence movement.

“If John Bradley loses his election in Williamson county, then that’s a loud message to prosecutors all over the state is that there actually are consequences to engaging in prosecutorial misconduct,” Udashen said. He pointed to the fact that many innocence cases, both those that include DNA evidence (like Morton’s) and those that do not, include instances where prosecutors either deliberately or mistakenly withhold evidence in support of a person’s innocence.

In an NPR interview in January of 2011, the differing philosophies of Bradley and Watkins were on blast as the two top prosecutors bickered on-air, Bradley criticizing Watkins for basking in the spotlight and Watkins harping on the idea of seeking justice, not just convictions.

“I hope you remember that you have other elected prosecutors in Texas who have been doing many of these same things,” Bradley said, pointing out that just because an office doesn’t have a special division dedicated to freeing innocent prisoners doesn’t mean they don’t have traditional channels for doing so.

“You enjoy the national media, you enjoy the attention that you get. We have a lot of prosecutors who don’t seek that. They seek justice by reviewing these cases carefully and making sure that a guilty violent person is not released,” Bradley said.

Watkins response is more true today than ever: “Well obviously that didn’t work.”

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

  • The play My Kind of Town, about police torture and wrongful conviction, opens in Chicago
  • Texas DA John Bradley, who was criticized for his handling of the Michael Morton case, goes down in primary election after opponent focuses on wrongful convictions (more here)
  • Some analysis and breakdown of the numbers in the exoneration registry
  • Commentary on the U.S. Dep’t of Justice and its failure to act when its prosecutors engage in misconduct
  • New documentary TV series about wrongful convictions being produced by Discovery Channel in Canada

Blawg Review #323 – Memorial Day, the Rule of Law, & Human Rights.



While those of us in the US or UK may be taking a chance to relax or spend time with friends and family (28th May 2012 being Memorial Day, or Spring Bank Holiday in the UK), it is trite to point out (and for many of us, guilt-inducing) that many more will be continuing their struggles to improve the lot of humankind, or will be imprisoned, or lost to their loved ones. Today also marks the anniversary of the publication of the letter ‘The Forgotten Prisoners’ in The Observer newspaper in 1961, authored by Peter Benenson. Benenson’s call to arms to write letters of support for those whose human rights are breached is credited with starting the organization Amnesty International. The fight to uphold human rights is continued by millions around the world today and there are a plethora of blogs reflecting an interest in such human rights campaigns. (see list of some here)

Some of the more essential blogs for those interested in human rights, in the US, see this. Australian human rights lawyers are meanwhile well served by the great blog at the Castan Centre. UK lawyers should not go past The Human Rights Blog or the blog out of 1 Crown Office Row.

My interest in ‘injustice’ focuses on the criminal justice system and failings therein. Justice is about distributions – according persons their fair shares and treatment. The primacy of individual autonomy and rights is central to the ‘due process model’ of criminal justice, recognising that human fallibility and systemic failures can yield grave injustice. Embracing an ‘encompassing’ model of miscarriages of justice can stir debate over the proper focus of researchers and campaigners alike, with some claiming that an exclusive focus on the ‘innocence’ is vital. They prefer the term ‘wrongful conviction’ (although this too can have wider meaning, to include the factually and legally innocent as well as those convicted through unjust procedures), to distinguish those convicted but innocent, from those unjustly convicted.

The debate over taxonomy continues but does not detract from the work of many globally, trying to address the injustices caused by the criminal justice system. In the UK, many legal professionals and investigative journalists, have worked tirelessly alongside campaigners, to bring miscarriages of justice to light. Pressure groups such as Justice and Liberty have now pretty much abandoned this area, leaving it to smaller, largely unfunded organisations such as MOJO (Miscarriages of Justice Organisation) and Innocent (who maintain a wonderful resource rich website covering almost all the miscarriages of justice in the UK since 1993). An international source of information and links, originated in Australia, is ‘Networked Knowledge’, by Robert N. Moles. Single campaigns of course continue, with some great examples of webpages highlighting their cases, such as: Simon Hall and Sam Hallam (exonerated last week). University based Innocence Projects are also working tirelessly in the UK on alleged miscarriages of justice, (see Universities of Cardiff and Leeds for just two examples. This model is replicated from those Innocence Projects so successful in the US, and now expanding internationally.

The original Innocence Project in New York continues to be a source of inspiration and information. The work of the Innocence Project and the Innocence Network now has its own global dimension with The Center for the Global Study of Wrongful Conviction at the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Their blog is new but rapidly growing in prominence. Whilst covering breaking news, in terms of exonerations and legislative or political manouvres, it also features some great contributions on the causes of wrongful convictions. Many other individual Innocence Projects maintain great websites and blogs that are worth following, such as Northwestern Law Center on Wrongful Convictions. The University of Texas at Austin has an ‘Actual Innocence Awareness Database’ while Northwestern University and Michigan University have also launched a National Registry of Wrongful Convictions, a vital research tool for anyone interested in wrongful convictions in the US or elsewhere.

Of course, the ‘Innocence’ movement would not be what it is today without the advent of forensic DNA profiling, leading to the exoneration of many, and proving without doubt their innocence. Yet, while forensic science is acclaimed in the media, it has a blemished history in reality. Many infamous miscarriages of justice have had at their core, scientific evidence that was not disclosed, flawed, or misrepresented in court. This is not to assert that ‘scientific’ methods of identifying criminal perpetrators in particular, have not advanced dramatically. Lessening reliance upon inherently flawed eyewitness or other evidence has undoubtedly saved many innocent individuals from investigation or possibly, wrongful conviction. It is simply to concede that such ‘scientific’ methods of identification are not infallible. This is a focal point of my research, the contribution of ‘science’ to (in)justice. As such, there are a wealth of ‘forensic’ blogs to keep up with if one is to keep anywhere near ‘on top’ of developments in forensics.

Many, if not most, are maintained by forensic departments in universities, such as the Florida University Forensic Science Blog or by keen individuals (the

‘father’ of forensic blogging is ‘Zeno’. Forensic Suite 101 has a wealth of reading materials and great videos for those with strong stomachs. Some more recent newcomers include the Forensics Guy and one aimed at criminal defense lawyers, The Truth About Forensic Science. Covering forensic science and news about injustices and wrongful convictions, the blog by Peter Tillers also does a great job on discussing issues relating to evidence, while David Kaye, author of ‘The Double Helix and the Law of Evidence’ blogs at Double Helix Law on all things ‘DNA’ and law and also blogs on Forensic Science, Statistics & the Law. ‘The Charles Smith Blog’ blog was named after the infamous pathologist, responsible for much injustice in Canada. Maintained by a retired journalist, the blog now covers fascinating news on all things ‘criminal injustice’ related and is a must read.

The scale of injustice perpetrated by the criminal justice system itself may never be agreed upon. “How Bad Is The U.S. Wrongful Conviction Problem?” asks Brian Evans on the Human Rights Now Blog of Amnesty USA. However, it is easy to see that the issue coming to the fore globally now, more than ever. The work of the Innocence Network is unrivaled in this respect, but so too is the most often thankless (and costly) work done by individuals and campaigners, including criminal lawyers, working on cases and trying to bring about reform. Without the development of forensic DNA profiling, who knows whether this explosion of interest would have happened, or could have been maintained. While they may be sometimes at fault, it is good to see some great examples of forensic scientists also working hard to remedy injustices, and work to ensure the prevention of many more. Long may these individuals and organisations, which look out for our human rights, have our support.

We begin this week’s Blawg Review #323 at the Innocence Blog, where the Innocence Project honors the wrongfully  convicted who had served in the military. Perhaps more to be honored on Veterans Day, former Army Sergeant Dennis Maher served almost six years on active duty before he was wrongfully convicted in 1984. Exonerated through DNA testing in 2003, Maher says “Because of my wrongful conviction, I missed the opportunity to serve my country because I was going to be a career soldier. I think about that on Memorial Day.”

Returning to the anniversary of Amnesty International,  #AmnestyReport2012 – an overview of state of human rights worldwide – is now available in full online here. Apparently, the US Department of State submitted the report to Congress, except the part about the USA noting, “The focus of the Human Rights Reports is on the human rights performance of other governments. We note that the United States does examine its own human rights record against its international commitments and obligations in many other fora. For example, in December, the United States submitted a lengthy report to the U.N. Human Rights Council on U.S. implementation of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights. The United States also engages in the U.N. Universal Periodic Review process, through which the human rights records of the U.N.’s 193 Member States are reviewed and assessed once every four years. These reports are available on HumanRights.gov.”

“The military trial of the WikiLeaks suspect Bradley Manning is being conducted amid far more secrecy than even the prosecution of the alleged 9/11 plotters in Guantanamo, a coalition of lawyers and media outlets protest,” writes Ed Pilkington for the guardian in New York.

Kenneth Roth, Executive Director, Human Rights Watch, on Twitter points us to an editorial of the New York Times alleging a court covers up that concludes, “The judges should have given the government’s overwrought claims of national security and secrecy special scrutiny, not extreme deference.”

Daphne Eviatar reports on HuffPost that “perhaps the most closely watched Guantanamo-related case since the Supreme Court confirmed detainees’ right to judicial review in Boumediene v. Bush in 2008, Latif v. Obama raises a critical issue that goes to the heart of whether U.S. prisoners have a meaningful opportunity to challenge their detention. Must a court presume the accuracy of a government document introduced against a Guantanamo detainee, even if it’s not clear how that document was produced?”

Focussing upon a particularly pernicious abuse of human rights, The Renditon Project website was officially launched. UK legal action charity, Reprieve, issued a press release, in which Clare Algar, Executive Director of Reprieve said, ‘The Rendition Project will be an important tool in bringing the tangled web of the CIA’s illegal rendition programme to light. It is essential that we get to the bottom of what was one of the worst human rights abuses of the ‘War on Terror’ – including the involvement of the UK, a number of other European states, and major corporations.

A Pakistani doctor was sentenced to 33 years in prison Wednesday for helping the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) locate Osama Bin Laden  reported JURIST news. “After a trial lasting two months during which Shakeel Afridi was not afforded the opportunity to defend himself, a tribal court convicted him of treason and spying.” Glenn Greenwald, in a provocative op-ed post on Salon.com says that “American rage at Pakistan over the punishment of a CIA-cooperating Pakistani doctor is quite revealing of The Imperial Mind.”

One of the most common human rights concerns in the USA, wrongful convictions, is reported by The Wrongful Convictions Blog and the ABA Journal as well as other media this week. The first-ever published report (PDF) of the National Registry of Exonerations, assembled by the University of Michigan Law School and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University School of Law, “highlights grave questions about the legitimacy of the legal justice system.”

On the Huffington Post Chicago, the president of the Chicago Innocence Project, David Protess, introduces the exonerated.

More than 200 men and women have been wrongfully convicted of serious crimes in California, six of whom were sentenced to death.  Here on Death Penalty Focus are some of their stories.

Brian Banks, former football star and USC Trojan recruit, was exonerated this week, as reported here on The Wrongful Conviction Blog. The “victim” recanted and admitted she lied at trial (the sex was actually consensual). She did not come forward earlier because she didn’t want to “give the money back”–meaning the settlement that she obtained from the school where the rape allegedly occurred.

The Innocence Blog points to a story on Salon.com that describes The Long Road From Exoneration to Compensation for the wrongfully convicted.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the Atlantic, there was an important victory for prisoners (and the public) in the European Court of Human Rights, with the Court RE-affirming earlier decisions, that there should not be a blanket rule disenfranchising prisoners. On the UK Human Rights Blog, Reuven Ziegler writes about the case for letting prisoners voteCharon QC notes the latest prisoner votes case from Europe on his blog, “The case is important.  For my part, I have no problem whatsoever with prisoners voting.  I rather hope that prisoners will return to society improved for paying their debt to society and be part of society.  Pie in the sky for recidivists… but an ideal to which we should aspire? I am, I suspect, in a sizeable minority.”

However, as the honest among us would readily admit, on the whole, our prison system does little to rehabilitate, in fact, as Alisa Roth on the ACLU Blog of Rights argues prisoners subjected to solitary confinement in particular are ““more broken than when they went in”. Meanwhile, Gideon, a public defender, looks at some reactions to the death penalty repeal  in CT and tells the tale in a post titled, Idiocracy.

A topic comes up time and again on the Wrongful Convictions blog, Conrad Black points to cases of prosecutor misconduct and asks, “How Many Wrongful Convictions Will the Public Stand for?

“Facing the truth is hard to do, especially the truth about ourselves,” says Bill Moyers. “Not surprising, Americans have been sorely pressed to come to terms with the fact that after 9/11 our government began to torture people and did so in defiance of domestic and international law. It’s no secret such cruelty occurred. It’s just the truth we’d rather not think about. But Memorial Day is a good time to make the effort because, if we really want to honor the Americans in uniform who died fighting for their country, we’ll redouble our efforts to make sure we’re worthy of their sacrifice. We’ll renew our commitment to the rule of law. For the rule of law is essential to any civilization worth dying for.”

Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

“Texas Monthly” Explores Official Misconduct in Discussion on Wrongful Conviction

A candid discussion in the June issue of Texas Monthly on the subject of wrongful conviction here  engaged  key players in Texas criminal justice, and included an exploration of options available to reduce government misconduct, a troubling contributor to many wrongful convictions. Of special note, these came  from those within the system who are troubled by colleagues who have not followed the rules or the ethical spirit of the law.

Kelly Siegler, a special prosecutor who lives in Houston said, “…introduce a law that says when a prosecutor commits a crime like tampering with evidence, tampering with a witness, or official oppression…there is no statute of limitations.”

Art Acevedo, Chief of the Austin Police Department since 2007, agreed. “The statute should start running on the day that we discover that misconduct. People should know that they’ll have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives.”

“It drives me nuts that I have 180 days [from the time of misconduct to discipline a police officer],” he added. “That’s all I have. One hundred and eighty days. That’s nothing. There should not be a statute of limitations when it comes to violating the public trust. And cops will hate me for saying that. Prosecutors will hate me for saying that. But in a democracy, if our criminal justice system doesn’t work, we are in deep trouble. And it starts with those consequences.”

While support for immunity for prosecutors from frivolous lawsuits remains,  prosecutors and police are joining ranks with those who believe governmental immunity is never absolute in the face of intentional misconduct.

The evolution in opinion on government misconduct in Texas comes in the wake of the state’s high number of exonerations and could be a precursor for similar thinking in other states.

Saturday’s Quick Clicks…

Report on Ted Stevens trial suggests suspensions for two Alaska-based prosecutors

From AlaskaDispatch.com:

The long-awaited internal report from the Justice Department on the botched prosecution of former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens was released on Thursday. This report falls on the heels of and mirrors the report conducted at the request of the judge in the case that was released in March.

That 525-page report was compiled by special investigator Henry F. Schuelke III, appointed by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan, who presided over Stevens’ 2008 trial. The appearance of prosecutorial misconduct during the trial, Continue reading

Breaking News: Texas Judge Recommends Exoneration for Woman on Death Row; Says Conviction Was Based on Junk Science…

Cathy Lynn Henderson

From Statesman.com (video story here):

The state’s highest criminal court should overturn the capital murder conviction of Cathy Lynn Henderson, once two days from execution for the 1994 death of an infant she was baby-sitting, a Travis County judge has recommended.

District Judge Jon Wisser said scientific discoveries into the causes of head trauma similar to the injury suffered by 3-month-old Brandon Baugh — and a change of heart from the prosecution’s star witness, former medical examiner Roberto Bayardo — mean no reasonable juror would convict Henderson if presented with the new evidence at trial.

“Testimony of the state’s chief experts was, at bottom, scientifically flawed,” Wisser wrote in findings dated May 14 and delivered Tuesday to the Court of Criminal Appeals.

After reviewing evidence via testimony and briefs, Wisser recommended that the appeals court dismiss Henderson’s conviction and return her case to Travis Continue reading

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

Reflections on System Resistance to Innocence Part II

In a blog post that appeared on March 14, 2012 entitled Bryant ‘Rico’ Gaines to Walk Free Today in Ohio:  Reflections on System Resistance to Innocence (Blog Post), I expressed frustration over how the criminal justice system in Cincinnati reacted to a post-conviction claim of innocence, in the context of a specific case, in a way that I felt did not comport with a prosecutor’s duty to search for truth and ‘do justice.’

After the Blog Post was published, I heard that at least one member of the Prosecutor’s Office was upset because he or she believed that the Blog Post contained some inaccurate facts.  As a result, I invited the Prosecutor or his representative to respond to the Blog Post in the comment section and asked them to specifically address any mistakes I had made so that we could flesh them out through discussion.

I later received this 10-page letter dated April 3, 2012 (‘the Letter’).  After receiving the Letter, representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office confirmed that it was intended as a public response to the Blog Post and encouraged me to post it in my blog, which I have done above.  [Note:  The Letter responded to my Blog Post by using the names of the various actors in the case.  I did not use names in the original Blog Post because I see this as an academic discussion about the criminal justice system broadly rather than a discussion that is personal in nature.  Therefore, I have redacted most names from the Letter.]

My response to the Letter:

I.  Global Comments

A.   Prosecutorial Tunnel Vision and Resistance to Innocence Claims

First, I would like to clarify the point of my Blog Post.  I intended to explore the concept of prosecutorial tunnel vision in post-conviction cases and to allow blog readers to contrast the reaction of the Prosecutor’s Office when presented with post-conviction evidence of Gaines’ potential innocence with how police and prosecutors have reacted in other similar cases I have celebrated on the blog, such as in the articles herehereherehereherehere, and here.

Specifically, in the Blog Post, I pointed out examples of prosecutorial behavior Continue reading

Wrongful Conviction Reminiscences of an Australian High Court Judge

I blogged recently about the awesome role Judges play in the dispensation of justice. Retired Australian High Court Judge Michael Kirby has just reiterated and properly contextualised it, with respect to wrongful convictions.  Drawing on his experiences in the bench, particularly with the wrongful conviction of Andrew Mallard. He addressed these issues along with others germane to the fair dispensation of justice. The occasion was about his experiences at the bench between 1996 to 2009 at Melbourne RMIT university. Read 9news reportage of his lecture here

He touched on the quality of legal training; the public perception of the apolitical nature of judges; the divide between conservative and liberal judges. And of course,  hinted of his ‘regrets’ on the Andrew Mallard case. He said ‘Maybe if I’d paid a little more attention, may be if I’d seen some of these arguments (sooner)…. he wouldn’t have had to spend a decade in prison; its something that troubles the mind’.  However hard we deny it, pretend it doesn’t exist or the system can not possibly have leakages, there still remain the real possibility of it happening, no matter the jurisdiction. We must continue to work at it with an open mind. We must come to terms with it. I commend Justice Michael Kirby’s ‘statement of regret’ a fortiori to prosecutors, police officers and lawyers generally.

Tough-on-Crime Prosecutor Fights for Job After Resisting DNA Testing

In dueling commentaries in the Austin (TX) newspaper The Statesman, Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley here and John Raley (eight-year pro bono attorney on the Innocence Project team that represented Michael Morton) here, are giving voters two versions of why Michael Morton spent an extra 2,400 days in prison for a crime he did not commit. At stake is an election in which Bradley is struggling to keep his job. Bradley, who has been a popular tough-on-crime prosecutor in Texas for ten years, is trying to refocus the race on anything but the issue that is dominating it: His long record of resisting a second look at the conviction of Michael Morton.

For those who have observed prosecutorial resistance to post-conviction DNA testing that eventually proved a wrongful conviction, the story is tragically familiar. Continue reading

Virginia Legislators Used Budget Amendments to Force Disclosure of DNA Exclusions…

I reported here earlier about the project in Virginia to test DNA in old cases where an inmate is in prison but the DNA from their cases had not been tested.  The testing resulted in DNA exclusions for up to 78 inmates, but many of these inmates were not informed.  The article below (referred to yesterday by Carole) tells an interesting tale of the state’s hesitancy to provide disclosure in these cases, and how the legislature used a creative budget amendment process to try to move along the process:

From the Richmond Times-Dispatch:

A Virginia budget amendment lifting some of the secrecy surrounding the state’s post-conviction DNA project was prompted by the tale of a cancer victim who was recently cleared of a 34-year-old rape.

Articles in the Richmond Times-Dispatch this year outlined the case of Bennett S. Barbour, convicted of a 1978 assault in Williamsburg. Testing failed to find his DNA in old evidence and instead implicated a convicted rapist in the crime.

Police and prosecutors had the test results since June 2010, but Barbour, 56, who lives in James City County near Williamsburg, did not find out until this January, when a volunteer lawyer contacted him. That delay prompted concern among some legislators.

“I asked for the budget amendment totally based on (The Times-Dispatch’s) article about Barbour and what happened,” said state Sen. Janet Howell, D-Fairfax, vice chairman of the Virginia State Crime Commission.

State Sen. Thomas K. Norment Jr., R-James City, also read about Barbour’s case. “If there was any reasonable way to either eliminate or at least minimize Continue reading

Saturday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Buy tickets to Center on Wrongful Convictions event June 7th in Chicago
  • Law review article dealing with the taxation of exoneree compensation awards
  • Queens DA criticized for policy of interrogating all arrestees without Miranda warnings; DA responds by saying he videotapes all of these interrogations and it has resulted in the dismissal of charges against more than 100 innocent people

Washington Supreme Court Grants a New Trial to a Death Row Inmate

The Supreme Court of the State of Washington handed down this morning a decision to grant a new trial to a death row inmate, Darold Stenson.   Read: In re PRP of Darold Stenson.

Stenson raised a due process claim based on alleged violations of  Brady v. Maryland. The Court held that the State violated Stenson’s rights under the mandates of Brady and its progeny, and it reversed his aggravated first degree murder conviction as well as the sentence of death and remanded for a new trial. Read the news here.

Excerpt:  Stenson, convicted in the 1993 slayings of his wife and business partner, is due a new trial because prosecutors failed to share evidence with his attorneys prior to trial, the eight-justice majority ruled.

Stenson will not be released following Thursday’s decision, which was authored by Justice Gerry Alexander. He is expected to face a second trial in Clallam County.

“We are left with the fact that constitutionally significant mistakes were made in Stenson’s trial, resulting in imposition of the ultimate punishment without the full benefit of due process protections,” Alexander wrote in the majority opinion. “The question here is not whether Stenson has proved his innocence.” ….